Category: Opinion

Government by Chaos Returns Under Trump’s Leadership

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

President Donald Trump’s approach to governance has once again thrown global and domestic affairs into turmoil. One day, he imposed steep tariffs on Canada and Mexico; the next, he temporarily halted auto tariffs after realizing their potential damage to the American automotive industry—something experts had warned about.

Last week, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky visited the White House to sign a deal on rare-earth minerals, which Trump hailed as a significant achievement for the U.S. However, after being provoked by Vice President JD Vance, Zelensky left abruptly, creating a diplomatic debacle that European leaders have been scrambling to address.

Meanwhile, Elon Musk is aggressively dismantling government bureaucracy, firing workers indiscriminately, and causing instability for citizens and industries reliant on federal assistance. This is happening at a time when the economy is already fragile and susceptible to shocks.

Trump’s initial surge of executive orders and policy shifts provided a burst of energy, especially compared to the perceived stagnation of President Joe Biden’s final months in office. However, six weeks into his term, as Trump disrupts post-Cold War security structures, global trade, and federal agencies that helped establish U.S. supremacy, a stark realization is emerging—there appears to be no coherent plan.

His unpredictable policies on Ukraine, trade tariffs meant to revive Rust Belt industries, and sweeping cuts to government are driven by instinct rather than strategy. This approach, reminiscent of his campaign-style “weave” speeches, leaves global leaders uncertain and on edge.

“There’s too much unpredictability and chaos coming out of the White House right now,” remarked Canadian Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly on Wednesday, describing U.S. trade policy as a “psychodrama” that Canada cannot endure every month.

Unpredictable Leadership Yields Mixed Results

Trump’s erratic leadership often leaves allies questioning his motives. On Wednesday, he criticized Canada for not doing enough to prevent fentanyl trafficking, even though the quantities involved are negligible. At other times, he blames Canada for unauthorized migration southward, despite low numbers. He also aims to shift manufacturing away from Canada to the U.S., leading some in Ottawa to suspect he is trying to weaken Canada for potential annexation.

Despite the turmoil, Trump’s aggressive foreign policy has yielded some results. His alarm over a Hong Kong-based firm owning two ports on the Panama Canal prompted U.S. investment giant BlackRock to negotiate their acquisition. While Trump’s claim that China controlled the canal was inaccurate, the deal could still bolster U.S. strategic interests.

Additionally, while he is diminishing the strength of NATO, Trump’s pressure has spurred an unprecedented military buildup among European allies—something past U.S. presidents had urged for years.

However, Trump often appears more interested in asserting personal power than executing a long-term plan.

Michael Froman, former U.S. trade representative and chair of the Council on Foreign Relations, told CNN’s Jim Sciutto that while tariffs generally have more costs than benefits, they can serve as leverage in negotiations. This has worked with Mexico, which has broader trade issues with the U.S. than Canada. However, Froman added, “You have to know what it is you want them to do for that leverage to be useful.”

Trump’s Chaos as a Political Strategy

To some extent, disorder is intentional. Trump thrives on political theatrics, using headline-grabbing maneuvers to rally his base. However, his administration often overlooks the domestic political constraints of allied nations.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, who, like Trump, is newly in office, hinted Wednesday that Mexico could seek alternative trade partners if necessary.

In the U.K., Prime Minister Keir Starmer recently honored British soldiers who fought alongside the U.S. in Iraq and Afghanistan. His speech appeared to counter Vice President Vance’s comment on Fox News that Ukraine needed stronger security guarantees than those from “some random country that has not fought a war in 30 or 40 years.” The remark, widely interpreted as a slight against Britain and France, caused significant outrage. Vance later claimed on X that such an interpretation was “absurdly dishonest.” However, Britain and France are currently the only two nations to have openly committed troops to a post-war security force in Ukraine.

French President Emmanuel Macron, acknowledging the shift in global dynamics since Trump’s return to power, stated Wednesday that he is considering extending France’s nuclear protection to European allies.

For Trump’s staunchest supporters, his ability to enrage Democrats, the media, and foreign governments is a success in itself. His populist nationalist base views the destruction of government institutions as a necessary step toward dismantling the “administrative state.”

Trump’s leadership style was honed in his Manhattan real estate empire, where he used aggressive tactics—making extreme demands, engaging in public disputes, and abruptly shifting positions—to throw opponents off balance. Now, he employs the same approach in politics, using unpredictability as a tool to consolidate power amid disorder.

However, while unpredictability may be a strength in business negotiations, it is a liability when managing a country, an economy, and international alliances—where stability and consistency are essential.

“It’s just constant, and it’s exhausting,” said Julian Vikan Karaguesian, a former Canadian Ministry of Finance official, about Trump’s aggressive trade policies. “It’s almost surreal. Is it real? Is it going to be real this time?” Now a lecturer at McGill University, Karaguesian added, “Maybe the modus operandi here is uncertainty. It’s not tariffs, it’s not anything else, but intentionally creating a sense of chaos and a sense of uncertainty.”

Trump’s Auto Tariff Reversal

Trump’s sudden decision Wednesday to pause auto tariffs for a month, just a day after imposing a blanket 25% tariff on Canada and Mexico, highlights his tendency to second-guess his own moves.

Market forces may have influenced his reversal. The announcement led to a near-500-point rebound in the Dow Jones Industrial Average, following two days of significant losses.

CNN reported that Trump relented after discussions with the CEOs of the Big Three automakers. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt later stated that Trump was open to “hearing about additional exemptions.”

The notion that corporate executives can lobby for exemptions unavailable to ordinary Americans contradicts principles of economic fairness. Trump has repeatedly dismissed the value of rules-based systems that prevent patronage and corruption—characteristics more common in autocratic regimes.

This suggests that Trump prefers using tariff threats as leverage rather than enforcing them. However, by repeatedly issuing and retracting threats, he is creating uncertainty for businesses, disrupting supply chains, and discouraging consumer spending—factors that could harm the already slowing economy.

“There’s so much uncertainty about what the administration is doing that the mere prospect of tariffs is creating a big anchor on the economy,” said Bharat Ramamurti, former deputy director of Biden’s National Economic Council. “The prospect of significant tariffs on our allies has resulted in withholding investments and preemptive price increases that are going to be borne by small businesses and, ultimately, by consumers.”

Long-Term Risks of Trump’s Approach

Trump’s pattern of antagonizing allies while seemingly advancing Russia’s interests in Ukraine could weaken U.S. power in the long run.

“What we have seen this week is that the dollar has suffered a very sharp decline,” said Ruchir Sharma, founder of Breakout Capital, on CNN International. “It’s revealing that the rest of the world is getting its act together … and I think investors are beginning to notice there are other countries worth investing in, given all this policy volatility that is emerging in the U.S.”

The broader risk is that another four years of Trump’s policies could reshape the global economic landscape in a way that diminishes U.S. influence rather than reinforcing it. While geography ensures that Canada and Mexico will continue trading with the U.S., both nations may also find it beneficial to deepen ties with China. Similarly, the European Union—expecting its own round of Trump-imposed tariffs—could seek economic partnerships elsewhere.

America’s closest allies have long-standing ties with Washington and do not want to see it falter. However, they also have national interests to protect. While Canada lacks the economic strength to win a trade war against the U.S., its patience is wearing thin over Trump’s combative tactics.

Doug Ford, the Premier of Ontario, Canada’s largest economic hub, insists that Trump must eliminate tariffs altogether instead of selectively lifting them by industry.

“All this gives us is uncertainty again,” Ford told CNN’s Phil Mattingly on Wednesday. “There is one person that’s causing that problem today: that’s President Trump.”

How Trump vs. Judiciary Could Bring a Constitutional Crisis, According to the Author of “The Courts and the President”

Ajay GhoshNation, Opinion 0

Newswise — Charles Wise, an expert in public law and public administration, said history offers insight into ramifications of any potential clash between our nation’s judiciary and President Donald Trump.

Wise is faculty emeritus at the John Glenn College of Public Affairs and author of the 2024 book “The Courts and the President.”

For a very long time, he said, judicial review was supportive of presidential directives, but in more recent times those rulings have been more restrictive.

As of now, courts have issued temporary restraining orders preventing implementation to allow time for court hearings on Trump’s policy orders. If the courts eventually decide against them on constitutionality or federal statute grounds, the president and federal agencies will have to decide whether to comply. If they decide not to comply, Wise said, then it could be termed that we have a Constitutional crisis, and the courts will have to decide what to do to try to enforce its orders. Officials of agencies refusing to comply could be held in contempt of court and face court-ordered penalties including professional discipline, fines or even jail time. That could precipitate a clash between federal law enforcement agencies who have to enforce the order. The resulting public reaction would affect whether the administration will pursue its actions.

Wise said the tension between the president and the courts has implications for presidential, Congressional and federal agency policymaking. Presidents, their appointees and administrative agencies who want to implement new policy may need to first determine how specific statutes authorize them to do so. If there’s not a clear statute of a previous decision by Congress, then the administration will need to get that approval from Congress before proceeding.

While obtaining Congressional authorization through the lawmaking process involves more than one branch and can be complicated, the country’s founders never meant for government to be simple, Wise said.

“That’s what the whole checks and balances system was about,” he said. “They wanted it to be complicated, for very good reason. They thought this would produce deliberative action in which proposers of legislation had to demonstrate widespread public support, and that any threats to people’s freedom would be stopped in such a process.”

Wise, who teaches federal policy and management to students in the Glenn College’s Master of Public Affairs-Washington, D.C., program, has published extensively in public administration journals and law reviews. In 2024 he published the book “The Courts and the President,” which analyzes the evolution of federal judicial treatment of presidential directives and the legal bases and principles employed in federal court decisions. It also illuminates the implications for presidential, congressional and federal agency policymaking. Wise also served in the United States Department of Justice, first as special assistant for policy analysis in the Office of Legislative Affairs and then as director of Intergovernmental Relations for the department.

The Nineteenth Vision (20th February, 2025)

Kiran BhatOpinion, Religion 0

Prayer 1: As a Roman Catholic, Praying from Cebu City, Visayas, the Philippines

Oh heavenly Father, dear heavenly Father, I have sinned. I know that I am a human being. Nasayud ko nga ang pagpakasala kabahin sa pagka tawo. But Father, oh heavenly Father, each day I sin and it hurts me.

He who descends from me sins, and he doesn’t take the time to pray and seek repentance, and that hurts me too.

I am praying for my son’s sins. I am praying for my sins that come because he sins and he is my blood, and because he sins I sin as the one who gave him life.

Tomas was a good boy. He never got into trouble. There were arguable signs he was different. Once when he was little a Carmen Soriano song came on the radio, and he danced to it. He used his thighs and flipped his head around like he had long hair. I didn’t think a single thing about it. He was a child. Little children do all sorts of things like running around naked or putting their hands all over their private parts. Otherwise Tomas was like any other boy. He liked Thomas the Tank Engine and those fighting guys from the animes. He didn’t have a lot of friends, but we wanted him to study and to pay more attention to school than making friends. My husband is a very successful and respected doctor in the community, and we were looking forward to Tomas becoming one too.

Tomas doesn’t live with us anymore. It has been over fifteen years since he left us, or perhaps close to seventeen, eighteen. I haven’t done the math. You think it would get easier because it has been years, but every day I miss him. He doesn’t live with us to punish us. He claims he is gay and wants to live with other men, and we would never have let him if he had stayed in Cebu.

It isn’t right to sin and be proud of sinning, the way he does.

That is why I pray, my Lord. Every day I sit down and I pray. You already know this. I love you for your forgiveness and I love you for your charity and I love you for listening. Oh my Lord. You are my one true Lord.

I don’t feel forgiven yet. It’s not you, my Lord. It’s him. He has to seek his own forgiveness. He has to kneel and ask to be saved. I’m sure right now he is putting his lips on the private parts of a man. Tomorrow some man will be wrapping his legs around him, and then another day he will bend down to five or six of them and arouse them at once. He should know that what he is doing is wrong. Every day he should pray and be begging you not to send him to Hell.

It’s like he is doing everything in his power to be sent there. It’s like no matter how much I pray for him to go forward on the right track, he keeps making the wrong decisions.

My sister and I had a talk a few days back. She told me that I should defy the very words I have been taught and learn in my heart that it is acceptable to be gay. She has nothing but the best of intent. I love her for trying, and I forgive her for giving input where it doesn’t belong.

I was fine with what she said when we spoke, but since then I have been angry. It feels like nails are being pressed into my skin each time I talk to you. Who is she to reject our teachings? Has she not read Leviticus? Has she not read Corinthians and Romans? Paul says that effeminates will never inherit the Kingdom of God. Who is she to allow my son to have pleasure in this life, only to be damned in his next?

God, teach me to forgive her. God, teach me to forgive my son too.

I am his mother. I love him more than he loves himself. My son thinks he knows what is best for him. Kana maoy idiocy. He put crayons in his mouth as a boy and thought chemistry was a useless subject in his teens. He’s going to random countries and teaching English. He doesn’t even tell me what countries he’s in.

I know he’s making nonsense for himself. I know he’s getting into a lot of trouble, and he doesn’t want me to know. I know he’s hurting and sad and alone. I don’t need him to tell me. A mother always knows the pain of his son, whether he confesses it or not.

He doesn’t want to come home. He doesn’t want to listen to me.

It’s as much my fault as it is his own that things are like this.

And yes, my sister is right on that front…perhaps if I learned to accept him, he would find a way to come back home.

But to accept him goes against everything I have been taught. I was formed to think in a certain way. And the way in which I was formed is the right way. I listened to my father and mother, and even though we didn’t live with money, we lived with dignity even until my father died and my mother married again. I didn’t seek further education. I got married and fulfilled the duties of my home. I listened to everyone and did everything right.

Why is it then that I feel so unhappy? Why do I feel like I have been deceived?

God, is there something you are trying to tell me?

How do you think I should feel about what my sister has asked?

I ask you time and time again, and you never answer, God. The doorbell has rung. I need to see who is here. I’ll come back to you tomorrow.

Please answer me tomorrow, my Lord. I’m so lost without your guidance.

Attempts to Undermine Gandhi’s Contribution to Freedom Movement: Musings on Gandhi’s Martyrdom Day

Ram PuniyaniOpinion, Nation 0

Eric Hobswam famously stated that History is as important to (sectarianism) Nationalism as poppy is to an opium addict. The right wing is surging with great speed; its ideologues keep a matching pace to construct the  history which suits their political agenda of exclusion of some and glorification of their past. In this direction medieval Indian history was the major one to be mauled by showing particularly that the medieval period of Indian history was an era of Islamic Imperialism and by projecting the Muslim Kings in bad light, which helped them create hate against today’s Muslims.

Even ancient Indian history, a golden period for them, was manipulated to show the Aryans, their ancestors were the indigenous people of this land. Coming to the freedom movement they first focused on Nehru, the colossus who articulated and practiced secularism in India. He was aware that practicing secularism in India is not easy as large sections of Indian society are in the grip of blind religiosity. He was the one to see the threat of majortarian (Hindu) communalism and equated it to fascism. He said minority communalism was at worst separatist. His mentor Gandhi, though murdered by the one who was trained by RSS and was working for Hindu Mahasabha, could not be demonized easily. Gandhi’s place in the global arena and in the heart of Indian people was at its peak.

Now as the communal right wing feels it is on firm feet, its ideologues are beginning the exercise of over projecting some of his shortcomings and undermining his contribution to freedom. This 30th January 2025 as the nation was paying tributes to the father of the nation many portals were relaying videos to propagate that Gandhi’s was just one of the efforts in India getting freedom. In various podcasts and social media channels they are propagating that Gandhi’s efforts had just a marginal effect on the British leaving India.

From the last few years glorification of Godse in the form of Twitter storms for ‘Mahatma Godse Amar Rahen’ (Long Live Godse) have been witnessed painfully. Ilk of Poonam Prasun Pandey have been enacting shooting of Gandhi’s effigy and then blood dripping from it have been a common site. Observing national mourning on 30th January by siren being sounded at 11 AM on 30 January for two minute silence has been muted. This year the Maharashtra state circular on two minute silence at 11 AM, did not mention even the name of Gandhi.

As we observed the Gandhi Martyrdom day on this 30th January many of these irritants flashed to our minds. He was given the honorific Mahatma by none other than Guru Ravindra Nath Tagore. It is propagated that Gandhi-Congress ignored Netaji Subhash Chandra bose. The fact is that Bose and Congress had some differences on strategy but the core agenda of freedom from British rule remained the same. It was Netaji who addressed Gandhi as ‘father of the Nation’. He also named one of his battalions of Azad Hind Fauz (Free India Army) as Gandhi battalion. It was Gandhi-Congress who fought the cases of prisoners of Fauz by forming a committee with top lawyers like Bhulabhai Desai, Kailashnath Katju and Jawaharlal Nehru.

Also the propaganda that Gandhi did not do anything to save Bhagat Singh’s hanging is being instilled into the social common sense. They hide the fact that it was Gandhi who wrote to Lord Irwin to cancel Bhagat Singh’s hanging. Irwin showed his inability to accept this request as all British officers in Punjab had threatened to resign if Gandhi’s request was accepted. Most interestingly Bhagat Singh requests his father Kishan Singh to support ‘General’ of the Freedom movement (Gandhi), which his father did by working for Congress.

The attempt to undermine Gandhi comes in the form of nitpicking the three major movements which Gandhi launched. The non cooperation movement of 1920 which was the first real attempt to involve the average people in the struggle against British, as per them was ineffective as it was withdrawn due to the Chauri Chaura incident, where the crowd had burnt to the police station killing many policemen. Also they allege that Gandhi’s support for Khilafat was demoralizing, as it related to supporting the restoration of the Ottoman Empire in Turkey. Let’s remember it was this move which brought in Muslims in large numbers into the vortex of popular anti British struggle. Also Mappila (Moplah) rebellion is supposed to have been an aggressive move by Muslims against Hindus. The fact is this rebellion was a rebellion of poor Muslim farmers against Janmis (Landlords, who were mostly Hindus), and the British authorities were protecting the interests of landlords.

As far as Civil disobedience of 1930 the counter is that it just led to Gandhi–Irwin Pact. This pact was a major step in furtherance of the pressure by Indian freedom Struggle. The accusation is that the Salt March did not lead to abolition of the salt tax which it aimed at. The fact is people could produce salt after this, its illegality was lifted.

As far as the 1942 ‘Do or Die’, ‘British Quit India’, it is true that as Gandhi and the major leaders of Congress were arrested; the movement did take a violent turn. The point is, it created a huge awareness about getting freedom from the British, it came as a culmination of the long process of creating mass consciousness which began picking up after the 1920’s Non Cooperation movement.

There is no denial that revolutionaries, Bhagat Singh and his likes, Subhash Bose’s Azad Hind Fauz and revolt of Naval ratings, were valuable add-ons to the whole process of rising consciousness among people towards longing for freedom and cementing the bonds of Indian-ness. Gandhi’s contribution is monumental as it created the fraternity, Indian-ness among the people. As Surendranath Bannerjee very aptly described it as “India: nation in the making”.

These were twin aspects of the freedom movement. One was to struggle against the British and two to ‘build a Nation: India’ through this. Gandhi understood that bringing people together is the core of the process of getting freedom. A Recent flourishing attempt by Right wing communalists totally ignores the process of people, masses waking up and constituting India, as a nation. This was the greatest endeavor for which Gandhi is really the ‘Father of the Nation’.

3 February, 2025: The Police Came and I Thought

Kiran BhatOpinion, Travel 0

set in Djibouti City, Djibouti

I was just looking outside of my hostel, at the vibrant mosque in front of me, and I was taking a picture, because I liked the contrast of the building’s white walls with the green of the minaret and the roof, and that is when the police officer came up. By instinct I turned around and walked away, and that made it worse. He was running, and shouting something, either in Somali or Arabic or some other language of the region I wouldn’t be able to make out, because I don’t speak anything of this part of the world, just some basic French, and obviously English, a but few people here speak in these languages.

Anyways, he came up and he started yelling at me, and that is when I was scared. He told me to open my phone. I wasn’t willing to do that. I wasn’t born and brought up in a country where police have the right to order me to do such things and without any reason. That is when he got mad, and he really started yelling, and two police officers who were nearby heard the noise and joined him.

I will be honest about one particular thing. The police officer who accosted me wasn’t that intimidating. He had a long face and buck-teeth, and he was significantly shorter than me. When I was taking that picture of the mosque he had been sitting on the stoop cleaning his teeth with his nails. It was only when he suddenly stood up and started walking in my direction that I even noticed him. Otherwise I was looking at the mosque and the piles of trash around it and remembering the people last night who were jostling near the market and the smells of the coffee wafting from the cafes on the other side of my hostel when I was having breakfast with a new friend from Canada the day before.

These two guys came and they were both tall and muscular and built, and one of them could speak broken English. That was the scariest part. He could tell me why I was in trouble.

‘You, open phone. You were taking photo of police officer.’

‘No, no,’ I immediately retorted, defending myself from what I genuinely felt was an incredulous accusation. ‘I was taking photo of the mosque.’

I did open my phone, because I knew what I wanted to take a picture of, and it wasn’t a picture of who I thought of at the time as a random guy doing nothing. But then the police officer snatched the phone out of my hands, and he scrolled through my photos, and he showed that exact same picture to me.

In the frame was the mosque in the centre, with some of the shops to the right, and at the bottom, the very bottom, a blur of black skin and blue uniform, which was only part of the upper half of the police officer.

‘That is the photo you’re complaining about?’ I actually asked. ‘He is barely in the photo! And I wasn’t taking a picture of him! I was taking a picture of the mosque! The mosque!’

I pointed as obviously as I could to what was clearly the focus of the photo, but instead of listening to me the police officer was taking the phone to the other police officers, showing it to them, and they were getting emboldened by what in their minds was proof of a foreigner doing obvious wrong.

‘We are taking you to police station,’ said the police officer.

‘No, no no,’ I was almost shouting, but I had no control of the situation. They were already walking in another direction, happy at having my phone in their hand. If I wanted my phone back I would have to follow them. But if I followed them I was off to a police station in a country where I didn’t know the local language and customs. The police were probably going to ask me for an exorbitant bribe, and if I didn’t pay that, they were probably going to be putting me in a jail. They didn’t care that I was a human who had no idea what was going on. I am sure they got a high at punishing a foreigner, and they were excited to have a chance to make some money off of one too.

I didn’t follow them. I wasn’t stupid enough to do so. Instead I went towards my hotel and I opened the door and shouted for help. It was eight in the morning. There was no one in the lobby. But the guard for the building noticed me. Though he didn’t speak any common language with me he noticed the desperation in my eyes, and ran in the building.

What I did also antagonised the police officers.

‘What are you doing? You come to the police station. You come now!’

‘Just wait! Wait!’

And I prayed and hoped that they did, at least long enough so that the person who owned the hostel would come out to help me.

Luckily she was out within a minute. She was an older Somali woman from Djibouti who had been brought up in Canada. She knew perfect English and asked me immediately, ‘What’s going on?’

‘They think I took a photo of a police officer,’ I explained. ‘They are trying to send me to jail.’

The owner of the hotel took a second to look eyes with me. Though her face and body were completely covered except for the eyes, I could tell she was scanning everything I was thinking and feeling, and assessed that I was telling the truth.

Then she turned to the police officers, and started bartering to them in their local language. I didn’t understand what she was saying, but because the owner of the hotel was significantly older than all of us, possibly in her fifties, as well as a respected member of the city, I could tell they were willing to listen to her properly, unlike how they behaved with me. They shouted at each other for some time but then their tempers cooled and the tones in the voices evened out. She got them to give her my phone, and she looked at the pictures herself. She came to my side and said, ‘Delete every photo you can of Djibouti, immediately, at once.’

I followed her instructions. I went into my photos, pressed the select all button, and deleted everything, and then went to the deleted photos section, and cleared them fully from my phone. I had a lot of pictures of my family and friends on my phone, as well as a lot of captivating snapshots from my days in Nairobi and Johannesburg, my explorations of Uganda and Rwanda, and even some striking photos from my time here, whether from the salt cakes around Lake Assal or the busy beaches around the coast of Djibouti City. At that moment I didn’t care that everything I did in the last half year was being erased. I wanted to save myself, and only my survival at that moment mattered.

The owner of the hotel showed my phone, completely empty of photos. I could tell she was saying there was literally nothing there. The police looked at the photos, saw there was nothing, and went on their way. They didn’t apologise for bothering me. They didn’t even look me in the eyes.

I thought I was going to go for a walk around town, but after everything that happened I needed to sit down. The sofas in the lobby were empty. I just collapsed onto one with my eyes unable to focus on anything.

Meanwhile the hotel owner scolded me.

‘Why are you taking photos of the police? In no country in the world is it appropriate to take photos of police officers?’

She went on and on, and a part of me wanted to defend myself, reminding her that I didn’t even see the officer, and all I wanted to do was capture a moment of the sun rising a little bit over the mosque, and giving a little bit of a pink and orange flair to the sky.

But honestly in my mind that wasn’t what I was thinking really. What I was thinking was that it had been some time since I had been in Africa. Some of the months I was in Johannesburg, and then I travelled in the south, and after that I went to Nairobi, crashed there. I saw the highlights of Zanzibar and the Masai Mara, and I was just thinking of exploring the horn. Online classes were going well, and I was able to travel while learning an income, but was I enjoying myself?

I was thinking about that then and there, that I really missed how easy life was in London. The job I had barely paid me anything for how expensive London is, but I liked teaching migrants over little kids, and the job was challenging, and rewarding. I didn’t like pointing to slides and talking to children, though the company, based in China, paid far better, especially given my living costs. And then London is such a colourful city, full of people from all over the world. Johannesburg had its highs, and Nairobi is an amazing amalgamation of natural beauty and wildlife with big city feels, but I couldn’t stand either for longer than a month.

I wanted to leave Africa. I thought I wanted to travel and explore and see every country here, but for one country that rewarded me there were five that just challenged me, and not in a good way. There was a part of me that wanted to see the West and the Central parts, but I also knew that the Internet would be as bad in those parts as it is in Djibouti. And most likely I’d get in trouble for this reason or that. I didn’t like the fact that people were targeting me because I looked richer or they looked like they could get something out of me. It didn’t help that I grew up feeling different from others, and was bullied a lot for it, and something about these experiences were rubbing salt on a completely unrelated wound, in a way I was still not able to understand.

I sat for some time and let that woman chew me out. She felt like an auntie for me in a lot of ways, and I appreciated her effort in trying to instruct me. At the same time for the rest of the day my mind refused to waiver on a very particular conclusion that was firming up inside of my head.

I had a job that allowed me to be anywhere in the world I wanted to be. I hadn’t seen all of Africa but I had seen some thirteen countries and I was satisfied with what I saw. If I was free to be anywhere in the world I wanted, why was I still in this part of the world despite every thought urging me to leave? I was trying to satisfy a country count that didn’t matter to me, and there were so many other parts of the world I haven’t touched yet, like Southeast Asia or the Middle East.

The point is that I wasn’t living exactly how I wanted to, despite arranging my life to give me the freedom to do so, and that made no sense. This experience with the police was horrible, just like the phone-snatching I went through in Johannesburg was horrifying, but these things were happening because the universe was telling me to move on, and I wasn’t listening.

I was going to be in Djibouti for a few more days, partly because I wanted to cross into Somaliland and then fly from there towards Addis Ababa. I decided to make a promise to myself. I wasn’t going to let myself be swayed by impulse and excitement. I was going to try to think to myself, really know what I want, and from that, make a decision, one that might involve hopping continents or not, changing jobs or sticking with what I’ve chosen, but one that would fundamentally make me feel happier with the way things were going in my life, and one that would make me feel like I’m finally on track to life life the way I was meant to.

Trump’s Pardons of Capitol Rioters Raise Fears of Emboldened Extremism

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

Former President Donald Trump’s decision to pardon around 1,500 individuals involved in the January 6 Capitol riot has drawn significant reactions from far-right activists and sparked deep concern among legal and extremism experts. The mass pardons, granted on Monday, included many who had been convicted of violent offenses, with far-right groups hailing the move as a reaffirmation of their loyalty to Trump.

Far-right activists celebrated the pardons, often echoing Trump’s own rhetoric. The California chapter of the Proud Boys posted on Telegram, “We’ll never forget, we’ll never forgive. You can’t get rid of us.” Similarly, a post on X from one pardoned rioter warned, “You are on notice. This is not going to end well for you,” addressing those who had supported the prosecution of Capitol rioters.

Enrique Tarrio, the former national leader of the Proud Boys who had been serving a 22-year sentence for seditious conspiracy, was among those pardoned. After his release, Tarrio appeared on conspiracy theorist Alex Jones’ podcast, stating, “The people who did this, they need to feel the heat. We need to find and put them behind bars for what they did.”

Experts worry that these pardons could embolden extremists and increase the likelihood of political violence, particularly in contentious areas like border security and elections. Heidi Beirich, co-founder of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism, remarked, “This move doesn’t just rewrite the narrative of January 6. It sets a dangerous precedent that political violence is a legitimate tool in American democracy.”

While not all those pardoned were involved in violent actions, the clemency order has amplified the voices of some individuals, raising concerns about its impact. Michael Premo, director of the documentary Homegrown, which chronicled the experiences of right-wing activists, noted, “This is going to build that base of support so when the next election cycle comes around, there’s the potential for Trump to hold onto power or to ensure his successor comes into office.”

Trump’s sweeping clemency fulfilled a campaign promise to the rioters he often referred to as “patriots” and “political prisoners.” The order dismissed or pardoned charges against nearly all individuals involved in the January 6 riots, including those convicted of violent attacks on police officers and obstructing official proceedings. Jacob Chansley, widely recognized for his horned fur hat during the riot, was among those pardoned. Celebrating the news, he wrote on X, “NOW I AM GONNA BUY SOME MOTHER … GUNS!!!”

For victims of the riot, the pardons have created a sense of helplessness. Former Metropolitan Police Officer Michael Fanone, who suffered a heart attack after being assaulted by a rioter with a stun gun, expressed frustration. Unable to obtain a protective order against his assailants, Fanone lamented, “We have no recourse outside of buying a gun.”

Critics argue that pardoning violent offenders sends a troubling message. Barb McQuade, a former U.S. attorney in Michigan, warned, “It signals that political violence is acceptable when it’s committed in service of the leader.”

Many pardoned individuals have openly expressed renewed devotion to Trump. Ali Alexander, a key organizer of the “Stop the Steal” rallies, declared in a Telegram livestream, “I would storm the Capitol again for Donald Trump. I would start a militia for Donald Trump. I dare say I’d— I would die for Donald Trump, obviously.”

Tarrio, who had once referred to January 6 as a “national embarrassment” during his sentencing, now praises Trump as “the best president, I think, since George Washington.” Speaking on Jones’ podcast, Tarrio expressed his enthusiasm, saying, “I love you, I love Elon Musk, and I love President Donald Trump, and I’m happy that all of us are going to be working together to make America great again.”

Stewart Rhodes, founder of the Oath Keepers militia, was also among those whose sentences were commuted. Rhodes, who was convicted of orchestrating a weekslong plot culminating in the Capitol attack, referred to January 6 as “Patriots’ Day.” Speaking outside the District of Columbia jail, Rhodes asserted, “I’m only guilty of opposing those who are destroying the country. We stood up for our country because we knew the election was stolen. Biden did not get 81 million votes.”

The claims of election fraud have been widely debunked. Recounts, audits, and reviews in battleground states—including those conducted under Republican leadership—affirmed the validity of the 2020 election results. Trump’s own attorney general acknowledged that there was no evidence of widespread fraud, and an Associated Press review found no substantial irregularities that could have affected the outcome.

Rhodes, who visited Capitol Hill to advocate for the release of another defendant, maintained his innocence, stating, “I didn’t lead anything on January 6 and bear no responsibility for the riot.” He described the actions of other Oath Keepers who entered the Capitol as “stupid” but not criminal.

Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat who served on the House committee investigating the attack, expressed concerns about whether the pardoned individuals had reformed. “The question is, are they contrite? Are they repentant? Are they reformed, or do they still pose a threat to police officers and to government in different parts of the country?” Raskin asked.

Legal experts and historians have raised broader concerns about the implications of Trump’s actions. Larry Rosenthal, chair of the UC Berkeley Center for Right-Wing Studies, compared the situation to historical instances of fascism, where private militias worked on behalf of political parties to suppress dissent. Rosenthal noted that militia groups active at the southern border might now seek endorsement from a future Trump administration. “The question is whether Trump’s administration will bring them into the fold,” he said.

When asked if groups like the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers would have a role in his movement, Trump replied, “Well, we have to see. They’ve been given a pardon. I thought their sentences were ridiculous and excessive.”

As the pardons continue to stir debates, the long-term impact on American democracy and the potential for increased political violence remain significant concerns. For many, the clemency order signals a troubling normalization of political violence and raises questions about the future of justice and accountability in the United States.

Trump’s second inaugural address: Immigration, culture, and conflict

William A. Galston And Elaine Kamarck At BrookingsOpinion 0

Previewing Donald Trump’s second inaugural address, several of his political advisors suggested that its tone would be gentler and its substance more unifying than was his “American Carnage” inaugural address eight years ago. They must have been misinformed as his spoken words continued to emphasize American crisis and decline and were hardly unifying or uplifting.

While there were occasional rhetorical bows toward unity, the thrust of the speech was an all-out assault on illegal immigration and on aspects of American culture loathed by social conservatives (with scant attention to any plans to bring down the cost of living, one of the issues that elected him). He wants to be a peacemaker overseas but a warrior at home. And in a speech traditionally devoted to selfless themes, President Trump spoke about the extent of his electoral victory and professed his belief that he had been saved by God to save the nation.

The speech celebrated the broadening of the Republican coalition that Trump has achieved. He praised Martin Luther King and promised that “we will strive to make his dream a reality.” To the Black and Hispanic communities, he said, “I want to thank you, we set records [measured in votes] and I will not forget it.” Absent, however, was a nod to President Biden, Vice President Harris, or any of his predecessors—or an olive branch to the 48.4% of Americans who voted for Harris.

Surprisingly, President Trump had little to say about his economic plans or efforts to tackle inflation, preferring instead to spend much of his time on the “invasion” of illegal immigrants into this country. Indeed, this was the portion of the address that was most detailed and concrete. To counter this “invasion,” Trump promised to declare a national emergency at the southern border, reinstate the remain in Mexico policy, end the practice of catch and release, send troops to the southern border, and designate cartels as foreign terrorist organizations.

In addition to the war at the southern border Trump, promised to wage a culture war, which he termed a “revolution of common sense.” Under his administration, the United States government would only recognize two genders, male and female, eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs in the government (especially in the military), and “end the practice of trying to engineer race and gender into every aspect of public life.”

Trump promised a golden age with no new overseas wars. He did not mention Russia or the war in Ukraine, but he did note his plan to expand our nation, including “increas[ing] our territory” and “[planting] the Stars and Stripes on the planet Mars.” (Elon Musk smiled broadly at this phrase.) He declared that “We didn’t give the Panama Canal to China, we gave it to Panama, and we’re taking it back.” He did not say how he would do this without starting a new war.

The newly inaugurated president used the occasion to announce two name changes. The Gulf of Mexico will henceforth be called “the Gulf of America,” and Mount Denali will revert to its name before the Obama administration—Mount McKinley. Indeed, William McKinley (who was a big fan of tariffs) seems to have replaced Andrew Jackson as Trump’s favorite president. What this portends for the fate of economic populism in the new administration is anyone’s guess. But it cannot be an accident that Trump chose to resuscitate the phrase “manifest destiny.” We will find out whether our destiny includes control of Greenland and Canada, as he has suggested.

Along with his unscripted speech later in the afternoon that talked about the stolen 2020 election and his grievances against political opponents, Trump’s second inaugural address is consistent with his campaign, in which he worked tirelessly to intensify his support rather than broaden it. If he wishes to maintain majority support, however, he must recognize that the voters who put him over the top were not fervent MAGA supporters but rather swing voters who decided that he offered a better chance than his opponent of solving specific problems, high prices for the basics of daily life first among them. If he governs as a hardliner on immigration and cultural issues, he may solidify his loyal base, but if he fails to take down high prices or restore economic hopes of upward mobility, he risks losing swing voters while reenergizing his disheartened opponents. In an era of narrow and shifting majorities, this is a risk that he ignores at his peril.

Trump Faces Sentencing Amid Historic Return to the Presidency

Staff ReporterOpinion, USA 0

Before his return to the White House, President-elect Donald Trump will face sentencing in a New York court for his conviction in the “hush money” case. Justice Juan Merchan ruled on Friday that the sentencing will occur on January 10, just ten days before Trump’s inauguration, marking an unprecedented moment in U.S. history.

Trump’s conviction stems from a $130,000 payment made by his former attorney, Michael Cohen, to adult film actress Stormy Daniels during the closing days of the 2016 presidential campaign. The payment was intended to secure Daniels’ silence about an alleged affair with Trump. The case and the subsequent conviction have placed Trump in the unique position of being the first former president in American history to be criminally convicted.

The decision concludes two months of speculation over the case following Trump’s narrow election victory on November 5. Despite the legal cloud, Trump’s supporters propelled him back into office, making him the first individual to win the presidency after being convicted of a crime.

Trump’s legal team filed a motion to dismiss the conviction, citing the demands of his new role as president-elect. They argued that his election victory necessitated the dismissal of the charges. However, Justice Merchan dismissed these claims in his Friday ruling, stating, “This court finds that neither the vacatur of the jury’s verdicts nor dismissal of the indictment are required by the Presidential immunity doctrine, the Presidential Transition Act, or the Supremacy Clause.”

While sentencing options included incarceration, Merchan indicated that Trump would not serve time behind bars. He also suggested that Trump could attend the sentencing virtually. “It seems proper at this juncture to make known the court’s inclination to not impose any sentence of incarceration,” Merchan wrote, adding that prosecutors concurred with this approach.

Merchan’s ruling highlighted the constitutional limits of presidential immunity, noting that even Trump’s motion to dismiss acknowledged the lack of immunity for a president-elect. “Undoubtedly, the transition period between election and the taking of the presidential oath is one filled with enormous responsibility,” Merchan wrote. “Yet, even (the) defendant in his motion refers to presidential immunity as one relating specifically to a sitting president no fewer than 33 times.”

Despite the conviction’s potential for up to four years of jail time, Merchan’s ruling opened the door to alternatives like probation or fines. Trump’s legal team shifted their tone following the election, adopting what Merchan described as rhetoric “dangerously close to crossing the line.” He criticized their language, stating, “Counsel has resorted to language, indeed rhetoric, that has no place in legal pleadings.”

The Manhattan District Attorney’s office, led by Alvin Bragg, proposed several unconventional measures to address the unprecedented situation. These included postponing proceedings until after Trump’s presidency or terminating the case with an acknowledgment of the unresolved verdict. Bragg’s team argued for creative solutions to balance the justice system’s integrity with the demands of Trump’s presidency.

Outside the courtroom, Trump’s communications director, Steven Cheung, condemned the case as a politically motivated attack. He labeled the proceedings a “witch hunt” and described Merchan as “deeply conflicted,” stating, “This lawless case should have never been brought, and the Constitution demands that it be immediately dismissed.”

Trump’s trial, which began in March 2023 with his indictment, captivated the nation. The seven-week trial, coinciding with the Republican presidential primaries, saw a jury deliver a unanimous guilty verdict in May. Inside the courtroom, Trump often appeared disengaged, at times leaning back with his eyes closed or seemingly dozing off. Outside, he continued to campaign, surrounded by Republican allies, attorneys, and Secret Service agents.

The trial revealed intricate schemes involving Trump, Cohen, and former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker. Prosecutors presented evidence of efforts to suppress damaging stories about Trump’s 2016 campaign through hush money payments and nondisclosure agreements. Pecker testified about three such arrangements, including the $130,000 payment to Daniels.

Cohen detailed how he was covertly reimbursed for the payment through falsified business records. Prosecutors argued that Trump authorized the scheme while in office, resulting in 34 falsified records disguised as payments for legal services. These records, in reality, covered Cohen’s reimbursements.

Witnesses recounted Trump’s relief that Daniels’ story remained hidden before the election. The jury deliberated for less than two days before delivering their verdict. When the foreperson read the 34 guilty counts, Trump, who had frequently stared at the jury during the trial, avoided eye contact.

Justice Merchan reprimanded Trump’s team for violating a gag order prohibiting public statements about jurors and witnesses, holding him in contempt ten times during the trial. Merchan also referenced concerns raised by the Supreme Court’s chief justice about political leaders undermining judicial institutions, warning that Trump’s attorneys’ arguments could have a chilling effect on the judiciary.

After the sentencing date was set, Trump’s reaction was defiant. Emerging from the courtroom, he grasped his son Eric’s hand, addressed the cameras, and declared his innocence. He described the proceedings as unjust and resumed his presidential campaign.

As January 10 approaches, Trump’s legal troubles and his return to the White House promise to make his sentencing a historic moment. The case not only underscores the challenges of balancing justice with political realities but also marks a pivotal chapter in America’s legal and political history.

Democrats Grapple with Identity Crisis Following 2024 Election Defeat

Staff ReporterOpinion, Politics 0

Democrats analyzing their sweeping losses in the 2024 elections are uncovering deeper concerns about their party’s identity and approach. According to recent focus group findings by the progressive group Navigator Research, the issues go beyond the leadership of Kamala Harris or Joe Biden, pointing instead to broader, systemic problems.

The research included three focus groups, highlighting that even past Democratic supporters now view the party as weak and overly preoccupied with diversity and catering to elites. When asked to compare the Democratic Party to an animal, one participant chose an ostrich, stating, “They’ve got their heads in the sand and are absolutely committed to their own ideas, even when they’re failing.” Another likened the party to koalas, describing them as “complacent and lazy about getting policy wins that we really need.” A third participant bluntly declared that Democrats are “not a friend of the working class anymore.”

These findings, shared first with POLITICO, illustrate the uphill battle Democrats face as they sift through the aftermath of November’s significant losses. The party now enters an era of a second Trump presidency without a clear leader or unified plan to improve its electoral prospects. While some Democrats point fingers at President Biden, others attribute the losses to inflation or what they describe as “losing hold of culture.” However, the focus groups suggest the challenges are far more entrenched and could have implications extending beyond a single election cycle.

Rachael Russell, director of polling and analytics at Navigator Research, emphasized the gravity of the situation. “This weakness they see — [Democrats] not getting things done, not being able to actually fight for people — is something that needs to be figured out,” she explained. “It might not be the message, it might be the policy. It might be something a little bit deeper that has to be addressed by the party.”

The focus groups, conducted by the Democratic polling firm GBAO immediately after the election, included three categories of voters: young men in battleground states who backed Biden in 2020 but switched to Trump in 2024; voters in battleground states who supported Biden in 2020 but abstained in 2024; and voters in blue states who had previously supported Democrats, a third-party candidate, or skipped voting in 2020 but chose Trump in 2024.

“I think what the Democratic elites and their politicians believe is often very different from what the average Democratic voter is,” said a Georgia man who had supported Biden in 2020 but shifted to Trump in 2024. “The elites that run the Democratic Party — I think they’re way too obsessed with appealing to these very far-left social progressivism that’s very popular on college campuses.”

The perception of disconnect between Democratic leadership and everyday voters was a recurring theme. Participants expressed a belief that the party prioritizes progressive ideals embraced by academia over practical solutions for the working class, a sentiment that has eroded trust in the party’s ability to represent mainstream concerns.

The focus groups were complemented by a national post-election survey conducted by GBAO. This poll, which included 1,000 respondents, found that Trump received his highest approval rating since leaving office in 2020, with 47% viewing him favorably and 50% disapproving. These results align with the cautious optimism expressed by focus group participants about Trump’s second term.

Russell, however, suggested that Trump’s improved ratings might be a temporary phenomenon. She described the post-election period as a “honeymoon” phase, predicting that public opinion could shift once Trump begins enacting policies. “Once things start happening, it’s going to take a turn, and so it’s going to rely really heavily on the actions in the first 100 days to see how we go from here,” she said.

Despite their electoral struggles, Democrats may find opportunities to resonate with voters on key issues. Russell pointed out that topics like abortion rights, health care, and taxing the wealthy still hold significant appeal among the electorate. Additionally, some voters expressed concerns that Trump might overreach, particularly on trade tariffs, which could create openings for the Democratic Party to regain support.

The GBAO survey highlighted a disconnect between voter priorities and perceptions of Republican leadership. Two-thirds of respondents identified inflation as the most pressing issue for the incoming president to address. However, only one-third believed it was a priority for Trump or the Republican Party.

These findings underscore the complex challenges facing Democrats as they seek to rebuild. While some strategists argue that refining the party’s message could address voter concerns, others believe the problem may lie in deeper structural issues. The party’s inability to present itself as a champion of the working class and its perceived focus on elite and progressive causes have alienated many former supporters.

As Democrats face the reality of a second Trump presidency, their path forward remains uncertain. The focus group feedback suggests that reconnecting with disillusioned voters will require more than just adjusting campaign strategies. It may necessitate a fundamental reexamination of the party’s priorities, policies, and approach to governance.

Without a clear leader or cohesive strategy, Democrats risk further alienation from a voter base that increasingly views them as out of touch with the needs of everyday Americans. As one focus group participant summarized, the party must address perceptions of weakness and inaction to regain the trust of the electorate. Whether they can rise to the challenge remains to be seen.

Boiling Issue Of WAQF In Kerala

Dr. Mathew Joys, Las VegasOpinion 0
The not-so-transparent  Munambam dispute has become a major political debate in Kerala. Christian and Muslim religious leaders are demanding that the ongoing Munambam protest be abandoned and the path of consensus be adopted. Palayam Imam Dr. V.P. Suhaib Maulavi said that the Munambam issue should be resolved amicably without disrupting social harmony and peace and without causing hardship to the residents. BJP leaders, including Union Minister Suresh Gopi, have accused the Waqf Board of going too far.
The protest, led by Christian groups and Hindu residents, demanded a speedy resolution and recognition of their property rights. The Syro-Malabar Church stands against the Waqf Board’s plan to claim land for 600 families in Kerala, with the support of the BJP. The efforts and stance taken by Christians under the leadership of Varappuzha Archbishop Joseph Kalathiparambil are highly commendable and appreciative.
Apart from the fishermen’s issue, there are also allegations that the slogan of ‘Muslim’ and ‘Waqf’ is an attempt to create division. It is also said that there is a conspiracy to divide the Muslim and Christian communities in the name of Munambam. Those who oppose the Waqf Act in its current form say that if the Waqf Board claims any property in India, it will be theirs and there is no contempt of court for it.
Origin and historical background of the dispute.
The Munambam Waqf land dispute revolves around 404 acres of land on the Munambam coast in Ernakulam district of Kerala. 600 families, mainly Christians from the Latin Catholic community and Hindus from the backward classes, live on this land. These families have been living on this land for decades. The Kerala State Waqf Board claimed ownership of the land, citing a waqf deed registered in 1950. However, the residents argue that they have the legal right to the land, which they purchased from Farooq College decades ago.
The origin of the controversy
The land was leased out by the Travancore royal family to Abdul Sattar Musa Sait, a prominent merchant in the area, in 1902. In 1950, Sait’s son-in-law, Mohammed Siddique Sait, submitted the land to the president of the Farooq College Management Committee in Kozhikode and registered the waqf deed. The deed specifically mentioned that the land would be used for charitable and educational purposes as per Islamic law. In the 1960s, the process of evicting the residents who had occupied the Farooq College land began, leading to a legal battle. These residents, who had been living in pockets of the land for generations, have no official documents to prove their ownership. Finally, the college management decided to settle the matter out of court with the residents and sold the land to them in pieces at market prices. However, the sale became another headache as the college management did not disclose that the land they were selling was a waqf property as per the documents. Instead, they cited a “gift deed” registered in 1950 as the basis of ownership. The fact that the land was a waqf property was omitted from the sale details, which led to future disputes. Later, the Kerala Waqf Board argued that selling waqf land without the permission of the Waqf Board was illegal under the Waqf Act.
The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024, underscores the Modi government’s broader plan to reshape the socio-political landscape. In India, the problems of misuse and misappropriation of waqf properties are real and need reform. In 2019, a decade after the Nisar Commission reported its findings, the Kerala Waqf Board decided to take action and voluntarily declared the land as waqf property, under Sections 40 and 41 of the Waqf Act, 1995. The Revenue Department stopped collecting land tax from the landowners, effectively undermining the claims of the owners. In 2022, the Kerala state government overturned the Waqf Board’s order. But the board challenged this decision in the Kerala High Court. The court issued a stay on the state government’s action, leaving the residents in legal limbo. Currently, several appeals are pending before the courts challenging the claims made by the residents and the Waqf Board.
The Waqf deed originally mentioned 404 acres of land , and the actual land available today is much less due to natural erosion caused by the Arabian Sea and the Periyar River. According to the 2022 survey by the Revenue Department, out of the 404 acres, only 225 acres remain. This raises further questions about whether the original claim to the 404 acres of land is still legally viable. From the residents’ perspective, this is not just a land dispute, but a direct threat to their livelihood and financial stability. Since they no longer receive valid land tax receipts, they are unable to mortgage these properties for loans, which is adding to their financial hardship. Many of these families work as fishermen and daily wage earners. It is not financially viable for them to sustain the long legal battles. The residents argue that they legally purchased the land from Farooq College decades ago and have been paying taxes ever since. They claim that the Waqf Board’s actions threaten their livelihoods as the lack of valid tax receipts prevents them from using their properties as collateral for loans.
The protest is being led by Christian organisations, including the Kerala Catholic Bishops’ Council, demanding an end to the harassment. Muslim organisations, including the Indian Union Muslim League, have assured that they will not try to evict the residents and are in favour of an out-of-court settlement.
What is a WAQF??
According to Islamic rules, it is property that is now available only for religious or charitable purposes, and any other use or sale of the property is prohibited. According to Sharia law, once a waqf is established and the property is dedicated to the waqf, it remains a waqf property forever. Waqf means that the ownership of the property is now taken away from the person making the waqf and transferred to Allah. According to Sharia, this property is now dedicated to Allah forever, which makes the waqf irrevocable in nature.
Another interesting aspect of waqf is that an apartment in your housing society, if the owner of that apartment decides to give it as a waqf, it can be converted into a mosque any day without any consent from the other members of the society.
Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan justified his government’s approach by saying that the government stands with the long-term residents of Munambam. He dismissed the BJP’s campaign, accusing it of an attempt to mislead the people.
Since it is an issue that affects religious harmony and the lives of the poor, it is hoped that the government and the courts will take urgent steps as soon as possible to resolve the Munambam issue without allowing polarization on this account.

Expectations about Harris and Trump as president

Pew ResearchOpinion, USA 0

Voters overall are divided in their predictions about how Vice President Kamala Harris or former President Donald Trump would perform as president – with negative expectations outweighing positive ones for both candidates. And while majorities of voters see both Trump and Harris as bringing change to Washington – though more say this about Trump than Harris – they are also split over whether that change would have positive or negative effects.

Would Trump and Harris be above or below average presidents?

Voters’ predictions for a Harris or Trump presidency

Voters are more likely to say each of the presidential candidates would be poor or terrible presidents than to say they would be good or great at the job.

More voters today say Trump would be a “good” or “great” president than say this about Harris (41% vs. 36%). But similar shares of voters say each would be a “poor” or “terrible” president (48% say this about Trump, 46% about Harris).

Views of a potential second Trump presidency are more polarized than views of a potential Harris presidency: Voters are more likely to say Trump would be great than to say this about Harris (22% vs. 14%). But they’re also more likely to say Trump would be terrible (38%) than to say the same for Harris (32%). Voters are more likely to predict Harris would be an “average” president (18% say this about her, 11% about him).

Supporters’ views of their candidate

While most supporters of both candidates offer positive predictions about how their candidate would perform as president, Trump supporters are more likely to say a potential Trump presidency would be good or great than Harris’ supporters are to say this about her.

  • 84% of Trump supporters say he would be a good or great president, including 46% who say he would be great. Just 13% say he’d be an average president.
  • 73% of Harris supporters say that she would be a good (44%) or great (29%) president, while 24% say she’d be an average president.

Very small shares of each candidate’s supporters (just 2% each) say their candidate would be a poor or terrible president.

Supporters’ views of the opposing candidate

About nine-in-ten among both Harris supporters (91%) and Trump supporters (89%) predict that the opposing candidate would be a poor or terrible president. Harris supporters are particularly likely to say Trump would be a terrible president (76% say this). By comparison, 67% of Trump supporters predict Harris would be terrible.

Who would bring change – for good or bad – to Washington

Most voters say Trump will change Washington but are split over whether that will be good or bad

An overwhelming majority of registered voters say that Trump would change the way things work in Washington, but they are fairly divided over whether that change would be for the better or for the worse.

While 41% say Trump would change things for the better, a somewhat larger share (48%) say he would change things for the worse. Relatively few (10%) say that he would not change things much either way.

In contrast, three-in-ten voters say Harris would not change things much either way in Washington, while 41% say she would change things for the worse and 29% say she would change things for the better.

Harris and Trump supporters have different opinions on whether their candidate would change the way things work in Washington:

  • 40% of Harris supporters say that Harris would not change the way things work much in Washington, while 59% say she’d change things for the better.
  • 86% of Trump supporters say Trump would change things for the better. Just 12% say he would not change things much.

Overwhelming shares of both Harris (92%) and Trump (83%) supporters say the opposing candidate would change things in Washington for the worse. But Trump supporters are more likely to say Harris would not change things much (16%) than Harris supporters are to say this about Trump (6%).

Harris presidency: Biden’s policies versus a new direction

Nearly six-in-ten voters (58%) expect Harris to continue President Joe Biden’s policies, while about four-in-ten (41%) expect her to take the country in a different direction.

  • Among the 58% who say Harris would continue Biden’s policies, far more say this would be a bad thing (41%) than say it would be a good thing (16%).
  • Those who say she’ll take the country in a different direction are more likely to say this would be good (30%) than bad (10%).
Most voters say Harris would continue Biden’s policiesHarris supporters

More than half of Harris supporters (58%) say she would take the country in a different direction – and they nearly unanimously view this course positively.

About four-in-ten Harris supporters (41%) say that she would continue Biden’s policies and most of this group (33%) say doing so would be a good thing for the country.

Trump supporters

Conversely, an overwhelming majority of Trump supporters (76%) say Harris would continue Biden’s policies – and this group nearly unanimously sees that as bad for the country. Only about a quarter of Trump supporters (23%) say Harris would take the country in a different direction – and most of this group (19%) say that would be a bad thing.

Have Harris and Trump clearly explained their views on issues?

When it comes to several major issues, voters are fairly divided on whether the candidates have clearly explained their policies and plans, with two notable exceptions.

  • 75% of all voters say Harris has clearly outlined her views on abortion, including 93% of her supporters and 59% of Trump backers. About six-in-ten voters (61%) also say Trump has been clear about his views on abortion.
  • 70% of all voters say Trump has clearly explained his policies and plans for addressing illegal immigration. Nearly all of his supporters (94%) and about half of Harris’ supporters (48%) say Trump has been clear about his plans on this issue.
Most voters say both candidates have made their abortion policies and plans clear, and that Trump has been clear about his plans for addressing illegal immigration

At least half of each candidate’s supporters say their candidate has clearly outlined their policies and plans for each of the policy domains asked about in the survey. But no more than a quarter of each candidate’s supporters say the other candidate has been clear about their policies and plans – with the exceptions of both candidates’ abortion policies and Trump’s policies on immigration.

Trump supporters are somewhat more likely than Harris’ to say their candidate has been clear on issues, while also being less likely to say the candidate that they oppose has clearly outlined their positions.

Addressing the concerns of supporters versus all Americans

Vast majority of voters say the candidates should address the concerns of all Americans

Both Harris (89%) and Trump (86%) supporters overwhelmingly say that, if their candidate is elected, they should focus on addressing the concerns of all Americans – even if it means that some of their supporters will be disappointed.

Only 10% of Harris supporters and 14% of Trump supporters say that their candidate should focus primarily on the concerns of those who voted for them without worrying too much about the concerns of those who did not.

These opinions closely mirror those of Biden and Trump supporters in 2020.

Views of whether the next president will work with the opposing party

Voters’ views on whether Harris and Trump, if they win the election, will work with the opposing party

A 55% majority of voters say it is likely that Harris will work with Republicans in Washington if she wins. A much smaller share (37%) say it is likely Trump will work with Democrats if he wins.

Majorities of each candidate’s supporters believe it is at least somewhat likely that their candidate will work with the opposition on important issues facing the country:

  • 91% of Harris supporters believe it is very or somewhat likely she will work with Republicans in Washington if she wins, including 38% who say this is very likely.
  • 70% of Trump’s supporters think he’d be at least somewhat likely to work with Democrats if he wins. Just 19% say this is very likely.

In 2016 – the last time this question was asked leading up to an election – voters were more likely than they are today to say Trump would work with Democrats if he won (45% said this was at least somewhat likely).

Voters’ assessments about whether Harris would work with Republicans are on par with their beliefs about a potential victory for Hillary Clinton in 2016.

The Unthinkable Nuclear Cauldron

Shadhank Heda MDOpinion 0
China recently urgently asked the US to abandon its first-use policy and dismantle its nuclear missile shield. Instead, China insisted that the US sign the No First Use policy.
Climbing the high moral pedestals
I would have been convinced about this had this proposal come from Bhutan. Of all the nations, the bully of South China, the reckless Covid contaminator, the genocider of the Xinjiang Muslim, the debt trap diplomat, the intellectual property thief, the megalomaniac, the aggrandizer, the suppressor and violator of human rights, the occupant of Tibet – finally found a pulpit to ask the US to take back its arsenals, and sign the nuclear nonproliferation.
An eye on Taiwan
This sudden escalation on the moral pulpit is not for taking any humanitarian, moral high grounds. China seems to have played the war scenario across the Taiwan Strait and reoccupation of Taiwan, and it has realized the American resolve to defend Taiwan; it has realized that there are no nuclear players (barring North Korea) in Southeast Asia.
The US Nuclear Missile Shield
By asking the US to dismantle its nuclear missile shield and revoke its First Use Policy, China is demonstrating its concern about US dominance and defeat. An urge of this scale reveals China’s weakness, not Sun Xu’s philosophy of war tactics. It realizes the QUAD and the local alliance in Southeast Asia with Japan, South Korea, and Indonesia are likely the biggest obstacles to reoccupying Taiwan.
Why Taiwan?
Enough water has flown down since the two countries separated three generations ago. Apart from ethnic genetic stock, the two countries are not very similar. One is an authoritarian dictator, the other a mature beacon of democracy. One is stringently invested in human rights, whereas the other is invested in debasing human rights. One dominates the chip market (and eventually, the AI usurped technology), whereas the giant lampoons mediocrity with all sorts of perverse IP thefts. One has a thriving economy with a prosperous working class, and the other has a managed economy in decadence. If you think the Chinese are one ethnic stalk, let me correct you by reminding you that China is comprised of  Zhuang, Hui, Miao, Manchus, Tujia, Mongols, Buyei, Dong, Yao, and the Bai are just a few of the ethnic stocks, from China. If you presume language is the binding factor, other than Mandarin, people commonly speak Mandarin, Min, Wu, Yue, and Ji, not to mention Cantonese.
By acquiring Taiwan, the CCP knows that it is the first battleground for establishing absolute hegemony in the region and globally. The only thing that comes in the way is the Nuclear Dome built by the US.
What should the US do?
Trump or no Trump, the US will lean on its established lesson of dealing with similar scenarios. In 1987, it placed intermediate-range ballistic missiles in Europe. The USSR came to its knees and signed the treaty to abolish the IRBM.
The US will arm Japan, South Korea, and Australia. By doing so, the deterrence from owning nuclear warheads will recede, and many players will be on a level playing field.
The world is getting increasingly complex to manage. However, the pathway to reconciliation goes via nuclear armament and arming Japan, South Korea, and possibly Taiwan with nuclear warheads.
Shashank Heda, MD
Dallas, Texas
July 26, 2024
Note: These are the author’s views and are not in alliance with any think tank.

76 Years of Independent India & the Vibrant Indian Diaspora in the United States

Prof. Bellamkonda Kishore, M.D., Ph.D., MBAEditorial, Opinion 0

As India is celebrating its 76th Independence Day on August 15, 2024, it is time to reflect how far the vibrant Indian Diaspora in the United States has come during the past 50 years, and what its future role in the rapidly changing demographics of America is. With a population of 4.9 million (1.48% of the US population), the Indian Americans are the largest group of South Asian Americans or the second largest group of Asian Americans after Chinese. Given their highly successful careers in most spheres, the Indian Americans represent a unique force in shaping the future of the United States. Indian Americans also have a profound influence on contemporary issues in India. So, this 5 million cohort Indian Diaspora, although not a monolithic structure in the United States, nevertheless, is a defining force both in the USA and India in the 21st century. Like in India, the Indian Diaspora in the United States represents the unity in diversity.

The Luce-Celler Act of 1946 allowed a limited number of Indians per year to immigrate to the United States. However, it was not until the 1970s, there was a palpable emigration from India. The earliest immigrants from India to the United States were physicians, scientists, and other professionals, as well as businessmen. Most worked in universities or institutes of higher learning or medical schools or in the healthcare sector. Very few worked in corporate America. Initially, the feelings in India were different, as most Indians considered that emigration was a “brain drain” with negative consequences to the country. Even the Government of India was concerned that it was losing educated and talented people to other countries, especially the United States, the land of opportunities where an ordinary person can do extraordinary things. At that time most immigrants from India were those who completed their university studies, such as MBBS, or PhD or engineering, often at the expense of taxpayers’ money, and were looking for better job opportunities in their professions elsewhere. They were not coming to the United States for college studies. Most could not afford to study in the United States.

The early immigrants from India were traditional, nostalgic for a long time, culturally oriented and worked hard to preserve their values and pass them on to their children. Hailing from hard-working middle-class families, most of them shouldered substantial responsibilities to support their parents, and siblings back in India. All these made them to be responsible, humble, and loyal citizens in addition to their high level of KSA (Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities) and studious working habits. Many of them sacrificed their own time and comforts of life for the sake of their beloved family members in the USA and India, and for their professions. They not only could establish themselves in institutes of the United States, but also could generate a thinking among American public that Indians are smart, skilled, hardworking, law-abiding and peace-loving people, a notion that became a bedrock as the time passed.

The subsequent generations of Indian Diaspora were fortunate to grow on these foundations laid by their predecessors and proved themselves as the most successful immigrant community in the United States. Because of this they thrived, and educated their children, who proved to be much more successful professionals occupying higher positions or taking up responsible roles at a relatively young age as compared to their parents. Many of the later arrivals started working in corporate America, where they ascended to new heights not seen before.

As time passed, the Indian Diaspora became very wealthy, established their own societies and associations, built their businesses, companies, temples and other places of worship, community centers and made the United States their comfortable new home. They are also supporting several service projects in their native places or alma maters, and charitable activities in India, and remitting billions of dollars every year. Ordinary people in the United States understand India as they see it through the activities and personalities of Indian Americans. In other words, the reputation of India in the United States was enormously boosted by the Indian Diaspora. Now the people of India as well as the Government of India consider that the Indian Diaspora abroad, especially in the United States is an “asset” not brain-drain, of India.

Now the question is what should be the next stage of evolution of Indian Diaspora in the United States? Can it afford to stay in the same course in a rapidly changing demographics and needs of the United States? What should be the future direction of the Indian Diaspora in the United States, if it must continue to be the most successful and respected immigrant community with unique values to their adopted land?

One can list several points to address this question. But, I have only one point to emphasize, the implementation of which will dramatically change the course of the Indian Diaspora and make it a much more formidable power in the 21st century United States. The Indian Diaspora in the United States should become more US centric in their activities and social life. They may be minorities only by their numbers, but not by any other metric. So, they have many assets to give to their adopted land, other than money. There is no need to guard their Indian identity or communities so closely.

They are not just Indians. They are Indian Americans playing pivotal roles in all spheres in the United States.  Language is not a barrier for them in the United States. So, they should step outside of their communities or “bubbles” and actively participate and lead mainstream America in nation building. Otherwise, they may hit a wall and stop moving forward. Following the same course as they have been doing for decades may not help them to rise to a higher level of respect and value in America. Because the 21st-century needs of America are very different. It does not need immigrants that can just do their jobs splendidly.

The 21st century America needs people who can create opportunities for others, and thus help them move up on an upscale value with passion. The Indian Diaspora should innovate itself by focusing on uplifting other minorities who are not blessed like them in education, wealth and other aspects of life. Being the most successful minority, the Indian Diaspora is uniquely positioned to uplift other minorities with them.

For instance, lack of mentorship is the single most cause by which even motivated minority children cannot find their way in the current society. The benefits of mentoring to mentees, mentors, and the community are well documented. Every minority child or student we mentor is an asset added to the treasure of our adopted land. Of course, there are other ways the Indian Diaspora can uplift less fortunate minorities, such as offering financial assistance for education, free or subsidized healthcare, conducting educational camps etc. No need to say that they should not limit these activities to only minorities, but extend to anyone in need, irrespective of their racial or ethnic background.

By following the above path, the Indian Diaspora will win the hearts of the less fortunate people in the United States, and thus foster long-lasting and healthy bonds with them, which is crucial for sustaining their respectable positions in the community, as well as securing the future and welfare of the children and grandchildren of the Indian Diaspora.

This path is also in line with our tradition, which preaches Vasudaivakutabakam and Sarvejana Sukinobhavatu. This is the best and practical way to spread Sanathana Dharma in the land of opportunities and freedom. This path speaks for itself, with no explanation from us what our Sanathana Dharma means. This path is also in line with the vision and mission of Prime Minister of India, Sri Narendranath Modi ji – Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas. Thus, this is a great opportunity for the Indian Diaspora to kindle the lamp of Santhana Dharma on the land of freedom, liberty, and justice for all. Let us all move to a higher realm of existence while serving both our motherland and adopted land.  Jai Hind. God bless America.

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are that of the author only, and they need not reflect the views of the organizations with which he is affiliated, such as the NRI Welfare Society of India, University of Utah Health, ePurines, Inc., and theunn.com.

Author: Prof. Bellamkonda K. Kishore, M.D., Ph.D., MBA is an academician and innovator turned toPicture1 entrepreneurship. He is an Adjunct Professor of Internal Medicine at the University of Utah Health; Co-Founder, President, CEO & CSO of ePurines, Inc., in Salt Lake City, Utah; and a Senior Member of the National Academy of Inventors. Dr. Kishore received several academic and community awards and honors for his contributions, such as induction as a Fellow of professional bodies, citations in Marquis Who’s Who in Medicine and Healthcare and European Biographical Directory,  Nelson Mandela Leadership and Hind Rattan (Jewel of India) awards from the NRI Welfare Society of India, New Delhi. Currently, he is  Vice President of the US Chapter of the NRI Welfare Society of India, which was started with the noble objective of strengthening the emotional bonds between India and Non-Resident Indians. Dr. Kishore was also conferred Global Unity Ambassador by the Indian.Community.

Personal Website: https://www.bkkishore.online/

Emergency: Declared versus Undeclared

Ram PuniyaniOpinion 0

Om Birla, the speaker of Lok Sabha is mired in many controversies. When he started his 2nd term as Lok Sabha (Parliament) Speaker he read out a resolution against Emergency which was imposed in 1975 by Indira Gandhi. The background of that emergency was the rising Sampoorna Kranti (Total Revolution) Movement, led by Jaya Prakash Narayan (JP). The movement of students of Gujarat which began to protest against the rise in mess bill, was soon joined by the students of Bihar. This spiraled into students requesting JP to lead the movement at national level. JP gave the call of gheraoing (encircling) the assemblies and parliament. On 15th June 1975 in a huge rally in Ramlila Maidan, Delhi, he gave the call to military and police to defy the orders of the Government. Mrs. Gandhi’s election was challenged and on flimsy grounds she was disqualified by the High Court. The Supreme Court gave a stay on this on 24 June.

Emergency Declared versus Undeclared (Reddit)
Picture: Reddit

Seeing the growing turmoil in the country, Mrs. Gandhi imposed the emergency using the article 352 of the Constitution on 25th June 1975. This lasted for 21 months, and she herself lifted it. Mrs. Gandhi had regretted the excesses during this period in a speech in Yavatmal on 24th January in 1978.  Even Rahul Gandhi offered apologies for the excesses during Emergency. While the opposition leaders were arrested Lalu Pradsad Yadav who was in jail all through emergency, in a recent article along with a journalist (The Sangh Silence on Emergency, (I.E. June 29, 2024) wrote that though the opposition was arrested it was treated with dignity by Indira Gandhi. For many years BJP has been observing the 25 June as the dark period of Indian democracy.

The first major change occurred around that time was that Jaya Prakash Narayan, who was one of the tall leaders of the freedom movement, accepted RSS to be the part of the agitation launched by him. RSS’s Nanaji Deshmukh, who has recently been awarded Bharat Ratna by the BJP regime, became the central organizer of the movement. It gave respectability to the RSS as it was under eclipse due to its trained ex-Pracharak Godse having killed the Father of the Nation. As some people pointed out to JP that RSS is a fascist organization, JP in his naivety or whatever went on to say, if RSS is fascist I too am a fascist!

JP’s call to the army and police not to obey the orders was very unnerving and this precipitated the intensification of agitations, gherao of Parliament and Assemblies. RSS had played an important role in the Sampoorna Kranti movement, which gave it credibility in people’s eyes. After the imposition of Emergency, when many of its members were arrested, it started bowing to the ruling regime. Many of its members signed Mafinamas (Mercy petitions) and got released.

BJP’s effort is to project itself as the Hero of resistance of Emergency. Prabhash Joshi, the eminent journalist brought out the real truth in his article in Tehelka Magazine, “”Balasaheb Deoras, then RSS chief, wrote a letter to Indira Gandhi pledging to help implement the notorious 20-point programme of Sanjay Gandhi. This is the real character of the RSS…You can decipher a line of action, a pattern. Even during the Emergency, many among the RSS and Jana Sangh who came out of the jails gave mafinamas. They were the first to apologize. Only their leaders remained in jail: Atal Behari Vajpayee [most of time in hospital], LK Advani, even Arun Jaitley. But the RSS did not fight the Emergency. So why is the BJP trying to appropriate that memory?” Deoras’s letters were also published in a book, ‘Hindu Sangthan aur Sattavadi Rajniti’, authored by him and published by Jagruti Prakashan Noida. Same was confirmed by T V Rajeshewar who was Deputy Chief of IB.

Press censorship and excesses on the issue of vasectomy and demolition of slums were painful parts of this period. On the contrary, since last ten years we have been witnessing the arrest of public intellectuals, participants in peaceful struggles, arrest of journalists, the mainstream media bowing to the regime, the opponents of Government policies being called anti-Nationals, the suspension of 146 members of parliament among others. The violations which took place during this period are aided by the foot soldiers of the patriarch of the ruling party, the RSS. The situation for the last one decade has been worse than the declared emergency. This is what prompted the critic of 1975 Emergency, Nayantara Sahgal to call the last one decade as undeclared emergency, “Well, we have an undeclared Emergency; there is no doubt about that. We have seen a huge, massive attack on the freedom of expression. We have seen innocent, helpless Indians killed because they did not fit into the RSS’s view of India. … So we have a horrendous situation, a nightmare which is worse than the Emergency… It is an absolutely nightmarish situation which has no equal. “

And to cap it all the leader of BJP, Mr. Lal Krishna Advani also called last one decade as undeclared Emergency, “Today there is an undeclared emergency in the country. Even senior BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) leader Lal Krishna Advani hinted the same after the government formed but after pressure from RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh), he became silent…” While we look back to the period of Emergency 1975, we need to introspect and ward off the periods like undeclared Emergency which the country has been witnessing from the last decade.

Filing mercy petitions to the rulers is the norm with the Hindu right wing. Savarakar wrote five mercy petitions when he was in Andamans, Atal Bihari Vajpayee wrote on similar lines to get released during his arrest in 1942 uprising stating that he had nothing to do with the ‘Quit India’ movement and during emergency Balasaheb Deoras wrote to Indira Gandhi twice to patch up, and then requested Vinoba Bhave to ask Indira Gandhi to lift the ban on RSS. Also many BJP leaders like the late Arun Jaitley compared the Emergency period to Hitler’s regime. The crucial difference between the two is the encouragement of foot soldiers by the fascist regime. It was brown shirts in Germany, in India there are many vigilante groups which flourished during last one decade.

76 Years of Independent India & the Vibrant Indian Diaspora in the United States

Prof. Bellamkonda Kishore, M.D., Ph.D., MBAOpinion 0

As India is celebrating its 76th Independence Day on August 15, 2024, it is time to reflect how far the vibrant Indian Diaspora in the United States has come during the past 50 years, and what its future role in the rapidly changing demographics of America is. With a population of 4.9 million (1.48% of the US population), the Indian Americans are the largest group of South Asian Americans or the second largest group of Asian Americans after Chinese. Given their highly successful careers in most spheres, the Indian Americans represent a unique force in shaping the future of the United States. Indian Americans also have a profound influence on contemporary issues in India. So, this 5 million cohort Indian Diaspora, although not a monolithic structure in the United States, nevertheless, is a defining force both in the USA and India in the 21st century. Like in India, the Indian Diaspora in the United States represents the unity in diversity.

The Luce-Celler Act of 1946 allowed a limited number of Indians per year to immigrate to the United States. However, it was not until the 1970s, there was a palpable emigration from India. The earliest immigrants from India to the United States were physicians, scientists, and other professionals, as well as businessmen. Most worked in universities or institutes of higher learning or medical schools or in the healthcare sector. Very few worked in corporate America. Initially, the feelings in India were different, as most Indians considered that emigration was a “brain drain” with negative consequences to the country.

Even the Government of India was concerned that it was losing educated and talented people to other countries, especially the United States, the land of opportunities where an ordinary person can do extraordinary things. At that time most immigrants from India were those who completed their university studies, such as MBBS, or PhD or engineering, often at the expense of taxpayers’ money, and were looking for better job opportunities in their professions elsewhere. They were not coming to the United States for college studies. Most could not afford to study in the United States.

The early immigrants from India were traditional, nostalgic for a long time, culturally oriented and worked hard to preserve their values and pass them on to their children. Hailing from hard-working middle-class families, most of them shouldered substantial responsibilities to support their parents, and siblings back in India. All these made them to be responsible, humble, and loyal citizens in addition to their high level of KSA (Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities) and studious working habits. Many of them sacrificed their own time and comforts of life for the sake of their beloved family members in the USA and India, and for their professions. They not only could establish themselves in institutes of the United States, but also could generate a thinking among American public that Indians are smart, skilled, hardworking, law-abiding and peace-loving people, a notion that became a bedrock as the time passed.

The subsequent generations of Indian Diaspora were fortunate to grow on these foundations laid by their predecessors and proved themselves as the most successful immigrant community in the United States. Because of this they thrived, and educated their children, who proved to be much more successful professionals occupying higher positions or taking up responsible roles at a relatively young age as compared to their parents. Many of the later arrivals started working in corporate America, where they ascended to new heights not seen before. As the time passed, the Indian Diaspora became very wealthy, established their own societies and associations, built their businesses, companies, temples and other places of worship, community centers and made the United States their comfortable new home. They are also supporting several service projects in their native places or alma maters, and charitable activities in India, and remitting billions of dollars every year. Ordinary people in the United States understand India as they see it through the activities and personalities of Indian Americans. In other words, the reputation of India in the United States was enormously boosted by the Indian Diaspora. Now the people of India as well as the Government of India consider that the Indian Diaspora abroad, especially in the United States is an “asset” not brain-drain, of India.

Now the question is what should be the next stage of evolution of Indian Diaspora in the United States? Can it afford to stay in the same course in a rapidly changing demographics and needs of the United States? What should be the future direction of the Indian Diaspora in the United States, if it must continue to be the most successful and respected immigrant community with unique values to their adopted land? One can list several points to address this question. But, I have only one point to emphasize, implementation of which will dramatically change the course of Indian Diaspora and make it a much more formidable power in the 21st century United States.

The Indian Diaspora in the United States should become more US centric in their activities and social life. They may be minorities only by their numbers, but not by any other metric. So, they have many assets to give to their adopted land, other than money. There is no need to guard their Indian identity or communities so closely. They are not just Indians. They are Indian Americans playing pivotal roles in all spheres in the United States.  Language is not a barrier for them in the United States. So, they should step outside of their communities or “bubbles” and actively participate and lead mainstream America in nation building. Otherwise, they may hit a wall and stop moving forward.

Following the same course as they have been doing for decades may not help them to rise to a higher level of respect and value in America. Because the 21st century needs of America are very different. It does not need immigrants that can just do their jobs splendidly. The 21st century America needs people who can create opportunities for others, and thus help them move up on an upscale value with passion. The Indian Diaspora should innovate itself by focusing on uplifting other minorities who are not blessed like them in education, wealth and other aspects of life. Being the most successful minority, the Indian Diaspora is uniquely positioned to uplift other minorities with them.

For instance, lack of mentorship is the single most cause by which even motivated minority children cannot find their way in the current society. The benefits of mentoring to mentees, mentors, and the community are well documented. Every minority child or student we mentor is an asset added to the treasure of our adopted land. Of course, there are other ways the Indian Diaspora can uplift less fortunate minorities, such as offering financial assistance for education, free or subsidized healthcare, conducting educational camps etc. No need to say that they should not limit these activities to only minorities, but extend to anyone in need, irrespective of their racial or ethnic background.

By following the above path, the Indian Diaspora will win the hearts of the less fortunate people in the United States, and thus foster long-lasting and healthy bonds with them, which is crucial for sustaining their respectable positions in the community, as well as securing the future and welfare of the children and grandchildren of the Indian Diaspora.

This path is also in line with our tradition, which preaches Vasudaivakutabakam and Sarvejana Sukinobhavatu. This is the best and practical way to spread Sanathana Dharma in the land of opportunities and freedom. This path speaks for itself, with no explanation from us what our Sanathana Dharma means. This path is also in line with the vision and mission of Prime Minister of India, Sri Narendranath Modi ji – Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas. Thus, this is a great opportunity for the Indian Diaspora to kindle the lamp of Santhana Dharma on the land of freedom, liberty, and justice for all. Let us all move to a higher realm of existence while serving both our motherland and adopted land.  Jai Hind. God bless America.

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are that of the author only, and they need not reflect the views of the organizations with which he is affiliated, such as the NRI Welfare Society of India, University of Utah Health, and ePurines, Inc.

piiiccccAuthor: Prof. Bellamkonda K. Kishore, M.D., Ph.D., MBA is an academician and innovator turned to entrepreneurship. He is an Adjunct Professor of Internal Medicine at the University of Utah Health; Co-Founder, President, CEO & CSO of ePurines, Inc., in Salt Lake City, Utah; and a Senior Member of the National Academy of Inventors. Dr. Kishore received several academic and community awards and honors for his contributions, such as induction as a Fellow of professional bodies, citations in Marquis Who’s Who in Medicine and Healthcare and European Biographical Directory,  Nelson Mandela Leadership and Hind Rattan (Jewel of India) awards from the NRI Welfare Society of India, New Delhi. Currently, he is  Vice President of the US Chapter of the NRI Welfare Society of India, which was started with the noble objective of strengthening the emotional bonds between India and Non-Resident Indians. Dr. Kishore was also conferred Global Unity Ambassador by the Indian.Community. Personal Website: https://www.bkkishore.online/

 

Rahul Gandhi Makes His Presence: New Parliament, Old Confrontation

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

Mr Narendra Modi taunted and ridiculed him as Shehzada. Mr Modi’s followers in the Bharatiya Janata Party took the cue and chanted ‘Pappu’. Over the decade of the BJP’s rule, Mr Modi’s media friends coined new terms to ridicule the 54-year-old Congress leader, who is the son of the late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and traces a political lineage back to India Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, and Motilal Nehru.

Motilal, too, was a leader of the Opposition in 1923. He was elected to the new Central Legislative Assembly of British India in New Delhi and became leader of the Opposition. In that role, he secured the defeat, or at least the delay, of finance bills and other legislation.
Mr Rahul Gandhi formally became the Opposition leader on Wednesday, the day Mr Om Birla was elected for a second successive term as Speaker.

For ten years, the position was not filled as the Congress, then the largest party in the Opposition, but with just 52 members, could not reach the 10% of the house membership required for its leader to qualify for the title and post of LOP. Experts, however, say there are no rules, and this limit is just a presumption.

Mr Om Birla, handpicked in 2019 by Mr Modi, won his second term in a token contest with the senior most Congress member in the Lok Sabha, Mr Suresh. Mr Birla could have been elected unopposed, but the BJP rejected the Opposition’s demand that their member be chosen as the Deputy Speaker.

The deputy speaker, too, is a statutory post. But Mr Modi ensured Mr Birla had no deputy last time. Now, with the razor-thin majority of his National Democratic alliance, the prime minister cannot risk having an Opposition leader in any parliamentary position of official power.

At stake is the longevity of his government and possibly even the life of the 18th Lok Sabha. If there is a motion of no confidence against the Speaker, the deputy speaker presides with full powers. He can allow a scathing debate. It would be a parliamentary coup.
Political observers say Mr Modi has always wanted a speaker who would do his bidding to avoid the possibility of such a coup. Mr Birla fits the bill. In the Rajya Sabha, the vice-president of India is the ex-officio chairman. It is no accident that both Venkatesh Naidu and then Mr Jagdeep Dhankar remain loyal to the BJP doctrines and personally to him.

But try as he will, Mr Modi will not be able to get rid of Mr Gandhi—not in the House, not in other forums, not even outside Parliament. As Leader of the Opposition, Mr Gandhi has the rank of a Cabinet Minister, like Home Minister Mr Amit Shah or Defence Minister Mr Rajnath Singh.

As the opposition leader, Rahul Gandhi also has a say in appointing key bureaucrats. He will be a member of crucial committees, including the Public Accounts, Public Undertakings, and Estimates Committees of Parliament, where much of the backroom work of legislation and policies is done. He also becomes a member of selection committees that appoint heads of statutory bodies such as the Central Vigilance Commission, the Central Information Commission, the Central Bureau of Investigation, and the National Human Rights Commission of India.

He politely asserted this in words and gestures. His hair was groomed, his salt and pepper beard trimmed close, and in a near-long, white khadi kurta, he looked every inch the holder of the new title. He was not the politician who had revived Congress and the Opposition in two long cross-country marches and then headed a searing election campaign in which he matched Mr Modi step by step.

He came close to defeating not just the BJP but also ensuring a considerable erosion in Mr Modi’s image. In Varanasi, his constituency, Mr Modi lost some three lakh votes. He now ranks low in the list of votes of winning candidates, a blow to his notorious ego.
Mr Modi and Mr Birla sought to begin the new term with an attack on the Congress party, harking back to the state of Emergency Mrs Indira Gandhi had imposed this day in 1975, a full 49 years ago. Mr Modi and the BJP sought the Congress to apologise. Mr Birla, in his inaugural speech, called for a two-minute silence to record Parliament’s condemnation of Mrs Gandhi’s actions. Elsewhere, Vice President Dhankar recorded his concurrence with their sentiments. President Murmu ended her address at the joint session of Parliament with a long condemnation of the Emergency.

The government will continue to attack the very image of Rahul Gandhi, his mother Sonia, who is now in the Rajya Sabha, and sister Priyanka Gandhi Vadra if she wins from Wayanad, where there is now a vacancy. This will be the first time three members of the Gandhi family will be in Parliament. The collateral branch, Menaka and Varun Gandhi, who too were together on the BJP benches for several years, are no longer MPs. The mother was defeated, and the son was not given a ticket. Samajwadi Party leader Akhilesh and his wife lead the five-member family group from Lucknow.

Mr Gandhi was prominent on camera when he joined Mr Modi to escort Mr Birla to the Speaker’s chair. He then finessed it with a short speech of felicitations in which he reminded the Speaker of his role in allowing the Opposition benches to be the voice of the people in the House. “We are confident that by allowing the Opposition to speak, by allowing us to represent the people of India, you will do your duty of defending the Constitution of India,” he said.

“The idea that you can run the House efficiently by silencing the voice of the Opposition is non-democratic. This election has shown that the people of India expect the Opposition to defend the Constitution,” the Congress leader said. “The Opposition would like to assist you in doing your work. We would like the House to function often and well. It is very important that cooperation happens on the basis of trust. It is very important that the voice of the Opposition is allowed to be represented in this House.”

The point was taken further in the House by Mr Akhilesh Yadav. “We believe you will move forward without discrimination and as the Speaker, you will give equal opportunity and respect to every party. Impartiality is a great responsibility of this great post,” he said. It is clear that these two young parliamentarians will be closely and powerfully monitoring the government and challenging Mr Modi at every turn.

But Mr Birla earned terrible notoriety in his first term in office. Many consider him obnoxious because he silenced speakers from the Opposition parties. Others referred to the manner in which he presided over the suspension of a large number of members and the disqualification of TMC member Mahua Moitra after a kangaroo court trial by a committee of the House.

A Parliamentary research report published in The Wire highlighted how the Opposition was all but sidelined under Mr Birla’s watch. Between December 14 and 21, 100 MPs were suspended from the Lok Sabha and 46 from the Rajya Sabha. This accounts for 19% of each House’s strength. This is the highest number of suspensions in any Lok Sabha term. Ms Mahua Moitra was expelled on grounds of ethical misconduct. She is the fourth ever to be suspended.

All bills introduced in the session passed; none were referred to Committees. With almost no one from the Opposition present in the House, all 10 bills introduced in the session were passed, in addition to seven bills pending from previous sessions. The Telecommunications Bill of 2023, which restructures the regulatory framework of the telecom sector, was passed within three days of its introduction. It was discussed for one hour and four minutes in Lok Sabha and one hour and eleven minutes in Rajya Sabha.

Most importantly, the three Bills replacing the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, were discussed and passed. Most of the speakers were from the BJP and its allies.

Mr Birla is unlikely to change, but he will feel the pressure more than he did during his last tenure. India’s 18th Lok Sabha is a testimony to the innate strength of the people’s democratic instincts. This commitment to democracy is an inheritance from Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi’s massive, peaceful, unarmed freedom struggle, which defeated not only colonial Great Britain but also several millennia of entrenched feudalism.

The 2024 elections also brought political equilibrium in Parliament, bringing to life a set of political parties that had been decimated in the 2014 and 2019 elections, in which Mr Narendra Modi emerged as India’s prime minister. He led his Bhartiya Janata Party to victory on a platform which was equal parts rabid Islamophobia and delusions of rapid development, targeting “aspirant” classes of hundreds of millions of young voters who had been led to believe that the fruits of freedom had been grabbed by the poor, the Dalits and other deprived classes, and the religious minorities, especially Muslims and Christians.

Mr Modi heads his third government as a coalition with a razor-thin margin. All the sheen and starch the first two tenures had, and even washed out in his party’s virtual rout in two major states of Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra, their stronghold. Mr Modi’s own winning margin had been whittled down to a fifth of what it was when he won in 2019. However, he has presented a brave and perhaps even aggressive face to the people and to his critics. When he was sworn in on June 9, he continued with his old cabinet—barring the many junior ministers who lost their seats.

He almost immediately went on his first foreign jaunt as a third-term Prime Minister as a guest at the meeting of developed nations. The Pope had been invited to speak on artificial intelligence and climate change issues. Mr Modi embraced him, took a selfie with the young prime minister of Italy and was photographed with the leaders of Europe and America.

The future of this Lok Sabha may well depend on whether Mr Modi, whose regime was dubbed dictatorial by critics at home and abroad, will embrace a more humane and democratic way of governance. His attitude may not work when serious legislative business begins, and the Opposition will challenge him for debate on every point. Hopefully, we will see new laws emerge after exhaustive discussion and negotiation.

The new Parliament demands that the government seek the cooperation of the Opposition instead of ramming decisions and legislation down its throat. That has been the practice in the last ten years, and for the last five, Mr Birla, as Speaker, has connived with the prime minister. This may not come naturally to Mr Modi. He is steeped in the ways of the 99-year-old Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, an unregistered religious and nationalistic organisation with a uniformed cadre and the political goal of a Hindu nation.

His 15-year rule as chief minister of his home state, Gujarat, and his 10 years in New Delhi as prime minister have shown a megalomaniac persona that demands total and absolute obedience and brooks no criticism, much less Opposition. He takes this arrogance as strength and keeps critics and opponents in check. After Mr Birla was installed as Speaker, Mr Modi focused almost entirely on the Emergency Mrs Indira Gandhi enforced for a year and a half 49 years ago.

Her election was overturned by the Allahabad High Court; Mrs Gandhi suspended the Constitution. For close to 20 months, she and her younger son, Sanjay Gandhi, ran a government which suspended civil liberties and imprisoned tens of thousands of political leaders across the country. The people punished her when she lifted the Emergency in 1977. Her Congress party was wiped out in north India, winning but a humiliating two seats. In later developments, she was temporarily arrested, her membership of the Lok Sabha revoked, and a judicial enquiry was ordered. Mrs Gandhi returned to power in the 1980 general elections and was prime minister till her assassination by her Sikh guards in October 1984

In Delhi, as in Gujarat, Mr Modi has bent the judiciary, police, bureaucracy, and education system to his will, massively eroding democratic institutions. Many think he came close to threatening the Constitution itself. The election results told him that perhaps the people would no longer obey.

India became a republic on January 26, 1950, with a written Constitution and well-defined freedoms, including the cherished Freedom of Religion and Belief. Arguably, for the first time in 3,000 years, all Indians, including women, were equal in the eyes of the law. Caste remains an integral part of the majority faith of Hinduism, but untouchability is now a federal crime with strong penalties. That caste tensions remain close to eight decades after Independence is another story.

The Fifteenth Vision (20th July, 2024)

Kiran BhatCulture, Girar, Opinion, Travel 0

This is a story I thought I was telling for a thousand years. Or so I thought. Or maybe I have been telling a thousand stories. Or maybe I was telling the same story to a thousand men. Things have changed. You are not a king. You are a simple person. But it’s my story to tell. So, listen.

This is what Mother is telling the man.

But where do I begin, and how do I start? In our daily life, there are no man-bearing sea creatures or swashbuckling pirates, immortality-granting herbs or wish-granting djinns. And these are not even my tales to tell. They are tales that guarantee your entertainment, certainly, and thus my survival. But I think you are not here to kill me, are you? You are here to free me from the stories I tell. And so, I won’t tell a lie, I won’t make anything up. I’ll tell you exactly how it is.

Or this is what she thinks.

Where does one start…? To be honest, I’ve been telling stories inside of my head for so long that to say anything that resembles the truth is an act of work, even for me. As for my real story…it has to begin with my birth. My birth year was 1959. That was so long ago! It was just a few years before the people of our country were starting to war against the state of Iraq to establish our government, but at that time I wasn’t thinking about such things. I knew I was a Kurd, and I knew I was a girl. 

As Mother says this, she looks around. She is in the confines of her living room. The room blazes with red carpets and drapes, and the leftover smell of morning tea wafts around the closed space. She thought she had turned the television off, but on the television are the serials, dubbed in Kurdish, shipped from Turkey. She thought she was looking after her mother-in-law, just as she thought she was talking to a man on the crossroad of Zanko and Madam Mitterand, but the house is empty. She only sees a picture of herself and her husband, the one they have put on top of the television. It’s a picture from the seventies. During that time, her husband would don a simple white shirt and set of pants. His belt firmly buckled his shirt around his waist. His bushy moustache curved around his mouth, not nearly as trimmed or greying as it has become. He was so young-looking back then, as she was, too, with her face round and without wrinkles, her curly black hair not even covered with a headscarf.

She thinks she is dreaming, but everything in this dream is so realistic and visceral.

She keeps telling her story anyway.

I was also an only child. Because my father, a banker, was constantly relocated for work, I didn’t grow up in one place or another. I was born in Zalan, grew up for a large part of my life in Arbat, spent some time also in Khurmal. My childhood was beautiful and rich, but it was also difficult. My mother and father didn’t have the best relationship, and they separated at a time when separating as a couple was very poorly looked upon. I think that is why I trust so much of my time and thoughts in Allah. My prayers with Allah gave me peace and guidance in a way that discussions with my father or mother never provided. 

Mother looks away from the frame. She remembers that she was in the middle of feeding her mother-in-law, a challenging task these days as her mother-in-law finds it difficult to swallow food. Because of this, Mother has completely changed her cooking and diet. She used to spend most of her time making biryani and kuki. Now she can only make soup.

That is what Mother is supposed to be doing, rather than getting lost in the stories inside of her head.

My story doesn’t start however with my own life. A story has a beginning, middle, and end, but the fact is there are stories upon stories happening all the time, on top of each other. Even at this moment while I am telling a story, there are an infinitude of stories happening all at once. The story that we tell is not just a story. It is the point at which a conflict occurs, one that jolts the seamlessness of the larger story that has been happening all along. It is something perverse, it is something bizarre, it is something that makes one stand up and say, everything was going so well, and now suddenly it is not. 

And in my particular case, that story has nothing to do with warriors or warlocks, ghuls or djinns. It has to do with something far more pressing.

Mother feels like she ought to go back towards the kitchen, but she is not ready.

My son lives as a homosexual. All men and women have urges. But we control them, we don’t live our life just to please them, we do what is best for society and our family so that everyone can survive and live well and grow. But my son is only a man of his impulses. He wants to have sex, and he lives only for that. He wants to travel and eat fine foods and spend money, and that is all he does. He thinks only about himself and has designed his life around it. And that deeply bothers me, because I have designed my life thinking only about what is best for him. He doesn’t think about the family. He doesn’t think about how his behaviours affect us. We are the laughing stock of our community because of how he lives his lifestyle. No one in our suburb even visits our house, knowing we are the parents of a proud and open homosexual.

Mother finds herself grabbing the picture on the television.

Does he care about the shame it causes me? Does he care that I spend so much of my time humiliated?

She finds herself throwing it, and the frame thuds against the carpet.

I am glad at least that I am no longer visiting the mosque. There, the rumours were incessant. I was the constant banter of the housewives. The previous imam tried to control it. The new imam who has replaced him is too young to order others around. And so, they made their comments, said their horrible words.

She has flung it with force, but somehow the glass has not broken. It has not even chipped. When she flips it over, she notices not a single difference.

I sometimes wish I were just dirt. Then I could crumple up into the rest of the earth and perish.

How is it that the glass did not break?

I have to live in this human form. I have to be surrounded by people who only want to share their ugly words. That is my torture. That is my ruin.

How is it that this glass is stronger than she is?

And my son, despite inflicting this on me, doesn’t even want to listen. He thinks anytime I express myself, I am going after him. I am an older woman. I was raised in a strict household. My values will not change. They were what I was born with.

She picks up the frame and puts it back on the television and looks at it one more time. This is a picture of just the two of them, without their son.

The least he could do is listen to me. He doesn’t have to agree, he doesn’t have to share his opinion. He can just listen. 

She swears she is seeing something else in the photo. It’s a sudden black stretch, small as if it were just a stain on the photo, but it is growing, vastly and infinitely, to the size of something cosmic.

Instead I have to confide in you, a random stranger, who has appeared in front of me, out of nowhere, as if you only exist to let myself be heard.

Suddenly Mother is talking to someone again. It is a person she has given the shape of a man to.

The worst part of it is that you aren’t even real. 

This someone is wearing the shalvar of a king. Or is he just a man?

I’m sitting here, day in and out, repeating the same old story, talking to myself.

Who is this person? And why is this person listening so intently to Mother’s story?

It’s not the time for spats between India’s rulers and prelates

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

The Christian community needs a broad spectrum of political support and cannot afford to make new enemies

Narendra Modi took the oath of office as prime minister of India for the third consecutive time at Rashtrapati Bhawan, home to its president, on a warm Sunday night, an unusual time for such magnificent functions of state.

Squirming under the cloudless night, lit not by the moon and the stars but by gigantic floodlights, were heads of government of neighboring South Asian countries barring Pakistan, India’s trillionaires, and political stars across party lines.

Only some in the several thousand invited gathering would have noticed that among those sworn in were two junior ministers from the tiny state of Kerala in the extreme south of the country.

One was a Christian who had not contested any seat in the elections but was a staunch loyalist of the prime minister’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Kurien George, a former vice chairman of the National Commission for Minorities, and a senior state leader of the party, was sworn in as a minister of state. He is expected to be made a member of the Rajya Sabha, the upper house of parliament, from one of the states where the BJP has significant strength in the legislative assembly.

The other new minister is also a strong BJP loyalist. Film actor Suresh Gopi created political history by winning for his party its maiden parliamentary seat in Kerala. The BJP had worked for it, conspired for it, and prayed for it, for all of half a century, without success. It had, though, come tantalizing close once when the then railway minister O Rajagopalan gave Congress star debater Shashi Tharoor a scare. Rajagopalan lost by a thin margin.

Gopi won rather handsomely from Trissur, beating seasoned professional politicians of both the Congress and Communist Party Marxist. In many ways, he did it without the help of Modi’s very noisy wooing of the Christian religious leadership in the state, and in New Delhi.

Observers attribute Gopi’s victory to not just his celebrity status as a popular film actor, but to his close connect with the people, particularly Christians who form a sizable chunk of the electorate in the Trissur constituency.

Gopi is chummy with bishops, is generous to local churches, and helps those in need. The bishops did not have to issue any calls from the pulpit to endear the people to this good Samaritan despite the baggage of his party’s image as a persecutor of Christians in north and northeast India.

Gopi by all accounts has also had more than a helpful nudge from the state’s Marxist Chief Minister Piniyari Vijayan, whose several visits to Trissur in the elections invited comment.

These developments are no less than a volcanic eruption and have sent strong shock waves through the state’s political structures.

For the Church, it is a time for introspection. The Catholic Church’s playing footsie with Modi and his party in Kerala, Mumbai (formerly Bombay), and some other regions, has not gone down well with the community which bears the brunt of the violence wreaked by the BJP’s militant associates in the militant Sangh Parivar or Hindu nationalists’ outfits affiliated to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the mother organization of the BJP, and alma mater of Modi.

Christians have traditionally been seen as supporters of the centrist Congress party which nationally is locked in a deathly tussle with the BJP-RSS.

For Vijayan, this is a fraught time. He too is a third-time elected head of government — of a state, though. Under his watch, his party has fared terribly, winning just one seat in the recent general election to parliament, with the remainder going to the Congress, an enemy in politics of the state, but a coalition partner in the rest of the country.

Vijayan faces criticism from his party as much for his personal style and family baggage, as for his poor stewardship, in managing the general election.

The spat this week between the chief minister and a local bishop has taken both Christians and Communists by surprise, though perhaps Modi, Gopi and George must have been greatly amused.

Mercifully for the Catholic Church — which is yet to get out of its own serious internal binds — no bishop of any of its three rites are involved.

The man in the spotlight is Dr. Geevarghese Mar Coorilose, the former Metropolitan of the Jacobite Syrian Church’s Niranam Diocese.

Mar Coorilose is a very popular and pleasant prelate known in the state as much for his simplicity and humor as for his commitment to the poor. This has earned him the sobriquet of being a leftist in the Church. He told people not to use the feudal “Thirumeni” in addressing him. He also resigned as bishop to spend his time in meditation and service.

It was possibly in that frame of mind that he took the chief minister to task for inviting an electoral defeat by his acts of commission and omission. In a Facebook post, Mar Coorilose said the huge defeat that the Marxists had to face in the general election was due to the erosion in people’s faith, and the poor performance of the second Pinarayi government, compared to the first one.

His advice was that the biggest political movement in Kerala, the Communist Party of India-Marxist, should not lose its relevance. And should be open to criticism. For good measure, the prelate seemingly mocked the relief packages the government had given to people impacted by the devastating floods in the state in 2018.

“Arrogance and opulence, if continued, would spell doom for the leftist government. Floods and epidemics will not come to your rescue every time, and the people will not fall for the ‘kit politics’ time and again, especially in Kerala,” Mar Coorilose posted on Facebook.

He cautioned that unless remedial steps were taken, the Marxists faced the sort of political wipeout they had faced in Bengal and Tripura, once their strongholds.

That touched the chief minister to the quick. He retorted with an epithet; language used more by young children in street fights than by a chief minister of a state.

“There has been no change in the behavior of this person, who once called a priest a wretch, and today he calls another priest ’empty-headed’. It can be understood that the nature of the caller has not changed,” said the Kerala Council of Churches (KCC), a joint confederation of Christian organizations, which came to the rescue of one of its own.

The last has not been heard of this exchange of words between the Church and the politician.

But beyond the bombast and brimstone, serious questions are being asked about relations between Church and State, and in particular, between the hierarchy and political parties and their leaders.

At 2.3 percent of India’s more than 1.4 billion people, the Christian community has no real say in the political processes, other than in Kerala, Goa, and the small states of the northeast such as Nagaland, Mizoram, Meghalaya, and Manipur. In the eastern states, the community has done well for itself in the general election this time. But in some states in North India, it is less than a tenth of a percent, and yet suffers in great measure with its nuns and pastors attacked, house churches outlawed, and schools and colleges vilified.

Also, though religious freedom is a constitutional right, the community still needs the goodwill of all political players in the land for its economic development and growth. The community needs a broad spectrum of political support and cannot afford to make new enemies.

This demands that its political, social and religious leaders work with all political parties in each one of the 30 states, big and small, to carefully impact policy-making and devolve resources from the state and federal exchequers to help the Dalits, tribal peoples and youth of the community.

The BJP, which is making friendly sounds in Kerala is hostile to the Christian community across the country. It has been vigorously curtailing Church activities through anti-conversion laws, curbs on foreign funding, and administrative pressure on its educational, medical institutions and activism.

Why Modi Underperformed

Staff ReporterOpinion, World 0

India’s prime minister will balk at needing allies to stay in power, but coalition rule has proved to have benefits for large democracies.

From pundits to polls, there was a wide expectation this year that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi would not just win a rare third consecutive term but would secure an even bigger parliamentary majority than he had before. As it emerged on Tuesday, India’s voters had other ideas. Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) won the most seats—more than the entire opposition alliance combined—but will need the help of coalition allies to form a government. Modi has never needed to share power before, and it’s anyone’s guess as to how he will adapt to the vulnerabilities of coalition politics.

What will the surprising election results mean for politics in India and for India’s place in the world? I spoke with two experts on FP Live: Milan Vaishnav, the director of the South Asia program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and Yamini Aiyar, the former president of New Delhi’s Centre for Policy Research. Subscribers can watch the full discussion on the video box atop this page or download the FP Live podcast. What follows is a condensed and lightly edited transcript.

Ravi Agrawal: There was a wide expectation that Modi would return to power in a landslide. He didn’t. What went wrong?

Milan Vaishnav: If we rewind the clock to January and February of this year, before voting began, every pre-election survey pointed in one direction. And that was an overwhelming majority for the BJP, plus seats for the BJP’s allies known as the NDA. Exit polls reconfirmed that as recently as June 1. But that’s not what we saw. We saw a BJP that fell short of a governing majority. It will only be in power thanks to the help and assistance of its coalition partners.

The overarching message or takeaway for me was that it really wasn’t clear what this election was about. It’s such an obvious question to ask, but I have no answer for it. And this really hurt the BJP. There was no defining economic, national security, emotive issue. And what ended up happening, in broad strokes, was more of a classic state-by-state contest where local factors, incumbency, caste equations, party dynamics, alliances mattered much more. The BJP is on much weaker ground there. They have been the incumbent for 10 years. They have a motley group of opposition parties which have banded together with the explicit purpose of keeping the BJP out of power. There was some upset within the BJP’s ranks. They replaced over 100 of their sitting MPs, bringing in defectors and turncoats from other parties.This is important because the BJP is a rank-and-file, cadre-based party, so they don’t necessarily take very kindly to people coming from the outside. And so they really struggled to do something that we think of as part of the BJP’s strength, which is crafting a narrative.

Generational Nostalgia: Why Americans Fondly Remember Their Youth as the ‘Good Old Days’

Staff ReporterCulture, Opinion 0

YouGov, the survey experts renowned for their adeptness at tackling the intangible, recently polled 2,000 adults on which decade excelled in areas like music, movies, and the economy across 20 measures. Yet, no clear pattern emerged from the results.

Certain trends did stand out, however. White people and Republicans, for instance, were about twice as likely as Black people and Democrats to view the 1950s as the era of the most moral society, happiest families, and closest-knit communities. This disparity likely hinges on whether one recalls that decade for its idyllic “Leave it to Beaver” charm or for its darker moments like the Red Scare and the murder of Emmett Till.

“This was a time when Repubs were pretty much running the show and had reason to be happy,” noted nostalgia researcher Morris Holbrook via email. “Apparently, you could argue that nostalgia is colored by political preferences. Surprise, surprise.” Holbrook’s point underscores that political, racial, or gender divides are overshadowed by generational perspectives in these assessments.

When the data was re-evaluated by examining the gap between each person’s birth year and their ideal decade, a fascinating pattern emerged. This revealed that nostalgia isn’t tied to a specific era but rather to a particular age. The “good old days” are typically the decade when individuals were around 11 years old, an age of innocence and parental omniscience.

The data showed that our nostalgia peaks during specific life stages. For instance, the most tightly-knit communities are remembered from childhood (ages 4 to 7), while the happiest families, most moral societies, and most reliable news reporting are associated with early formative years (ages 8 to 11). The best economy, radio, television, and movies are linked to early teens (ages 12 to 15). As people reach their late teens (ages 16 to 19), nostalgia for music, fashion, and sporting events intensifies, consistent with findings from the University of South Australia’s Ehrenberg-Bass Institute which pinpoint music nostalgia at around age 17.

Interestingly, YouGov also asked about the worst music and economy. Consistently, respondents viewed “right now” as the worst time. Even when historical context suggests otherwise, such as the Great Depression, which had far worse unemployment rates than today’s pandemic-induced lows, the present era is often viewed as the most challenging.

This perception is particularly pronounced among Republicans, who were notably more negative about the current decade compared to Democrats. Joanne Hsu, director of the University of Michigan’s Surveys of Consumers, explained this partisan split. She observed that people whose party is in power generally have more favorable economic sentiments, a gap that has widened over time. During Trump’s presidency, Republicans’ optimism surged while Democrats’ expectations plummeted. This trend flipped with Biden’s inauguration but remains significant.

Hsu and her team explored where Americans get their economic information. They found that Republicans who follow partisan news outlets are more likely to view the economy negatively, although only a fifth of Republicans primarily rely on these sources. Despite this, both Democrats and independents also expressed dissatisfaction with the current decade, though to a lesser extent.

Carl Bialik from YouGov noted that when Americans were asked last year which decade they’d most prefer to live in, the most common answer was “now.” This suggests that while the current era is viewed negatively in specific terms, there is still a preference for contemporary life over past decades.

A deeper understanding emerged during a Zoom call with Australian researchers from the Ehrenberg-Bass Institute, who revisited music nostalgia. Their study asked respondents to rate songs from different decades, revealing a preference for music from their late teens without a corresponding spike in negative ratings for recent music.

Marketing researcher Bill Page pointed out that asking about the “worst” era often elicits a predisposition towards negative thinking rather than genuine opinions. His colleague Zac Anesbury added that surveys can unintentionally measure sentiments like “declinism,” the belief that things are perpetually getting worse. This phenomenon, rooted in rosy retrospection, means that we tend to remember the past more fondly than the present.

Psychological studies by Leigh Thompson and Terence Mitchell have shown that our satisfaction with experiences improves over time. For instance, a trip that seemed disappointing while underway might be remembered fondly once it’s over and the difficulties have faded.

In essence, describing the 2020s as the worst decade ever is akin to lamenting a trip during its roughest moments. Over time, as memories soften and the good moments stand out, the current decade may eventually be looked back on with nostalgia.

So, in a few decades, reflecting on the 2020s through the lens of cherished photos and fond memories, we might find ourselves recalling the good times rather than the challenges. Thus, the 2020s could well become the “good old days” of the future.

Weak But Sensible Voices Should Be Listened To In A True Democracy

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

I have been living in Shimla, the capital of Himachal Pradesh, for the past one month. In my general conversations with many people living in Shimla from different parts of Himachal Pradesh, there has been some discussion about the Lok Sabha elections also. The election is to be held in the last phase on four Lok Sabha seats here. One day five-six BJP workers came to my house in Summerhill. As soon as I opened the door, a senior worker among them said, ‘We have come   for Modiji . . .’ I welcomed them smilingly and asked them to first tell me about your candidate contesting from Shimla constituency. Narendra Modi is the Prime Minister of the country, everyone knows him. Pointing to the candidate’s photo printed on the poster they were holding, they said, ‘Yes, yes, he is our candidate from Shimla.’

While taking the election material from them, I apprised them that my vote was not here. I will definitely read your pamphlet. I kept talking about the elections with those workers for ten-fifteen minutes. They were not in a hurry. At my query they told me that there is a close contest on the Shimla seat. They further said that BJP’s victory in Hamirpur and Kangra seats is certain. The Congress may win the Mandi seat again. (The BJP candidate had won from Mandi in 2019 Lok Sabha elections. Congress won this seat in the midterm elections held in 2021 due to the death of the elected MP.) I asked why it seems that there is no tough competition in Mandi? The senior worker explained that such candidates can be fit in big cities. It is difficult for them to make a mark in a small city like Mandi. They all seemed to be very ordinary level workers of the party. During the entire conversation, they presented their assessment of the elections with a lot of neutrality and objectivity. I bid them farewell by saying my best wishes for your efforts.

A day before this, the Congress workers had come to our colony. I could not meet them. They had left their election material on the ground floor and put up posters in the compound and left. Maybe they thought that since the house is closed on the ground floor, there will be no one on the upper floors

Indian Elections: Is BJP Paying For Its Overconfidence?

Staff ReporterIndia, Opinion 0

There is little doubt in the minds of many today that this election is turning. It will not be the cakewalk that the BJP imagined it would be for the party. Seeking a third straight term, which was only recently seen as a given, is no more an easy task. There are many numbers being tossed, but almost all of them bring the BJP to and below the magic figure of 272. The only question that is being asked is how much can the party go down from that half-way mark required to form a government.

All indicators point to the ruling party taking heavy losses this time. What looked like rock-solid confidence has evaporated almost overnight. One clear indicator is that there is no talk anywhere in the BJP circles of a “char sau paar” (past the 400-mark) that was the hallmark of the BJP campaign as it began this run.  Yet, it is good to add a cautionary note. There are still five phases of voting left and a month to counting-day itself. Anything can happen. The election will need careful monitoring and is all set to becoming a thriller.

Voter turnout in the first two phases of the election has been lower than expected. There are many ways to read this. One is the view that since the BJP put in so much effort in declaring right at the beginning that there is virtually no contest, and the message was sent out with the full force of its rather rich, well-funded campaign and machinery, the BJP voters were less than enthused and decided – what is the point in working since the end result is given? The other is the weather – the summer has been unusually hot this time. The third is that the BJP itself has not been able to move its cadres, one reason being that the election was declared as won before the first vote was cast, and the second and more important one being the influx of all kinds and varieties of non-BJP workers who have joined the ranks on their own accord or have been lured/forced to move to the BJP.

The odd mix of “Intruders” versus cadres Is In part causing a mismatch of chemistry, and so building a sense of despondency within the committed workers who now feel excluded from the party they have worked in and for over a number of years. The last reason could be despondency among a broader section of the electorate, and if this is the cause, then the lower turnout could go any way in terms of influencing the results.

Bad news for BJP

But as the week drew to a close, there was more bad news for the BJP. On one hand, Rahul Gandhi was virtually on fire, demanding that the Prime Minister Narendra Modi apologise to every girl and woman in the country for seeking votes for Prajwal Revanna, a “mass rapist”, and further saying that votes for Revanna would strengthen Modi. That was at an election rally in support of the BJP’s new ally, the JD(S), where the prime minister made as clear an appeal as he could in support of JD(S) candidates, including Revanna, who is the grandson of the former Prime Minister H D Deve Gowda. Revanna fled to Germany the day after polling ended in his constituency of Hassan in Karnataka on April 26, just as tapes of his advances and assaults against women were leaked. The BJP has not been able to respond to the questions on support for Revanna, which particularly exposed the prime minister himself, given that it has emerged that the party was warned well in advance of Revanna’s conduct and the allegations against him, and went ahead with endorsing his candidature.

On the other hand, bad news for the BJP also came from the failed attempt to stir up a controversy over allegations that the Congress wanted to redistribute wealth, or take it from the middle class and give it, as the BJP alleged, to minorities.  This blatant and desperate attempt to bring in religion into an issue that has more to do with rising inequality, which has been highlighted by Rahul Gandhi, backfired with a laughable protest march by a section of students from Galgotias University, which claims to be NAAC Grade A+ with more than 300 national and international awards. Students in the protest march could barely read the placards against the Congress and knew nothing about the issues they said they had gathered to protest against! This deplorable display has not only highlighted the state of higher education, but the wages of a system under which fake news is fed and spread right from the very top of the political order, with students asking no questions and learning with no interest or curiosity. The university website begins with this headline: “Excellence is what we strive to achieve”.

In many ways, the BJP is suffering from the impact of its own over confidence, and its liberal use of communalism to get over the slide that it appears to be facing now. As Modi himself goes to the extreme in his attacks on the Congress (he claimed that the Congress manifesto “has the stamp of the Muslim League”), the party seems not to have calculated that there will be some price to pay for its role in the electoral bonds, the arrest of opposition leaders like Arvind Kejriwal and its attempt to get power at any cost, like it did in Maharashtra. Maharashtra is one state where the Opposition is getting huge traction.

Boast backfiring?

The story of how the BJP collected Rs.8,000 crores via the electoral bonds, revealed by the force of the Supreme Court, has led to the widespread view that the party is at its core corrupt. The “BJP washing machine” that cleans up the corrupt the moment they shift sides and join the BJP has also cost the party in terms of its image and standing, even among loyalists. The boast that it will get more than 400 seats has backfired because it has led to fears that this mandate would endanger the Constitution, with the BJP then in a position to trifle with some of the basic guarantees, like reservations. Further, there is also the huge fear of an impending dictatorial style being embedded into the nation’s democratic fabric should Modi get a third straight term.

All in all, the issues on the agenda are very different from the issues that the BJP thought would be on the agenda. The finals could go down to the wire and there will be many lessons learned once the votes are counted and the results are declared.

(The writer is the Managing Editor of The Billion Press. Views are personal. By special arrangement with The Billion Press)

Read more at: https://www.southasiamonitor.org/spotlight/indian-elections-bjp-paying-its-overconfidence

Tharoor Foresees Leadership Change: Modi’s Term to End in June, Asserts Congress Leader

Staff ReporterNews, Opinion, Politics 0

Senior Congress leader Shashi Tharoor remarked on Sunday that there’s no need to wait until September 2025 for a change in leadership, asserting that Prime Minister Narendra Modi will no longer be in charge after the declaration of Lok Sabha poll results on June 4.

In response to AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal’s assertion that Modi is seeking votes for Home Minister Amit Shah as his successor post-September 2025, Tharoor stated, “A new government will come to power at the Centre in June. There is no need to wait till September 2025.”

During a press conference in Mumbai, Tharoor criticized Modi for diminishing the quality of public discourse and employing language unsuitable for the nation. He defended the Congress’ refusal to attend the consecration ceremony of the Lord Ram temple in Ayodhya, stating that Lord Ram is not under BJP’s exclusive domain. Tharoor emphasized, “I visit temples to pray, not to engage in politics. The ‘pran pratishtha’ ceremony in Ayodhya is being exploited for political gains. Should I relinquish Lord Ram to the BJP?”

Tharoor further accused the BJP of neglecting crucial issues such as inflation, unemployment, the failure to double farmers’ income, and the dwindling income of 80% of the population. Responding to Kejriwal’s comments about Modi’s “retirement age,” Tharoor questioned whether the BJP would make an exception for one individual, reiterating that Modi’s tenure as PM would end after the June 2024 elections.

Regarding the absence of Muslim candidates from Maharashtra in the Lok Sabha polls, Tharoor cited “compulsions of coalition politics,” explaining that in such scenarios, parties contest fewer seats. He emphasized that making concessions for the greater benefit of the alliance shouldn’t be viewed as surrender.

Tharoor highlighted the inclusive nature of the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) alliance in Maharashtra, comprising the Congress, Shiv Sena, and NCP, contrasting it with the BJP-led NDA where allies like Akali Dal and BJD have distanced themselves from the BJP. He praised former PMs Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh for their adept handling of coalition governments, implying that Modi’s approach leans toward a presidential style of governance, deviating from the parliamentary system.

Asserting the Congress’ commitment to preserving Mumbai’s cosmopolitan essence, Tharoor noted a noticeable shift in sentiment after three phases of polling. He campaigned for Congress candidates Varsha Gaikwad and Bhushan Patil contesting from Mumbai North Central and Mumbai North constituencies, respectively, against BJP’s Ujjwal Nikam and Union Minister Piyush Goyal. Tharoor expressed confidence in favorable outcomes for the Congress in the upcoming elections on May 20.

Overall, Tharoor’s statements reflect his conviction in the impending change in leadership at the national level and his party’s strategic positioning within coalitions while advocating for inclusive governance and addressing pressing socioeconomic concerns.

Indian-American Groups Oppose Kashmiri Flag Display at Rutgers University Amidst Gaza Conflict Protests

Staff ReporterCommunity, Diplomacy, News, Opinion 0

Prominent Indian-American community organizations have appealed to Rutgers University Chancellor in New Jersey to refrain from allowing the exhibition of a separatist Kashmiri flag on its campus. They argue that such an act would convey a misleading message amid the ongoing turmoil at prominent US educational institutions over Israel’s conflict in Gaza.

Leading universities across the US are witnessing protests against Israeli military action in Gaza. The conflict was instigated by unprecedented attacks against Israel by Hamas militants on October 7, resulting in the deaths of over 1,400 people. In response, Israel has initiated a significant counter-offensive against the Islamic militant group governing Gaza since 2007.

On Friday, a group representing protesting students claimed that eight out of their ten demands had been met by the Rutgers University administration. However, the ninth demand, which proposed the display of flags of occupied peoples, including Palestine, Kurds, and Kashmiris, across Rutgers campuses, did not receive approval. The university administration stated that it would assess the flags exhibited on the New Brunswick Campus to ensure appropriate representation of enrolled students.

This refusal to meet the demand angered several Indian American groups, including the Hindu American Foundation (HAF) and the Coalition of Hindus of North America (CoHNA). They criticized Rutgers University for what they perceived as giving in to hate by approving the display of a Kashmiri separatist flag, which they associated with terror and the displacement of Kashmiri Hindus.

Some individuals, like Dharma Viveka, criticized Rutgers University for what they saw as capitulating to the demands of protesting students and failing to uphold equitable resource allocation. Additionally, the university’s decision sparked concern among Indian American communities, given the significant number of Indian students at Rutgers and the large Indian American population in New Jersey.

Thomas Abraham, Chairman of the Global Organization of People of Indian Origin (GOPIO), expressed surprise and dismay over Rutgers’ consideration of the demand to display flags of occupied peoples. He argued that such actions would call into question India’s integrity, asserting that Kashmir is an integral part of India and not a separate entity. Abraham cautioned against Rutgers’ involvement in internal conflicts of other countries, emphasizing its role as a public educational institution belonging to everyone.

The controversy surrounding Rutgers University’s handling of demands for flag displays reflects broader tensions over international conflicts within US educational institutions and the complexities of representing diverse student populations while navigating geopolitical sensitivities.

Tory Turmoil: Sunak Stands Firm Despite Election Setbacks

Staff ReporterNews, Opinion, Politics 0

Rishi Sunak has rebuffed calls for a change in direction following disappointing local election outcomes, asserting his ability to foster “progress” among voters prior to a general election.

In his initial response since the extent of Tory setbacks became evident, the prime minister lamented the loss of 470 councillors as “deeply disappointing”.

Critics within the Tory party have urged Sunak to steer towards the right.

However, Sunak expressed to The Times his determination to unify the party, stating, “I am determined that we will come together as a party.”

The Conservative party is reeling from a series of defeats in local elections. After the final tally on Sunday, they relinquished control of 10 councils, over 470 council seats, and suffered the symbolic defeat of West Midlands mayor Andy Street.

Additionally, the party ceded 10 Police and Crime Commissioners to Labour, posing a potentially significant setback for the Conservatives if they intend to focalize their next general election campaign on law and order.

Acknowledging for the first time that his party might be on course to lose its majority, Sunak conceded, “The local election results suggest we are heading for a hung parliament with Labour as the largest party.”

In an interview with The Times, he cautioned against the prospect of Keir Starmer leading a government backed by the SNP, Liberal Democrats, and the Greens, deeming it disastrous for Britain.

Sunak emphasized the necessity for action, asserting, “There is work to do and more progress to be made, and I am determined that we will come together as a party and show the British people we are delivering for them.”

His remarks parallel the analysis by leading psephologist Prof Michael Thrasher for Sky News, which projected that Labour would secure 294 seats in a general election.

The projection, though contested by some polling experts, extrapolated the nationwide vote share at a general election from the local election results. It operated on the assumption that voting patterns in the local elections would mirror those in a general election, notwithstanding the usual stronger performance of smaller parties and independent candidates in local elections.

Moreover, it did not factor in potential developments in Scotland, relying instead on the 2019 general election results, despite expectations of a stronger showing for Labour there this year.

Polling expert Prof Sir John Curtice noted that winning more seats in Scotland alone probably wouldn’t suffice for Labour to secure a majority. Nonetheless, he observed that the impact of Reform UK was subdued in the local elections as they contested only one in six wards. Where they did contest, there was a significant decline in the Conservative vote, indicating that they could wield greater influence in a general election, given their pledge to field candidates in every seat across England, Scotland, and Wales.

Health Minister Maria Caulfield acknowledged the caveats surrounding the projection. However, she asserted that last week’s results indicated former Conservative voters were abstaining rather than defecting to Labour, emphasizing, “they want a reason to vote for us.”

Labour refuted claims of planning alliances with other parties to form a government in the forthcoming general election, expected in the latter half of the year.

Speaking on BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, Labour’s election coordinator Pat McFadden expressed confidence in his party’s prospects, citing a growing belief in victory. He hailed the party’s remarkable election outcomes, particularly the unexpected triumph in the West Midlands mayoral race.

Former Home Secretary Suella Braverman criticized Sunak’s strategy as ineffective, acknowledging the dismal election results for the Conservatives. However, while advocating for a rightward shift in policies to recapture disenchanted Tory voters, she stopped short of calling for Sunak’s replacement, deeming it impractical so close to a general election.

Braverman is among several conservative voices advocating for a shift to the right following the bleak local election results. Miriam Cates, co-chair of the New Conservatives group primarily comprising “red wall” MPs from the 2019 intake, urged the party to emphasize “patriotism and national security” to avoid decline.

In an op-ed for the Telegraph, Cates urged Sunak to prioritize policies that resonate domestically over those catering to an international elite, proposing measures such as substantial immigration reduction and planning law reforms to stimulate house-building.

Former lead Brexit negotiator Lord David Frost expressed skepticism about rescuing the Conservative Party from electoral defeat in the next general election, contending that Sunak must implement “more tax cuts, more spending cuts,” and a “serious assault on the burden of net zero” to salvage the party’s prospects.

Contrarily, Damian Green, chairman of the centrist One Nation Group of Conservative MPs, criticized calls for a rightward shift as irrational, pointing out that recent losses were to parties on the left.

Conservative Party chairman Richard Holden stressed the need for the party to articulate a clear vision for the country rather than engaging in internal discussions, deeming it self-indulgent in the current climate

India Dismisses USCIRF Report, Labels Accusations of Discrimination as Biased

Staff ReporterDiplomacy, News, Opinion 0

India has firmly dismissed the recent findings of the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), accusing the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) of promoting discriminatory nationalist policies. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) spokesperson, Randhir Jaiswal, labeled the USCIRF as biased and propagandist, expressing little hope for the organization to grasp India’s diverse, pluralistic, and democratic essence. Jaiswal emphasized this stance during a press briefing, asserting, “We really have no expectation that USCIRF will even seek to understand India’s diverse, pluralistic and democratic ethos. Their efforts to interfere in the largest electoral exercise of the world will never succeed.”

USCIRF, established by the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, comprises Commissioners appointed by the President and bipartisan leadership from both chambers of Congress. The Commission’s recent report accused India’s government, particularly the BJP, of exacerbating communal tensions and neglecting to address violence disproportionately impacting various religious and ethnic communities.

“In 2023, religious freedom conditions in India continued to deteriorate,” the USCIRF report stated. It criticized the BJP-led government for reinforcing discriminatory policies, fostering divisive rhetoric, and failing to address communal violence, particularly affecting Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Dalits, Jews, and indigenous Adivasi communities. The report highlighted the continued enforcement of laws such as the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA), Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), and anti-conversion and cow slaughter laws, which allegedly led to the arbitrary detention and targeting of religious minorities and their advocates.

Moreover, USCIRF’s report raised concerns about media and NGO freedom, citing instances of strict monitoring under FCRA regulations. It pointed to the suspension of the FCRA license of the Centre for Policy Research, an NGO focused on social issues and minority discrimination, as well as raids on the offices and homes of journalists, including Teesta Setalvad, known for her reporting on anti-Muslim violence during the 2002 Gujarat riots.

India’s response to the USCIRF report underscores the ongoing tensions between the Indian government and international organizations regarding religious freedom and human rights. The rejection of USCIRF’s findings reflects India’s assertion of sovereignty and resistance to external scrutiny, particularly from entities perceived as biased or politically motivated. As India continues to navigate complex religious and social dynamics, its relationship with international bodies like USCIRF remains contentious, with divergent perspectives on issues of religious freedom and minority rights.

Analysis: Declining US Birth Rate Not the Economic Disaster Some Fear, Says Fisher Investments

Staff ReporterFinance/Economy, News, Opinion 0

Recent analysis from Fisher Investments suggests that the declining birth rate in the United States, though significant, may not spell the economic catastrophe that some anticipate. The advisory firm highlights a global trend of falling birth rates, with the US experiencing its lowest rate in decades, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control.

This downward trend in birth rates is not a new phenomenon. World Bank data indicates a consistent decline since the 1960s. Despite these numbers, Fisher Investments argues that a shrinking population may not be detrimental to the economy, citing previous instances in the 1980s and 1990s when economic growth persisted despite declining fertility rates.

The correlation between falling birth rates and economic prosperity is not straightforward. Wealthier nations tend to have lower birth rates due to factors such as improved healthcare leading to lower infant mortality rates and longer life expectancies, allowing individuals to delay or choose not to have children.

While acknowledging potential long-term implications of declining birth rates on human capital and other factors, Fisher Investments remains cautiously optimistic about the future. They emphasize the unpredictability of future developments and the potential for technological advancements, such as AI, to mitigate the effects of a smaller workforce.

Economists have also speculated on the impact of technological innovations like AI on the labor force. Goldman Sachs estimates that AI could disrupt millions of jobs worldwide, potentially offsetting the effects of a declining workforce.

Moreover, Fisher Investments suggests that any economic repercussions from declining birth rates would likely unfold gradually over time rather than having an immediate impact. Founder and co-chief investment officer Ken Fisher remains bullish on the stock market, downplaying concerns about a recession or prolonged periods of high-interest rates. He asserts that the recent fluctuations in the market do not signify the beginning of a bear market, as bear markets typically manifest through a gradual decline rather than sudden drops like those observed recently.

JPMorgan Stays Cautious on Cryptocurrencies Amid Lack of Bullish Catalysts

Staff ReporterFinance/Economy, News, Opinion 0

JPMorgan, a leading US bank, has expressed a cautious outlook towards cryptocurrencies in its recent report released on April 23rd. The report highlights several factors contributing to the current state of the cryptocurrency market. One notable observation is the absence of bullish catalysts following a decline in ETF inflows. Analysts at the bank point to various factors amplifying the bearish sentiment, including high market positioning, disappointing venture capital funding, and the associated production costs.

In a previous assessment, JPMorgan suggested that the impact of the Bitcoin halving had already been factored into the market, which tempered optimistic forecasts. This sentiment was echoed back in February when the bank projected a potential drop in Bitcoin’s value post-halving, envisioning a figure as low as $42,000 per coin. Additionally, JPMorgan foresaw a doubling in the production cost of individual coins. During this period, Bitcoin advocate Mike Novogratz also cautioned against an overheated market.

Despite hitting an all-time high of $73,737 in March and achieving eight consecutive months of gains, Bitcoin faced a significant downturn in April, followed by continued declines into May. This downward trajectory was attributed to substantial outflows from ETFs and broader macroeconomic uncertainties. As of the latest update, Bitcoin is trading at $59,110.

Meanwhile, Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan, reiterated his longstanding skepticism toward Bitcoin, labeling it as “a fraud” and likening it to a “Ponzi scheme.” Dimon maintained his stance that Bitcoin lacks the fundamental qualities of a viable currency. However, he acknowledged the potential value of blockchain technology despite his reservations about cryptocurrencies.

Renowned Trader Peter Brandt Sparks Controversy with Bold Bitcoin Price Prediction

Staff ReporterFinance/Economy, News, Opinion 0

Renowned trader Peter Brandt has ignited yet another fervent discussion within the cryptocurrency community with his most recent Bitcoin price forecast. In a recent social media update, Brandt put forth the notion that should Bitcoin sustain its current price levels and persist on its upward path, it could adhere to a conventional pattern indicative of a continuation in the bull market.

Brandt’s analysis, coupled with an illustrative chart portraying his perspective, indicates that notwithstanding recent fluctuations, Bitcoin might be on the brink of a substantial surge towards the $74,000 threshold, potentially revisiting its prior all-time pinnacle. This buoyant prognosis, however, hasn’t garnered unanimous acceptance.

Some skeptics have cast doubt on Brandt’s credibility, pointing to his earlier prognostications which oscillated between predicting a downturn to $40,000 per BTC and speculating that Bitcoin had already peaked. Nevertheless, Brandt remains steadfast in his conviction that the cryptocurrency is amidst a bullish phase, underscoring the significance of adaptability in proficient trading.

In response to the criticism levied against him, Brandt dismissed detractors, underscoring his extensive decades-long experience in trading and stressing the indispensability of agility in maneuvering through volatile markets. Engaging in a direct confrontation with one skeptic, Brandt assertively proclaimed his readiness to capitalize on their skepticism, cautioning them against the risk of jeopardizing their capital in the process.

The veracity of whether Bitcoin will indeed adhere to Brandt’s envisaged trajectory remains uncertain, yet one aspect is indisputable: the esteemed trader has once again kindled deliberation and captured the attention of investors.

India’s Economic Odyssey: Modinomics’ Decade of Progress and Perils

Staff ReporterEconomy, Opinion 0

In January, despite the bone-chilling cold, a multitude gathered at Delhi’s Red Fort to hear Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s address. His message, encapsulated in the catchphrase “Viksit Bharat 2047,” outlines an ambitious vision to elevate India to the status of a developed nation by 2047. This mantra reflects Modi’s penchant for crafting memorable slogans. While “Developed India” might seem like a broad pledge, Modi, during his ten-year tenure since assuming power, has diligently worked to lay the groundwork for an economic resurgence.

Upon inheriting an economy teetering on the brink, characterized by sluggish growth and faltering investor confidence, Modi faced significant challenges. The legacy of bankruptcies among Indian billionaires burdened banks with massive unpaid loans, constraining their lending capacity. However, after a decade, India’s economic trajectory has shifted positively, outpacing other major economies. Despite the challenges posed by the pandemic, India’s growth has remained robust, its banking sector fortified, and government finances stabilized. Last year, India ascended to become the fifth largest economy globally, and analysts project a rise to the third spot by 2027, surpassing Japan and Germany.

India’s recent achievements have fostered a sense of optimism nationwide. Hosting the G20 summit, pioneering lunar exploration, and nurturing numerous unicorn startups underscore the nation’s progress. Moreover, the buoyant stock markets have augmented the wealth of the middle class, contributing to this optimism.

However, a deeper analysis reveals a more nuanced reality. While “Modinomics,” the economic vision of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), appears effective on the surface, substantial segments of India’s vast population still grapple with economic hardship. Despite strides in digital governance, which have revolutionized access to services for marginalized communities, substantial disparities persist.

The transformative impact of Modi’s infrastructure initiatives is evident in the proliferation of construction projects across India, symbolized by the sleek underwater metro in Kolkata. Over the past three years, infrastructure spending has exceeded $100 billion annually, significantly enhancing the nation’s public facilities. Additionally, bureaucratic hurdles have been alleviated, a longstanding impediment to India’s economic growth.

However, Modi’s policies have not uniformly benefited all sectors of society. The stringent lockdown measures during the pandemic, coupled with the ramifications of the 2016 cash ban and the flawed implementation of a new goods and services tax, have precipitated enduring structural challenges. The informal sector, comprising small enterprises vital to India’s economy, continues to grapple with the repercussions of these decisions. Furthermore, private sector investment remains subdued, diminishing as a proportion of GDP over the years.

The dire employment situation underscores the persistence of economic challenges. The influx of job seekers at government recruitment centers highlights the severity of India’s jobs crisis, exacerbating widespread disillusionment. Despite educational achievements, many youths, like Rukaiya Bepari, struggle to secure stable employment opportunities, reflecting the widening gap between skills and job availability.

Moreover, India’s manufacturing sector’s sluggish growth and the enduring dominance of agriculture underscore persistent structural challenges. The lack of substantial industrial development perpetuates reliance on agriculture, a sector increasingly beset by profitability concerns.

India’s economic growth post-pandemic has been characterized by unevenness, with the affluent prospering while the marginalized endure hardship. Despite ranking as the fifth largest global economy, India lags significantly in per capita terms, with inequality reaching historic highs. The ostentatious displays of wealth among the elite stand in stark contrast to the financial struggles faced by many.

Nevertheless, despite these challenges, experts remain optimistic about India’s economic prospects. Drawing parallels with China’s rapid growth trajectory in the early 21st century, analysts foresee India’s ascendance driven by demographic advantages, geopolitical shifts, and technological advancements. Infrastructure investments, combined with a focus on human capital development, are seen as critical for sustaining long-term growth.

While Modi’s economic policies have yielded tangible benefits for some, significant segments of society continue to grapple with economic insecurity. As India embarks on its next phase of development, addressing systemic inequalities and prioritizing inclusive growth will be imperative to ensure a prosperous future for all citizens.

Trump’s Time Interview: Evasion on Election Violence, Abortion Ambiguity, Netanyahu Critique, and Detained Journalist’s Release

Staff ReporterOpinion, Politics 0

Former President Donald Trump didn’t rule out the potential for violence from his supporters if he isn’t elected in November, indicating it could hinge on the outcome of the presidential race.

“I don’t think we’re going to have that,” Trump, the likely GOP nominee, told Time magazine. “I think we’re going to win. And if we don’t win, you know, it depends. It always depends on the fairness of an election.”

These statements emerged from a comprehensive interview with Time published on Tuesday, covering a variety of topics such as abortion and the leadership of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Here are the key points from the interview:

  1. Trump’s Response to Election Conspiracies and January 6 Pardons: Initially, Trump minimized the likelihood of future political violence akin to the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack. However, he later equivocated when pressed by Time, continuing to propagate unfounded election conspiracy theories that he suggested incited the violent mob.

 

  1. Trump’s Abortion Position: Trump’s stance on abortion in the interview showcased the complexities and potential political risks of his approach, particularly regarding his reluctance to veto a federal abortion ban or to object to states penalizing women for undergoing abortions in places where it’s prohibited.

 

  1. Trump’s Critique of Netanyahu: Trump’s criticism of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu intensified following the October 7 attack by Hamas on Israel. Trump blamed Netanyahu for perceived security lapses during the incursion, although he stopped short of explicitly calling for Netanyahu’s replacement.

 

  1. Calls for the Release of Evan Gershkovich: Trump tepidly supported the release of Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich, who has been detained in Russia for a year on espionage charges. Trump’s restrained response mirrors his past reluctance to strongly condemn foreign leaders for their treatment of perceived political adversaries, as evidenced by his reactions to the deaths of Alexey Navalny and Jamal Khashoggi.

Trump’s comments in the Time interview reflect his continued refusal to disavow election conspiracies, his nuanced stance on abortion, his renewed criticism of Netanyahu, and his restrained response to the detainment of journalist Evan Gershkovich in Russia.

Electoral Bonds Scandal In India Speaks Of A Compromised Private Sector

Staff ReporterIndia, Opinion 0

This much should be now clear and settled to any reasonable person – the scheme of electoral bonds was an extortion racket, even if it is granted that – to be charitable to its designers  – that was not the intention with which it was devised. The legalised corruption that the scheme unleashed will be studied and analysed for a long time and will go down as a milestone in the history of scandals, one that leaves nothing to the imagination given the remarkable and audited documentation that it leaves behind.

Specifics of the transactions in all their horror, particularly when it comes to a) pharma companies and their donations in the wake of investigations into the quality of drugs, b) assorted investigations that began and stopped after “donations”, one of these kinds leading to the process against Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, c) long-pending clearances and other accommodation in favour of business houses against payments and d) a clear path for foreign funds coming in as donations, are just the headline concerns. They point to not only the anti-national character of the scheme but also stand out as an invitation to corruption – an open-door policy that lays out a clear path to tamper with the Indian system.

What can a business leader or a vested interest not do when the price is known, legal cover is guaranteed, secrecy is written into the law, and the party of the Prime Minister of India is the recipient of the booty? It legitimises the “rate-card” method of corruption that makes rent-seeking an efficient, predictable and quantitative enterprise, only that this one is legalised, works at the highest echelons of power, and gets your job done, whatever that job be. It marks the collapse of India as a modern democratic nation and a firm entry into the territory of a banana republic, with an outer sense of calm barely concealing an inner dealing room where the dirty jobs are done.  This is the inner rottenness of India’s growth story, a self-imposed colonisation of a nation that has lost its standing, never mind the growing GDP.

Deep damage to nation

Electoral Bonds Scandal In India Speaks Of A Compromised Private Sector (South Asain Monitor)

What A R Antulay as chief minister set up in Maharashtra can be described as an early version of the electoral bonds scheme, save that his collections were meant for the poor and not funds to fight elections.  Antulay was forced to resign in 1982 when what was then universally regarded as a monumental scandal about “donations” to trusts he controlled came to light. It was the BJP that filed the case against Antulay, who collected Rs.50-odd crore in trust funds, partly in return for cement allocations to builders at a time of shortages. As the scandal hit the national headlines, the BJP was at the forefront of raising issues of corruption. L K Advani led efforts to highlight the scandal. Today, the same party has reached a stage where its leadership talks of a pro-rata justification of the collections: we got this much with so many MPs versus the amount that the opposition got with fewer MPs, as the attempted justification offered by Home Minister Amit Shah goes.

Yet, the deep damage caused to the nation by electoral bonds is yet to be captured. The bigger twist is that India must come to terms with the realisation that its directional 1991 turn to the era of liberalisation and privatisation has failed. India’s liberalisation was meant to free the private sector from the license-control-Raj, fire up “animal spirits”, the term given to us by John Maynard Keynes, and provide the economic escape velocity to enable us to float high above the so-called Hindu rate of growth. Pre-reforms, businesses kept liaison offices in New Delhi to ease the process of business-government interaction. In one case from a long time ago, the chief executive of Unilever in India was asked to meet Prime Minister Indira Gandhi to help put an end to price control on soap, which had been brought in a desperate bid to control inflation in light of the “oil shock” of the 1970s. None of this would be required after Dr. Manmohan Singh under Prime Minister P V Narasimha Rao abolished industrial licensing on July 24, 1991, and declared: “As a whole, the Indian economy will benefit by becoming more competitive, more efficient and modern and will take its rightful place in the world of industrial progress.”

What has this turn yielded? India has GDP growth but government spending remains a significant part of this growth. The private sector still has to and is equally happy and willing to negotiate the corridors of power and pay speed money to those who matter. The ones closest to power have grown the most. Worse, the inefficiencies this builds into the system will not allow the private sector on the one hand to mature and on the other hand to stand up to authority, build governance systems, take bold decisions and the risks that must come with “animal spirits”. Why risk it all when there is a side gate to manage the process?

A handmaiden of government

With a bent spine, it is entrenched players who will continue to rule and what we have in the name of the private sector (barring some exceptions) is money-making at all costs and with the least risks to the money-makers. This cannot be the dream of an India firing away on all cylinders to solve the burning problems of society. It is, therefore, no surprise that with liberalisation, we have built wealth and income inequality higher than that obtained during the British Raj, as the World Inequality Lab’s working paper titled “Income and Wealth Inequality in India, 1922-2023: The Rise of the Billionaire Raj” by Bharti, Chancel, Piketty and Somanchi notes. It should also be clear that India’s private sector has not really matured and remains comfortable only as a handmaiden of the government.

It may therefore not be a stretch to argue that there is not a strong and purposeful private sector worth the name in India. It is no surprise that many Indians still don’t trust private enterprises. In India today the working system is to pay a price, buy peace and make money – the government and those with the means stand together in an anti-people agenda.

(The writer is a journalist and faculty member at SPJIMR, Mumbai. Views are personal. By special arrangement with The Billion Press)

Read more at: https://www.southasiamonitor.org/perspective/electoral-bonds-scandal-india-speaks-compromised-private-sector

New Legislation in U.S. House Aims to Address ‘Hinduphobia,’ Sparks Debate Over Intent and Impact

Staff ReporterDiplomacy, Opinion 0

A fresh legislative proposal presented in the House of Representatives seeks to denounce “Hinduphobia,” a term utilized by certain Hindu Americans to articulate what they assert as burgeoning anti-Hindu sentiments in the United States.

The bill was put forward by Democratic Representative Shri Thanedar, an Indian American hailing from Michigan. During a press conference on Monday, he delineated what he perceives as an escalating threat to Indian Americans who adhere to Hinduism, the world’s third-largest religion.

“Today I am seeing in the United States a substantial increase of attacks on Hinduism, a lot of misinformation being circulated,” he stated. “Having practiced Hinduism, having grown in a Hindu household, I know what Hinduism is. It is a very peaceful religion … It is not a religion that attacks others, it is not a religion that is aggressive against others.”

Thanedar’s resolution outlines various points, including the House’s acknowledgment of the contributions of Hindus to the U.S. and its condemnation of “Hinduphobia” and anti-Hindu bigotry.

However, progressive Hindu and South Asian groups have voiced apprehension about this legislation, contending that while anti-Hindu sentiment does exist, the term “Hinduphobia” was fabricated by the Indian far-right to stifle criticism of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government.

“In many cases, instances of anti-Indian sentiment, general xenophobia, or even mistaken Islamophobia are misleadingly labeled as ‘Hinduphobic’ regardless of whether or not there is any evidence to support claims of religious motivation,” remarked Hindus for Human Rights, a progressive civil rights organization, in a news release. “Even worse, claims of ‘Hinduphobia’ have routinely been weaponized to smear anyone — including self-identifying Hindus — who criticizes the current Indian government.”

During his press conference, Thanedar depicted the Hindu community as “inclusive” and asserted that it has been purposefully misrepresented by mainstream media. He also highlighted instances of vandalism on two California Hindu temples with graffiti reading “Modi is a terrorist” and slogans calling for an independent Sikh state.

“We have experienced substantially more events of this kind in recent months, and I have a feeling that this is just the beginning,” he remarked. “This is just the beginning of a very coordinated attempt against this community.”

Thanedar refrained from speculating about the perpetrators of these attacks but urged the FBI, the Department of Justice, and local authorities to intervene.

Modi’s government frequently faces criticism for its human rights record, including assaults on the media and anti-Muslim legislation. It’s also been accused of promoting Hindu nationalism both in India and among the diaspora.

In the U.S., Muslims and caste minorities have reported facing targeted attacks and violence for speaking out against far-right, Hindu nationalist actors aiming to establish India as a Hindu-dominated nation. Hindus for Human Rights contended in its release that Thanedar’s resolution could stifle these conversations by branding them as “Hinduphobic.”

In reality, the organization argued, the primary threat to Indian American immigrants in the U.S. is white nationalism.

“Though it claims to celebrate Hindu Americans and speak for our community’s interests, this resolution does not respond to real concerns about how Hindu Americans are affected by white Christian nationalism in the United States,” the release stated. “Instead, it reflects a longstanding effort by the Hindu supremacist movement in the United States to divide South Asian communities.”

Retired Judges Urge Chief Justice: Defend Judiciary Against Threats

Staff ReporterDiplomacy, Opinion 0

A collective of retired judges from both the Supreme Court and High Courts has penned a letter to Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, expressing their shared apprehension concerning the escalating efforts by specific factions to undermine the judiciary through strategic pressure, dissemination of misinformation, and public denigration.

The missive, dated April 14, features signatures from 21 former judges, including prominent figures like former Supreme Court Justices Deepak Verma, Krishna Murari, Dinesh Maheshwari, and M R Shah, as well as former High Court judges Permod Kohli, S M Soni, Ambadas Joshi, and S N Dhingra.

In their communication, the ex-judges highlighted their awareness of “elements, motivated by narrow political interests and personal gains,” endeavoring to diminish public trust in the judicial system. They emphasized the multifaceted and surreptitious nature of these efforts, aimed at influencing judicial proceedings by casting doubt on the integrity of the courts and judges.

The former judges underscored that such actions not only disregard the sanctity of the judiciary but also present a direct affront to the principles of fairness and impartiality that judges, as custodians of the law, are duty-bound to uphold. They expressed deep concern over the tactics employed by these groups, ranging from disseminating unfounded theories to besmirch the judiciary’s reputation to engaging in overt and covert maneuvers to sway judicial outcomes in their favor.

“This behavior,” the former judges remarked, “is particularly evident in cases of social, economic, and political significance, including those involving specific individuals, where the distinction between advocacy and manipulation becomes blurred to the detriment of judicial independence.”

The signatories voiced particular alarm over the tactics of misinformation and the orchestration of public sentiment against the judiciary, deeming them not only unethical but also injurious to the foundational tenets of democracy. They criticized the selective praise of judicial decisions that align with one’s viewpoint while vehemently condemning those that do not, asserting that such practices undermine the essence of judicial review and the rule of law.

“The judiciary, spearheaded by the Supreme Court, must fortify itself against such pressures to ensure the sanctity and autonomy of our legal system are preserved,” urged the former judges. They stressed the imperative for the judiciary to remain a bastion of democracy, impervious to the transient whims of political interests.

In a show of solidarity with the judiciary, the former judges pledged their readiness to lend support in any capacity necessary to uphold the dignity, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary. They looked to Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud for steadfast guidance and leadership in navigating these challenging times, safeguarding the judiciary as a beacon of justice and equity.

American Youth Unhappiness: US Plummets in Global Happiness Rankings, Concerns Rise Over Well-Being

Staff ReporterYouth, Opinion 0

The latest findings from the annual World Happiness Report have sparked concern over the well-being of youth in the United States. According to the report, the US has slipped to the 23rd position among the world’s happiest countries, marking a significant decline from its previous standing. This drop has pushed the US out of the top 20 for the first time since the report’s inception in 2012. Published by the Wellbeing Research Centre at the University of Oxford, the report indicates a worrying trend in American happiness levels.

While Finland continues to hold the top spot, countries like Canada and the UK have also fared better than the US, securing the 15th and 20th positions respectively. The dissatisfaction among American youth appears to be a primary factor contributing to this drastic decline. For the first time, the report has introduced alternative rankings based on age groups, revealing that the US ranks 62nd in the under-30 category, lagging behind nations such as Saudi Arabia and Guatemala.

Jan-Emmanuel De Neve, a professor at Saïd Business School and one of the editors of the World Happiness Report, expressed astonishment at the decline in average happiness within the US. He emphasized that the well-being of young Americans has experienced a sharp decline, consequently dragging down the overall rankings of the country. Conversely, older Americans have exhibited a more positive outlook on their quality of life.

De Neve highlighted alarming decreases in happiness levels across North America and western Europe, describing the situation as “disconcerting.” He stressed the urgency for policy interventions, particularly concerning the emotional well-being of children who are facing challenges comparable to a mid-life crisis in some parts of the world.

The report’s findings indicate a decline in well-being among individuals aged 15 to 24 in various regions, including North America, western Europe, the Middle East, North Africa, and South Asia, since 2019. Conversely, happiness levels within the same age group have generally increased in other parts of the world.

In the United States, young people grapple with a multitude of social issues, including a pervasive sense of loneliness. De Neve pointed to several potential factors driving this decline, including the proliferation of social media, worsening mental health among youth, and political polarization.

“The rising inequality in society is also a significant factor,” De Neve remarked. “In the United States, there’s a palpable divide between the left and right, contributing to a myriad of issues.”

He emphasized that attributing the decline in happiness to a single cause would be oversimplifying the situation, as it is influenced by a complex interplay of various factors.

Nationalism A Dominant Frame In Global Media Narratives; India Is No Exception

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

Resurgent right-wing politics and ‘ubiquitous hyper-nationalist politics’ have been global phenomena that have taken different forms of governance into their folds. The case of India and China can be two contrasting examples of the rise of such hyper-nationalism. The case of the United States will also be discussed.

Nationalism has deeply influenced media narratives in the recent conflict between India and China, where the governance structure is fundamentally different. India is the world’s largest parliamentary democracy, and China symbolizes one-party totalitarianism, where the Communist Party is the world’s largest political party.

While the electoral promise of social and economic upliftment in the world’s largest democracy, India often rejects media dissent and creates an ecosystem whereby major stakeholders in the media landscape conform to the government and are expected not to ‘oil the wheels of democracy’ and bolster nationalistic ideas and opinions through their pervasive and persuasive media narratives; a section remains within that media landscape in India which also keep making efforts to speak truth to power, often questioning and introspecting the government narratives, ranging from less-nationalistic to non-nationalistic. Such counter-thoughts to construct a parallel narrative alongside the mainstream nationalistic media narrative provide a wholesome and divergent interpretation of information, which often baffles the reader into asking which is the ‘real story’.

In China, the media is perennially nationalistic and conforming to the state which owns the media; dissent or contrasting ideas, opinions and facts are either smuggled out through the social media platforms (which face strict censorship once dissent is spotted) or are published by some foreign media who base their research on sources embedded within the Chinese society or collect data from short-lived Chinese social media accounts. An example of this can be drawn from the fact that the Australian media organisation The Klaxon, which conducted a year-long investigation by Chinese social media researchers, published a report stating that at least 38 Chinese soldiers died in the Galwan Valley clash, contrary to the Chinese government’s claim of four casualties only.

Contrasting narratives of conflict

Political, structural, economic, and cultural issues often influence and guide media narratives and journalism practices. Several previous studies around print media narratives have shown the power relations at work in constructing and disseminating information. The mainstream Indian media, a section of which has mostly been a subject of the nationalist government’s monopolistic control, has often served the ends of the dominant elite. Dominant political narratives and media narratives have often resonated where nationalism was used as a keyframe in conflict-reporting of the Sino-Indian border clash.

Democratic India also allowed room for the media organisations critical of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government to report the 2020 Sino-Indian conflict critically, deviating from the majoritarian media practice of toeing the government line. The primary sources of information, however, remain unchanged as the actual conflict was largely opaque, with hardly any avenue to learn the exact sequence of events as the conflict unfolded in the darkness of the night of 15 June 2020. Some of these media organisations also relied on reports published in the leading Western media.

They analyzed satellite images from US-based space technology firm Maxar Technologies and earth-imaging company Planet Labs to highlight Chinese military build-up and construction of roads in the Galwan Valley. Reporting of the Galwan conflict and the media narratives that were constructed around it were distinctly different in the Indian media ecosystem, which was circulated domestically than it was in the state-controlled Chinese media ecosystem; however, nationalism remained an important frame in the democratic media landscape.

Nationalism A Dominant Frame In Global Media NarrativesNationalism, in the case of the United States, is also a significant frame used by media organizations to project their own nation’s image to the rest of the world. While some media organisations in the US can be identified as being aggressively nationalistic (we see that in the media organizations’ coverage of reports that helped President Donald Trump win the 2016 presidential elections, for example, Fox News), others are more balanced, accurate and unbiased such as the CNN or The Wall Street Journal. This does not, however, prevent these media organizations from identifying themselves with values and principles that they uphold as the identity of their ‘great’ nation. Equality, rule of law, representative democracy, freedom of speech, individualism, and patriotism often resonate in the media reports from these revered organizations. Ironically, some of these values are put on the back burner when media organizations of international repute, reverence, and credibility in the US report on developments that contradict their country’s geopolitical goals.

Double standards in coverage

The fact that nationalism seeps into the ways in which some of the best media organisations in the world cover global incidents can be understood if one pays close attention to the US media coverage of two ongoing conflicts that have plagued the world. Coverage of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, which escalated on 22 February 2022, and the coverage of the Hamas-Israel conflict, which broke out after Hamas attacked on 7 October 2023, as being witnessed in the mainstream US media organizations, re-establish the fact that not only nationalism but a mix of nationalism with a capitalist veneer helps in advancing geopolitical ambitions.

A close analysis indicates the hierarchy of geopolitical influences marked by double standards in covering such issues as human rights and racial equality witnessed during the two invasions: one undertaken by an old adversary of the United States (Russia) and another by a staunch US ally (Israel).

Chinese President Xi Jinping has often said on several occasions that China needs to tell its story well. This has also become the mantra in mainstream media organisations in countries that, unlike China, have democratically elected governments. Nationalism is a dominant frame that the media uses in each of these three countries – India, China and the US – in diverse variants and in methods that are complex and intricate to understand and surely worth intellectual investigation.

(The author is a PhD scholar at Hong Kong Baptist University. Views are personal. He can be contacted at [email protected]) Read more at: https://www.southasiamonitor.org/medley/nationalism-dominant-frame-global-media-narratives-india-no-exception

Temple Inaugurations Are Not Decolonization; Indian Culture Is Much Broader

Ram PuniyaniOpinion 0

The recent ‘pran pratishtha’ (consecration) of Lord Ram in Ram Temple in Ayodhya has been a major spectacle. This has accompanied the promotion of the mass display of religiosity in most parts of the country, more so in northern India. This also saw the fusion of the roles ‘chief of religion’ and ‘chief of political power’ into a single person, the Prime Minister of India. It was immediately followed by Narendra Modi inaugurating another big temple (Swaminayan) in Abu Dhabi with gaiety and publicity. Soon the foundation for another temple in Chambal, Kalki Dham, was also done by Modi. Impressed by the serial temple events many right-wing ideologues are claiming that Modi is the first statesman from post-colonial societies to move towards the decolonization of cultures in post-colonial societies.

Temple Inaugurations Are Not Decolonization; Indian Culture Is Much BroaderHow did colonialism affect South Asia in particular? South Asia was predominantly a feudal society, ruled by the landlord-kings legitimized by the clergy. The British succeeded in colonizing most parts of South Asia, the Indian subcontinent in particular. Their primary focus was on plundering its wealth and creating markets for the goods being produced in England. It had to lay the structure of a colonial state in which transport, education and foundations of modern administration were laid down. Incidentally, they also supported the eradication of some of the ghastly practices like sati. For other reforms, the likes of Jotirao Phule, Savitribai Phule, B R Ambedkar and Mahatma Gandhi moved the mountains to bring in reforms and cultural changes.

The culture of society is not a static thing. It did start changing in multiple ways during the colonial period. While a blind aping of the West was a small part of cultural change, the major accompanying part was the journey towards a society with equality. These were baby steps towards the culture of industrial-modern society in India. This was looked down upon by the conservative political forces like the Muslim League, Hindu Mahasabha and RSS, the communalists, as being “Western values”. They were essentially piqued by the journey towards equality of the downtrodden, they were opposed to it and they labeled it as being ‘Western’.

On these lines, they called the Indian constitution, the embodiment of India’s political culture, as being based on Western values. One recalls that the ideologues of the Hindu Right were opposed to the ideology that talks of equality. In opposition to this, they harp on holy books like Manu Smriti, which talks of the inequality of caste and gender. Interestingly those social forces that had roots in feudal power structure stuck to the ‘anti-Western narrative’. At the same time, they collaborated with the colonial rulers. Interestingly the national movement was shaping the culture and also opposing colonial rulers.

One recalls the Muslim Brotherhood (West Asia) at this point as yet another example. It also calls the democratic culture and values as Western import and tries to impose dictatorial norms and social inequality in the name of Islam. In India, the Hindu Right wing seeks to oppose equality as being a Western import. The opposition to the values of the Indian constitution is also couched in the garb of opposition to colonial culture and is propagated as a glorification of ‘Indian culture’.

Misplaced cultural convictions

So what is being called opposing colonial culture at times is the culture that bases itself on opposing fraternity and justice. Justice for all, irrespective of caste and gender, has been the goal of the emerging Indian democracy; this gives space to pluralism and diversity. Amongst the post-colonial states, India had the best political journey till a few decades ago. This was also accompanied by a culture, which had continuity and change. This was reflected in the life patterns promoted by the likes of Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, Subhash Bose and Maulana Azad, to name a few. This was an attempt to tune the culture which is compatible with democratic values.

The spree of temple-related events is accompanied by the right-wing assertion that this is the decolonization of culture. Also, the impression being created that the inauguration of the temple in Abu Dhabi is the first one in the ‘Muslim countries’ of West Asia is false. One knows there are many temples in the region, including UAE, Muscat, Bahrain and Oman to name a few. As the global migrations; the economy in this case, of Indians are accompanied by the temples in the region. We also recall there are many temples in our neighboring Muslim countries. Dhakeshwwari temple in Bangladesh is well known and we also recall that apart from other existing temples in Pakistan, Lal Krishna Advani visited Pakistan to inaugurate the renovated Katasraj Temple.

The glorification of Modi for ensuring a Hindu temple is unwarranted. To assert that by inaugurating temples in India and in Abu Dhabi, Modi is showing the conviction to bring in decolonization is misplaced. In India the colonial impact was undone during the freedom movement itself, as the roots of progressive social steps and progressive writings, the theatre also ran parallel with the national movement. Post independence the process continued with Nehru’s encouragement of scientific temper and Ambedkar’s well-drafted Indian constitution.

India did not get subdued by colonial culture in totality. What we are facing today is the promotion of religiosity and conservatism. Since politics is stalking the streets in the garb of religion, India’s traditional syncretic culture is coming under attack from conservative and orthodox values. A hilarious example of this is the opposition by BJP associate VHP (Vishwa Hindu Parishad) and company legally challenging the forest department to let the lion Akbar cohabit with the lioness Sita at the Kolkata zoo.

Onslaught of orthodoxy

As far as Abu Dhabi is concerned, not only Abu Dhabi but the whole of West Asia (Middle East) has suffered the onslaught of orthodox values due to the promotion of Islamic fundamentalism by the United States. In pursuit of its control over oil resources, it had overthrown the democratically elected government of Mossadegh in Iran in 1953 paving the way for a fundamentalist regime in due course. Later it was instrumental in propping up madrassas in Pakistan to train mujahedeen which gave rise to Al Qaeda with huge funding and also supplied them with armaments. This whole American intervention shifted West Asian culture towards a retrograde one.

The inauguration of the temple in Abu Dhabi in no way can undo the cultural damage done to the region by the global forces with infinite hunger for oil. Temples are one part of the culture. The definition of culture has to be much broader than just temple-related events.

(The writer, a former IIT Bombay professor, is Chairman, Centre for Study of Society and Secularism, Mumbai. Views are personal.)

Read more at: https://www.southasiamonitor.org/perspective/temple-inaugurations-are-not-decolonization-indian-culture-much-broader

Representative Democracy Remains A Popular Ideal, But People Around The World Are Critical Of How It’s Working

Richard Wike, Janell Fetterolf, Moira Fagan and J.J. Moncus At PewOpinion, World 0

The health of democracy has declined significantly in many nations over the past several years, but the concept of representative democracy continues to be popular among citizens across the globe.

Solid majorities in each of the 24 countries surveyed by Pew Research Center in 2023 describe representative democracy, or a democratic system where representatives elected by citizens decide what becomes law, as a somewhat or very good way to govern their country.

However, enthusiasm for this form of government has slipped in many nations since 2017. And the survey highlights significant criticisms of the way it’s working. Across the countries included in the study:

  • A median of 59% are dissatisfied with how their democracy is functioning.
  • 74% thinkelected officials don’t care what people like them think.
  • 42% say nopolitical party in their country represents their views.

What is a median?

Throughout this report, median scores are used to help readers see overall patterns in the data. The median percentage is the middle number in a list of all percentages sorted from highest to lowest.

What – or who – would make representative democracy work better?

Many say policies in their country would improve if more elected officials were women, people from poor backgrounds and young adults.

Electing more women is especially popular among women, and voting more young people into office is particularly popular among those under age 40.

Views are more mixed on the impact of electing more businesspeople and labor union members.

Overall, there is less enthusiasm for having more elected officials who are religious, although the idea is relatively popular in several middle-income nations (Argentina, Brazil, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Mexico, Nigeria and South Africa, as defined by the World Bank).

For this report, we surveyed 30,861 people in 24 countries from Feb. 20 to May 22, 2023. In addition to this overview, the report includes chapters on:

Read some of the report’s key findings below.

How do views of democracy stack up against nondemocratic approaches?

Even though most people believe representative democracy is a good way to govern, many are open to other forms of government as well.

Direct democracy – a system where citizens, rather than elected officials, vote directly on major issues – is also viewed favorably by majorities in nearly all countries polled.

In most countries, expert rule – in which experts, not elected officials, make key decisions – is also a popular alternative.

And there is notable support for more authoritarian models of government.

In 13 countries, a quarter or more of those surveyed think a system in which a strong leader can make decisions without interference from parliament or the courts is a good form of government. In four of the eight middle-income nations in the study, at least half of respondents express this view.

Even military rule has its supporters, including about a third or more of the public in all eight middle-income countries. There is less support in high-income nations, although 17% say military rule could be a good system in Greece, Japan and the United Kingdom, and 15% hold this view in the United States.

Representative Democracy Remains A Popular Ideal But People Around The World Are Critical Of How It’s Working 1Views on representative democracy

Strong support for representative democracy has declined in many nations since we last asked the question in 2017.

The share of the public describing representative democracy as a very good way to govern is down significantly in 11 of the 22 countries where data from 2017 is available (trends are not available in Australia and the U.S.).

For instance, 54% of Swedes said representative democracy was a very good approach in 2017, while just 41% hold this view today.

In contrast, strong support for representative democracy has risen significantly in three nations (Brazil, Mexico and Poland).

Views on autocratic leadership

Representative Democracy Remains A Popular Ideal But People Around The World Are Critical Of How It’s Working 2Support for a government where a strong leader can make decisions without interference from courts or parliaments has increased in eight of 22 nations since 2017.

It is up significantly in all three Latin American nations polled, as well as in Kenya, India, South Korea, Germany and Poland.

Support for a strong leader model is especially common among people with less education and those with lower incomes.

People on the ideological right are often more likely than those on the left to support rule by a strong leader.

Views on expert rule

Support for a system where experts, not elected officials, make key decisions is up significantly in most countries since 2017, and current views of this form of government may be tied at least in part to the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, in the U.S., 59% of those who believe public health officials have done a good job of responding to the coronavirus outbreak think expert rule is a good system, compared with just 35% among those who say public health officials have done a bad job of dealing with the pandemic.

Widespread belief that elected officials are out of touch

Representative Democracy Remains A Popular Ideal But People Around The World Are Critical Of How It’s Working 3One factor driving people’s dissatisfaction with the way democracy is functioning is the belief that politicians are out of touch and disconnected from the lives of ordinary citizens.

In every country surveyed, people who feel politicians don’t care about people like them are less satisfied with democracy.

Across 24 nations, a median of 74% say elected officials in their country don’t care what people like them think.

At least half of those surveyed hold this view in all countries but one (Sweden). Opinions about elected officials are particularly negative in Argentina, Greece, Nigeria, Spain and the U.S., where at least eight-in-ten believe elected officials don’t care what people like them think.

Many don’t think political parties represent them

While a median of 54% across the 24 countries surveyed say there is at least one party that represents their views well, 42% say there is no party that represents their views.

Israelis, Nigerians and Swedes are the most likely to say at least one party represents their opinions – seven-in-ten or more express this view in each of these countries.1 In contrast, about four-in-ten or fewer say this in Argentina, France, Italy and Spain. Americans are evenly divided on this question.

In 18 countries where we asked about ideology, people who place themselves in the center are especially likely to feel unrepresented. And in some countries, those on the right are particularly likely to say there is at least one party that represents their views.

The U.S. illustrates this pattern: 60% of American conservatives say there is a party that represents their opinions, compared with 52% of liberals and just 40% of moderates.

People rate their country’s leaders, parties and overall state of democracy poorly

The survey asked respondents how well they feel democracy is working in their country, and it also asked them toRepresentative Democracy Remains A Popular Ideal But People Around The World Are Critical Of How It’s Working 4 rate major national leaders and parties. Opinions on these questions may have shifted since the survey was conducted in spring 2023, but the overall results provide a relatively grim picture of the political mood in many nations. (Refer to Appendix A for details about the specific leaders and parties we asked about.)

  • There are only seven countries where half or more are satisfied with the way democracy is working.
  • Among the 24 national leaders included on the survey, just 10 are viewed favorably by half or more of the public.
  • Opposition leaders fare even worse – only six get favorable reviews.
  • Across the countries polled, we asked about 87 different political parties. Just 21 get a positive rating.
  • Opinions vary greatly across regions and countries, but to some extent, we see more positive views about leaders and parties in middle-income nations.

How ideology relates to views of representation

This report highlights significant ideological differences on many questions, including preferences regarding the characteristics of people who serve as elected officials.

Those on the political left are generally much more likely than those on the right to favor electing more labor union members, young adults, people from poor backgrounds and women.

Meanwhile, those on the right are more likely to say policies would improve if more religious people and businesspeople held elective office.

Ideological divisions on these topics are often especially sharp in the U.S. There are also very large partisan differences.

Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents are much more likely than Republicans and Republican leaners to favor having more women, young adults, people from poor backgrounds and labor union members in office.

Meanwhile, Republicans are more likely to endorse electing more religious people and businesspeople.

In their own words: Ideas for improving democracy

The survey also included the following open-ended question: “What do you think would help improve the way democracy in this country is working?” Respondents describe a wide variety of ideas for making democracy work better, but a few common themes emerge:

Improving political leadership:Respondents want politicians who are more responsive to the public’s needs, more attentive to the public’s voice, less corrupt and more competent. Many would also like political leaders to be more representative of their country’s population in terms of gender, age, race and other factors.

Government reform:Many believe improving democracy will require significant political reform in their country. Views about what reform should look like vary considerably, but suggestions include changing electoral systems, shifting the balance of power between institutions, and placing limits on how long politicians and judges can serve. In several countries, people express a desire for more direct democracy.

Expecting more from citizens: Respondents also emphasize that citizens have an important role to play in making democracy work better. They argue that citizens need to be more informed, engaged, tolerant and respectful of one another.

Improving the economy: Many people – and especially those in middle-income nations – emphasize the link between a healthy economy and a healthy democracy. Respondents mention creating jobs; curbing inflation; changing government spending priorities; and investing more in infrastructure, such as roads, hospitals, water, electricity and schools.

The full results of the open-ended question will be released in an upcoming Pew Research Center report. For a preview of some of the findings, read “Who likes authoritarianism, and how do they want to change their government?”

Additional reports and analyses

Pew Research Center regularly explores public attitudes toward democracy and related issues around the world. The Center also regularly examines U.S. public opinion on topics related to democracy. Some of the most recent releases include:

Hate Speech in India: How to Promote Amity?

Ram PuniyaniOpinion 0

India has been ruled by the Hindu Nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party for the last decade. BJP, in turn, is the progeny of RSS, which has the goal of Hindu Rashtra. It has many progeny, hundreds of associated organisations with lakhs of volunteers (Swayamsevaks) and thousands of senior workers called Pracharaks (Propagators). It has been pursuing its agenda of the Hindu Nation with twice the speed since the BJP came to power at the centre. The rise of the BJP on the electoral battlefield is due to intensifying communal issues, Ram Temple, Cow-Beef, and Love-Jihad, among others. Communal violence has been a significant factor in increasing its electoral strength.

There are well-placed mechanisms to create hate, hate speech against minorities, the chain of shakhas, Schools, Godi media, social media and IT cells, among others. Hate speech, which is a punishable offence, is used with gay abandon, more so when the BJP is in power in states and also in the centre. Those indulging in Hate speech do know that they enjoy a sort of impunity.

Hate Speech in India (The Wire) (1)
Picture: The Wire

All this is confirmed by the latest report released by ‘India Hate Lab’, a Washington DC-based group that documents hate speech against India’s religious minorities. The report titled ‘Hate Speech Events in India’ notes that while 255 events took place in the first half of 2023, “the number rose to 413 in the second half of the year, a 62% increase. The details are very revealing. As per the report, nearly 75% of the events of the total (498) took place in the BJP-ruled States, Union Territories (administered by the BJP-led Central government), and Delhi (here, police and public order come under the Union government’s purview). While 36% (239) of the events “included a direct call of violence against Muslims”, and 63% (420) of incidents include references to “conspiracy theories, primarily involving love jihad, land jihad, and population jihad”. About 25% (169) featured speeches calling for targeting Muslim places of worship.”

The resulting events are very well known by now. We remember the addition of using bulldozers and demolitions by BJP-ruled states. The demolition of the Mosque here and there is no longer a big deal. Boycotting Muslim hawkers and traders is occasionally propped up.

The impact on the Muslim community is an increasing sense of insecurity and ghettoisation. The walls of hatred are becoming stronger by the day. The hate speech signals begin from the top when the Prime Minister, lately being touted as the reincarnation of Lord Vishnu, gives these hints that they can be identified with their clothes, Shamshan-Kabristan and Pink revolution. The next layer of hate spreaders further intensifies the language, and when it comes to Dharma Sansads, the Holy ones, like Yati Narsinghnand, the message of violence becomes more direct and despicable.

One of the peaks of this was witnessed in the Parliament itself when Ramesh Bidhudi used expletives of the worst kind against Danish Ali, ‘Mullah’, ‘terrorist’, ‘anti-national’, ‘pimp’ and ‘katwa’ (a Hindi slur against Muslims). Ramesh Bidhudi, in turn, was given additional promotion responsibility. This makes it clear the way of going in the upward direction of hierarchy in the BJP-RSS combine is hate speech. Ramesh Bidhudi was let off by the Lok Sabha Speaker by saying that if he repeated it again, action would be contemplated.

We have seen the horrific Bulli Bai and Sulli deals to humiliate prominent Muslim women and celebrities. The culprits went away without any severe punishments. Lately, the Haldwani mosque issue also disturbed the peace at the ground level. The absence of an impartial media is the worst thing in the present scenario. The anchors of the big channels find ways to blame the Muslims for every insinuation against them.

Apart from leading to acts of violence against the Muslim community, the present trajectory of events is leading to gradually intensifying Islamophobia. We can see a teacher, Tripta Tyagi, asking the class students to slap a Muslim boy one by one for not doing homework. Another teacher, Manjula Devi, told two Muslim students, who were bickering over a minor issue, that this is not ‘their country’. We also witnessed a bus conductor, Mohan Yadav, being sacked as he stopped the bus briefly, during which some passengers eased, and a few Muslims offered Namaz during that time.

Hate speech was identified by our leaders as a curse for our society. In the aftermath of the murder of Swami Sahajanand by a Muslim, Gandhi correctly identified the problem when he wrote in Young India, calling for “…purging the atmosphere of mutual hatred and calumny” by “boycotting papers which foment hatred and spread misrepresentation”. Here, Gandhi is talking about the negative role of newspapers at that time. Later, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, in the aftermath of the murder of Mahatma Gandhi, in a letter to Golwalkar, directly indicted RSS for spreading hatred, “All their speeches were full of communal poison. It was not necessary to spread poison and enthuse the Hindus and organise for their protection. As a final result of the poison, the country had to suffer the sacrifice of the valuable life of Gandhi. ”

The clock has moved full circle. The same RSS has created layers and layers of hate-creating mechanisms. Apart from its own vast army of swayam-sevaks, pracharaks and network of schools, a large section of media has totally surrendered to those in power and unabashedly uses their influence to intensify hate. The social common sense created through these mechanisms leads to Bulli Bai and Sulli deals. This creates Trupta Tyagis and Manjula Devis, who take it to the young children. Things are becoming difficult for Muslim children in mixed schools.

Hate is the antithesis of our Constitution’s value of fraternity. It is also against the tolerance of the values of the morality of Hinduism as practised by Gandhi. This is an aggressive attack on the dictum of the Vedas, ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbkam’ (World is a family). This is not only intimidating the religious minorities, it is an attack on the values of our Constitution. To combat hate speech, Gandhi’s Hinduism, Vasudhaiva Kutumbaka and the fraternity of the Indian Constitution are needed more than before. (Courtesy: The Indian Currents)

Debunking Daylight Saving Time: A Timeless Debate on Health, Energy, and Public Opinion

Staff ReporterNation, Opinion 0

On Sunday, March 10 at 2 a.m., the U.S. and approximately one-third of the world’s nations will adjust their clocks forward by an hour, leading to a perceived later sunrise and extended evening daylight. The notion of this time shift isn’t universally embraced; in fact, many people strongly oppose it for various reasons.

The idea of Daylight Saving Time (DST) has a peculiar history, dating back to 1907 when British builder William Willett advocated for it in his pamphlet “A Waste of Daylight.” Despite his efforts, Willett didn’t witness its adoption, as he passed away just before it became official. The practice gained traction during World War I as a fuel conservation measure, with the U.K. and subsequently the U.S. implementing it. Although DST was suspended after the wars, it was reinstated during World War II and eventually became a recurring tradition. Congress solidified this with the Uniform Time Act in 1966, dividing the year into six months of DST and six months of Standard Time, later extending DST to eight months in 2005.

However, the effectiveness of DST in conserving energy is questionable. Studies suggest it only minimally reduces electricity consumption, if at all. In fact, research indicates that it might even lead to increased energy usage, particularly due to heightened reliance on air conditioning during later sunlit evenings.

Moreover, DST’s impact on health is concerning. Sleep disturbances resulting from the time change can contribute to various health issues, including cardiovascular problems, heightened inflammatory markers, and an elevated risk of fatal traffic accidents. Young children and adolescents are particularly vulnerable, experiencing disrupted sleep patterns and associated cognitive and behavioral effects.

Despite widespread dissatisfaction with the biannual clock changes, there’s no consensus on how to address the issue. While a majority of Americans express support for eliminating the practice and opting for a single time setting year-round, legislative efforts to establish permanent DST face obstacles. Federal law permits states to adopt permanent Standard Time but not permanent DST, complicating attempts to enact change. The Sunshine Protection Act of 2023 aims to establish permanent DST but has encountered opposition, including from groups advocating for permanent Standard Time, citing alignment with human circadian biology.

The overarching sentiment is that the current system of biannual clock adjustments is untenable. However, inertia and resistance to change hinder progress in finding a solution. As a result, Americans are left to accept the ritual of sacrificing an hour in the morning for an extra hour of daylight in the evening each spring, only to reverse the process come fall.

Flaunting Wealth Amidst Global Crisis: Inside the Lavish Ambani Pre-Wedding Extravaganza

Staff ReporterLifestyle, Opinion 0

They argue that while money can’tpurchase affection, it can undoubtedly fund a lavish pre-wedding extravaganza. The world’s elite are presently recuperating from a three-day spectacle in India celebrating the imminent marriage of Anant Ambani, the youngest offspring of Asia’s wealthiest individual.

The celebration, reportedly priced at $120 million, epitomized extravagance: it boasted a detailed nine-page attire guideline, an exclusive performance by Rihanna, and a banquet that even Nero might have deemed excessive.

“Twenty-one chefs concocted ’75 types of dishes for breakfast, more than 225 types of dishes for lunch, 275 types of dishes for dinner, and 85 types of items … [for] the midnight meal,'” elaborated the Times of India. The aim was to ensure that none of the guests, among them Mark Zuckerberg, Ivanka Trump, and Bill Gates, would experience the indignity of eating the same meal twice.

While the notion of outrageously affluent individuals indulging in exorbitant activities isn’t novel, the conspicuousness of the Ambani pre-wedding gala is noteworthy. It was so extravagant that even the Daily Mail, not typically associated with leftist views, penned a dismayed article highlighting that the lavish celebrations occurred “just yards from where some of the poorest people on earth eke out a living.”

Flaunting Wealth Amidst Global Crisis Inside the Lavish Ambani Pre Wedding Extravaganza

The stark contrast between multimillion-dollar feasts and Gujarati slums wasn’t the sole disconcerting aspect of the event. In recent times, there has been a noticeable shift towards “stealth wealth” or “quiet luxury.” The ultra-rich have opted for more understated displays of their immense wealth, signaling affluence through subtle status symbols rather than ostentatious labels. However, the Ambani festivities deviated from this trend, representing a bold return to the overt excess and conspicuous consumption reminiscent of the 1980s.

Admittedly, the Ambani family has never adhered to the understated luxury trend. They have consistently flaunted their wealth. For instance, in 2018, Beyoncé performed at Isha Ambani’s pre-wedding festivities—an affair estimated to cost around $100 million. Moreover, the family resides in Antilia, a 27-story tower recognized as the world’s first billion-dollar residence. This is no ordinary mansion; it boasts three helipads, a 168-car garage, and a snow room for cooling down amid artificial snowflakes. With nine elevators, it epitomizes opulence. “This is a gated community in the sky,” remarked author Gyan Prakash as Antilia was constructed overlooking Mumbai’s slums. “It is in a way reflective of how the rich are turning their faces away from the city.”

Nevertheless, while the Ambanis have always flaunted their wealth, this wedding signifies a shift in societal trends. It wasn’t just the bride and groom embracing ostentation; even figures like Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan, who have championed philanthropy and advocated for a more equitable world, didn’t hesitate to display their materialistic inclinations. A viral video captured the couple admiring the groom’s $1 million Richard Mille watch. “This watch is fantastic,” exclaimed Chan. “That’s soo cool!”Flaunting Wealth Amidst Global Crisis Inside the Lavish Ambani Pre Wedding Extravaganza

Zuckerberg concurred, adding, “You know, I never really wanted to get a watch, but after seeing that, I was like, ‘Watches are cool.'”

The tech mogul wasn’t the only one attracting attention. Bill Gates, also vocal about his intentions to address global issues, shared a video featuring the internet-famous tea-seller Dolly Chaiwala serving him tea. While Gates likely intended it as a lighthearted celebration of innovation, it exuded uncomfortable colonial undertones.

Inequality, exacerbated by the pandemic, has reached unprecedented levels, with the wealth chasm continuing to widen. As Oxfam recently observed, we inhabit a “decade of division,” with successive crises accentuating the gap between the oligarchic few and the vast majority. Are these oligarchs not concerned about flaunting their wealth in front of the masses? Are they oblivious to the optics of reveling in luxury while even middle-class Americans struggle to put food on the table? They’ve undoubtedly been cautioned about the optics of inequality. At a London event last year, members of the global elite were warned of a “real risk of actual insurrection” if inequality persisted, and they were advised to be wary of “pitchforks and torches.”

However, if the flamboyance of the Ambani pre-wedding affair signifies anything, it’s that those born into privilege aren’t particularly perturbed by the prospect of public backlash. And why should they be? They possess underground doomsday bunkers to retreat to if things go awry. The Ambani spectacle appears to herald the demise of stealth wealth, signaling that billionaires no longer feel compelled to feign concern about inequality and are shamelessly embracing ostentatious luxury. Once again, the 1,200-person soirée was merely a prelude to the grand event in July—only time will tell what extravagant measures they’ll undertake or how the wedding could possibly surpass the pre-party. We mere mortals can only anticipate and speculate.

 

Tulsi Gabbard Open to Vice President Role with Trump, Signals Departure from Democratic Party

Staff ReporterOpinion, USA 0

Former Representative Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii has expressed her openness to potentially serving as the vice president alongside former President Donald Trump, as indicated during an interview on Fox News. Gabbard stated, “I would be open to that,” in response to a query from host Jesse Watters regarding her willingness to consider a vice presidential position. She emphasized her commitment to serving the nation, stating, “My mission is to serve our country…I wanna be in a position to solve problems, Jesse, and we got a lot of ‘em to solve.”

Former President Trump recently disclosed a roster of potential vice presidential candidates, including Gabbard, Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina, entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, and South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem. While Trump affirmed the names on his shortlist, he did not specify the timeline for announcing his running mate, asserting, “all of those people are good. They’re all solid.”

Additionally, Gabbard is scheduled to attend a fundraiser for the 917 Society at the former president’s Mar-a-Lago resort next week. The event aims to celebrate the Constitution and was detailed in an invitation exclusively shared with The Hill.

Gabbard, a former contender for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020, announced her departure from the Democratic Party in late 2022. In a video statement, she criticized the party, stating it was “under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers who are driven by cowardly wokeness.” Urging like-minded Democrats to join her in leaving the party, she emphasized the need for a government that serves the people rather than powerful elites, inviting those who disagree with the direction of the party to unite with her.

A Pivotal Week Unfolds in American Politics

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

In a week that promises to be pivotal for American politics, the nation braces for a consequential and unprecedented election that challenges established interpretations of the Constitution and presidential powers.

The focus is on a potential landmark ruling by the Supreme Court, expected as early as Monday, regarding the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to exclude former President Donald Trump from the ballot based on the 14th Amendment’s prohibition of insurrectionists. This decision holds immense significance for the ongoing narrative of Trump’s political future.

Simultaneously, the 15-state Super Tuesday GOP primaries loom, where Trump aims to secure a third consecutive Republican nomination. A Trump victory here would signal not just a political comeback but also the potential for a more radical second term.

Contrastingly, President Joe Biden is set to address the nation in his State of the Union speech two nights later, facing skepticism about his fitness for a second term amid global crises and domestic disappointments. The race between Biden and Trump, though dreaded by many Americans according to polls, appears inevitable, barring unexpected events.

This election, scheduled for November, is already testing the resilience of political and electoral institutions, the Constitution, and the nation’s fragile unity. Never before has an election featured a candidate facing multiple criminal trials and running on the false claim of an illegal ousting from power.

The Supreme Court’s potential ruling on the Colorado case hangs in the balance, with uncertainty surrounding the fate of votes for Trump in the Super Tuesday primary if the justices deem him ineligible to serve. Another significant case before the Supreme Court revolves around Trump’s claims of broad presidential immunity, delaying his federal criminal trial over election interference and raising questions about the equality of presidents under the law.

As the political landscape unfolds, Trump’s trajectory towards the Republican nomination gains momentum, marked by victories in Idaho and Missouri caucuses, and securing all Michigan’s delegates. Despite not reaching the required delegates on Tuesday night, Trump is poised to become the presumptive GOP nominee, solidifying his dominance and reshaping the party’s leadership.

While Trump’s campaign exudes confidence and increasingly wild rhetoric, Biden faces challenges highlighted by recent polls. These polls depict public concerns about the direction of the nation, economic benefits, and Biden’s handling of various issues such as the economy, inflation, border security, and international conflicts.

Of particular concern for Biden is the perceptible unease about his age and capacity, as reflected in polls indicating voters questioning his ability to serve effectively. The State of the Union address becomes a critical moment for Biden to project vitality and optimism, countering doubts about his leadership.

Trump’s narrative, on the other hand, revolves around portraying himself as a political dissident facing persecution by the Biden administration, emphasizing the stakes of the Supreme Court case and his aspirations for unchecked political power.

As the week unfolds, the clash between these two figures in American politics becomes more apparent, with each seeking to define the narrative that will shape the upcoming election. The potential rematch between Trump and Biden, despite being dreaded by many, appears increasingly likely, setting the stage for a contest that will test the nation’s democratic foundations and the resilience of its political institutions.

Threats Against Judges Surge Amid Political Fray

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth, renowned for his unwavering stance against criminals ranging from drug cartels to al Qaeda, found himself in uncharted territory when he became the target of a torrent of harassment. The onslaught followed his involvement in cases against supporters of former President Donald Trump implicated in the assault on the U.S. Capitol in a bid to overturn the 2020 election.

Previously accustomed to facing dangers from various criminal factions, Lamberth expressed astonishment at the barrage of threats he encountered amid his judicial proceedings. He recounted how right-wing platforms vilified him, portraying him as part of a “deep state” plot aimed at undermining Trump and his followers. The vitriol escalated to calls for his execution on sympathetic online platforms. “Traitors get ropes,” read one chilling message. Lamberth revealed that his chambers’ voicemail was inundated with death threats after he sentenced a 69-year-old Idaho woman for her involvement in the January 6 riot. He even received graphic death threats at his home phone number.

The escalation of threats against judicial figures is part of a broader pattern observed since Trump’s emergence as a political force in 2015. A Reuters analysis revealed a staggering increase in threatening communications directed at federal courts and personnel, rising from an average of 1,180 incidents in the decade preceding Trump’s presidential bid to 3,810 in the seven years following his entry into politics. The situation reached unprecedented levels, with nearly 27,000 threatening and harassing communications recorded by the U.S. Marshals Service between 2015 and 2022.

Trump’s combative rhetoric against the judiciary, prosecutors, and other officials involved in legal proceedings against him has fueled a culture of intimidation. His characterization of judges as biased and corrupt, coupled with his demonization of the judicial system, has contributed to an environment where threats against judges have become increasingly commonplace. Even after leaving office, Trump’s public comments continue to incite hostility towards judges handling cases related to him.

While the surge in threats is alarming, the response from law enforcement has been limited. The U.S. Justice Department does not systematically track prosecutions for threats against judges, and arrests remain infrequent. The difficulty in distinguishing between protected speech and criminal threats poses a challenge for authorities tasked with addressing the issue. Despite the gravity of the threats, many menacing messages fall short of meeting the legal threshold for criminal charges.

The repercussions of this wave of threats extend beyond individual judges to the broader functioning of the judicial system. Judges, who traditionally faced threats from aggrieved parties directly involved in cases, now contend with a deluge of threats stemming from politically charged disputes. The erosion of judicial independence poses a significant threat to the foundational principles of American democracy.

The impact of these threats reverberates throughout the legal community, with judges expressing concern over the chilling effect it may have on judicial independence. In particular, judges hearing politically sensitive cases find themselves increasingly vulnerable to harassment and intimidation. The need for enhanced protections for judges has become imperative to safeguard the integrity of the judicial process.

Despite the daunting challenges posed by the current climate, judges remain committed to upholding the rule of law. However, the escalating threats underscore the urgent need for robust measures to protect judicial officials and preserve the impartiality of the judiciary. As the political landscape continues to evolve, the resilience of the judicial system in the face of such threats will be critical in safeguarding the principles of democracy and the rule of law.

New CDC Guidelines Ease Covid-19 Isolation Rules, Sparking Debate Among Experts

Staff ReporterOpinion, Health 0

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has issued new guidelines altering the approach to handling Covid-19 positive cases. Previously, individuals were required to isolate for at least five days, but this strategy has now been revised. The CDC emphasizes aligning Covid-19 recommendations with those for other respiratory infections like influenza and RSV, aiming to streamline guidance for the public. Dr. Mandy Cohen, CDC Director, highlights the shift, attributing it to the broader immunity across the US population, resulting in fewer severe outcomes from the virus.

Under the updated guidance, individuals with Covid-19 should remain home until they’ve been fever-free without medication for at least 24 hours, with improving symptoms for the same duration. Following this period, resumption of normal activities is permissible, with additional precautions recommended for the subsequent five days to minimize virus transmission. These precautions are especially crucial for individuals in contact with vulnerable populations, such as the elderly or immunocompromised individuals.

The CDC’s adjustments reflect the evolving impact of Covid-19 in the US, where significant reductions in hospitalizations and deaths have been observed since 2020. Hospitalizations declined by 60% from 2.5 million in 2021 to 900,000 in 2023, while deaths plummeted by 83% from 450,000 to approximately 75,000 during the same period. Consequently, Covid-19 has dropped from the third leading cause of death to the tenth, though its toll remains higher than typical flu seasons.

Dr. Cohen stresses the importance of vaccination in mitigating severe illness, anticipating an updated vaccine in the fall and urging individuals to prepare for it. Alongside vaccination, staying home when sick, seeking testing, and prompt treatment are crucial preventive measures emphasized by the CDC. Importantly, states and countries that have shortened isolation periods have not reported increased hospitalizations or deaths from Covid-19.

However, not all experts agree with the revised guidelines. Dr. Ellie Murray from Boston University’s School of Public Health criticizes the shift, arguing it undermines public health efforts by downplaying the severity of respiratory diseases like Covid-19. Some public health professionals advocate for ending “Covid exceptionalism,” treating the virus similarly to other respiratory infections, while others oppose this approach, citing the unique and dangerous nature of Covid-19 compared to the flu.

The previous five-day isolation period garnered criticism from various perspectives. Employers and parents found it burdensome, while individuals at higher risk of severe infection deemed it insufficient given prolonged positive test results and continued contagiousness. Despite concerns, Lori Tremmel Freeman from the National Association of County and City Health Officials acknowledges the need for easily understandable guidance amid the ongoing pandemic challenges.

The CDC’s updated guidelines signal a shift in approach to managing Covid-19, reflecting broader immunity and reduced severity of outcomes. While someexperts express reservations, the focusremains on promoting vaccination, early detection, and preventive measures to mitigate virus transmission and protect vulnerable populations.

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/01/health/cdc-covid-isolation-recommendations/index.html

Pope Francis Addresses Armenian Bishops on Pastoral Responsibility and Prayer

Staff ReporterOpinion, Religion 0

On the morning of Wednesday, February 28th, Pope Francis met with the members of the Synod of Bishops of the Patriarchal Church of Cilicia of the Armenians in a private audience. Due to health reasons, Monsignor Filippo Ciampanelli delivered the Pope’s speech, which centered on three key themes: the pitfalls of pastoral adultery among bishops, the significance of prayer, and the importance of vocational pastoral care.

Addressing the gathered bishops, Pope Francis expressed joy in welcoming them to Rome on the feast day of Saint Gregory of Narek, a Doctor of the Church. He reminded them of their role as successors of the Apostles, entrusted with guiding the people of God towards Jesus Christ. Emphasizing the responsibility of the Synod in selecting future bishops, he urged careful consideration to ensure they prioritize pastoral devotion over personal ambition, cautioning against those motivated by self-interest or career advancement.

The Pope warned against the dangers of “pastoral adultery,” likening it to a bishop viewing their episcopal position as a mere stepping stone to higher status. He stressed that bishops are chosen by Christ to shepherd His flock, emphasizing the need for closeness and pastoral care, particularly for those in diaspora and remote areas. He underscored the importance of fraternity and cooperation with the Armenian Apostolic Church, highlighting pastoral charity as paramount.

In the spirit of Lent, Pope Francis called for contemplation of the cross and urged intercession for all, quoting Saint Gregory of Narek’s prayer for forgiveness and mercy towards enemies. He urged the bishops to emulate Saint Gregory the Illuminator’s example of bringing Christ’s light to the Armenian people, emphasizing their role as witnesses to Christian prophecy in a world marked by darkness and division.

The Pope stressed the significance of prayer in discerning the Gospel’s priorities and maintaining harmony within the Church. He urged thorough preparation for Synods, prudent decision-making for the good of souls, and transparent financial management. Additionally, he emphasized the importance of fostering vocations grounded in authentic Christian life and supporting priests, especially amidst challenges, with fraternal communion and joyful service.

Expressing concern for Armenia amidst conflicts and displacement, Pope Francis called for prayers for peace and solidarity with those affected. He lamented the continuation of wars despite past efforts for peace, urging collective action and prayer for reconciliation. Before concluding, he led the gathering in a prayer of mercy and forgiveness, expressing gratitude for their ministry and requesting prayers for himself.

Pope Francis reiterated his call for prayer, expressing hope for future unity with the Armenian Apostolic Church. He imparted his blessing and recited a prayer of Saint Nerses the Gracious, inviting all present to join him in seeking mercy and forgiveness for all.

Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers Highlights Overlooked Factor in Economic Sentiment: The Cost of Money

Staff ReporterEconomy, Opinion 0

The widely followed measure used by the government to gauge the cost of living tracks various expenses each month, but a significant factor is overlooked: the cost of borrowing money itself. This omission could lead to an understatement of the financial strain experienced by many Americans when interest rates rise, impacting expenses such as purchasing a home, securing a car loan, or managing credit card balances.

Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers presents this argument in a recently published working paper titled “The Cost of Money is Part of the Cost of Living.” He suggests that this oversight might help explain why despite positive economic indicators, a substantial portion of the population remains dissatisfied. Summers points out the discrepancy using the example of the “misery index,” which traditionally combines unemployment and inflation rates. Despite reaching its lowest point since the 1980s, Summers contends that this index fails to capture the true sentiment of consumers.

Summers notes that although there has been some improvement in public perceptions of the economy, a pessimistic outlook persists. Despite robust economic growth, significant job gains, and wages outpacing inflation for a considerable period, a January Gallup poll revealed that 45% of Americans perceive the economy as poor, with 63% believing it’s deteriorating.

Summers humorously remarks, “The economy is booming and everyone knows it — except for the American people.” This contradiction between positive government data and negative public sentiment is likely to become increasingly scrutinized in the lead-up to the November election.

Summers emphasizes the importance of considering the cost of credit, which has surged due to the Federal Reserve’s efforts to raise interest rates to levels not seen in two decades. He argues that the expense of borrowing money should be viewed as part of the overall cost of living. Previously, the consumer price index (CPI) incorporated financing expenses until 1983, measuring housing costs by tracking monthly mortgage payments. However, the current CPI assesses housing costs differently, primarily by examining rental prices. While there were valid reasons for this change, Summers believes it fails to fully capture the financial impact on individuals. He suggests that incorporating interest rates into the calculation is essential for understanding people’s subjective well-being.

Summers suggests that if the pre-1983 CPI formula were still in use, it would have shown even higher inflation rates in 2022, around 15% instead of 9.1%, and inflation would not have decreased as rapidly in 2023.

As a prominent figure in economic discussions, Summers, who served in both the Clinton and Obama administrations, has consistently voiced his opinions. He was among the first to warn about the risk of runaway inflation in 2021 and predicted that a sustained period of high unemployment would be necessary to stabilize prices the following year.

The Federal Reserve has hinted at potential interest rate cuts later this year, which Summers believes could contribute to an improved economic outlook. He observed a positive correlation between decreased mortgage rates in December and January and a notable surge in economic sentiment.

“Insofar as interest rates come down, that’s likely to contribute to improved sentiment,” Summers concluded.

Google CEO Pledges Overhaul of AI Tool Gemini After Backlash: Promises Improved Performance in Reintroduction

Staff ReporterTechnology, Opinion 0

Google CEO Sundar Pichai conveyed to staff through an internal memorandum on Tuesday evening that the company’s rollout of the artificial intelligence tool Gemini had fallen short, committing to rectify and reintroduce the service in the forthcoming weeks.

The decision to halt Gemini’s image generation function came after widespread sharing on social media of certain outcomes, such as portrayals of America’s Founding Fathers as black, the Pope as a woman, and a Nazi-era German soldier with dark skin. This move sparked a backlash, particularly among conservative commentators, who criticized Google for what they perceived as anti-white bias.

Acknowledging the discontent among users, Pichai emphasized the unacceptable nature of the tool’s performance in a message reviewed by NPR, stating, “I know that some of its responses have offended our users and shown bias — to be clear, that’s completely unacceptable and we got it wrong.” He outlined a series of measures to address the issue, including structural adjustments, revised product guidelines, enhanced launch processes, thorough evaluations, and technical recommendations.

In a blog post released on Friday, Google attributed the missteps of Gemini to a “fine-tuning” error during its development phase. The aim was to create diverse images, ensuring the tool catered to a global audience. However, as explained by Google executive Prabhakar Raghavan, the AI service faltered by misinterpreting certain prompts and becoming overly cautious over time.

Raghavan clarified that the intention was to counteract biased and stereotypical images commonly found in datasets, such as the overrepresentation of white individuals or the portrayal of certain professions as predominantly male. Despite these efforts, Google found itself ensnared in another controversy, this time concerning accuracy and historical representation.

Aside from its image generation function, Gemini also serves as an AI chatbot, akin to OpenAI’s ChatGPT. However, its text-generating capabilities faced scrutiny after some of its responses went viral online. Notably, a response regarding the comparative harm caused by libertarians and Stalin drew attention, prompting adjustments to provide more accurate information.

Reflecting on the challenges encountered, Pichai acknowledged in his communication with Google employees that perfection remains elusive in the realm of AI technology. He expressed a commitment to improving Gemini upon its relaunch, recognizing the high expectations set for the company in this evolving industry.

Pichai’s remarks underscored the broader context of technological advancement in the AI sector, with major companies like Google racing to develop and deploy their own iterations of large language models. Despite the setbacks experienced along the way, Pichai remained resolute in his determination to meet the demands of this competitive landscape.

While Google’s foray into AI technology has faced notable setbacks and criticisms, Pichai’s assurances to address these issues reflect the company’s ongoing commitment to innovation and improvement in this burgeoning field.

Former Supreme Court Justice Urges Removal of Dharmic Motto from Constitution

Staff ReporterOpinion, Religion 0

Former Supreme Court Justice Kurian Joseph has recently voiced his opinion that the Supreme Court’s motto, “यतो धर्मस्ततो जयः” (Where there is Dharma, there is victory), should be discarded. Justice Joseph argues that the concept of Dharma, as defined within Hinduism, does not always align with truth and therefore, isn’t suitable to be the motto of the Indian Constitution. He emphasized, “The truth is the Constitution, Dharma – not always.” This divergence becomes more apparent when compared to the motto “Satyameva Jayate” (Truth alone triumphs), adopted by all High Courts across the nation.

Speaking at an event organized by activists and the controversial website “The Wire,” Justice Joseph highlighted his objections to the inclusion of the shloka from the Hindu epic Mahabharata in the Supreme Court’s motto. His previous comparison of the Catholic Church with the Preamble adds weight to his stance. Advocating for the motto’s removal, the retired judge, who left the apex court in 2018, urged the Chief Justice of India to seriously consider this proposal. He believes that embracing a Hindu shloka like this significantly influences the Supreme Court’s approach to dispensing justice.

Although Justice Joseph was addressing the topic “Supreme Court administration and management- Issues and concerns,” he didn’t shy away from criticizing the media’s role, accusing it of neglecting its duty and contributing to the nation’s bleak outlook.

Supreme Court to Decide on Trump’s Presidential Immunity in Historic Case

Staff ReporterNation, Opinion 0

The Supreme Court has taken up the matter of whether former President Trump could face criminal prosecution for his endeavors to overturn the results of the 2020 election, presenting a pivotal case that scrutinizes the boundaries of presidential immunity.

In a move that temporarily halts the criminal trial proceedings against Trump related to the events of January 6, the Court’s decision delivers an initial setback to Special Counsel Jack Smith while leaving open the possibility for prosecution before the 2024 presidential election.

Trump had urged the Court to delay his trial but defer consideration of his immunity claims until he exhausted his appeals in a lower court, a process that could have prolonged the case and potentially allowed him to return to the White House before facing trial.

However, at the suggestion of Smith, the Supreme Court has chosen to address Trump’s immunity claims promptly. This decision, while not fulfilling Smith’s request to stay out of the case entirely, sets an expedited schedule, with oral arguments scheduled for April 22, and a landmark ruling anticipated by June or earlier.

Legal observers widely anticipate that a ruling against Trump by the conservative-majority Court would pave the way for Smith’s prosecution to proceed, possibly allowing for a trial before the upcoming election.

This legal battle adds another layer to Trump’s ongoing legal challenges, including his imminent trial on hush money charges in New York. The outcome of the immunity dispute could significantly impact Trump’s remaining criminal cases.

In Washington, D.C., Trump faces federal charges related to election interference and classified documents, asserting immunity from prosecution. The Supreme Court’s decision to hear his immunity claims marks the first instance of the Court engaging with any of Trump’s criminal cases since his indictment.

Reacting to the news on Truth Social, Trump expressed gratitude for the Court’s decision, emphasizing the significance of presidential immunity in enabling effective governance

Meanwhile, a spokesman for the special counsel’s office declined to comment on the matter.

The Supreme Court is already grappling with another significant dispute involving Trump, reviewing a Colorado ruling that barred Trump from the state’s ballot under the 14th Amendment’s insurrection ban. The Court’s decision on this matter is expected imminently.

Now, Trump’s legal team is preparing to argue before the Supreme Court that Trump should be immune from prosecution for his alleged election subversion, a claim that has been rejected by lower courts.

The D.C. Circuit panel, in a recent decision, dismissed Trump’s immunity claim, asserting that the presidency does not grant perpetual immunity from prosecution.

Regardless of the eventual outcome, Trump has achieved a victory in delaying his trial, originally scheduled for March 4.

The special counsel has consistently sought to expedite Trump’s immunity claims, emphasizing the importance of a speedy and fair resolution. Smith has urged the Court not to delay any further, citing the national significance of the case.

On the other hand, Trump’s legal team has criticized the special counsel for what they perceive as a politically motivated rush to trial, alleging that Smith aims to secure a conviction before the upcoming election.

The Supreme Court’s decision rejects Trump’s request for further delay and aligns with Smith’s position to expedite the case, underscoring the significant legal battle ahead.

Supreme Court Weighs Urgency in Trump’s Immunity Claim: Timing Sparks Speculation

Staff ReporterNation, Opinion 0

When special counsel Jack Smith urged the Supreme Court to dismiss former President Donald Trump’s immunity claims, there was a palpable sense of urgency in his plea.

Smith repeatedly emphasized the need to avoid further “delay” in his brief to the court.

Now, following Trump’s petition for the court to intervene in the contentious dispute regarding his immunity from prosecution, and after all necessary briefs were submitted to the justices eight days ago, observers of the court are once again engaged in the timeless pursuit of deciphering significance from the timing and silence.

“The entire population is getting a bit of exposure to one of the perils of watching the court carefully, which is that an awful lot of what it does happens behind the scenes and in ways that can’t be easily predicted,” remarked Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law.

The Supreme Court could opt to reject Trump’s plea to halt a lower court ruling against his immunity claims, effectively paving the way for Smith’s case to proceed to trial. Alternatively, it might grant Trump’s request and subsequently convene hearings and rule on the merits of the immunity issue, possibly expediting the process. The court could also reach a decision without formal arguments and may or may not issue an opinion elucidating its ruling.

Although the Supreme Court is capable of swift action, particularly within the confines of the judicial branch, the resolution of most significant cases often spans several months. Even cases on the court’s expedited docket can take weeks to be resolved.

What remains evident is the substantial importance attached to the timing of these proceedings. Smith is keen for the court to promptly address Trump’s immunity claim to enable US District Judge Tanya Chutkan to conclude a trial on the former president’s charges related to election subversion before the upcoming November elections. Chutkan had already postponed a previously scheduled trial start on March 4.

Anticipating this scenario, Smith had previously brought the issue before the Supreme Court in December, urging the justices to bypass the DC Circuit Court of Appeals and swiftly address the question of whether a former president can assert immunity from criminal prosecution.

“It is of imperative public importance,” Smith emphasized at the time, stressing the need for prompt resolution and trial proceedings if Trump’s immunity claims were dismissed.

The Supreme Court, however, declined that request, allowing the appeals court to proceed with its review of the case.

Some experts speculate that the longer the Supreme Court deliberates, the more inclined it may be to reject Trump’s petition to halt the DC Circuit ruling. This theory is grounded on the possibility that a conservative justice might be composing an extensive dissent, a process that could consume considerable time.

Unpacking the Intersection of Faith and Politics: The Ramaswamy Controversy Sparks Debate on Hindu Representation in American Politics

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

For centuries, the United States has stood as a beacon of religious freedom, embracing people of diverse faiths and beliefs. This foundational ideal, dating back to the early English settlers seeking refuge from religious persecution, continues to shape the American narrative, exemplified by immigrants like my Hindu grandparents who sought a better life in the late 1980s. However, the journey of Vivek Ramaswamy, a Hindu-American who ventured into the 2024 Republican presidential race, sheds light on the complexities of religious identity in American politics.

Following his withdrawal from the Republican primary race post-Iowa caucuses, Ramaswamy’s bid for the presidency as a Hindu-American son of immigrants holds significance. In a political landscape increasingly influenced by Christian conservatism, his Hindu faith marked him as an unconventional candidate. To many Christian conservatives, Ramaswamy’s religious background alone posed a barrier to his presidential suitability, highlighting the challenge of appealing to a predominantly Christian voter base. In navigating these hurdles, Ramaswamy strategically aligned aspects of his Hindu faith with the religious beliefs prevalent among GOP’s evangelical supporters.

Central to Ramaswamy’s campaign was his emphasis on faith, encapsulated in his “Ten Truths” political manifesto, commencing with the declaration “God is real.” While affirming his Hindu convictions, Ramaswamy often drew parallels between Hinduism and Christianity, leveraging familiar biblical narratives to resonate with Christian voters. Responding to inquiries about his religious beliefs, he sought to bridge the gap between Hinduism and Christianity, portraying them as complementary rather than disparate faiths.

In his quest for broader appeal, Ramaswamy selectively emphasized aspects of Hinduism that aligned with conservative values, framing it within a monotheistic framework akin to Abrahamic religions. However, this approach drew criticism from some quarters, with concerns raised about the oversimplification and misrepresentation of Hinduism. Critics argued that by packaging Hinduism to fit into a narrow mold of family values and monotheism, Ramaswamy overlooked the diversity and complexity inherent in the religion.

As a Hindu Indian-American, I am troubled by the reduction of my faith to suit political expediency. Ramaswamy’s strategic maneuvering, while aimed at political gain, risks perpetuating stereotypes and erasing the richness of Hindu tradition. Despite his efforts to navigate the intricacies of religious identity in American politics, Ramaswamy’s approach ultimately falls short of genuine representation for Hindu-Americans.

While acknowledging Ramaswamy’s political agency, it is imperative to scrutinize the implications of his candidacy. The scrutiny he faced regarding his faith raises concerns about the equitable treatment of candidates from religious minority backgrounds. In a country that prides itself on religious freedom, the singling out of Ramaswamy’s Hindu identity underscores persistent challenges faced by marginalized communities in accessing positions of power and influence.

Nevertheless, Ramaswamy’s unwavering commitment to his Hindu faith amid political pressures deserves recognition. By eschewing attempts to conceal or downplay his religious identity, he sets a precedent for future minority candidates navigating the political landscape. Despite diverging from Ramaswamy’s political stance, his resilience in maintaining his faith serves as a testament to the importance of authenticity in political representation.

As the Republican primaries continue sans Ramaswamy, the legacy of his presidential bid resonates beyond partisan lines. While he may not have been the ideal standard-bearer for Hindu representation in politics, his candidacy sparked crucial conversations about religious diversity and inclusion in American democracy. In states with limited exposure to Hinduism, Ramaswamy’s campaign served as a window into a faith tradition often marginalized in mainstream discourse. Regardless of his political fate, Ramaswamy’s journey underscores the ongoing struggle for equitable representation in the political arena.

The Sustainable Success of the Four-Day Workweek: A Lasting Gift to Employee Well-being and Company Efficiency

Staff ReporterBusiness, Opinion 0

The concept of a four-day workweek has proven to be a transformative and enduring strategy for companies, yielding happier employees, lower turnover rates, and increased efficiency. Recent data from a trial in the United Kingdom conducted in 2022 reveal that the positive effects of this approach are not only immediate but also have a lasting impact. In this trial, 61 companies transitioned their workforce to a four-day workweek without any reduction in pay. Initially designed as a six-month experiment, the results indicate that 54 of these companies have maintained the policy, with over half declaring it as a permanent shift, according to researchers affiliated with the think tank Autonomy, who collaborated with the 4-Day Week Campaign and 4 Day Week Global.

The enduring success of the four-day workweek is substantiated by follow-up surveys that shed light on various aspects contributing to its effectiveness. Juliet Schor, a sociologist from Boston College and part of the research team, notes that improvements in physical and mental health, work-life balance, and overall life satisfaction, coupled with reductions in burnout, have persisted over the past year. Importantly, workers express higher job satisfaction compared to the period before the trial commenced.

“The results are really stable. It’s not a novelty effect. People are feeling really on top of their work with this new model,” affirms Schor, emphasizing the sustained positive impact on employee well-being.

Similar affirmative outcomes are emerging from other four-day workweek trials, including those in the United States, indicating a broader trend of success beyond national borders, as noted by Schor.

Participating companies have shared their experiences and insights in a recent webinar, highlighting that the success of the four-day workweek requires deliberate effort rather than relying on magic. Nicci Russell, CEO of the London-based water conservancy non-profit Waterwise, stresses that a smooth transition to a four-day workweek involves identifying and implementing efficiencies. After overcoming initial challenges, Waterwise achieved a system where all 10 employees could enjoy Fridays off. Key strategies included limiting meetings to 30 minutes, starting meetings punctually, scheduling focused work time, and adopting mindful email practices.

“I only do my emails now at certain times of the day. I’m not drawn into them all day, every day,” Russell explains, underlining the importance of intentional communication and time management.

At the conclusion of the pilot, Waterwise employees unanimously expressed a desire to continue the four-day workweek. Many indicated they would only consider returning to a five-day workweek if presented with a substantial pay raise. Russell recognizes the positive impact on employee retention, particularly beneficial for a smaller organization like Waterwise.

A noteworthy finding from these trials is the absence of a one-size-fits-all approach to implementing the four-day workweek. Ruth Llewellyn, leading the pilot at Merthyr Valleys Homes in South Wales, emphasizes that the concept of giving everyone Fridays off wouldn’t have suited their operations. With 240 employees performing diverse roles from customer service to home repairs and maintenance, they opted for flexible schedules tailored to individual and team needs. Various arrangements, such as set days off, rolling schedules, and shorter workdays, were adopted to accommodate the diverse workforce.

Teams at Merthyr Valleys Homes discovered time savings in different areas, such as reducing travel time and addressing customer issues promptly over the phone. Llewellyn reports increased motivation among employees, consistent performance, and a reduction in sick leave absences. While the company has not committed to a permanent four-day workweek, it has extended the pilot, aiming to gather more data and evaluate the results later in the spring.

The trial in the U.K. experienced minimal discontinuations of the four-day workweek, with only a few companies opting out. Feedback from one small consultancy suggested that despite improved morale and increased efficiency, challenges arose in managing client and stakeholder expectations. Researchers propose that enhanced external communication and greater flexibility in adapting the policy to challenging conditions could have made a difference.

“There is a suggestion that the organization did not give the policy enough of a chance, and indications of a change of heart on the issue from management,” the researchers wrote, underscoring the importance of commitment and effective communication in the successful implementation of the four-day workweek.

The four-day workweek has emerged as a sustainable and beneficial strategy for companies, fostering employee well-being and operational efficiency. The positive outcomes seen in the U.K. trial, as well as in other global experiments, underscore the potential for this model to become a standard practice. As companies continue to refine their approaches and gather more data, the four-day workweek may very well become a lasting gift that reshapes the landscape of work culture for the better.

Trump Triumphs in South Carolina Primary, Haley Vows to Persist in Republican Race

Staff ReporterOpinion, Politics, USA 0

Former President Donald Trump emerged victorious over his primary opponent, former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, in the Republican presidential primary held in South Carolina on Saturday. The Associated Press called the race as polls closed statewide, confirming Trump’s win. Despite Trump clinching victory across the state, Haley managed to secure the counties containing the two largest cities, Columbia and Charleston. Having served two terms as governor of South Carolina, Haley currently resides in Charleston County and also claimed victory in Beaufort County, where Hilton Head is located. While Haley garnered three delegates from South Carolina, Trump secured 47, bringing Haley’s total delegate count to 20 compared to Trump’s 110. The road to clinching the Republican presidential nomination requires a candidate to secure 1,215 delegates.

Trump’s triumph in South Carolina was largely anticipated, given his consistent lead in the polls in Haley’s conservative home state throughout the campaign. The AP based its race call on an analysis of a survey of primary voters, affirming Trump’s substantial lead over Haley statewide. Addressing a jubilant crowd of supporters in South Carolina, Trump expressed his satisfaction with the early and resounding win, stating, “This was a little sooner than we expected … an even bigger win than we anticipated.”

On the other hand, Haley, addressing her supporters, acknowledged the upcoming primary elections in various states in the following weeks and affirmed her commitment to remain in the race, asserting voters’ right to a genuine choice in the electoral process. She emphasized, “They have the right to a real choice, not a Soviet-style election with only one candidate,” underscoring her dedication to providing voters with alternative options. Despite her defeat, Haley conveyed her love for the people of South Carolina and reiterated her determination to continue her presidential bid.

In preparation for future primaries, Haley’s campaign announced a substantial national advertising campaign ahead of Super Tuesday on March 5, signaling her persistence in the race despite the setback in South Carolina. She reiterated her commitment to providing an alternative voice in the Republican primaries, emphasizing the desire among a significant number of Republican voters for an alternative to the current options.

Trump, despite facing numerous legal challenges, has maintained a dominant position in the Republican presidential race, having emerged victorious in every contest where his name appeared on the ballot. His victory in South Carolina underscores his enduring popularity among conservative voters, particularly in the Southern states.

Haley’s loss in South Carolina represents a setback in her quest for the Republican nomination, despite considerable investments of both time and resources in the state. Trump’s continued popularity in the South, coupled with his stronghold among conservative voters, poses significant challenges for any contender seeking to challenge his position within the party.

Analyzing the voting patterns in South Carolina provides insights into Haley’s appeal among more moderate voters and those open to alternatives to Trump within the Republican Party. While she garnered significant support in New Hampshire among independent voters, Trump’s dominance prevailed in the primaries. Independent voter Lynda Higgins cited Haley’s effective governance during her tenure as governor as a key factor in her decision to support her candidacy, expressing a desire for a change in leadership due to perceived societal divisions under Trump’s presidency.

Republicans in South Carolina acknowledge the evolving landscape of the party since Haley’s tenure as governor, noting a shift in perspective regarding the role of the president compared to that of a governor or cabinet member. Despite Haley’s commendable campaign efforts, Trump’s entrenched position as the de facto leader of the party presents formidable obstacles for any challenger.

Looking ahead, Trump expressed confidence in upcoming primary contests, including Michigan’s primary scheduled for the following Tuesday. He also anticipated success on Super Tuesday, citing polls indicating widespread support across various states. Trump emphasized the unity within the Republican Party and the ongoing efforts required to secure victory in the forthcoming elections.

CPAC Straw Poll: Noem and Ramaswamy Emerge as Top Picks for Trump’s VP

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem and biotech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy emerged as the top contenders among Republican grassroots activists for former President Trump’s potential vice presidential pick, according to attendees at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). They both garnered 15 percent of the preferences when CPAC attendees were asked about Trump’s potential running mate for the 2024 election. This puts both Noem and Ramaswamy in the spotlight as potential choices for Trump’s vice president. Trump himself confirmed earlier in the week that all individuals rumored to be on his shortlist are considered “solid.”

In the CPAC straw poll conducted on Saturday, former Hawaii Representative Tulsi Gabbard secured the second position with 9 percent, followed closely by House Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik and Senator Tim Scott from South Carolina, both at 8 percent. Representative Byron Donalds from Florida received 7 percent, while Arizona Senate candidate Kari Lake obtained 6 percent. Former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, and Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders each garnered 5 percent of the vote. Notably, conservative commentator Tucker Carlson, independent presidential candidate Robert K. Kennedy Jr., Senator JD Vance from Ohio, and former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley each received less than 5 percent of the vote.

Although the CPAC straw poll’s influence on Trump’s decision for his running mate may be minimal, the results are likely to generate increased attention around the top candidates. Noem, Stefanik, and Vance are among the prominent Republican figures present at CPAC and have been mentioned as potential running mates for the former president.

Senator Tim Scott’s presence in South Carolina is particularly noteworthy as the state prepares for its GOP primary, where Trump is expected to outperform Haley, a former governor of the state. According to polling data from The Hill/Decision Desk HQ, Trump holds a commanding lead of 30 points over Haley in her home state.

Evolutionary Prospects: The Fate of the Y Chromosome and the Emergence of New Sex Genes

Staff ReporterOpinion, Science 0

The sex determination process in humans and other mammals hinges on the presence of a male-determining gene on the Y chromosome. However, concerns arise as the human Y chromosome faces degeneration, potentially disappearing within a few million years and posing an existential threat unless a new sex gene emerges.

The Y chromosome, historically vital for male development, is gradually losing genetic material, raising questions about our species’ future. Despite this, intriguingly, certain rodent lineages have already navigated the loss of their Y chromosome, offering hope for evolutionary adaptation.

Research highlighted in a recent Proceedings of the National Academy of Science paper sheds light on the spiny rat’s evolutionary journey towards a novel male-determining gene. This discovery underscores the potential for species to adapt in response to genetic challenges.

The intricate dance of sex determination unfolds through the interplay of chromosomes. In mammals, females possess two X chromosomes, while males carry a single X and a diminutive Y chromosome. Despite its modest size, the Y chromosome harbors a critical gene triggering male development during embryonic stages.

This master gene, aptly named SRY (sex region on the Y), orchestrates the activation of downstream genes, including SOX9, pivotal for testis development and subsequent male hormone production. The intricate genetic pathways governed by these genes ensure the differentiation of male and female characteristics.

The evolutionary trajectory of sex chromosomes unveils intriguing complexities. While most mammals, including humans, possess X and Y chromosomes, some species, like Australia’s platypus, exhibit distinct sex chromosome systems resembling those of birds. This diversity underscores the dynamic nature of genetic evolution across species.

An analysis of the Y chromosome’s fate reveals a concerning trend of gene loss over millions of years. This gradual erosion suggests a potential endpoint where the Y chromosome ceases to exist, sparking debates about the timeline of its demise.

Remarkably, amidst these speculations, the resilience of certain rodent populations offers a glimmer of hope. Species such as mole voles and spiny rats have thrived despite losing their Y chromosome, challenging conventional notions of sex determination.

Intriguingly, researchers studying spiny rats have identified a remarkable adaptation—a tiny genetic duplication near the crucial sex gene SOX9 on chromosome 3. This duplication, exclusive to males, suggests a potential mechanism for sustaining male development in the absence of traditional male-determining genes.

The implications of these findings extend beyond rodents, prompting reflection on the future of human evolution. While the disappearance of the Y chromosome may spell doom for conventional reproductive mechanisms, the emergence of alternative sex determining genes offers a glimmer of hope.

However, the prospect of evolving new sex determining genes introduces a new set of challenges and uncertainties. The possibility of disparate evolutionary pathways leading to the emergence of multiple sex determination systems raises questions about species divergence and future biodiversity.

Ultimately, the fate of the Y chromosome and the emergence of new sex genes offer a glimpse into the intricate tapestry of evolutionary processes. Whether humanity faces extinction or diversification hinges on the complex interplay of genetics, adaptation, and environmental factors.

In the grand tapestry of evolutionary biology, the journey towards a new era of sex determination underscores the resilience and adaptability of life forms in the face of genetic challenges. As we ponder the fate of the Y chromosome, we are reminded of the dynamic nature of evolution and the endless possibilities it holds for the future of life on Earth.

Survey Shows Split Public Opinion on State Efforts to Exclude Trump from 2024 Ballots

Staff ReporterNation, Opinion 0

State-level initiatives aimed at excluding former President Trump from the 2024 election ballots are causing a rift among the populace, as indicated by a recent survey.

The study, carried out by Marquette University Law School, unveiled a near-even divide among respondents who had formed an opinion regarding the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling to disqualify Trump from the ballot under the 14th Amendment.

In recent weeks, the United States Supreme Court deliberated on the matter, contemplating whether Trump’s support for the January 6, 2021 insurrection warranted his removal from contention. Justices appeared hesitant to take the drastic measure of disqualifying him.

A notable 31 percent of those surveyed expressed either unfamiliarity with the case or insufficient information to formulate an opinion. Among those who did have a stance, half favored the Supreme Court nullifying the Colorado court’s decision, while the other half opposed such intervention.

The Supreme Court’s intervention followed a ruling by Colorado’s highest court in December, which declared Trump ineligible for inclusion on the state’s primary ballot.

Originally crafted to bar ex-Confederates from regaining power, the 14th Amendment found renewed relevance after the Capitol assault, leading anti-Trump factions to pursue legal avenues nationwide to prevent his potential return to the White House.

The survey painted a picture of limited confidence in the Supreme Court, with only a quarter of respondents expressing “a great deal” of trust, while 35 percent possessed some confidence, and 40 percent harbored little to no faith in the institution.

The Supreme Court’s expedited handling of the case suggests a decision could be imminent, potentially within weeks. Until then, Trump’s name will persist on ballots throughout the nation.

Despite the legal wrangling, Trump maintains his status as the frontrunner for the GOP nomination and is anticipated to engage in a showdown with President Biden in the upcoming general election.

Conducted between February 5 and 15, the survey sampled 1,003 adults, with a margin of error of 4.3 percentage points.

Biden’s Approval Rating Dips to Near All-Time Low of 38%, Gallup Survey Shows

Staff ReporterNation, Opinion 0

President Biden’s approval rating has dropped to 38 percent, nearing his previous record low, according to the latest Gallup survey released on Friday. The poll revealed that 38 percent of respondents approve of Biden’s performance in the White House, while 59 percent disapprove.

Quoting directly from the original article, “The poll released Friday found that 38 percent of respondents approve of Biden’s performance in the White House, while 59 percent disapprove.”

The survey also highlighted dissatisfaction with Biden’s handling of various crucial issues facing the nation. In terms of the war in Ukraine, only 40 percent of respondents expressed support for Biden’s approach, and his response to the conflict in Gaza garnered approval from only 30 percent. Additionally, a mere 33 percent approved of his handling of other foreign affairs.

Concerns about the economy persist, with 36 percent approving of Biden’s efforts to revive it post-pandemic. Notably, this reflects a 4-point increase since November, although the economy itself continues to perform well.

Quoting again from the original article, “The president also received low ranks for the economy, with 36 percent approving of Biden’s efforts to turn it around following the pandemic.”

Immigration remains a significant point of contention, with only 28 percent of respondents approving of how Biden is managing the surge of migrants at the U.S. border.

The article goes on to discuss the varying levels of support among Democrats. While there is generally support for Biden regarding the economy and his handling of the Russia-Ukraine war and foreign affairs, opinions diverge on the Israel-Hamas conflict and the situation at the southern border. Among Democratic respondents, there is a “bare” majority, with 55 percent approving of Biden’s approach to immigration and 51 percent on the Middle East conflict.

Quoting from the original article regarding Democrats, “According to the survey, Democrats generally support Biden with the economy and his handling of the Russia-Ukraine war and foreign affairs. But opinions about the Israel-Hamas war and the southern border are less favorable among respondents who identify as Democrats; he holds a “bare” majority among them on those issues, securing a 55 percent approval on immigration and 51 percent on the Middle East conflict.”

Biden’s handling of the economy has contributed to a modest improvement in his standing among independent respondents. However, their opinions on other topics, including immigration, remained lower, according to Gallup’s observations.

Republicans, on the other hand, exhibited minimal support for Biden across the board. Only 3 percent of Republicans approved of his immigration efforts, and 4 percent expressed approval for his handling of the economy.

Quoting directly from the original article about Republican respondents, “Very few Republican respondents support Biden on ‘any of the issues measured,’ the survey giant said. Just 3 percent of Republicans approve of Biden’s immigration efforts and 4 percent said the same about the economy.”

The article notes that Biden’s approval rating has not surpassed 44 percent since August 2021, and his average approval rating during his third year in office was 39.8 percent, making it the second-worst rating among post-World War II presidents.

Highlighting historical context, the piece points out that looking ahead to November, Biden faces a significant challenge in improving his approval rating among both independents and Democrats if he hopes to secure a second term. It emphasizes that incumbents who win reelection typically have at least a 50 percent approval rating.

Quoting once more from the original article, “Looking ahead to November, history suggests that Biden has significant work to do to improve his approval rating among independents as well as Democrats if he is to win a second term.”

The Gallup survey, conducted from Feb. 1-20 among 1,016 U.S. adults, carries a margin of error of 4 percentage points.

Biden Campaign Slams Trump’s Last-Place Ranking in Presidential Greatness Survey

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

President Biden’s reelection campaign strongly criticized former President Trump on Monday for his bottom-ranking performance in a recent survey evaluating presidential greatness.

Trump, widely expected to be Biden’s adversary in the upcoming November election, found himself occupying the lowest position on the list, while Biden was recognized as the 14th-best president in the 2024 Presidential Greatness Project Expert Survey. The survey, conducted by a panel of experts specializing in the American presidency from Nov. 15 to Dec. 31, placed Trump at the very bottom.

In a statement titled “Happy Presidents’ Day! … Unless You’re Donald Trump,” the Biden campaign expressed no qualms in emphasizing Trump’s last-place standing.

“It takes a lot to be known as the absolute worst in your profession in the history of your country. But Donald Trump managed to do it, and it’s pretty clear why. Donald Trump spent his four years in office working for one thing only: himself,” remarked Kevin Munoz, spokesperson for the Biden campaign.

Highlighting Trump’s position relative to historical figures, the campaign pointed out that he fared worse than President James Buchanan, responsible for leading the U.S. into the Civil War, and President Herbert Hoover, who was in office during the Great Depression.

Munoz emphasized the contrasting approaches of Biden and Trump, portraying Biden as a president dedicated to the well-being of the American populace.

“President Biden wakes up every day fighting for the American people, helping to create more jobs in three years than any president has created in four, and investing in America at record levels,” Munoz stated. “The choice in this election is clear: a president who has consistently delivered for the American people or Donald Trump who experts agree might be the worst to ever do it.”

The survey, conducted by experts in the field, crowned Abraham Lincoln as America’s greatest president. Biden’s ranking placed him ahead of Woodrow Wilson, Ronald Reagan, and Ulysses S. Grant.

Interestingly, former President Obama experienced a notable rise in the rankings, securing the seventh position, eight places higher than in the previous year’s survey.

Nikki Haley Vows to Persist in Presidential Race Despite Trump’s Lead: Refuses to Yield in Republican Primary

Staff ReporterOpinion, USA 0

Nikki Haley asserted her commitment to persist in the Republican presidential primary race against former President Trump, affirming her determination during an address in Greenville, South Carolina. “I’m not going anywhere,” she declared, emphasizing her readiness to vocalize uncomfortable truths and her refusal to yield to intimidation. She asserted, “I feel no need to kiss the ring… My own political future is of zero concern.” Haley drew parallels between her contest against Trump and the biblical tale of David and Goliath, dismissing speculation that she seeks the vice presidency or is positioning herself for a future presidential bid.

Despite trailing Trump significantly in South Carolina according to The Hill’s Decision Desk HQ polling average, Haley remained resolute. Trump’s campaign had issued a memo suggesting her impending defeat, characterizing her as a “wailing loser” clinging to a false reality. Haley brushed off such assertions, reaffirming her intention to persevere beyond the primary, declaring, “South Carolina will vote on Saturday, but on Sunday I will still be running for president.”

She did not shy away from criticizing both Trump and President Biden, targeting their age and mental acuity, alleging they are “at risk for dementia” and act as “dividers.” Haley highlighted public concerns over their age, stressing, “Nearly 60 percent of Americans say Trump and Biden are both too old to be president.” She accused Biden of self-inflicted harm and criticized Democrats for what she perceives as anointing him rather than engaging in robust competition.

In an emotional moment, Haley choked up as she discussed her husband Michael Haley, currently deployed abroad with the South Carolina Army National Guard. Her remarks followed a jab from Trump questioning why Michael wasn’t accompanying her on the campaign trail.

Despite her trailing position against Trump in South Carolina and nationally, polling data suggests Haley outperforms Biden in a head-to-head matchup, holding a slim lead over the president according to The Hill’s Decision Desk HQ polling average.

The Thirteenth Vision (21 February, 2024)

Kiran BhatOpinion, Girar, Lifestyle, Travel 0

This is the real world. This is the world that Mother knows.

She is inside her home. It is a two-story cottage in Toledo, a town of Castilla La Mancha. The town encircles a hill. The houses are egg-shell yellow or dove white and covered with brick-coloured roof tiles. Her home sits on the top of a lane curving up to the Alcázar.

Mother is in her bed, opening her eyes. She goes to the window and opens her curtains, seeing the hazy clouds and the Tagus river underneath, as well as the sharp green cliffs on the other side.

She had dreamt she was on top of a horse in Mongolia just now.

Su vida ahora tiene que ser la realidad. No es una ilusión.

She yawns and stretches, still in the pants and shirt she sleeps in. She goes for a shower, then gets herself ready to go downstairs.

As she passes the hallway into the kitchen, she notices someone right by the wooden table. It is her mother-in-law, sitting in her wheelchair. This is more and more of a sign that Mother cannot be in a dream. She remembers the day her mother-in-law was moved into her house. Was it a week ago? Was it two? Certainly, the way her husband and his two brothers had bickered, that could not have been an illusion. They had been shouting so loudly that she could hear them on the second floor while doing her prayers. When she came downstairs, their hands and arms were flailing in the air, gesticulating with passion their shared concern for their mother that had led each of them to a separate conclusion.

She must come home. She must stay with me. We will take care of her.

That was what her husband felt despite what his brothers had said. And so her mother-in-law was now staying at home with them as they tried to improve her medical state.

Mother tries to shake herself awake. Why is her mother-in-law downstairs by herself? There she is, sitting in her wheelchair, her mouth stuck in a smile, staring not at any person but deeply at the wall. Mother’s husband, Pedro, must have taken her in her wheelchair up and down the cobblestones to show her around the town before leaving to go to the hospital. It is only around six in the morning. Pedro must have left ten minutes ago. He trusts Mother to help him with the rest of his mother’s needs. This includes cleaning out her diaper, bathing her from head to toe, and feeding her by spoon the gazpacho or paella she makes for lunch.

This is not a dream. This is very much reality.

Mother suddenly shivers. She feels like she is in the middle of the tundra, but how can she feel this cold when she’s indoors and the heater is on? She feels like she has horse hair stuck to her pants, but when she picks it up, the hairs are grey and blond, clearly hers. She could have sworn she was in the middle of doing something, and it wasn’t cooking or cleaning.

I was about to realise something, and it was important…

« Oye… oye… ¿me escuchas?»

Is that her mother-in-law speaking? First of all, the dementia has been strong for the last year. If her mother-in-law speaks, which happens at random moments, it usually isn’t anything comprehensible, just a word here or there followed by a few sentences that don’t cohere to what was previously said.

The voice is also not coming from that side of the room. It’s almost like it is coming from somewhere underneath her. How is that possible? There is nothing below her other than the floor tiles they installed a few years ago…

« Oye… oye… ¿me escuchas? »

This is clearly a man’s voice. Mother is now scared. She reaches for the knife nearest to her, the one she normally uses to cut peaches and apples. The rough gesture frightens her mother-in-law, who gasps and looks about, as if she has been suddenly awoken from whatever dream world she was living in. What a beautiful thing, to live in a dream. Mother is almost jealous of her mother-in-law’s innocence, but only for a moment. Mother fears getting older and slowly losing her mind.

In a bid to console her mother-in-law, Mother comes to her side and tries to pat her arm.

« Suegra… no te asustas, por favor »

Her mother-in-law looks like she is about to cry. Teardrops are forming under her eyes. She is trying to lift a finger, like she is about to point somewhere behind Mother. She always does this regardless of what’s going on, but this time Mother wants to turn around. She brandishes the knife and faces the other side.

There is nothing. No one. It’s just the corridor that leads towards the living room, and a window facing the cliffs. Mother holds the knife firmly but considers putting it back on the table. She remembers she should be cutting some fruit for breakfast. It is difficult for her mother-in-law to chew apples, so Mother mashes them and feeds them to her mother-in-law via a spoon, like she would a little boy.

« Oye… you need to look below, not behind… »

Right on the tiles is the upper half of a man’s body. The man is wearing armour from the Medieval era. He has a sharp pointed goatee, and the two tips of his moustache curl upwards.

« ¿Quien eres tú? » Mother shouts. He cannot be human. His body is literally bifurcated by the floor. And yet when Mother stares firmly, she sees the rest of him. He is sitting up, lying on a bed, with the covers partially on top of him. He looks almost exactly like how Mother must look when she wakes up. Even the lower part of his body is in pyjamas, and the covers of his bed resemble hers.

« ¿Quien eres tú? » Mother asks again. « ¿And why are you on my bed? ¿How are you on my bed? ¿Who are you? »

« Tantas preguntas » the man complains. He rolls his eyes at Mother, then closes them, as if he would rather be sleeping. « I used to have all of these questions arise to me in my dreams. ¿Where is my Dulcinea? ¿What has happened to Sancho? ¿And who are you? ¿Who are you? Ultimately, it never mattered. I acted and made a lot of mistakes and embarrassed myself. And now here I am, lying here for eternity, known to the world as a fool. I just lie in bed and hide under the covers. If I had known back then that everything I believed in was an illusion, I would have never done what I did. »

Mother takes a few steps back. The fingers that are holding the knife are quivering. She has to concentrate to make sure she doesn’t drop it. Mother’s bottom lip wobbles.

The man carries on: « But then would I take it back? I acted as I did because I believed it. Belief is such a strong emotion. We do everything with the conviction that it is right, but most of the time, when we are in that state of mind, we do so much wrong. »

Mother would nod if she had the composure to do so. She sees a bit of herself in the man’s reflections, and the pit of feeling in the centre of her chest is aching, as what tends to happen whenever a truth is said and one is unprepared to deal with it.

« And yet the world is turning, the turns are turning. The world is like one giant windmill, and we are trying to catch on to it. »

The man laughs peculiarly, taking Mother out of the pain she is feeling. She now feels irate, annoyed, and confused. She wants to take the knife and cut the man right at the point where the tiles are reflecting the bed, to make the illusion dissipate like fog.

The man pulls at his moustache, twisting the hairs into an even finer upward curl. He looks at Mother and contracts his eyebrows.

« Life itself is a farce. We call something madness when we think it’s close to the odd, but in reality, being so fixed in how we should live life is a madness itself. What is wrong with dreaming? I lived my entire life as a dream, and the world made fun of me for it. And yet because I was willing to live this way, many others came after me and made a fool of themselves as well. People call such fools heroes. They make stories about them, they erect statues of them, they memorialise them, as time goes on and on. »

The man stifles a laugh, and then turns his eyes to meet Mother’s.

Mother turns away to face the wall, but the man’s half-body is coming out of the beige paint. Mother turns towards the kitchen, only the man is appearing out of the sink. Mother suddenly worries about her mother-in-law. Mother turns to face her, but she is facing the man instead, who is now sitting in the wheelchair, but also on the bed, as if it were an image pasted all around the wheelchair’s frames.

How is it that she can’t escape this man? He has become a part of everything she sees. She doesn’t have the time for this. It’s already getting late, the sun which was starting to rise is now full in the sky. She has to get on with washing and feeding her mother-in-law. If this apparition wasn’t disturbing her, she would have been in the midst of her prayers by now.

Mother closes her eyes and wishes, Dios, denounce this devil and leave me in peace.

She opens her eyes and sees he is still in front of her.

« You cannot get rid of me yet, dear. I am in front of you for a reason. I’m here to propose to you an adventure. It is an adventure far greater than the one I have undertaken. For though I have slayed many a knight and rescued many a damsel, it was only at the end of my journey that I realised anything about myself. You, my dear, have the gift of taking such a journey after countless others have tried and failed. You can start already knowing something a bit about yourself. You can start having already learned from our failures. And deep down, dear, you are far less in the fantasy than I ever was. I think you already know what you need to work on. »

The man touches Mother in the middle of her chest, and as if she is a pool stuck in stillness, she feels something inside of her ripple.

« You were dreaming for a reason. »

Mother looks at her mother-in-law, remembers the feeling of annoyance of having someone intrude on the schedule of her day. There are so many people and existences suffering on the planet, but Mother has not done anything for them. Mother has been extremely inactive. She wanders in her mind, she wanders in the four corners of her house. She has only lived her life while waiting for her life to end.

Perhaps she could use an adventure to take her closer to her destiny.

Mother suddenly imagines her son kissing another man, and her heart fills with disgust.

The man says:

« Do you want to leave this dream, to become disillusioned like I have? You have the chance to keep dreaming, to reach the heights I could only imagine reaching. »

Mother shakes her head.

The man smiles and extends his hand.

World Social Forum in Kathmandu Calls for Peace and Justice Across Borders

Staff ReporterNation, Global, Opinion 0

Social advocates from 72 nations convened at the five-day World Social Forum (WSF) conference, which concluded on February 19 in Kathmandu, issuing a plea for the establishment of a world devoid of warfare.

The event, bearing the motto ‘Another World is Possible,’ kicked off on February 15 with a spirited rally involving 20,000 participants who paraded through the streets of Nepal’s capital, pressing for the liberation of Palestine, the eradication of slavery, casteism, fundamentalism, human trafficking, the empowerment of women, Dalits, and all marginalized groups.

A total of 252 seminars, workshops, and related sessions were organized by diverse human rights and social advocacy bodies from across the globe, tackling an array of subjects including climate justice, discrimination, secure migration, and the cessation of trafficking.

Approximately 9,000 individuals engaged in smaller group discussions, dissecting and reflecting on contemporary socio-political landscapes in various regions worldwide, and articulating statements advocating for unity, solidarity, and the revitalization of democratic values.

wsf1 350x233
Picture: Matters India

Indian representatives from numerous social and Christian organizations made a significant presence, with a notable turnout from Christian denominations, including Catholics and members of the World Council of Churches, who hosted seminars and workshops.

Among these, 60 members of the Forum of Religious for Justice and Peace from India, along with their 70 associates, led sessions focusing on themes such as environmental conservation, the protection of minority rights to foster an inclusive society, and ensuring safe and dignified migration.

During discussions on environmental stewardship, attendees deliberated on the degradation of natural habitats and ecosystems, water pollution, and the unsustainable exploitation of natural resources, advocating for a transition away from fossil fuels toward clean energy to sustain the web of life.

Calls were made for South Asian governments, particularly India and Nepal, to take decisive measures towards phasing out fossil fuels and transitioning to renewable energy sources. Additionally, developed nations were urged to compensate South Asian countries for the financial losses incurred during this transition, ensuring sustainable livelihoods for all, especially the most impoverished segments of society in the region.

Forum members and their collaborators listened attentively to accounts of persecution faced by minorities, particularly Christians, in India and Pakistan. Renowned Pakistani human rights activist Saeda Diep recounted various atrocities inflicted upon Christians, Hindus, Ahmediyas, and Shias in Pakistan, while Jesuit Father Bosco Xavier from India shed light on systemic discrimination based on ancestry and occupation worldwide.

wsf indian participants 350x233
Picture: Matters India

The assembly condemned the prevailing atmosphere of xenophobia, exclusion, and violence targeting minority communities and those on the fringes of society, pledging to champion religious, cultural, ethnic, and linguistic diversity, which they regarded as integral to the region’s identity and deserving of respect and promotion.

In a joint statement, the forum demanded that South Asian governments, notably India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka, halt discrimination and violence against minorities and vulnerable groups, and instead, celebrate their distinctive cultural and religious heritage.

On the topic of safe and dignified migration, forum members affirmed the reality of extensive internal and international migration within South Asia driven by economic aspirations and conflict, emphasizing the need for robust legal protections for migrant workers and measures to shield them from discrimination and indignity.

Montfort Brother Varghese Theckanath, a forum participant, orchestrated a three-day International Tribunal on Evictions, wherein testimonies regarding forced displacement were presented. A panel of esteemed human rights activists from various continents rendered a verdict in favor of the rehabilitation of all displaced communities.

Forum national convener Presentation Sister Dorothy Fernandez, along with Congregation of Jesus Sister Ancy, Father Xavier, and Father Anand from the Indian Missionaries of Society, orchestrated various initiatives throughout the five-day event.

The program also featured a diverse array of cultural performances, with Bhrikuti Mandap, the event venue, resounding with Nepali melodies and dances, as well as musical renditions in various other Asian, African, South American, and European languages.

Each evening, Prerna Kala Manch, the theatrical arm of Vishwa Jyoti Communications in Varanasi, staged professional dramas addressing issues pertinent to farmers and minorities, captivating audiences with street plays that elucidated environmental concerns, discrimination, and communal strife.

Shift in Economic Sentiment: Voters’ Views on Inflation Impact Biden’s Prospects Ahead of November Election

Staff ReporterOpinion, Nation, Politics 0

Nancy Pontius is prepared to voice an unpopular opinion: she doesn’t perceive inflation as a significant concern and asserts that economic worries won’t sway her voting decision in the upcoming November election.

Despite experiencing financial strain akin to tens of millions of Americans in recent years, the 36-year-old Democrat from Pennsylvania remains resolute. “I definitely felt the gas price increase,” she acknowledges, “but I also recognized that it was likely to be temporary.” Having cast her ballot for Joe Biden four years ago, she intends to do so again, driven by issues like abortion. “I’m not concerned about the broader economic landscape,” she affirms.

This sentiment comes as a relief for President Biden, whose first term grappled with an unprecedented 18% surge in prices, sparking economic discontent and diminishing political backing. While America’s robust post-pandemic economic resurgence drew admiration globally, domestic sentiments remained starkly pessimistic.

However, there are indications of a shift as gasoline prices regress towards $3 per gallon nationally and wages edge closer to keeping pace with inflation. Economic sentiment, often described as the “vibe” people perceive about the economy, has seen improvement in business surveys recently.

According to the University of Michigan, Democrats like Nancy now express optimism about the economy akin to 2021 levels, surpassing any point during the Trump administration. Even Republican sentiments have slightly brightened, as per their research.

The White House is hopeful that this change in mood will endure, bolstering support for the president as the November election looms, especially in pivotal swing states like Pennsylvania. Yet, such optimism is far from guaranteed.

The president’s approval ratings linger near the lowest of his term, weighed down by concerns over immigration, his age, and conflicts like the one in Gaza. Despite positive indicators, overall economic sentiment is yet to rebound from the pandemic’s blow, notwithstanding robust growth and record low unemployment.

Within the Democratic camp, dissatisfaction with Biden’s economic policies, particularly among those under 30, presents a challenge. Kim Schwartz, a 28-year-old health technician from Pennsylvania, who voted for Biden in 2020, feels let down by the administration’s economic agenda.

“I don’t see any progress in getting more money into the hands of middle class and working class Americans to keep up with [inflation],” she laments. Kim’s financial situation has improved since 2020, yet she still diligently hunts for bargains at multiple grocery stores each week.

Her concerns resonate with others like John Cooke, a 34-year-old restaurant manager in Pennsylvania. While his eatery’s business remains strong, inflation has eaten into profits, and he hasn’t received a pay increase despite rising expenses.

Republicans, traditionally favored on economic matters, have seized on inflation to criticize Biden, attributing it to his spending policies. Economists attribute inflation to a combination of factors, including pandemic-induced supply chain disruptions and the Ukraine conflict’s impact on oil prices.

Democrats have maintained their electoral ground by attributing inflation to broader forces and focusing on other issues like social justice and climate change. However, swing voters, often prioritizing economic concerns, hold significant sway in presidential elections.

Strategists acknowledge Biden’s previous reliance on national economic metrics as a defense strategy as emotionally disconnected. Consequently, Biden has adopted a more populist rhetoric, criticizing price gouging and advocating against “shrinkflation” while denouncing “extreme MAGA Republican” economic policies.

Don Cunningham, a veteran Democratic figure in Pennsylvania, anticipates a reconciliation between economic sentiment and reality in the coming months. As head of the Lehigh Valley Economic Development Corporation, he notes challenges for Biden unrelated to economic issues, such as generational divides and personal connections with voters.

Yet, signs indicate many Americans are disheartened by the probable 2020 rematch between Biden and Trump. Even Nancy, who ardently displayed her support for Biden in 2020, plans a more subdued approach this time, wary of discord with her neighbors.

“We might still put the Biden-Harris sign out,” she muses, “But I was willing to be a little louder in 2020… than I am now.”

Is Modi Government Targeting Opposition Leaders for Political Reasons?

Ajay GhoshIndia, Opinion 0

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) in India used to be a sleepy corner of India’s Finance Ministry and was not known to majority of Indians until recently. Mandated to investigate money-laundering and foreign-exchange violations, it rarely made headlines under the previous governments, including during the coalition led by the Congress party, which ruled from 2004 to 2014. Its record on money-laundering—a big problem in India—was particularly lackluster: it conducted only 112 raids and failed to achieve a single conviction.

Under Narendra Modi, the ED has become one of India’s most feared agencies. Since he became prime minister in 2014 it has conducted more than 3,000 money-laundering raids and secured 54 convictions. Most controversially, especially in the run-up to a general election due by May, it has targeted dozens of Opposition politicians, including at least five party leaders—while largely steering clear of bigwigs in Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

In March 2023, The Union government introduced changes to rules on money laundering which significantly widen the net under which the Enforcement Directorate (ED) can access the financial history of individuals and organisations. This has implications on all those the powerful central agency can now act against.

Is Modi Government Targeting Opposition Leaders for Political Reasons (TOI)The recent offensives against the Opposition Party leaders by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) may owe partly to the BJP’s objective of winning the 2024 general election with a much bigger margin, which requires it to “discredit and disunite” its opponents, analysts across India say.

Indian investigators have raided multiple premises linked with a prominent rights activist in the national capital – a move that Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s critics say is part of a pattern that has seen his government targeting political opponents two months before general elections.

Congress Party leader and a former Under-Secretary-General for Communications and Public Information at the United Nations, Shashi Tharoor crticized the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government in India, accusing it of misusing central agencies to target political opponents. Tharoor expressed concern about the state of central agencies and independent institutions in the country under what he termed as “electoral autocracy.”

Highlighting that the ruling government is misusing central agencies for political benefits, Tharoor said, “Now we are seeing the government being quite shameless in misusing even those institutions that were meant to be independent like the ED, CBI, and law enforcement bodies, which were meant to chase wrongdoers. They are now being unleashed selectively only on those whom the BJP deems to be its political opponent.”

The recent offensives against the Opposition Party leaders by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) may owe partly to the BJP’s objective of winning the 2024 general election with a much bigger margin, which requires it to “discredit and disunite” its opponents, analysts across India say.

The latest victim of this lopsided ED raids and arrests was on January 31st, 2024, when ED officers arrested Hemant Soren of the Congress Party and the chief minister of the eastern state of Jharkhand, on suspicion of money-laundering.

Soren is the fourth opposition chief minister to come under the scanner of the central investigation agency. Earlier,Is Modi Government Targeting Opposition Leaders for Political Reasons (Yahoo) former Chhattisgarh chief minister Bhupesh Baghel and his associates were accused by the ED of being involved in an illegal online betting case. Baghel was named by the ED days ahead of the state’s assembly polls, which allowed the BJP to carry out a political campaign against the chief minister’s alleged corruption.

Rashtriya Janata Dal chief Lalu Prasad and his son and former deputy chief minister of Bihar Tejashwi Yadav have also been implicated in an alleged “land for jobs” scam. Lalu Prasad, who is severely ill, was called for questioning by the ED in a case that the CBI had first registered in May 2022 as a “land-for-jobs” scam. The CBI has named Lalu Prasad, his wife and former chief minister Rabri Devi, and their son Tejashwi Yadav and two daughters Misa Bharti and Hema Yadav, along with 12 others.

Other opposition leaders, including Tejashwi Yadav, the former deputy chief minister of neighbouring Bihar state, and Arvind Kejriwal, the chief minister of Delhi, have also been raided by federal agencies in recent months. Kejriwal’s deputy and one of his party’s parliamentarians are already in jail.

The ED raided the premises linked to AAP leaders in Delhi, prompting the party to accuse the Centre and the probe agency of intimidation. ED sources refuted the claims and added that the agency will take  “legal recourse.”

Delhi chief minister and Aam Aadmi Party leader Arvind Kejriwal, too, has been served multiple notices by the ED in the excise policy case, in which his deputy Manish Sisodia and party MP Sanjay Singh have already been arrested. Satyendra Jain, another AAP minister in Delhi, has been in prison for around two years. Speculations are rife that Kejriwal may soon be arrested for refusing to present himself for questioning, as the chief minister has maintained that the questioning was politically motivated and a ploy to arrest him to prevent him from campaigning during the 2024 Lok Sabha polls.

In the central Chhattisgarh state, Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel and his associates were picked up by the ED officials right before elections in November last year. The BJP accused them of multiple scams, including an illegal coal mining deal, and used the charges as a major plank to win the state polls.

Kerala CM Pinarayi Vijayan is now facing the heat from central agencies. In its efforts to portray a negative perception on the Communist leader in Ketrala, the CBI pushed for a March or April hearing on its plea, ahead of the national elections, challenging the discharge of Pinarayi in an over-25-year-old corruption case, but the Supreme Court listed it for a final hearing in May.

The case is about an allegation that as Kerala power minister, Pinarayi visited Canada as “a guest” of Lavalin and decided to grant it a contract for the renovation and modernisation of three hydroelectric projects in Idukki. The CBI alleges the decision resulted in a loss of Rs 86.25 crore to the Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB). The trial court and the Kerala High Court have discharged Pinarayi in the case. The CBI says the high court’s decision to discharge Pinarayi was “not correct.”

Several other Opposition leaders are under the scanner of the central agencies, including a former Congress minister in Rajasthan Mahesh Joshi in the alleged Jal Jeevan Mission scam, associates of a few Congress leaders in Haryana and Himachal Pradesh in an alleged Haryana Urban Development Authority scam, and several local opposition leaders in southern states.

The Tamil Nadu government has moved the Madras High Court against the Enforcement Directorate (ED), opposing the agency’s recent summons to 10 district collectors in the state in connection with alleged irregularities in sand mining. The state’s petition on behalf of the collectors, in which it alleged constitutional overreach by the ED and a deliberate attempt to harass state officials, marks an escalation in the ongoing tussle between the state machinery and central agencies.

This can potentially be an election issue during the Lok Sabha polls, especially in Kerala, where the BJP is trying to expand its base and the CPI-M and the Congress have been the leading parties for decades.

The ED’s raids against the Opposition, however, have served the BJP readymade campaigns to target the Opposition and advance its own anti-corruption plank. Curiously, however, the ED hasn’t been able to substantiate many of its charges, with its conviction rate remaining at an abysmal low.

In yet another instance of abus eof power by the Modi government, a total of 141 federal lawmakers – 95 from the lower house (Lok Sabha) and 46 from the upper chamber (Rajya Sabha) – were suspended since December 14, 2023 for allegedly disrupting House proceedings, after they demanded a debate on a Parliament security breach.

Alleging that central agencies are silent in the BJP-ruled states, Aam Aadmi Party Rajya Sabha MP Raghav Chadha added that 95 per cent of the cases registered by the CBI and ED are against politicians of the Opposition.

Calling ED, I-T department and CBI as the “jawans” of the Modi government, Mallikarjun Kharge, President of the Congress Party said that the prime minister is afraid because of the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) defeat in Karnataka and Himachal Pradesh and therefore the agencies are trying to scare the Congress. He questioned why action is not taken against BJP leaders despite them having money and property. He said that the BJP has a “washing machine” through which tainted people in BJP are made clean. He said the agencies get active ahead of polls and target only Opposition leaders.

As the Lok Sabha elections approach, there are allegations that the BJP is using government agencies to intimidate and stifle opposition voices. Interestingly, the ED has yet to initiate any investigations against leaders of the BJP and its NDA coalition partners. Such alacrity against Opposition leaders contrasts that with ED’s lack of any initiative in pursuing similar cases of alleged financial fraud against BJP chief minister of Assam Himanta Biswa Sarma or deputy chief minister of Maharashtra Ajit Pawar, against whom allegations of corruption were being vigorously followed up before he joined ranks with the BJP.

Old cases like Vyapam during the Shivraj Singh Chouhan-led BJP government in Madhya Pradesh have also been put in cold storage. The same is the case of multiple small and big cases of corruption during the BJP rule in Karnataka under chief ministers B.S. Yediyurappa and B.S. Bommai when many of their ministers faced allegations of financial irregularities.

Sushil Sunny Agrawal, a 39-year-old former minister in Baghel’s cabinet, was among the politicians the ED raided before the state elections last year. “They mentally tortured us. The ED officials told me: ‘What’s in there to stay with the Congress? Join BJP, that’s where the future is,’” Agrawal said. “These agencies have become liaisons for the BJP. They deal on their behalf: If you go with Modi, you will be cleared from all this and stand a chance at a bright future.” Agrawal said the Modi government is “hijacking” the forthcoming vote by targeting Opposition leaders and activists. “Democracy has completely ended in India,” he said.

The upcoming general elections are keeping Agrawal on edge. “The BJP knows no limits. And they are in a full-on attacking mode, weaponising the central agencies to completely curb the opposition,” he said.

The Congress Party along with most Opposition parties expressed concern over the “worrying trend” of the ED being used as a “political tool” by the ruling BJP against Opposition leaders and also cited the raids at the residence of Rajasthan Congress president Govind Singh Dotasra.

Last April, 14 Opposition Parties moved the Supreme Court to challenge the Modi government’s alleged misuse of bodies like the ED. A delegation led by Congress Working Committee member Abhishek Singhvi met the Chief Election Commissioner and others when they also demanded disciplinary action against ED officials who are “misusing” their powers and violating the guidelines of the of the EC, which insists on “neutral, impartial and non-discriminatory” actions by agencies.

The politicization of central agencies is not limited to political leaders who are opposed to BJP alone. They have targeted businessmen, heads and staf of financial institutions, Bollywood stars and their families, Media personnel, Human Rights activists, Not for Profit Agencies and many other groups who are considered independent and oppose Modi regime’s policies and abuse of power.

The arrest and ongoing investigations on Chanda Kochhar is another typical example. The Bombay High Court on February 13, 2024 declared the arrests of ex-ICICI Bank CEO Chanda Kochhar and her husband Deepak Kochhar in the ICICI Bank-Videocon loan fraud case as “illegal” as it upheld the 2023 interim bail order. The court had questioned the CBI over the delayed investigation since the FIR in 2019, while granting interim bail to the Kochhars. They were arrested on December 23, 2022, when their plea was pending. It ruled that the arrests were not in accordance with the law, citing lack of clarity on the reason for arresting them four years into the probe.

CBI officials raided the residence of former bureaucrat Harsh Mander and the office of a think tank, the Centre for Equity Studies (CES) in New Delhi, linked to him, alleging financial irregularities under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act.

Mander, a fierce critic of the Modi government’s Hindu supremacist agenda, served as an Indian Administrative Service officer for 22 years before he resigned in 2002 in the wake of the riots in Gujarat state when Modi was its chief minister. More than 1,000 people died in the violence, most of them Muslims, according to the state government.

Apoorvanand, professor of Hindi Literature at the University of Delhi and one of Mander’s close acquaintances, said he woke up to the “upsetting news” of the raids. “Mander and the civil society members have been relentlessly hounded by the investigative agencies,” he added.

The crackdown by the government is an attempt to establish a one-party rule in India, Apporvanand said. “When the opposition parties should be hitting the roads [to campaign] ahead of the elections, they are running from one agency to another,” he said. “The campaigns are distracted and their followers will be demoralised. You can practically achieve a one-party state without changing the constitution. From the civil society to academia, I can feel this fear – who’s going to be next?” said Apoorvanand.

“These raids or allegations of financial irregularities seem to have become a norm for the authorities to silence peaceful criticism,” Meenakshi Ganguly, the deputy director of Human Rights Watch’s Asia division said. Several activists are currently facing charges, some under draconian terror laws. “When independent state agencies are seen to act in a partisan manner, with politically motivated targeting of dissent, it undermines India’s image as a country that upholds the rule of law,” Ganguly said.

The ED’s raids against the Opposition, however, have served the BJP readymade campaigns to target the opposition and advance its own anti-corruption plank. Curiously, however, the ED hasn’t been able to substantiate many of its charges, with its conviction rate remaining at an abysmal low.

The Wire reported that there is a four-fold jump in ED cases since 2014 and that 95% of the cases probed by the ED and the Central Bureau of Investigation against political leaders are from the Opposition. Although the ED claims that it has a high conviction rate of 96%, the figures appear to be misplaced if one factors in the number of cases it has closed since 2005. The ED registered 5,906 cases until March 2023 but completed the probe and filed a chargesheet in only 1,142 cases – out of which it has disposed of only 25 cases, a mere 0.42 of the total number of cases. Of those 25 cases, the ED has managed convictions in 24 cases, which is around 96% conviction rate as claimed by the agency.

Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan said, “Like the politicians, the civil society or anybody who is a critic of this government is being targeted. This is the rise of a fascist state under Modi and unfortunately, the judiciary is doing very little or hardly anything to protect the rights and liberties of the citizens. Its independence appears to have collapsed.”

According to Tharror, “The institutions are those that give body and strength to our democracy, whether it’s parliament, whether it’s an independent election commission, whether it’s the information commission or the Reserve Bank of India. All of these institutions have found their independence vitiated.”

“Let the ED, income tax department, and CBI do their job, but how come all of their targets are from the Opposition? How is this possible that there are no other criminals anywhere but only in Opposition? Till now, nobody has given any satisfactory answer to these questions,” the Tharror said. “The respected V-Dem (Varieties of Democracy) institute in Sweden decided to call us not a democracy anymore, but an “electoral autocracy” that is that, we elect our leaders but then they behave as autocrats.”

Trump Threatens to Abandon NATO Allies Over Defense Spending, Sparks Concerns Over Alliance’s Future

Staff ReporterDiplomacy, Opinion 0

Former President Donald Trump has asserted that the United States would not come to the defense of NATO allies in the event of a Russian attack if those allies failed to meet his criteria for defense spending. This declaration, made during a campaign rally in Conway, S.C., raises significant concerns about the future of the alliance should Trump be reelected in 2024.

Trump’s stance on NATO spending has been a longstanding point of contention, with him consistently criticizing other member countries for not meeting defense spending targets and inaccurately claiming that there are outstanding balances owed by allies. However, his recent remarks take this criticism a step further, suggesting that Russia should be encouraged to attack countries that are “delinquent” in their contributions.

During the rally, Trump recounted a hypothetical scenario where a country asked if the U.S. would protect them in the event of a Russian attack due to unpaid contributions. Trump’s response was blunt: “No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want.”

Trump also claimed that his threats led to a significant increase in NATO spending, stating that “hundreds of billions” flowed into the alliance as a result. However, data shows that NATO spending was already on the rise before Trump took office in 2016.

The issue of NATO spending has been a focal point since Russia’s annexation of Crimea from Ukraine in 2014. In response, NATO countries pledged to increase defense spending to 2% of their gross domestic product by 2024. Yet, according to data from July 2023, only 11 out of the 31 member countries have met this target. Notably, the United States contributes 3.49% of its GDP to defense, while several other countries, including France, Germany, and Canada, have fallen short.

The White House swiftly condemned Trump’s remarks, describing them as “unhinged” and emphasizing President Joe Biden’s commitment to strengthening NATO. White House spokesman Andrew Bates emphasized that Biden’s approach prioritizes American leadership and national security interests.

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg echoed these sentiments, stating that any suggestion of allies not defending each other undermines collective security and increases risks for American and European soldiers.

Trump’s comments on NATO come amid a campaign rally in South Carolina, just weeks before the state’s Republican presidential primary. At the rally, he reiterated his hardline stance on immigration, promising to reverse Biden administration policies and implement aggressive deportation measures.

Trump also addressed the legal challenges he faces, including numerous criminal indictments, attributing them to bolstering his poll numbers rather than seeking revenge against Biden.

These remarks on foreign policy coincide with congressional struggles to advance aid packages for Israel and Ukraine, issues Trump claims would not have arisen under his administration’s leadership.

Unlocking the Enigma: Exploring the Depths of Consciousness Across Disciplines

Staff ReporterScience, Opinion 0

“The enigma of consciousness, often termed ‘the hard problem,’ resonates across disciplines, permeating both academic discourse and popular culture,” reflects the opening lines of an article discussing the elusive nature of consciousness. Coined by philosopher David Chalmers three decades ago, this label has since found its way into various realms, even serving as the title of a play by Tom Stoppard. Notably, it’s referenced in a recent episode of Big Think’s Dispatches from the Well, featuring discussions on consciousness with prominent figures including neuroscientist Christof Koch, Swami Sarvapriyananda from the Vedanta Society of New York, technology entrepreneur Reid Hoffman, complexity expert Melanie Mitchell from the Santa Fe Institute, and mathematical physicist Roger Penrose.

Koch delves into the essence of consciousness, describing it as encompassing sensory perceptions, emotions, and experiences. He states, “It’s what you see, it’s what you hear, it’s the pains you have, the love you have, the fear, the passion.” This sentiment echoes Descartes’ famous assertion, “Cogito, ergo sum” – “I think, therefore I am.” Sarvapriyananda draws parallels to Descartes as well, portraying consciousness as “the light of lights” that illuminates all existence.

Mitchell offers a perspective of consciousness as a spectrum, varying in intensity and present not only in humans but also in different species. She suggests, “I’m more conscious when I’m awake,” indicating a fluctuation in consciousness levels. Moreover, Mitchell ponders the potential for consciousness to emerge in non-biological entities, envisioning a spectrum where machines might one day reside.

The conversation turns to the realm of artificial intelligence (AI) as host Kmele Foster engages with Hoffman, an AI researcher. Despite remarkable advancements in AI technology, few would attribute consciousness to current AI chatbots. Yet, Hoffman suggests that striving to imbue machines with not just intelligence but consciousness could yield insights into the workings of human consciousness.

Penrose introduces a provocative theory positing that consciousness arises from unpredictable quantum processes within the brain’s microtubules. This perspective challenges conventional understandings of consciousness and underscores its complexity. Koch adds a speculative dimension by proposing that consciousness might permeate all forms of matter to varying degrees.

The article reflects on the multifaceted nature of consciousness, encapsulating various philosophical, scientific, and speculative perspectives. Ultimately, whether consciousness stems from quantum processes, emerges across a spectrum of entities, or remains a deeply personal experience, its true nature continues to elude definitive explanation.

Unlocking India’s Potential with AI

Staff ReporterNation, Opinion, Technology 0

A new UN Advisory Body is expected to make recommendations on international governance of AI. The members of the AI Advisory Body – launched October 2023 by Secretary-General António Guterres – will examine the risks, opportunities and international governance of these technologies. Credit: Unsplash/Steve Johnson

BANGALORE, India, Feb 5 2024 (IPS) – India is on the brink of a transformation that could change its economic and social future.

Before the end of this decade, more Indians will use AI every day than in any other country in the world. What’s more, people in advanced economies will be surprised by the ways the country will use AI.

India is on the cusp of a technological revolution that could alter the trajectory of its social and economic future, and in this revolution. there are lessons for the rest of the world.

Our prediction hinges on three facts: India needs it, India is ready for it, and India will do it.

India needs it

The concept of “China plus one” has been gaining traction, with its admonition that global companies should not depend inordinately on China for their manufacturing and software needs.

India, with its growing infrastructure investments, favorable policies, and young working population, is the most likely beneficiary of this shift. It is perhaps the only country poised to match the scale of China.

With 1.4 billion people, India is closer to a continent than a country. Its population is almost twice that of Europe. But the average age in India is 28, compared with Europe’s 44, which means a higher share of the population is of working age. This is the starting point: India is a very large country of very young people.

This demographic dividend, favorable global trends, and the unlocking of decades of suppressed potential are starting to show returns. Even as the macroeconomic projections for most of the world seem modest or bleak, India remains a bright spot. These young Indians are aspirational and motivated to use every opportunity to better their lives.

What really sets India apart from the West are its unique challenges and needs. India’s diverse population and complex socioeconomic concerns mean that AI there is not just about developing cutting-edge technology. It’s about finding innovative solutions to address pressing problems in health care, education, agriculture, and sustainability.

Though our population is just double the size of Europe’s, we are much more diverse. Indians, like Europeans, are often bi- or multilingual. India recognizes 19,500 dialects spoken by at least 10,000 people. Based on data from the Indian census, two Indians selected at random have only a 36 percent chance of speaking a common language.

This language barrier is complicated by the fact that the official literacy rate in the country hovers near 77 percent, varying vastly between states. This means that roughly 1 in 4 people can’t read or write. Even though the government tries to provide welfare assistance for its most vulnerable, it’s hard to spread awareness about the service and reach the last mile.

Filling out a simple form to access welfare can be daunting for someone who is illiterate. Determining eligibility for assistance means depending on someone who can read, write, and navigate the bureaucracy.

Actually. receiving services means assistance seekers must have an agent helping them who is not misinformed—or worse, corrupt. These barriers disproportionately affect those who need government assistance the most.

We have the ability to solve a lot of problems for our population, but the hard part has always been in the distribution, not the solution. In India, we believe that AI can help bridge this access gap.

AI enables people to access services directly with their voice using natural language, empowering them to help themselves. As Canadian writer William Gibson aptly said, “The future is already here—it’s just not evenly distributed.” Nowhere is this more glaringly evident than in India.

The rest of the world has been eyeing AI with curiosity, waiting for real-use cases. In India, we see potential today. While this may be true of many other developing economies, the other important factor is that.

The rest of the world has been eyeing AI with curiosity, waiting for real-use cases. In India, we see potential today.

India is ready for it

India’s population isn’t just young, it is connected. According to the country’s telecommunications sector regulator, India has more than 790 million mobile broadband users. Internet penetration continues to increase, and with the availability of affordable data plans, more and more people are online. This has created a massive user base for AI applications and services.

But where India has surpassed all others is in its digital public infrastructure. Today, nearly every Indian has a digital identity under the Aadhaar system. The Aadhaar is a 12-digit unique identity number with an option for users to authenticate themselves digitally—that is, to prove they are who they claim to be.

Further, India set up a low-cost, real-time, interoperable payment system. This means that any user of any bank can pay any other person or merchant using any other bank instantly and at no cost.

This system—the Unified Payments Interface—handles more than 10 billion transactions a month. It is the largest real-time payment system in the world and handles about 60 percent of real-time payment transactions worldwide.

With the success of these models, India is embracing innovation in open networks as digital public infrastructure. Take the example of Namma Yatri, a ride-hailing network built in collaboration with the union of auto-rickshaw drivers in Bangalore and launched in November 2022.

These drivers have their own app, with a flat fee to use it, no percentage commission and no middleman. The app has facilitated close to 90,000 rides a day, almost as many as ride-hailing companies in the city.

Unlike Western countries, which have legacy systems to overhaul, India’s tabula rasa means that AI-first systems can be built from the ground up. The quick adoption of digital public infrastructure is the bedrock for these technologies.

Such infrastructure generates enormous amounts of data, and thanks to India’s Account Aggregator framework, the data remain under the citizens’ control, further encouraging public trust and utilization. With this solid footing, India is well positioned to lead the charge in AI adoption.

India will do it

In September 2023, the Indian government, in collaboration with the EkStep foundation, launched the PM-Kisan chatbot. This AI chatbot works with PM-Kisan, India’s direct benefit transfer program for farmers, initiated in 2019 to extend financial help to farmers who own their own land.

Access to the program, getting relevant information, and resolving grievances was always a problem for the farmers. The new chatbot gives farmers the ability to know their eligibility and the status of their application and payments using just their voice. On launch day more than 500,000 users chatted with the bot, and features are being released slowly to ensure a safe and risk-managed rollout.

These steps are part of an encouraging trend of early adoption of new technology by the Indian government. But the trend extends beyond the government. India’s vibrant tech ecosystem has taken off as well, a direct offshoot of its booming IT exports—currently at nearly $250 billion a year.

Next to those from the US, the largest number of developers on GitHub, a cloud-based service for software development, are from India. This sector not only innovates but also widely adopts digital public infrastructure.

The effect is cyclical: start-ups feed the growing tech culture and, in turn, leverage the data to build more precise and beneficial AI tools. India’s dynamic start-up ecosystem, moreover, is actively working on AI solutions to address various challenges.

AI can be a game changer in education as well, helping close the literacy gap. AI technologies are uniquely positioned to help students learn in their native languages, as well as learn English. AI’s applications are useful not only for students; they extend to teachers, who are often overwhelmed by administrative tasks that detract from teaching.

As AI takes over routine tasks in government and start-ups, the roles of teachers and students evolve, and they form dynamic partnerships focused on deep learning and meaningful human interaction.

What India needs is a strategic plan to chase down the most important opportunities for AI to help. The trick is not to look too hard at the technology but to look at the problems people face that existing technology has been unable to solve.

And organizations such as EkStep have stepped up with a mission called People+AI. Instead of putting AI first, they focus on the problems of people. This has led to surprising new uses unique to India.

India’s emerging status as a technological powerhouse, combined with its unique socioeconomic landscape, puts it in a favorable position to be the world’s most extensive user of AI by the end of this decade.

From streamlining education to aiding in social protection programs, AI has the potential to deeply penetrate Indian society, effecting broad and meaningful change.

Nandan Nilekani is the chairman and cofounder of Infosys and founding chairman of UIDAI (Aadhaar); Tanuj Bhojwani is head of People+AI

Source: IMF Finance & Development

Opinions expressed in articles and other materials are those of the authors; they do not necessarily reflect IMF policy.

IPS UN Bureau

Is the Reform of the UN Security Council a Good Try in a Lost Cause?

Thalif DeenOpinion, World 0

(IPS) – The myriads of proposals for the reform of the much-maligned Security Council have been kicked around the United Nations for more than two decades—with no significant progress.

Speaking at the General Assembly’s (GA) annual debate, GA President Dennis Francis told delegates last November that without structural reform, the Council’s performance and legitimacy will inevitably continue to suffer.

“Violence and war continue to spread in regions across the world, while the United Nations seems paralyzed due largely to the divisions in the Security Council,” he said.

With the world changing quickly, the Council is “dangerously falling short” of its mandate as the primary custodian for the maintenance of international peace and security, he said.

Meanwhile, a proposed new model for reforms, initiated by the Group of Four (G4: Brazil, Germany, India, and Japan), has been doing the rounds.

Not surprisingly, all four countries have been longstanding contenders for permanent seats (P5s) which have remained the privilege of five countries since the creation of the world body 79 years ago: the US, UK, France, China and the Russian Federation (replacing the USSR of a bygone era).

The G4 is calling for a total of 11 permanent members (P11): China, France, The Russian Federation, UK and the US, plus six others.

In the event of possible expansion, and upon the adoption of a comprehensive framework resolution on Security Council reform, interested Member States prepared to assume the functions and responsibilities of permanent members of the Security Council would submit their candidatures in writing to the President of the General Assembly.

The General Assembly will then proceed, as soon as possible, at a date to be determined by the President, to the election of six new permanent members, by a vote of two thirds of the members of the General Assembly. through a secret ballot. The rules of procedure of the General Assembly will be applied to the election of the new permanent members.

Is the Reform of the UN Security Council a Good Try in a Lost CauseThe criteria of Article 23 (1) should also apply to the election of the new permanent members: “due regard shall be paid, in the first instance to their contributions to the maintenance of international peace and security and to the other purposes of the Organization, and also to equitable geographical distribution”.

The non-permanent members with a two-year term, currently at 10, will be increased to a total of 14/15 seats – The election process for non-permanent members will follow current practices.

According to the G4 proposal, the six new permanent members of the Security Council shall be elected according to the following pattern: (i) Two from African Member States: (ii) Two from Asia-Pacific Member States, (iii) One from Latin American and Caribbean Member States; (iv) One from Western European and Other Member States.

The four/five new non-permanent members of the Security Council shall be elected according to the following pattern; (i) One/Two from African Member States: (ii) One from Asia-Pacific Member States: (iii) One from Eastern European Member States; (iv) One from Latin American and Caribbean Member States.

Member States should give due consideration during the nomination and election of non-permanent members to adequate and continuing representation of small and medium size Member States, including Small Island Developing States (SIDS).

Andreas Bummel, Executive Director, Democracy Without Borders, told IPS any reconfiguration of the Security Council would have to be adopted in line with Article 108 of the Charter, which means it requires the support of two thirds of UN members and the P5.

“Given the fact that Security Council reform has been discussed for decades, I think it is legitimate to pursue such a vote instead of consensus. Whether it is politically wise is a different question.”

In essence, he said, the G4 are not willing to compromise. “If they can mobilize a two thirds majority and the P5, fine. But if not, it’s finally game over for them. I can’t see how a broad agreement is possible without introducing new concepts that go beyond today’s permanent and non-permanent seats.”

Re-electable seats rotating among the membership of certain regions is a good approach, in my mind. New permanent seats vested with a veto will make the Security Council even more unworkable.

This option should be off the table. Delaying a decision for fifteen years does not solve this, he declared.

On the question of the veto, the G4 says Member States should be invited to continue discussions on the use of the veto in certain circumstances.

The new permanent members, would as a principle, have the same responsibilities and obligations as current permanent members.

However, the new permanent members shall not exercise the veto-right until a decision on the matter has been taken during a review, to be held fifteen years after the coming into force of the reform.

Amendments to the charter shall reflect the fact that the extension of the right of veto to the new permanent members will be decided upon in the framework of a review.

The enlarged Security Council would be encouraged to, inter alia, hold regular consultations with the President of the General Assembly; submit an analytical and comprehensive evaluation of the Council’s work in the annual report to the General Assembly; submit more frequently special reports to the General Assembly in accordance with Articles 15 (1) and 24 (3) of the Charter, improve participation of the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission and the chairs of the country-specific configurations of the Commission in relevant debates and, in an appropriate format, in informal discussions

Asked for her comments, Barbara Adams, Senior Policy Analyst, Global Policy Forum, told IPS: Surely, now 11 (not 5) veto-wielding powers, will not correct the inability of P5 or P11 to put their chartered responsibility for international peace and security above their national security interests.

She pointed out that the G4 proposal for a 15-year pause on use of the veto acknowledges the tension between expanding the number of permanent members and the veto.

Re the proposal for seats for developing countries, and countries from other regions, they should not need to be justified by the concept of regional representation, she argued.

“The privilege of permanency in the Security Council extends beyond the use of veto. The “chill factor” of this privilege reaches into many parts of the UN system in ways formal and informal such as preferential treatment for senior UN positions,” Adams declared.

Joseph Chamie, a consulting international demographer and a former director of the UN Population Division, told IPS reform of the United Nations Security Council is not a new proposal; it’s been around for decades.

Despite committees, discussions and calls by many Member States for reform of the Council, he pointed out, little progress has been achieved towards equitable representation, inclusiveness and legitimacy.

“Increasing numbers of both governments and people consider the Council to be ineffectual and unjust and require reform, including expanding membership and restricting vetoes”.

While enormous changes have occurred in the world over the past eight decades, he said, the Council continues to have the same five permanent members.

When established, the five permanent members accounted for about 35 percent of the world’s population. Today, they represent 25 percent and by mid-century they are expected to represent 20 percent of the world’s population, said Chamie, author of numerous publications on population and related issues.

In brief, the desire for reform of the Security Council is both understandable and reasonable and despite the geo-political challenges, reform should be undertaken without further delays, he declared.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Gandhi’s Ramrajya Vs. Modi’s Ramrajya

Jeevan Prabhu At The Indian CurrentsOpinion 0

I mean by Ramarajya-Divine Raj, the kingdom of God. Ramarajya of my dream ensures equal rights alike of Prince and Pauper…. Ramarajya is undoubtedly one of true democracy…. (Young India, September 19, 1929)

On January 22 in Ayodhya, the Prime Minister, Mr Narendra Modi, presided over the Pranapratistha ceremony at the Ram Mandir. In his speech after that, he claimed that the event heralded the birth of a new era. Further, he declared that the foundation for the next thousand years had been laid. The Sangh Parivar, its allies, and sympathisers announced that India is moving towards Ramarajya. The term Ramarajya was close to the heart of Mahatma Gandhi, and it was his vision for an independent India. This article attempts to understand the concept of Ramarajya as used by the Father of the Nation and the reality in India today.

Gandhi’s Idea of Ramarajya

According to Gandhi’s political philosophy, Ramarajya literally means Rajya or reign of Rama. Rama being the seventh avatar of Lord Vishnu, Ramarajya could be understood as the ‘reign of Lord Vishnu or God’. In the common parlance, Ramarajya is a ‘perfect democracy’.

Gandhi wrote in Hind Swaraj in 1929, “By Ramarajya, I do not mean Hindu Raj. I mean by Ramarajya, a Divine Raj, the Kingdom of God. For me, Rama and Rahim are one and the same deity. I acknowledge no other God but the one God of Truth and righteousness.”

Gandhi's Ramrajya Vs Modi's Ramrajya (Medium)For Gandhi, the state embodies a relationship between the government and its citizens. The state unites its people into a community and provides all possible means for its well-being, security and development. The state functions in the common interest without neglecting the last individual’s interest (Anthyodaya). Gandhi’s concept of Ramarajya is inspired by morality, ethics, and spirituality, as Rama is believed to embody all these virtues. Therefore, in Ramarajya, laws are guided by morality, power is decentralised, and the interests of every individual are attended to.

According to Gandhi, religion binds one inextricably to the Truth within and purifies one’s thoughts, intentions and actions. For Gandhi, there is no religion higher than Truth and Righteousness. Religion and morality go hand in hand. Therefore, one who loses morality ceases to be religious. For India, which is heterogeneous, multireligious, and characterised by inter-caste and inter-religious problems, Gandhi proposed the concept of Ramarajya, which is based on morality and virtues. Not one religion’s dominance over other religions. Rama is the embodiment of morality and virtues.

Rama is Truth incarnate. Truth is God. Every religion worships ‘Truth’. Therefore, the end of all religions is Truth. But the means to achieve this end may be varied. Different religions may perceive the Ramarajya in different terms. Muslims may call it ‘Khudai Raj’. For Christians, it is the ‘Kingdom of God’. Or ‘Dharmarajya’ may be a more inclusive word.

In Dharmarajya or Ramarajya, every individual is of great value. No one should be discriminated against on any basis whatsoever. Gandhi was against any social discrimination, so he called for eradicating untouchability. Ramarajya, of his dreams, ensures equal rights to princes and paupers alike.

Features of Gandhi’s Ramarajya:

Gandhi’s Ramarajya is a reign characterised by wisdom, compassion, morality and justice. The following are some of its features:

  • Equal status of all: In Gandhi’s Ramarajya, all individuals are equal regardless of their caste, creed or gender and therefore, all must have equal opportunities and rights.
  • Equal distribution of resources:Gandhi’s Ramarajya is where there are no rich or poor, no class conflict, where there is an equal distribution of national resources, and where there is a self-sufficient economy. The nation’s wealth is to be used to serve the common good. The prosperity of the country should be shared by all its citizens. In such a Ramarajya, the wealthy and powerful would act as trustees and use their resources for the betterment of the poor and the needy.
  • Decentralised Power:Ramarajya of Gandhi advocates local self-government and decentralisation of power. Decisions that affect the local people should be made locally, involving people at the grassroots level.
  • Morality and Spiritual Values:Ramarajya of Gandhi’s dreams is governed by morality and spiritual values. Truth, love, compassion, and forgiveness are characteristic values of every citizen, and an Individual’s conscience should be his or her guiding light.
  • A Just Society:In this Ramarajya, no one is above the law, and all should be treated justly. Self-discipline is the most crucial ingredient of justice. A self-disciplined person respects the rights of others as well.
  • Non-Violence:Non-violence is Ramarajya’s mantra. All violence should be done away with, and all conflicts should be resolved peacefully. Non-violence and Satyagraha are the means to press for one’s rights.
  • Education for Empowerment:For Gandhi, education is essential for the development of individuals and the whole society. He emphasised the importance of holistic education, including intellectual and moral development.

In the background of these features of Gandhi’s Ramarajya, let us cast a bird’s eye view on the Modi’ Ramarajya’Gandhi's Ramrajya Vs Modi's Ramrajya (Federal News) during the past ten years, its relentless attempts with phenomenal success to communalise and polarise the Indian society and how it has undermined the democratic values of the Indian Constitution.

The Ram Mandir movement catapulted the Bharatiya Janatha Party (BJP) to power in 2014. Notwithstanding the promises of efficient and corruption-free governance, the country witnessed a gradual and steady onslaught on its democracy and its institutions. The governance was transformed into totalitarianism with religious hegemony. When Gandhi’s concept of Ramarajya is juxtaposed with that of Mr Narendra Modi, one may get a fair idea of what the Sangh Parivar and its allies meant by Ramarajya and what to expect in the coming years.

  • Poverty and Unemployment:Most of India’s public enterprises have been handed over to corporates. About 10.1% of people have been affected by unemployment. Rising prices of food grains and commodities of daily consumption are soaring to the skies. The lives of rural and urban poor have been reduced to abject poverty. Many young Indians leave the country to pursue education and jobs in foreign lands.

Demonetisation grounded the economy almost to a halt. Sales, traders’ incomes, production, and employment nose-dived. Small producers and traders lacking capital to stay afloat were shut down. India’s multitude of daily wage workers could not find employers with the cash to pay them. Local industries suspended work for lack of money. The informal financial sector, which conducts 40% of India’s total lending, predominantly in rural areas, collapsed.

  • Socio-Economic Inequality:According to Oxfam’s Report “Survival of the Richest: The India story”, the rich have grown richer and the poor poorer over the past decade. Thewealthiest 1% in India now own more than 40% of the country’s total wealth, while the bottom half of the population together share just 3% between 2012 and 2021. The report also highlighted gender inequality in India, stating that female workers earned only 63 paise for every 1 rupee earned by male workers.

The Scheduled Castes and rural workers are the worst affected. They earned only 55% and half of what the advantaged social groups earned, respectively, between 2018 and 2019. Oxfam India stated that the country’s marginalised communities, such as Dalits, Adivasis, Muslims, Women, and informal sector workers, are continuing to suffer in a system that prioritises the survival of the richest.

Thanks to the implementation of GST, the poor in India are paying disproportionately higher taxes and spending more on essential items and services compared to the rich.

  • Standard of Education:In an era of science, technological revolution, and artificial intelligence making inroads into daily lives, the country’s education system is being taken back to primitive times. Everything from science to history is being mythicised in such a primitive manner that India has become a laughing stock at the international level. The following findings of the latest ASER report titled “Beyond Basics” smack at the face of the country with a pathetic scenario of our educational standard.
  1. About 25% of this age group still cannot fluently read a standard II-level text in their regional language. 
  2. More than half struggle with division (3-digit by 1-digit) problems. Only 43.3% of 14-18-year-olds are able to do such problems correctly. This skill is usually expected in Std III-IV. 
  3. A little over half of the surveyed group between 14 and 18 can read sentences in English (57.3%). Almost three-quarters of those who can read sentences in English cannot tell their meanings (73.5%). 
  • Religious Intolerance and Discrimination:Ram, who was an avatar of God, is taking the avatar of a destroyer. Hailed as the ‘Maryadapurusha’ and ‘Purushottama’, Rama’s values have been thrown into the winds. Hatred, intolerance and vilification of minority religions are being disseminated in all possible ways, the media being the leading national channel for this purpose.

The Indian constitution provides for freedom of conscience and the right of all individuals to freely profess, practice, and propagate religion; as a secular state, it requires the state to treat all religions impartially and prohibits discrimination based on religion. But the ground reality is devastating.

  • Thirteen states in the Indian Union have passed laws prohibiting religious conversions for all faiths. Some states have imposed penalties and severe punishments against religious conversions, even for the purpose of marriage.
  • The police and law enforcement authorities have been let loose on minorities in the states like Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. They harass, persecute, penalise and even publicly flog men of minority religions based on allegations. Some state governments have bulldozed Muslim-owned homes and shops following communal violence. A report drafted by a Citizens Committee stated that there were “multiple instances of apparent police complicity” in violent actions against protestors, who were chiefly Muslim, in the Delhi riots in 2020.
  • In its report, the ‘Indian American Muslim Council (IAMC)’ said Christians were “increasingly targeted using these anti-conversion laws,” as “allegations of forced conversion, no matter if false, have led many Christians to be attacked, arrested and detained by police.” In several BJP-ruled states, the Sangh Parivar’s foot soldiers disrupted Christian prayer assemblies, desecrated Christian churches and beat up Christian congregations. The police either witnessed the attacks, sometimes joined the miscreants and finally arrested the Christians alleging conversion.
  • In its annual report, the NGO Human Rights Watch (HRW) said the government “continued its systematic discrimination and stigmatisation of religious and other minorities, particularly Muslims.”
  • United Christian Forum (UCF) said till November 26, 2022, 511 anti-Christian incidents around the country had been reported to its hotline, compared to 505 in all of 2021. It urged the government to take action in response to these incidents. The Modi administration maintained a deafening silence.
  • Religious leaders, academics, political figures, and activists made inflammatory public remarks about religious minorities. The cries of minorities, the anguish of the right-thinking citizens and letters of senior government officials and retired bureaucrats did not cut any ice with the Prime Minister.
  • Justice for all?

The state violates the Constitutional rights to freedom of speech and the right to dissent daily. Any criticism of the ruling dispensation or public disagreement with its policies is construed as ‘anti-national’ and an act of ‘sedition’. Protests or demonstrations are silenced in the name of national interest, and human rights are violated with impunity.

Here are five instances out of the many others that signify the slow but steady withdrawal of the promise of social justice enshrined in the Constitution of India.

  1. Public Lynchings

The public lynching incidents have steadily increased since 2014. Muslims, Dalits and other minorities have been victims of public lynching based on false allegations.

  1. Arrests of Journalists

At least fifty-five journalists have faced arrest and imprisonment for practising their profession and exercising freedom of speech and expression on various issues of national concern. Journalists arrested on charges of sedition during the Modi rule include Siddique Kappan, Prashant Kanojia, Rahul Kulkarni, Dhaval Patel and many others.

III. Misuse of the UAPA

The UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act) has been misused as a weapon to subdue social activists or human rights activists. The Elgar Parishad-Bhima Koregaon case, the arrest of journalists in Kashmir, and the violence against activists in the Delhi riots cases are but a few examples. The incarceration of 83-year-old Stan Swamy and his murder in the police custody has stirred the nation’s conscience.

  1. Police Atrocities

The protest of Students of Jamia Millia Islamia against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) was brutally handled by the Delhi Police. The police were given a free hand to enter the university campus, to thrash the students and to damage university property. JNU also saw a similar ferocity.

  1. The Manipur Ethnic strife

The state-sponsored ethnic cleansing in the BJP-ruled state of Manipur set ablaze the state. The gross human rights violations and wanton killings and pillage are the orchestrated events. The rape, the naked parade and the torture of women of the Kuki tribe are the ultimate blot on Indian democracy. Aren’t these the ‘Sita Matas’ in Modi’s Ramarajya?

If this scenario is the foretaste of Modi’s Ramarajya, one shudders to think what will be the actual Ramarajya that is envisioned by the Sangh Parivar on the occasion of ‘Pranapatishta’ of Ram Mandir at Ayodhya.

Unveiling Trump’s Triumph: The Reign of Extrinsic Values in American Society

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

Numerous analyses attempt to comprehend the ongoing ascent of Donald Trump and the unwavering support he commands, despite the accumulating controversies and legal allegations. While many of these explanations hold weight, there’s one factor, largely overlooked, which could arguably be paramount: Trump reigns supreme in the realm of extrinsics.

Psychologists posit that our values tend to gravitate towards distinct poles termed “intrinsic” and “extrinsic.” Those inclined towards intrinsic values prioritize empathy, intimacy, and self-acceptance, alongside a receptiveness to change and challenge, a commitment to universal rights, equality, and a protective stance towards others and the environment.

On the other hand, individuals leaning towards extrinsic values exhibit a keen attraction to prestige, status, image, fame, power, and wealth. Their motivations revolve around individual rewards and accolades, often manifesting in objectification and exploitation of others, alongside a propensity for rudeness, aggression, and disregard for societal and environmental welfare.

Donald Trump epitomizes extrinsic values in myriad ways, from the ostentatious towers bearing his name to exaggerated claims of wealth, incessant rhetoric about winners and losers, and reported instances of cheating at golf. His objectification of women, including his daughter, his fixation on physical attributes like hand size, and his disdain for public service, human rights, and environmental concerns further underscore his allegiance to extrinsic values.

Unveiling Trump's Triumph The Reign of Extrinsic Values in American Society

Our values aren’t innate; they’re shaped by societal cues and norms, and the political landscape we inhabit plays a crucial role. Under oppressive political systems, individuals tend to internalize extrinsic values, perpetuating a cycle of insecurity and unmet needs, fostering a breeding ground for further exploitation.

Since Ronald Reagan’s tenure, marked by societal divisions and a lack of public support mechanisms, U.S. politics has increasingly embraced extrinsic values. Even Democratic administrations, influenced by neoliberal principles, have struggled to reverse this trend, inadvertently bolstering support for right-wing ideologies.

Beyond politics, the U.S. has long championed extrinsic values, epitomized by the American dream of wealth acquisition and conspicuous consumption. Cultural narratives promoting success at any cost, alongside rampant consumerism and media fixation on fame, further entrench extrinsic values in society.

Blaming individuals for their misfortunes has become a hallmark of this shift, exemplified by punitive measures against rough sleepers, who are criminalized for their destitution, often exacerbated by government policies.

Beneath societal polarization and the mental health crisis lies a fundamental shift in values, wherein the pursuit of status, wealth, and dominance engenders widespread frustration and resentment. In a culture glorifying winners, the blame for societal discontent often falls on those advocating for a more equitable world.

Trump’s potential reelection hinges not only on factors like racial resentment or culture wars but also on deeply entrenched values that shape individuals’ perceptions and choices.

Trump’s appeal lies in his embodiment of extrinsic values, perpetuated by societal norms and political dynamics, which fuel resentment and division. Understanding this phenomenon is crucial in navigating and addressing the underlying causes of societal dysfunction.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/29/donald-trump-americans-us-culture-republican

Restoring the Inclusive Idea of India in the Times of Sectarian Nationalism

Ram PuniyaniCulture, Opinion 0

Satyapal Malik, the ex-Governor of many states stated that the role of Pulwama and Balakot was very much there in the victory of Modi-BJP in the previous 2019 General elections. He also predicted some other major spectacle may happen before the 2024 elections. The hysteria created around the temple consecration is a spectacle of high order. At the same time Suranya Aiyer, a lawyer and author has undertaken a fast and penitence, calling it 72 hours of love and sorrow to fellow Muslims. She proclaims her pride in Mughal heritage. One can see the creation of a stifling atmosphere of divisiveness around, which sounds very intimidating.

As such temple inaugurations have also been occasions of promoting communal harmony as a couple of instances will show. Mahatma Gandhi while inaugurating Laxminarayan Temple (Birla Temple) in Delhi in 1939 had stated, “It must be the daily prayer of every adherent of the Hindu faith…that every known religion of the world should grow from day to day and should serve the whole of humanity…I hope that these temples will serve to propagate the idea of equal respect for religions and to make communal jealousies and strife; things of the past.”

More or less on similar lines Swami Vivekananda had earlier stated, (1997) ““it is here in India that Hindus have built and are still building churches for Christians and mosques for Mohammedans.” In his book ‘Lectures from Colombo to Almora’ we see Swamiji stating “Nay more, to understand that not only should we be charitable, but also positively helpful to each other, however different our religious ideas and convictions may be. And that is exactly what we do in India as I have just related to you… That is the thing to do.”

The present atmosphere is in total contrast to this as reflected by the fast of Suranya. It is also reflected in the incidents where cultural activists screening censor approved all time classic by Anand Patwardhan, ‘Ram Ke Naam’ are being arrested and issued non bailable arrest warrants. This happened in Hyderabad on 20th January.

Then there are claims by the likes of Prafulla Ketkar, Editor of unofficial RSS mouthpiece Organiser claiming that “the pran-pratishta (consecration ceremony) of Ram Lalla in Ayodhya was not simply the culmination of the decades-old Ram Janmabhoomi movement, but the beginning of a “reconstruction of national consciousness”. This essentially means the whole process of social change and the idea of India which accompanied the freedom movement now stands to be negated and what can roughly called ‘Hindu India’ is already there and multiple steps towards Hindu rashtra have been achieved by the communal forces.

What accompanied the ‘Idea of India’ was a coming together of different sections of society to fight the colonial powers, with the aspirations of striving for Liberty Equality, Fraternity and Justice for all. This massive movement had the overarching ‘Idea of India’, which culminated in the values of Indian Constitution.

There were challenges to this idea of India, which were rooted in the values of Kingdoms and what can be roughly called feudal society. The core of these values which are being hailed by the forces creating hysteria around temple consecration were/are the birth based hierarchies of caste, class and gender. The roots of these lay in the Kings and landlords of different religions and their ideologues who came forward as Muslim League, Hindu Mahasabah and RSS. While Muslim communal forces are implementing their idea of feudal values in Pakistan, the Hindu communal forces are now rejoicing, in gradually increasing intensity, now reaching its semi-peak with Ram Temple consecration.

The idea of India of freedom movement got manifested in the values of Bhagat Singh, Ambedkar and Gandhi focusing on Liberty Equality and Fraternity or friendship. Despite few differences with the father of Nation, Subhash Chandra Bose was also firmly committed to this “idea of India’.

The elite landlord and Manusmiriti worshipping ideology was the social base of Hindu Rashtra, Hindutva. These forces and this ideology have grown stronger particularly during last four decades and are rejoicing the sectarianism becoming stronger by the day. They are also giving narrow projection of the temple consecration in contrast to what Gandhi and Vivekananda stood. The sectarian nationalists are for the further deepening of particular ‘civilizational values’ inherent in what can be called as Brahmanism inherent in Manusmriti.

Those standing for doing away with the values of Manusmriti, those integrating all into the umbrella of Indian-ness, those who have stood together cutting across class, caste and gender are currently under different types of intimidations of Hindu India, the parallel and opposite of Muslim Pakistan are emerging.

The only ray of hope for ‘idea of India’ is the same classes of society who ushered in the Idea of India during freedom movement to come together. It is their collective movement; the overarching effort to undermine the forces which gloat over the birth based hierarchical values in the name of religion, those who uphold the Holy Scriptures in contrast to the Indian Constitution. Their movements have been scattered. Their group interests may be different but their interests in protecting the Indian Constitution and Idea of India which emerged during freedom movements does need a collective expression, cutting across the groups- party lines.

Many non sectarian parties do exist today. The predecessors of many of these had fought the British colonial powers together despite their differences. It is time that the social and political alliance of these sections of society given primacy. As colonial rule was detrimental to the interests of large sections of society, similarly those in power ruling through polarization are also out to undermine the rights of weaker sections of society. This is abundantly clear during the last ten years or so.

Hysteria cannot be combated by hysteria. We need the ideology which binds the weaker sections of society, the dalits, religious minorities, women, workers and Adivasis. They have many common values to protect and that is the ‘Idea of India’ which came with freedom movement. Can Bharat Jodo Nyay Yatra be the first step in building such a common platform, can the yatra succeed in doing this is the question baying us all?

Overcoming Envy: The Power of Positive Self-Talk and Personal Definition of Success

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

“What am I doing wrong?” This nagging question echoed persistently in my mind. A recent revelation about a friend’s thriving business left me pondering. Their numbers dwarfed mine in every aspect.

“My newsletter had tens of thousands of subscribers. His had a hundred thousand. My podcast got thousands of downloads. His got millions.”

Comparing our material possessions exacerbated the situation. He flaunted a larger house, a swankier car, seemingly more success. But this fixation on his apparent triumphs was eroding my contentment, albeit temporarily. I realized I was ensnared by envy.

However, this wasn’t an isolated incident. I found myself repeatedly ensnared in the same trap. Hence, I devised a straightforward mental framework to extricate myself whenever these feelings resurfaced.

In these moments of envy, I uttered a concise two-word mantra to myself: “Don’t compare.”

The simplicity of this phrase belies its effectiveness. It draws from principles of psychology and emotional intelligence, offering a means to navigate and manage emotions effectively.

“Why is this phrase so effective? And how can it help you manage your feelings and emotions, when you start to feed the envy animal? Here’s a breakdown.”

Decades of scholarly research underscore the potential benefits of self-talk, the internal dialogue shaping one’s thoughts, emotions, and actions. The key lies in fostering a positive self-narrative.

While critical self-talk may be inevitable, its duration is within our control. By infusing positivity into our inner dialogue, we can reshape our perceptions and responses. This shift in mindset is crucial, a concept I refer to as the blue dolphin rule.

The mantra “don’t compare” proves invaluable in curbing envy. It serves as a poignant reminder:

“No matter how good things are going, there will always be someone who ‘appears’ to be doing better.”

These appearances can be deceptive, concealing unseen challenges and adversities. Moreover, others’ achievements hold no sway over our happiness.

In tandem with this mantra, I employ a two-pronged framework:

  1. Define success.

It is incumbent upon us to delineate our own metrics of success, independent of others’ benchmarks.

By discerning our goals and priorities, we avoid the perennial pursuit of others’ ideals. This pursuit not only breeds dissatisfaction but also tempts us to compromise our values.

  1. Strive to be the best you can be.

Embrace your uniqueness; it sets you apart.

Your distinct strengths, experiences, and style are your assets. Embrace them wholeheartedly, for they attract those aligned with your vision.

In essence, the next time envy rears its head, remember the tenets of positive self-talk and affirm to yourself:

“Don’t compare.”

This practice not only propels you towards your vision of success but also cultivates enduring happiness along the way.

Shades of Divinity: Debating the Complexion of Lord Ram in Contemporary Politics

Staff ReporterOpinion, Religion 0

“He possesses a voice reminiscent of the resonating tones of a dundubhi (kettledrum). His skin exudes a radiant glow, brimming with splendor. His physique is robust and square-built, with symmetrically proportioned limbs. He is adorned with a dark complexion.”

In the Sundara Kanda of Valmiki Ramayan, when Sita challenges Hanuman to demonstrate his knowledge of Ram and Lakshman, this is his eloquent reply. The repetitive emphasis on Ram’s dark skin appears consistently in various versions of the Ramayana. However, scriptures don’t always mirror the lived reality. In a world marked by diversities, where the struggle between great and little traditions persists, Ram is at times portrayed in blue, black, and occasionally even in white or green.

The question of Ram’s skin color becomes pertinent in a country predominantly inhabited by people labeled as ‘brown’ by the West. In the case of the most politically active deity of the century, who himself engaged in a legal battle to secure rights over his birthplace, the debate over his depiction takes on broader political implications.

The controversy emerged when three renowned sculptors from different regions were commissioned to create a 51-inch idol of five-year-old Ram lalla for the sanctum sanctorum of the Ram Mandir. Ganesh Bhatt and Arun Yogiraj sculpted the idol from bluish-grey stone known as Shyam-Shila, sourced from Karnataka. On the other hand, Satyanarayan Pandey fashioned a white idol from the makrana marble of Rajasthan.

Union Minister Prahlad Joshi announced on January 1, through a tweet, that Yogiraj’s idol would be installed in the consecration ceremony. However, reports suggested that during a meeting on December 22, a few senior trust members favored Pandey’s ‘Shweta’ version, despite 11 members supporting Yogiraj’s idol. Does the color of the idol hold significance in contemporary politics? Hindu saints and scholars argue that diverse interpretations lead to varied perceptions and, consequently, multiple depictions.

This isn’t the first instance of Ram being portrayed as white. Various television adaptations, including the widely popular one by Ramanand Sagar, depict Ram as anything but dark. Even when depicted differently, he is often shown in blue. Mythologist and author Devdutt Pattanaik points out the preference for blue over black, stating, “We had gods who were always pink, demons who were always brown, and dark gods who were always blue. Indra, Brahma, and Durga were pink, Asuras and Rakshasas were brown. Vishnu, Ram, and Krishna were blue.” He attributes this preference to the symbolism of blue representing the sky, ether, and divinity.

Discussing the blue depiction of Ram, Deepam Chatterjee, author of The Millennial Yogi, notes, “Blue depicts the infinite. It is the color of the clear day sky and of the deep sea. Divinity is often depicted as infinity. Hence, depictions of Lord Rama as blue are symbolic of his divine nature.” Referring to the Bhakti literature tradition, Chatterjee adds that Ram is called “Nīlameghashyama”—the one with the complexion.

Dr. Thomas Abraham on LinkedIn: GLOBAL ORGANIZATION OF PEOPLE OF INDIAN ORIGIN (GOPIO) INC.

Staff ReporterCommunity, Opinion 0

A Tribute to the Late Prod. Ved Prakash Nanda By Dr. Thomas Abraham, Chairman, GOPIO International Prof. Nanda was a good friend. He was a patriotic Indian. I have had an opportunity to work with him closely since 1981 when I took up a job at the University of Denver where Prof. Nanda was already working at the law school. Since then, we worked together on many community campaigns. We jointly did a couple Indian-American fundraising campaigns for candidates running for elections in Colorado in the 1980s.        Other than his professional contribution as a professor of law and a leading legal expert, he stood out for his contribution to the Indian Diaspora community for the last five decades.   Other than what others spoke earlier, Prof. Nanda’s had made major contribution to the mainstream Indian community organizations. At our First Global Convention of People of Indian Origin in 1989 in New York City, Prof. Nanda was entrusted to come up with a structure for a global Indian Diaspora organization. He helped to draft the constitution and bylaws of the Global Organization of People Indian Origin (GOPIO). He had attended many of our early steering committee meetings and conventions in the USA, Europe and India.   He was also a frequent speaker at the conventions organized by the National Federation of Indian American Associations (NFIA) held in different US cities.   After our First GOPIO Convention in 1989 in New York, he had chaired GOPIO Human Rights Council and successfully campaigned on the human rights violation of Indo-Sri Lankans and Indo-Fijians at the UN Human Rights Commission in 1991 and 1992 in Geneva.   He made substantial contribution to build Indian American community’s infrastructure through national organizations for the last five decades. His passing away is a great loss for our community.   GOPIO International and its chapters convey our heartfelt condolences to Nanda family and particularly Anjali and her family. We will miss him in our midst. May his soul rest in peace. Like a bird singing in the rain, let grateful thoughts prevail at this time. In fact, we are now celebrating his life for his contribution to Indian Diaspora, India and society at large.

https://lnkd.in/e4pkY-bT

Navigating the Swings of American Favorability: A Historical Perspective

Staff ReporterGlobal, Opinion 0

If we examine the trajectory of American favorability on the global stage since World War II, two significant troughs emerge: the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the election of Donald Trump thirteen years later.

These moments, though seemingly disparate, share a common thread, portraying an America characterized by testosterone-driven decisions, bluster, xenophobia, and nativism—a nation that adheres to a “my way or the highway” ethos. In essence, theyrepresent 21st-century incarnations of the Ugly American stereotype from the 1950s.

During the Trump Administration from 2017 to 2020, U.S. favorability witnessed a decline across major global regions, especially among key security and trade partners. The country’s favorability ratings plummeted from the 70s to the 20s and 30s. Under Joe Biden’s leadership, there was a significant effort to rebuild international credibility, bringing the median favorability rating to 62%. However, recent events, particularly America’s stance on the Israel-Hamas conflict, have reignited anti-American sentiments worldwide.

President Biden acknowledged concerns about diminishing global support for the U.S. and Israel during a campaign event in December. Subsequently, a UN General Assembly vote in favor of a ceasefire in Gaza, with only 10 states, including the U.S., opposing, signaled a potential resurgence of global anti-Americanism.

The apprehension about America’s image globally is deeply ingrained in the nation’s history. Dating back to 1630, John Winthrop envisioned America as a “city on a hill,” emphasizing the scrutiny of the world’s eyes. The Founders, cognizant of the opinions of mankind, meticulously crafted a narrative that projected America as both a revolutionary force and a model for the existing world order.

Over the centuries, America’s global reputation has fluctuated, from a revolutionary upstart to a global superpower. The Cold War era cast a shadow on America’s image, characterized by perceived brutishness and heavy-handedness, diverging from the ideals it purportedly stood for. The post-Soviet era marked the U.S. as the lone superpower, promoting the “Washington Consensus” of democratic free-market capitalism for global prosperity and security.

However, the goodwill garnered from this era waned after the invasion of Iraq post-9/11. The present echoes of global disapproval surrounding America’s unwavering support for Israel parallel the aftermath of the Iraq invasion.

Public Diplomacy, as defined by Harvard professor Joe Nye, embodies “soft power”—influence through culture, music, movies, and ideas. The author, having served as President Obama’s Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy, emphasizes the impact of cultural influence on international perceptions. Yet, during times of controversial policy decisions, such as the Iraq invasion or the Trump administration’s “Muslim ban,” American soft power loses ground.

The author cites an example of declining Coca-Cola sales after the Iraq invasion, highlighting a Pew survey noting global dislike for the spread of U.S. ideas and customs. Presently, social media depicts Arab boycotts of American companies, symbolized by images of empty McDonald’s, Starbucks, and Domino’s outlets across the Middle East.

Navigating the Swings of American Favorability A Historical Perspective

 

The Obama administration brought a shift in Brand America, aligning it with innovation and technological prowess. However, the election of Donald Trump reversed this trend, contributing to a decline in global favorability. The U.S. experienced a notable hit during the COVID-19 pandemic, revealing a lack of manufacturing capabilities despite being the birthplace of technological innovations like the iPhone.

Biden’s presidency saw a gradual recovery in global favorability, yet challenges persist. The author underscores the indelible global image of the Capitol attack on January 6th, characterizing it as a negative-Statue of Liberty. While U.S. favorability has improved to a median of 62% across 12 nations, it no longer resonates as a model for democracy. Only 17% consider the U.S. a good example, a significant drop from the previous 57%.

The Israel-Hamas conflict has further complicated America’s image, with Israel perceived as an oppressor and the U.S. as its enabler. The strategy of normalizing relations with Sunni nations while marginalizing Palestinians has backfired, and America is losing ground in the messaging battlespace, particularly in Arab nations.

The global landscape is witnessing an existential struggle between the Western rules-based order and the Chinese/Russian might-makes-right approach. China and Russia advocate for a sphere-of-influence diplomacy, challenging the democratic ideals upheld by the U.S. This shift is part of a broader global decline in democracy, as evidenced by the decrease in the number of democratic countries over the last fifteen years.

The author highlights the contrast between the Enlightenment principles of democratic self-government and individual rights and the 21st-century authoritarianism of China and Russia. As the world grapples with this ideological struggle, the U.S. faces internal challenges, with a significant minority supporting an authoritarian leader and a growing appetite for an American “strongman.”

The article concludes by acknowledging America’s unique foundation based on uncommon ideas rather than common blood or religion. The nation’s commitment to universal human rights, even in the face of difficult choices, remains a defining aspect. However, the global narrative surrounding American exceptionalism is evolving, and the U.S. must confront the current reality where hard power choices overshadow its historical advantage in soft power.

This adaptation is derived from a speech given to the Virginia Civil Rights Law Institute.

https://time.com/6553202/resurgence-global-anti-americanism-essay/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=sfmc&utm_campaign=newsletter+brief+default+ac&utm_content=+++20240113+++body&et_rid=207017761&lctg=207017761

Puri Shankaracharya Addresses Concerns on Political Interference in Religious Affairs

Staff ReporterReligion, Opinion 0

Reaffirming his stance against participating in the ‘Pran Pratishtha’ of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya on January 22, Puri Shankaracharya Swami Nischalananda Saraswati emphasized the undesirability of political interference in religious and spiritual matters. He asserted that even the Constitution does not permit such intrusion. The Shankaracharya spoke out against the encroachment of politicians into realms governed by religious and spiritual regulations, labeling it as both irrational and a violation of constitutional principles.

In a statement made at the Ganga Sagar Mela in West Bengal, where he attended the annual ritualistic bath for Makar Sankranti, Swami Nischalananda Saraswati elaborated on the need for politicians to respect their constitutional limits. He stressed, “Politicians have their limits and they have responsibility under the Constitution. There are rules and restrictions in religious and spiritual domain and these rules should be followed. Interfering in every area by politicians is insanity. This is also a heinous crime according to the Constitution.”

Acknowledging his own limitations as a Shankaracharya, he explained the boundaries that dictate where he can go, what he can involve himself in, and even what he can eat. He specifically addressed the ‘murti pratishtha’ (consecration of idols) and underscored that established rules based on scriptures should be adhered to, especially by the head of state or the Prime Minister.

“Overstepping these rules for propagating one’s name is an act of rebellion against God… and going down the path of destruction,” Puri Shankaracharya warned. Despite clarifying that he harbors no resentment towards Ayodhya and occasionally visits, he firmly stated his decision not to partake in the ‘Pran Pratishtha’ of the Ram Mandir on January 22.

Swami Nischalananda Saraswati emphasized that there exists unanimity among the four Shankaracharyas regarding attending the inauguration ceremony of the Ram Mandir on August 22. He clarified that he does not dissuade anyone from participating in the event.

While expressing his lack of displeasure with the central government, the religious leader did express regret over the invitation to the inauguration ceremony of the Ram Temple. He revealed that he was asked to attend with a colleague, a condition he found disagreeable. The Shankaracharya lamented the fact that despite the religious and spiritual eminence of the Shankaracharyas, they were not granted access to the ‘garbhgriha sanctum sanctorum’ of the temple but were instructed to stay outside. “This is not acceptable to me. I do not like the prospect of watching the inauguration of the Ram Temple by sitting at the event and clapping,” he asserted.

Swami Nischalananda Saraswati also drew attention to certain irregularities within the country’s political system, highlighting how politicians often seek votes by capitalizing on the distress of the population.

When asked about the Ganga Sagar Mela potentially receiving the status of a ‘National Mela,’ the religious leader responded humorously, suggesting that West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee’s habit of gifting kurtas to the Prime Minister might influence such a decision. He remarked, “If she makes the requests while offering these gifts, the Prime Minister might agree and declare the Ganga Sagar Mela a National Mela.”

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/political-interference-not-desirable-in-religious-events-says-puri-shankaracharya/article67738571.ece

Congress Launches Bharat Jodo Nyay Yatra, Decrying ‘Era of Injustice’ under Modi’s Rule

Staff ReporterOpinion, Nation 0

In a bid to underscore what they term the “anyay kaal [era of injustice]” during the past decade of the Narendra Modi-led government, the Congress party officially announced the commencement of the Bharat Jodo Nyay Yatra from Manipur to Mumbai. Speaking at a press conference in Manipur’s capital, Jairam Ramesh, the chief of Congress communications, emphasized that the primary challenge facing the nation is an ideology characterized by polarization, economic disparities, and political authoritarianism.

Ramesh clarified that the purpose of the yatra is not electoral but rather focused on safeguarding and upholding Constitutional values. He criticized Prime Minister Modi’s portrayal of a utopian ‘amrit kaal’ (golden era), contrasting it with the harsh reality of the last decade, which he labeled as ‘anyay kaal’ (era of injustice). Ramesh stated, “The Prime Minister shows the golden dreams of ‘amrit kaal,’ but what is the reality of the last 10 years — ‘anyay kaal.’ No mention of ‘anyay kaal’ is made while big boasts of ‘amrit kaal’ are projected.”

The press conference also featured the presence of former Manipur Chief Minister OkramIbobi Singh, State party chief KeishamMeghachandra Singh, and Congress Working Committee member Gaikhangam.

Ramesh emphasized that the Bharat Jodo Nyay Yatra is an “ideological yatra” focused on highlighting the political, economic, and social injustices of the past decade. The yatra is set to cover a distance exceeding 6,500 km, passing through 100 Lok Sabha constituencies across 15 states. These states collectively account for 355 of the 543 Lok Sabha seats. Congress chief Mallikarjun Kharge will flag off the yatra from a private ground in Manipur’s Thoubal district, deviating from the initial plan to start from Imphal. The yatra is scheduled to conclude in Mumbai on March 20, following a 67-day journey primarily on a customized bus, with occasional foot marches covering five to seven km stretches.

The Congress party justified the initiation of the Bharat Jodo Nyay Yatra by pointing out that the government had not provided opportunities to raise critical issues in Parliament. According to the party, the yatra aims to re-establish the fundamental principles of justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity enshrined in the Constitution.

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/bharat-jodo-nyay-yatra-is-to-highlight-the-anyay-kaal-of-the-modi-led-government-congress/article67738774.ece

Understanding the Persistent Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Comprehensive Analysis

Staff ReporterDiplomacy, Opinion 0

If one has delved into the intricate history of the modern Middle East and closely monitored the developments in the region, forming opinions on the enduring conflict between Israeli Jews and Palestinians becomes almost second nature. However, for those not well-versed in this complex history and only tuning in during times of crisis, a common question arises: Why has the resolution of differences between Israelis and Palestinians been so elusive? Drawing parallels with successful reconciliations in other parts of the world, such as post-World War II relations between America, Germany, and Japan, or the peaceful transformations in South Africa and Northern Ireland, prompts the inquiry into the reasons behind the ongoing strife in the Holy Land.

To shed light on this issue, let’s delve into the top five reasons why the Israeli-Palestinian conflict persists, causing loss of innocent lives, regional destabilization, and a disproportionate drain on Washington’s political resources, perpetuating fear, suffering, and injustice.

  1. Indivisible Objectives:

At the core of the conflict lies a fundamental structural problem – both Israelis and Palestinian nationalists lay claim to and aspire to control the same piece of territory. This situation, known in international relations as an “indivisibility” problem, makes resolution challenging when both parties vehemently believe in the righteousness of their cause. The contested status of Jerusalem, a sacred site for three major religions, adds complexity to the issue. Despite various proposals for sharing the land over the past century, the voices advocating compromise have been stifled by those demanding the entirety of the disputed territory, illustrating the inherent challenges within nationalist movements.

  1. The Security Dilemma:

The conflict is compounded by a severe security dilemma stemming from the first problem and the small size of the disputed territory. Zionist leaders, recognizing the difficulty of establishing a Jewish-controlled state with a significant Arab minority, resorted to acts of ethnic cleansing during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War and again in 1967. The expansionist impulse, driven by Israel’s vulnerable geography and small population, led to the retention of the West Bank and Golan Heights post-1967, creating a demographic problem. The pursuit of a “Greater Israel” clashes with democratic principles, leaving the least undesirable option – giving up a substantial portion of controlled territory for a two-state solution.

  1. Unhelpful Outsiders:

The involvement of third parties with self-interested interventions has fueled and prolonged the conflict. From Britain’s mismanagement in the interwar period to the United States and the Soviet Union arming respective sides during the Cold War, external influences have often been counterproductive. Interventions by Iran, backing groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, further complicated the situation, deflecting attention from resolving the core Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

  1. Extremists:

Extremists on both sides have consistently undermined well-intentioned efforts for peace. The Oslo peace process in the 1990s faced challenges from suicide bombings by Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The opposition to a two-state solution, notably exemplified by Benjamin Netanyahu, has impeded progress. Netanyahu’s covert support for Hamas aimed to weaken the moderate Palestinian Authority interested in a two-state solution, culminating in tragic events on Oct. 7.

  1. The Israel Lobby:

Groups like AIPAC, the Anti-Defamation League, and Christians United for Israel, while not solely responsible, have impeded progress. By shaping a one-sided view of the conflict within the American body politic, these groups obstructed serious attempts by U.S. presidents to bring about a resolution. Despite public commitments by Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama to a two-state solution, the lack of meaningful pressure on Israel hindered progress, leading to successive Israeli governments avoiding compromise.

Each of these five factors, alone a formidable obstacle, collectively contributes to the prolonged Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The tragedy extends to both Israelis and Palestinians, with the latter bearing the greatest losses. Furthermore, the present actions of Israel in the Gaza war raise concerns about global repercussions, potentially fueling antisemitism and implicating the United States in a moral and strategic quagmire. As the conflict persists, the prospects for a timely resolution seem increasingly remote, posing a challenge to the region’s stability and global peace.

Nikki Haley Seeks to Surpass Expectations in Iowa Caucuses, Emerging as Top Contender Against Trump in Republican Primary

Staff ReporterCommunity, Opinion 0

Nikki Haley aims to exceed expectations in the upcoming Iowa caucuses, positioning herself as a formidable challenger to former President Trump in the Republican presidential primary. Recent weeks have witnessed a surge in Haley’s poll numbers and fundraising efforts, prompting increased attention and scrutiny from Trump, indicative of concerns about her growing influence.

As of now, Trump maintains a substantial lead in Iowa, raising uncertainties about Haley’s ability to generate enough momentum to carry into the subsequent New Hampshire primary. According to The Hill/Decision Desk HQ polling average, Trump commands 51.6 percent support in Iowa, with DeSantis trailing at 18 percent and Haley closely behind at 17.1 percent.

Matthew Bartlett, a New Hampshire-based Republican strategist, emphasizes the significance of outperforming expectations in Iowa, stating, “It would always be great for someone to outperform expectations in Iowa, and right now Trump’s expectations are a resounding win.”

However, strategists anticipate that New Hampshire and Haley’s home state of South Carolina will play crucial roles in her campaign’s trajectory. In New Hampshire, Trump leads with 41.6 percent, followed by Haley at 29.7 percent, Chris Christie at 10.9 percent, and DeSantis at 7.4 percent. Bartlett suggests that if Trump fails to secure over 50 percent in New Hampshire, a strong showing by Haley could reshape the narrative of the race.

Addressing the dynamics between the two states, Haley hinted at the correction of Iowa’s results during a recent visit to New Hampshire, a statement that drew criticism. Doug Heye, a national Republican strategist, notes that Iowa often serves to “winnow the field,” emphasizing the greater importance of New Hampshire and South Carolina.

While Haley currently leads DeSantis in South Carolina polling, Trump holds a commanding lead with 53.6 percent support, leaving uncertainty about Haley’s ability to surpass him in her home state. Some South Carolina Republicans believe that the outcome in their state could be influenced by events in New Hampshire.

Alex Stroman, a South Carolina Republican strategist, suggests, “If she’s able to win in New Hampshire, I think it really sets up a true battle royal in South Carolina.”

Despite challenges, Haley’s allies maintain optimism about her multiple paths forward. Preya Samsundar, spokesperson for the pro-Haley Stand for America PAC, asserts, “I think they’re all states that we want to win. Nikki is not playing for second. She’s said that over and over again. At the end of the day Nikki has so many pathways to moving forward.”

Trump has signaled his perception of Haley as a threat, evident in recent campaign ads targeting her in New Hampshire. The ads focus on immigration issues, portraying Haley’s perceived weakness against Trump’s claimed strength. Additionally, a pro-Trump super PAC has released an ad featuring past remarks from Haley, highlighting her stance on describing immigrants crossing the border as “criminals.”

Haley is beginning to reveal her strategy for a one-on-one matchup against Trump, taking a more aggressive stance during a CNN town hall in Iowa. She emphasized the need for stability, asserting, “We can’t have a country in disarray and a world on fire and go through four more years of chaos. We won’t survive it.”

In contrast to Trump’s approach, Haley concentrates on counterpunching rather than direct attacks. Haley’s focus is on running her own race and providing truthful responses when necessary. Matthew Bartlett notes, “That is a position of strength. That is somebody that is saying, ‘I’m not going to start it, but I’m certainly not going to take it.’”

However, Republicans caution Haley against falling into Trump’s provocations, drawing parallels with past candidates like Marco Rubio, whose campaigns faltered after direct confrontations with Trump. Bartlett advises, “Remember, when you roll around in the mud with a pig, you both get dirty, but the pig likes it. Donald Trump wants that.”

Haley faces competition not only from Trump but also from DeSantis, who is actively challenging her in the race. The two will engage in a one-on-one debate in Iowa, providing insight into their dynamic. DeSantis has criticized Haley for ties to big-dollar donors and labeled her as “phony,” while Haley has countered by scrutinizing DeSantis’ positions on China.

The upcoming debate will be a pivotal moment for both candidates. Despite potential challenges, Haley has proven her debating prowess in previous encounters, gaining appreciation from voters. Bartlett observes, “It seems as if voters appreciate that.”

Hindu Temples in San Francisco Bay Area Face Vandalism, Prompts

Staff ReporterCommunity, Opinion 0

Call for Increased Security

In the span of two weeks, three Hindu temples in the San Francisco Bay Area have fallen victim to acts of vandalism, raising concerns among Hindu advocates about the safety and security of temples across the United States. The incidents have prompted a call for heightened vigilance and security measures within the Hindu community.

On January 5, Vijay’s Sherawali Temple in Hayward, California, experienced an act of vandalism when the entrance sign was spray-painted with the phrases “Modi is a terrorist” and “Khalistan Zindabad” (Khalistan Forever). Khalistan represents the aspiration of Sikh separatists for an independent state carved out of the Indian state of Punjab. This incident follows an earlier burglary at the Shiv Durga Temple of Santa Clara on January 1, where three perpetrators were captured on camera stealing gold jewelry from the temple’s idols and donation boxes.

Sunil Khanna, president of the Santa Clara temple’s board, expressed shock at the incident, emphasizing the community’s belief that temples are invulnerable. He highlighted the emotional impact, stating, “The main thing that hurt all of us was how they misbehaved with the gods.”

The Shree Swaminarayan Temple in Newark, California, faced a different form of desecration on December 23, with a vulgarity aimed at Narendra Modi, India’s prime minister, defacing the premises. Jonathan Arguello, police captain for the city of Newark, indicated that the act appeared to be targeted, leading to a commitment to a thorough investigation.

These attacks are part of a concerning trend of anti-Hindu hate crimes, according to Ramya Ramakrishnan of the Hindu American Foundation. She noted the impact on community members, saying, “This is supposed to be a safe place where you go to pray and get peace of mind. But this holy and sacred space is now being violated.”

The recent wave of vandalism follows previous incidents, including an attack on the Indian Consulate in San Francisco and the vandalism of a Mahatma Gandhi statue in New York. These occurrences point to a growing pattern of anti-Hindu sentiments and actions.

The incidents also coincide with charges by the U.S. Department of Justice in November, accusing an Indian government official of plotting to murder Sikh separatist leader Gurpatwant Singh Pannun in New York. The Canadian prime minister’s office had earlier accused India of involvement in the assassination of Sikh separatist leader Hardeep Singh Nijjar.

Pro-Khalistani vandalism has been ongoing since at least March 2023 when protesters in San Francisco entered the Indian Consulate, displaying Khalistani flags. A subsequent arson attack in July further highlighted the issue. Despite these incidents, law enforcement has emphasized the criminal nature of vandalism against diplomatic facilities without explicitly addressing Sikh separatism.

Anti-Khalistani activist Puneet Sahani highlighted the need for the Hindu and Sikh communities to address separatist sentiments, referencing a 2021 incident in Queens where Khalistani rhetoric was spray-painted. Sahani expressed concern that Hindu organizations might avoid speaking out against the Khalistan movement due to fears of being labeled anti-Sikh. He emphasized the importance of addressing extremists within the community.

Ramakrishnan pointed out that Hinduphobia is yet to be fully recognized by law enforcement, calling for increased federal-level efforts. While local authorities have responded promptly to recent crimes, she stressed the need for broader recognition and swifter action, comparing the incidents to potential reactions if they had occurred in synagogues or mosques.

The Hindu American Foundation, the largest Hindu advocacy organization in the U.S., regularly provides resources for temples to enhance security measures. These resources include a manual with information on safety assessments, education on security measures ranging from CCTV cameras to alarms, and a call for reporting all incidents to prevent Hinduphobia-related crimes from going unnoticed.

“We really want our Hindu community to be aware that this is happening in your backyard,” Ramakrishnan said. “Not to be afraid, but to face this. We need to be united as a community.”

Sunil Khanna, determined to rebuild, aims to lead a consortium for Bay Area Hindu temples, advocating for recognition of the community’s unity in the face of these attacks. He emphasized resilience, stating, “No temple should close their doors… This is a time to stand up and rebel against the negative forces.”

Pope Francis Urges Unity Amidst Church Discontent and Emphasizes Compassion for the Marginalized

Staff ReporterReligion, Opinion 0

In the face of opposition from conservative factions within the Catholic Church, Pope Francis delivered a message of unity, cautioning against the fragmentation of the faithful based on personal ideologies. The pontiff issued this plea during his homily at St. Peter’s Basilica on Epiphany Day, the final significant celebration of the Christmas season.

In his address, Pope Francis specifically discouraged the adoption of “ecclesiastical ideologies” and urged believers to transcend such divisions. He emphasized the need to avoid forming groups rooted in individual ideas, urging unity and a focus on shared faith. The Pope’s words served as a response to internal resistance within the Church, particularly regarding recent policy decisions.

Last month, Pope Francis granted permission for priests to bless couples outside of traditional marriages, including same-sex relationships. However, this move was met with opposition from some conservative bishops who labeled the Pope’s stance as dangerously progressive. In response to the pushback, the Vatican issued a statement earlier this week, clarifying that the blessings did not constitute heresy, and there were no doctrinal grounds to reject the practice.

While Pope Francis did not explicitly reference the controversy surrounding same-sex blessings in his Epiphany homily, he did deviate from the prepared text to emphasize the broader need to abandon ecclesiastical ideologies. The pontiff underscored the importance of ensuring that faith does not become a mere collection of religious devotions or outward appearances.

“We find the God who comes down to visit us, not by basking in some elegant religious theory, but by setting out on a journey, seeking the signs of his presence in everyday life,” Pope Francis remarked. He specifically highlighted the significance of recognizing God in the faces of the poor, urging the Church to focus on compassion and genuine connection rather than theoretical discussions.

Despite turning 87 last month and facing health challenges in the previous year, Pope Francis displayed resilience during the Epiphany ceremony, which included the singing of Christmas hymns. At the conclusion of the 90-minute service, an aide assisted the Pope, who has a chronic knee problem, in navigating the basilica’s center aisle using a wheelchair.

Throughout his almost 11-year papacy, Pope Francis has dedicated significant attention to advocating for marginalized groups, particularly the poor. Despite the Church’s teachings that deem homosexual acts as sinful, the Pope has actively sought to create an inclusive environment for LGBTQ+ Catholics. His recent approval of blessings for same-sex couples outside traditional marriages aligns with his broader efforts to promote acceptance and compassion within the Church.

Reflections on the Third Anniversary of the Capitol Storming: A Deep Dive into the State of American Democracy

Staff ReporterOpinion, Nation 0

As the nation marks the third anniversary of the Capitol storming on January 6, experts are expressing increasing concern about the current state of American democracy, especially as the country heads into an election year with deep divisions over the significance of that fateful day.

The violent events of January 6, 2021, resulted in multiple fatalities, the desecration of the Capitol building, the subsequent prosecution of former President Trump, and a wave of shock as the public witnessed the disturbing scenes unfolding from the heart of American democracy.

However, the collective reflection on that dark day proved short-lived. Former President Trump has consistently sought to deflect responsibility for the attack, downplaying it as mere expressions of concerns about the election. He continues to propagate unfounded claims of election fraud while endorsing conspiracy theories surrounding the assault. Notably, Republicans who initially condemned Trump shortly after the attack realigned themselves with the former president just weeks later.

On the first anniversary of January 6, only one GOP lawmaker, Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), joined Democrats in commemorating the day. Rachel Kleinfeld, a democracy expert and senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for World Peace, expressed her concern about the direction of the Republican Party, stating, “I think among the signs of concern regarding our democracy, the biggest concern is that we have one of our two main political parties being taken over by a faction that is probably only about a third of its voters but is very willing to eschew democratic rules.”

“We now seem to think that if we don’t have another major riot that disrupts the transfer of presidential power, things aren’t so bad…And we just need to take a big step back and say, is this where we want our society to go?” she added.

The anniversary arrives amidst troubling indicators regarding the strength of America’s democracy. A recent USA TODAY/Suffolk University Poll revealed that just over half of Trump supporters lack confidence in the accuracy of the 2024 election results, aligning with the former president’s claims of a “rigged” last presidential election. In contrast, 81 percent of President Biden’s supporters expressed strong confidence in the upcoming election’s accuracy.

A Washington Post-UMD poll found that a quarter of Americans believe in the conspiracy theory that the FBI orchestrated and encouraged the Capitol attack. Furthermore, several polls indicate a growing openness among Americans to resorting to violence for political ends. A Public Religion Research Institute-Brookings Institution poll in October discovered that 23 percent of Americans agreed that “American patriots may have to resort to violence to save our country,” marking an increase from 15 percent in 2021.

These studies coincide with the steady decline in America’s Freedom House ranking over the past decade, attributed to factors such as rising political polarization, extremism, and partisan pressure on the electoral process, according to Freedom House President Michael Abramowitz.

Abramowitz highlighted the role of social media in exacerbating these issues, stating, “The rise of social media has really made it harder for the country to unite around a shared narrative or shared set of facts…There’s not a shared agreement on the facts. There’s not a shared agreement on what actually happened,” referring specifically to the events of January 6.

Matt Hall, a professor at Notre Dame University involved in the January 6th, 2025, Project, emphasized how social media has contributed to the contradictory viewpoints held by many Trump supporters regarding the Capitol attack. He explained, “Somehow January 6th was no big deal, just a minor protest overhyped by the media, and it did happen but it was a false-flag operation perpetrated by Democrats, and it was actually a deep-state conspiracy to keep Trump out of power, and it was a completely justified effort to defend our democracy.”

Despite widespread divisions in news sources and perspectives, Kleinfeld argued that the current polarization in U.S. politics is more nuanced than perceived. While Americans may hold mixed views on various topics, a failure to bridge emotional polarization persists. Efforts to address political divides face challenges within a system where politicians are rewarded for playing to their polarized bases.

Hall contended that Trump is exploiting these divisions and distrust to foster a “revival of fascist politics.” He explained, “MAGA politicians like Donald Trump are using divisive rhetoric to divide us into an ‘us’ versus ‘them’…Fascist leaders are then able to exploit these social divisions to break down basic social norms and shared understandings about our politics.”

Kleinfeld stressed the importance of political leaders calling out actions that erode democracy, acknowledging the difficulty in doing so within the current environment. She stated, “A lot of times the media reports on our democratic breakdown as left versus right or right versus left. But in fact, what’s happening is that a small faction of the Republican Party is trying to take over, and fellow Republicans who want to uphold the rule of law and liberal ideals — those are the ones being ejected from the party, threatened with violence, called all sorts of names and [had] their children threatened.”

Recent statistics released by the Justice Department highlighted that out of over 1,265 people charged in connection with January 6, 2021, 718 have pleaded guilty, and 139 have been convicted at trial. Trump has pledged to pardon them.

Abramowitz concluded, “The January 6 attack tested the strength of American democracy, and American democracy did hold…But we can’t take that for granted in the future. And so I think we really do have our work cut out for us when it comes to reinforcing American institutions and democratic safeguards.”

Nikki Haley Faces Backlash and Swift Damage Control Over Civil War Remarks

Staff ReporterOpinion, USA 0

Former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley (R) moved to clarify her controversial remarks on the cause of the Civil War, acknowledging in a New Hampshire radio interview, “Of course the Civil War was about slavery. We know that. That’s the easy part of it. What I was saying was what does it mean to us today? What it means to us today is about freedom. That’s what that was all about.”

Haley faced scrutiny after a video of her exchange with a voter in New Hampshire surfaced on social media. When pressed by a Granite State voter on the cause of the Civil War during a town hall in Berlin, N.H., she responded, “Well, don’t come with an easy question, right? I mean, I think the cause of the Civil War was basically how government was going to run, the freedoms and what people could and couldn’t do.”

The voter expressed astonishment that slavery wasn’t mentioned, to which Haley defended her stance, emphasizing the role of government and the importance of capitalism and economic freedom. The exchange quickly drew attention, with critics questioning her interpretation of historical events.

In response to the backlash, Haley accused the voter of being a “Democrat plant,” as reported by the New Hampshire Journal. This swift attempt to deflect criticism highlighted the potential threat to her campaign. Recent polls in New Hampshire showed a narrowing gap between Haley and former President Trump, with Trump holding a 17-percentage-point lead, down from 27 points on Dec. 6.

Republican and Democratic figures alike criticized Haley’s initial comments, with Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) bluntly stating on social media that the cause of the Civil War was “slavery, period.” Despite the criticism, Donalds believed that Haley’s remarks wouldn’t impact the outcome, confident that Trump would secure the GOP presidential nomination.

Even Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’s campaign weighed in, sharing the video with a simple caption, “Yikes.” President Biden also reposted the video, reiterating, “It was about slavery.” Democratic Representative Ro Khanna characterized Haley’s remarks as a “sad betrayal of her own story,” pointing to the shared immigrant experience of their fathers in the context of the civil rights movement.

Attempting to address the controversy, Haley’s campaign emphasized the lesson that “freedom matters and individual rights and liberties matter for all people.” She acknowledged slavery as a stain on America’s history but underscored the need to avoid reliving such dark periods and protect freedoms.

In the broader national context, Haley and DeSantis found themselves in a tight race for second place behind Trump in the polls. As of the latest data, Trump led with 63.1 percent support, followed closely by Haley at 10.8 percent and DeSantis at 10.6 percent, according to Decision Desk HQ and The Hill’s polling index. The evolving dynamics of these poll numbers reflected the shifting landscape and the potential impact of controversial statements on candidates’ standings in the presidential race.

Vivek Ramaswamy’s Presidential Campaign Takes Bold Approach, Shuns TV Ads for Innovative Voter Outreach Strategy

Staff ReporterOpinion, Nation USA 0

Vivek Ramaswamy’s bid for the presidency has taken an unconventional turn as his campaign shifts its focus away from television advertisements, as reported by NBC News. Confirming this change in strategy, the campaign’s press secretary, Tricia McLaughlin, emphasized their commitment to mobilizing identified voters. In a statement to NBC News, McLaughlin outlined their approach, stating, “We are focused on bringing out the voters we’ve identified — best way to reach them is using addressable advertising, mail, text, live calls and doors to communicate with our voters on Vivek’s vision for America, making their plan to caucus and turning them out.”

This shift in strategy is part of what McLaughlin described as an “intentionally structured strategy” that allows the campaign to be “nimble and hypertargeted” in their advertising efforts. Ramaswamy himself echoed this sentiment in a post on X, expressing his disdain for traditional TV ad spending, deeming it “idiotic” and “low-ROI.” He characterized it as a ploy used by political consultants to deceive candidates with lower intelligence. Ramaswamy emphasized their departure from this norm, stating, “We’re doing it differently. Spending $$ in a way that follows data…apparently a crazy idea in US politics. Big surprise coming on Jan 15.”

McLaughlin responded to Ramaswamy’s post, highlighting their commitment to “playing smarter and working harder.” This strategic pivot comes just a month after the campaign initially announced plans to allocate over US $10 million across various advertising platforms, including broadcast, cable, radio, digital, and direct mail promotions in Iowa and New Hampshire. AdImpact confirmed that they had already spent US $2.2 million on TV, digital, and radio ads.

In contrast to Ramaswamy’s unconventional approach, his GOP rivals, including Chris Christie, Donald Trump, Nikki Haley, and Ron DeSantis, continue to invest heavily in traditional advertising methods. While Ramaswamy’s campaign spent a modest US $6,000 on TV ads in a given week, Trump’s campaign allocated a substantial US $1.1 million, Haley’s team spent US $1 million, DeSantis’ team invested $270,000, and Christie’s campaign expended US $88,000 in the same period. The divergence in spending strategies raises questions about the effectiveness of traditional advertising in the current political landscape. The outcome of this experiment will unfold on January 15, promising a potential surprise that challenges the conventional norms of US politics.

Trump’s Pattern of Denying Historical Knowledge: From Hitler’s Rhetoric to White Supremacy, a Recurring Theme Emerges

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

In an unexpected journey from reality television fame to a brief presidency and a potential return, Donald Trump has consistently portrayed himself as a shrewder alternative to Washington’s often inept political class, even dubbing himself a “very stable genius.” However, when confronted with accusations of echoing Adolf Hitler’s rhetoric in relation to immigrants entering the U.S. unlawfully, Trump claimed ignorance of the Nazi dictator’s similar use of language.

“I never knew that Hitler said it,” Trump asserted in an interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt, emphasizing that he had never read Hitler’s biographical manifesto, “Mein Kampf.” This denial of knowledge about one of the most notorious figures of the 20th century is remarkable for someone seeking the presidency, a role deeply rooted in historical understanding. Yet, this pattern of claiming ignorance, especially regarding individuals espousing racist or antisemitic views, has become a recurring tactic for Trump.

During his 2016 campaign, when endorsed by former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard David Duke, Trump insisted he had no awareness of Duke’s background as a white supremacist. Despite Duke’s notoriety as, according to the Anti-Defamation League, “perhaps America’s most well-known racist and anti-Semite,” Trump stated, “I don’t know anything about David Duke.” This strategy of disavowing knowledge was similarly employed when confronted about QAnon, a conspiracy theory alleging Democratic involvement in a satanic pedophilia ring, and the Proud Boys militia group, organizers of the Capitol assault in 2021.

Even in matters of American history, Trump has professed unawareness. At a rally in Nevada, he claimed to have sought the definition of Reconstruction from Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, illustrating a lack of familiarity with a pivotal period post-Civil War. Princeton University professor Julian Zelizer emphasized the importance of a president having a basic understanding of history, citing Reconstruction as a crucial moment for civil rights and race relations.

Trump’s statements regarding Hitler, particularly given his New York upbringing with a substantial Jewish population, are notable. Despite participating in Holocaust memorial events and condemning Holocaust deniers, he insisted on having no knowledge of Hitler’s words. Notably, in 1990, journalist Marie Brenner reported that Trump’s ex-wife claimed he had a copy of Hitler’s speeches, “My New Order,” though Trump later denied reading it.

Amid criticism, Trump maintained that his message about immigrants “poisoning” the country’s blood was vastly different from Hitler’s, asserting zero racist intent. Despite the repeated use of “poisoning” references, Trump contended that his focus was on those entering the country illegally and posing threats, rather than echoing Hitler’s dehumanizing rhetoric. This raises questions about the importance of historical awareness in a leader and the motivations behind disavowing knowledge of contentious figures and ideologies.

International Relations Will Be More Issue-Based Than Bloc-Based

Retired Colonel Kl ViswanathanOpinion, World 0

In a multipolar, multi-discipline, multisource, and multi-requirement world, torque will play a predominant role in stability in international relations more than the centre of gravity.

The world has come to be defined as a global village. A village being the smallest social community living space, the world view of the day is significant in defining the close interactions in international relations at all levels. With such close cohabitation, interdependency cannot be homogenous across the spectrum and will be defined by specific requirements of nations leading to multipolarity.

World is One Family

“Vasudeva Kudumbakam” is a Sanskrit phrase found in Indian texts such as the Upanishads, of the Vedic era, which means “The World Is One Family”. The idea of the phrase remains relevant today as it emphasizes a global perspective, prioritizing collective well-being over individual or family interests. It encourages thinking about the welfare of others, fostering global solidarity. This ancient Indian concept is all the more relevant today when the world, in addition to the usual issues, is grappling to address crucial issues like climate change, sustainable development, and tolerance of diversity.

Global communications

Global communication such as satellites and the internet are redefining power in world politics in ways that traditional theories of international relations have not yet seriously considered. The most telling effect is the increased forced transparency in interactions between Nations. Information technologies since decades and Artificial Intelligence presently, have profoundly transformed the nature of military power because of emerging weapons systems dependent on laser and information processing.

International Relations Will Be More Issue Based Than Bloc Based (Wikipedia)
Picture: TheUNN

Then there are the satellites. The worries expressed by the West, on the recent launching of spy satellites by North Korea, is an example of how digital footprints have established an information power and deterrence similar to the nuclear power and deterrence of an earlier era.

Emerging technologies in communications have also had a profound impact on soft power such as ideological, cultural, or moral appeals. Although there is no hard or soft theoretical evidence on the dynamics, trends indicate that the latter is assuming increasing traction and importance.

Communities of affinity

International relations in politics and cooperation in security and economics, through government, businesses and nonprofits develop cooperative exchanges between nations and benefit commerce, security, quality of life, and the environment. Today’s world is richly connected and complex and for stability, there is a need for a globally oriented perspective on issues that transcend international boundaries. Exceptional economic integration, unprecedented threats to peace and security, and an international focus on human rights and environmental protection all are subject to the complexity of international relations in the twenty-first century.

Global communications, powered digitally, are empowering hitherto dormant groups and voices in the international community. Their voices have created an ecosystem for the contestation of new political, economic, and, more tellingly, cultural boundaries. The interactive and instant nature of these communications has created large perceived moral spaces for exploring changing values among communities of affinity rather than geography.

Surge of nationalism

Nationalism is both omnipresent and elusive. It pervades global behavior and can be seen as both a conservative and a revolutionary force. It attacks the status quo such as populism and authoritarianism. Nationalism calls for allegiance in a nation greater than other groups that may be based on religion, political leaning, or other socio-economic groups.

Nationalism is perceived as seeking distinction from other nations. It gives preference to political representation striving to preserve the nation by the nation for the nation. Nationalism can be dormant including legal immigrants and minorities or a problematic, infectious, escalatory, and overtly violent nationalism to exclude minorities, endangering stability. At the end of the day, the fresh thought of nations for the nation with slogans such as “America for Americans” and “Make in India’ and the spirit behind them in vibrant democracies cannot be faulted.

Conflicting relationships

As late as the end of the Second World War, the world was divided into two camps – the Allied and the Axis. In the succeeding decades, the Cold War set in and the communist bloc came into being as a powerful section under the leadership of the erstwhile USSR. On the opposite side was the West, including the vanquished in war,  under the economically fast-growing influence of the growing [power of the USA.

Over the last few years, all of this changed, especially after the disintegration of the erstwhile USSR. Here are a few samples of conflicting relationships in the world today, if you may. Iran and Türkiye are together against Israel but on opposing sides against Armenia. Türkiye, while spewing venom against Israel, does not want to cut economic ties with it. China is “neutral” in the matter of the Russian invasion of Ukraine but wants a close economic relationship with the USA who, as part of NATO, are wholly behind Ukraine.

Issue-based relationships

A system is said to be in stable equilibrium if, when displaced from equilibrium, it experiences a net force or torque in a direction opposite to the direction of the displacement. By the laws of physics, there can be no stability without tension. Would you say that going forward the world will see stability in contradictory multilateral relations rather than gravitating towards any particular permanent bloc?

In an environment where the practice of international relations is valuable in their own respective space, in a wide array of settings, and differing players distinct from each other, the requirement for stability is varied and independent of each other. The kaleidoscope of such relations is explicit in areas of trade policies between nations, travel related to business, tourism, and immigration, providing people with opportunities to enhance their lives. These different spaces help nations to cooperate to pool resources, and share information as a way to face global issues that go beyond any particular country or region in that particular space.

In a multipolar world, the relationships will be defined by the requirements in each separate space like security, economy, etc rather than gravitating wholesome to defined blocs.

(The author is an Indian Army veteran and a contemporary affairs commentator. Views are personal. He can be reached at [email protected] )

Read more at: https://www.southasiamonitor.org/spotlight/changing-world-order-international-relations-will-be-more-issue-based-bloc-based

Trump Appeals for Presidential Immunity in Federal Election Subversion Case

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

Former President Donald Trump is urging a federal appeals court to dismiss the federal election subversion criminal case against him in Washington, DC. In a filing late Saturday, Trump’s legal team reiterated the claim that he is protected under presidential immunity. The appeal, currently under consideration by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, seeks to overturn a lower-court ruling that rejected Trump’s immunity assertions in the election subversion case brought by special counsel Jack Smith. The Supreme Court, however, refused to expedite the case as requested by Smith.

In the filing, Trump’s lawyers maintained that the former president, in his official capacity, was working to “ensure election integrity” during the alleged undermining of the 2020 election results. They argue that this official duty grants him immunity and that his indictment is unconstitutional, asserting that presidents cannot face criminal prosecution for “official acts” unless impeached and convicted by the Senate. Trump’s attorneys emphasized the structural checks established by the Constitution to prevent the abuse of criminal prosecution as a tool to disable the president and target political enemies.

“The Constitution establishes a powerful structural check to prevent political factions from abusing the formidable threat of criminal prosecution to disable the President and attack their political enemies,” Trump’s attorneys wrote in the filing. “Before any single prosecutor can ask a court to sit in judgment of the President’s conduct, Congress must have approved of it by impeaching and convicting the President. That did not happen here, and so President Trump has absolute immunity.”

The former president has sought to delay his March 4 trial, with the fight over the immunity claim being a focal point of these efforts. The appeals court has expedited its consideration of Trump’s appeal and is scheduled to hear oral arguments on January 9. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, overseeing the criminal case, has temporarily halted all procedural deadlines pending the outcome of the appeal.

The Supreme Court declined Smith’s request for an immediate hearing, allowing the DC Circuit to assess the case first. Both parties will retain the option to appeal the eventual ruling from the appeals court to the Supreme Court.

Trump’s legal team had previously requested the appeals court to review the immunity ruling issued by Judge Chutkan. Chutkan had rejected Trump’s immunity claims, asserting in an opinion that his service as Commander in Chief did not grant him immunity from criminal accountability. The judge dismissed arguments that Trump’s actions were part of his official capacity as president, emphasizing that such actions do not exempt him from criminal charges. Trump’s lawyers reiterated these arguments in the recent filing, contending that Chutkan overlooked the Founders’ recognition that the punishment of the president is inherently political and belongs primarily to the politically accountable branch, Congress, and ultimately, the Senate.

In their filing, Trump’s legal team expressed concern about the potential repercussions of the indictment, warning that it “threatens to launch cycles of recrimination and politically motivated prosecution that will plague our Nation for many decades to come.” The assertion implies that Trump’s case could set a precedent affecting future presidents and the political landscape of the country. The legal battle continues, with the upcoming oral arguments serving as a critical juncture in determining the trajectory of the federal election subversion case against Donald Trump.

Americans for Prosperity Action Amplifies Nikki Haley’s Iowa Campaign in a Last-Minute Push for Republican Nomination

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

Tyler Raygor knocked on the door of a gray, single-story house in a neighborhood in northern Ames, Iowa. He patiently waited until a man in a hoodie and jeans emerged before launching into his pitch.

In this encounter, the man, Mike Morton, expressed his inclination to vote for either Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida or former President Donald J. Trump in the upcoming caucuses. However, Mr. Morton hadn’t considered Nikki Haley, the former governor of South Carolina. Mr. Raygor, the state director for Americans for Prosperity Action, a super PAC supporting Ms. Haley, seized the opportunity. He referred to a recent poll showing Ms. Haley with a significant lead over President Biden in a general election matchup and emphasized her tenure as the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. After handing Mr. Morton a Haley campaign flier, Mr. Morton acknowledged that he would now take a closer look at Haley, noting, “If you didn’t come to my house, I probably would overlook her a little bit more.”

With less than a month remaining before January’s caucuses, Ms. Haley’s campaign, along with Americans for Prosperity Action, is actively working to build on the momentum gained in recent months. The goal is to reach persuadable voters and firmly position her as the primary alternative to Mr. Trump for the Republican nomination.

Ms. Haley received a last-minute boost with the endorsement of Americans for Prosperity Action, a well-funded organization founded by billionaire industrialists Charles and David Koch. This endorsement provided access to donors and injected much-needed funds into her campaign for television spots and mail advertisements. While her campaign initially faced challenges in Iowa against better-funded rivals, the A.F.P. Action apparatus has come to life, deploying a network of volunteers and staff members across the state to engage voters.

The super PAC has mobilized approximately 150 volunteers and part-time staff members to canvass Iowa, with a goal of knocking on 100,000 doors before the caucuses, according to Drew Klein, a senior adviser with A.F.P. Action. Since endorsing Ms. Haley, the super PAC has spent over $5.7 million on pro-Haley advertisements and canvassing efforts nationwide. Financial filings with the Federal Election Commission indicate that the organization had more than $74 million on hand as of July.

Both Ms. Haley and Mr. DeSantis are vying for a pool of undecided voters, although Mr. Trump continues to maintain a significant lead. Recent polls indicate that Mr. Trump is the top choice for 51 percent of Republicans likely to caucus, up from 43 percent in October. Mr. DeSantis’s support increased slightly to 19 percent, while Ms. Haley’s remained at 16 percent. However, the super PAC’s efforts might be insufficient to overtake Mr. DeSantis, who has invested considerable time and money in Iowa.

Despite recent challenges, including the departure of top strategist Jeff Roe from Never Back Down, an affiliated super PAC supporting Mr. DeSantis, the Florida governor has established a strong presence in Iowa. He has visited all 99 counties, and his well-funded ground operation, managed by Never Back Down, has been active for months, boasting over 801,000 doors knocked.

The A.F.P. Action’s endorsement is considered by some, like Republican strategist Jimmy Centers in Iowa, as the potential “missing link” for Ms. Haley. However, the group faces a time constraint. Mr. Centers poses the open question of whether Ms. Haley peaked too soon in Iowa and if A.F.P. has sufficient time to catch up. A spokesman for Mr. DeSantis, Andrew Romeo, dismisses A.F.P. Action’s efforts as a “rent-a-campaign gambit” by Ambassador Haley, asserting that grassroots success cannot be bought.

A critical component of A.F.P. Action’s strategy is the ground game, aiming to reach voters just as attention to the Republican nomination race intensifies. Mr. Raygor, addressing criticism from the Trump campaign about door-knocking on Christmas, stated, “Maybe not on Christmas, but we’ll be knocking on the 23rd. We’ll be knocking on the 26th. My team’s knocked in negative-30-degree wind chills before. Winter does not scare us.”

However, a recent visit to Ames revealed the challenges of a last-minute push. Among the six Republican voters Mr. Raygor spoke with, one was already a Haley supporter, two were persuadable, and three were firmly supporting either Mr. Trump or Vivek Ramaswamy. One voter, Barbara Novak, emphatically declared, “You’re not going to get me off of Trump, ever.”

In another neighborhood in Cedar Rapids, the efforts of A.F.P. Action staff members Cheryl Jontz and Kyla Higgins to promote Ms. Haley proved less successful. Few residents were interested in answering their doors in freezing morning temperatures, and those who did mostly expressed their support for Mr. Trump. One voter, Lisa Andersen, was somewhat open-minded, indicating a willingness to consider Ms. Haley if former President Trump faced legal troubles.

A spokesperson for the Haley campaign maintains that A.F.P. Action’s support hasn’t altered the campaign’s strategic approach and ground game in Iowa. The campaign has intensified its efforts in the final weeks before the caucuses, including a five-day swing through the state. Additional staff members, such as Pat Garrett, a former adviser to the Iowa governor, have been brought on board to lead the Iowa press team.

David Oman, a Republican strategist and Haley supporter, believes that Ms. Haley is focusing on the metro areas where the majority of Iowa’s voters reside, running a nimble campaign with a small core staff and dedicated volunteers. As Ms. Haley’s team makes a final push in Iowa, the outcome of the caucuses remains uncertain, and the effectiveness of A.F.P. Action’s endorsement and ground game will be closely watched.

For 2024, INDIA Opposition Is Still In The Game

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

The next general election is not a done deal. Not yet. Unless the Opposition surrenders to this psychological warfare and gives a walkover before the match begins

On the eve of the 2004 Lok Sabha elections, I had written an article, ‘Never Mind the Pollsters, the Race is Still Open’ (The Hindu, March 15, 2004). It made a limited point: Notwithstanding the hype about “India Shining”, a dispassionate look at electoral numbers showed that a defeat for the BJP was a possibility. Something similar needs to be said now in the wake of the hype around BJP’s hat-trick in the three assembly elections: Never mind the darbari media, the race is still open.

For 2024 INDIA Opposition Is Still In The Game (AP)
Picture: AP

Let me clarify what I am not saying. There is no doubt that the outcome in Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh is a setback for the Congress, and all those who wish to see restoration of democracy in 2024. The BJP’s victory in three north Indian states does overshadow the Congress’ historic comeback in Telangana. It creates favourable optics for the BJP in the run-up to the national polls. But this does not translate into cold numbers. The outcome of these four states does not change the electoral calculus as it stood before the results. I just don’t see how these reverses for the Opposition close the 2024 contest.

Let us start by counting votes. Before we conclude that a 3-1 victory for the BJP is a ringing endorsement of the regime by the voters, let us add up votes of both the leading parties for these states. Of the 12.29 crore votes polled, the BJP secured 4.82 crore, while the Congress had 4.92 crore (5.06 crore, if you include all INDIA parties). Except in MP, the margin of the BJP’s victory is very small in terms of popular votes. Congress’s lead over the BJP in Telangana is large enough to make up for its deficit in the rest. So the BJP has not received a massive popular endorsement in the latest round.

Let us convert these votes into parliamentary seats. We have a surprise in store. These states have 83 seats in the Lok Sabha, of which BJP had as many as 65 and Congress secured only 6 seats in the last Lok Sabha elections. Suppose the citizens of these states vote exactly the same way next year as they did in the recent assembly elections, the net gainer will be Congress, not the BJP.

Even after this hat-trick, the BJP’s performance is way below its post-Pulwama support in 2019. If we add up assembly-wise votes for each parliamentary seat, the tally will be 24 for BJP and 5 for the Congress in Madhya Pradesh (compared to 28-1 in 2019), 8 for BJP and 3 for the Congress in Chhattisgarh (9-2 in 2019), 14 for BJP and 11 for Congress in Rajasthan (24-0 in 2019) and 0 for the BJP and 9 for the Congress in Telangana (4-3 in 2019). In all, it would mean 46 seats for the BJP (loss of 19) and 28 seats for the Congress (gain of 22). If we merge the votes of the INDIA partners, there would be 38 seats for the BJP and 36 for INDIA. I am not saying that this is the likely outcome. But this notional calculation puts to rest the idea that the BJP has sealed its victory.

Let us now consider the obvious argument that the Lok Sabha outcome may not replicate the Vidhan Sabha verdict. That’s true. We have seen a reversal in the BJP’s favour in 2019 and for the Congress in 2004. But this argument cuts both ways. If the BJP can look to improve upon its position in the next few months, so can the Congress. You can choose which of these scenarios is more likely, but the outcome of the recent elections is no basis to close any of these. The idea that the BJP is bound to improve its votes in the run-up to the national elections draws upon the misplaced parallel with 2019 when Balakot intervened between these two polls.

For 2024, INDIA Opposition Is Still In The Game (The Guartdian)
Picture: The Guardian

Let us for a moment assume that the BJP improves further during the next few months and sweeps the three Hindi states in the Lok Sabha just as it did last time. Assume further that this sweep extends to states like Gujarat, Delhi and Haryana. Does that settle the national contest? Not really, as the BJP had already reached saturation level in these states. A sweep here is necessary but not sufficient for the BJP.

The Opposition’s game plan for 2024 is not dependent on these states.

Look at the big picture. In 2019, the BJP won 303 seats, just 30 seats above the majority mark. The BJP faces significant depletions in its unprecedented tally in Bengal (where it faces a meltdown), Karnataka (where, going by assembly election results for BJP-JDS combine, Congress would gain 10 seats), Maharashtra (where it faces the MVA), Bihar (pitted against a new Mahagathbandhan) and Uttar Pradesh (even a repeat of the 2022 Assembly results would mean a loss of 10 seats to BJP). Add to it near-certain but minor losses in Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, Telangana and Assam. Put any number to these losses for the BJP and it is sure to exceed 30. The hard question is: Where can the BJP possibly add to its 2019 tally and make up for these losses?

I am not saying that there is no way the BJP can contain its losses or make up for them. I am simply pointing to the writing on the wall, written in cold electoral numbers, as it stands today: 2024 is not a done deal. Not yet. Unless the Opposition surrenders to this psychological warfare and gives a walkover before the match begins.

(The Indian Express link: https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/yogendra-yadav-writes-for-2024-opposition-is-still-in-the-game-9058961/)

Psychologists Report Escalating Mental Health Struggles for Patients, Prolonged Waitlists, and Provider Burnout Amid Lingering Pandemic Impact

Staff ReporterHealth, Opinion 0

In a study released this week by the American Psychological Association (APA), psychologists nationwide have highlighted the persistent challenges faced by their patients, revealing that symptoms are escalating, necessitating extended treatment periods for the third consecutive year. The annual survey, initiated by the APA in 2020 to assess the repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic on practicing psychologists, emphasizes the growing demand for mental health services.

According to the survey, a majority of psychologists have noted a surge in individuals seeking mental health care in the current year, exacerbating the already lengthy waitlists. An alarming 56% of respondents indicated that they had no available slots for new patients. For those managing waitlists, the average waiting period extended beyond three months, and nearly 40% acknowledged an expansion of their waitlists over the past year.

Psychologist Vaile Wright, the Senior Director of Health Care Innovation at the APA, expressed concern about the unsustainable situation, stating, “We continue to see incredibly high demand for mental health services and an incredibly limited supply. This is not a sustainable solution to addressing the mental health crisis in this country.”

The survey findings also shed light on a notable increase in the number of individuals seeking assistance for specific mental health issues, particularly anxiety disorders, depression, trauma, and stress-related disorders such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), sleep disturbances, and addiction. Over half of the psychologists observed a lengthening of the duration for which patients required treatment.

Wright attributes these lingering mental health challenges to the enduring impact of the pandemic. She explains, “I think there are a variety of ways that individuals experienced trauma during the pandemic,” citing the loss of loved ones, associated grief, personal sickness, and the consequences of hospitalizations. Additionally, pandemic-induced changes to personal lives, encompassing alterations in social interactions, employment circumstances, and the ability to care for loved ones, have contributed to heightened stress levels.

The repercussions of these stressors often manifest after the initial traumas and stresses have subsided. Wright notes, “It’s when things actually start to quiet down that the impacts of all that we’ve gone through, all that stress, actually start to hit us.”

Furthermore, mental health care providers themselves have grappled with significant stress since the pandemic’s onset. Adapting rapidly to virtual platforms and coping with increased care demands have added to the strain. Psychologist Mary Alvord, founder of Alvord, Baker & Associates, a private practice in Chevy Chase and Rockville, Md., acknowledges the challenges, stating, “It’s been just very difficult the last number of years, first pivoting to virtual and now pivoting back to accommodation of in-person and hybrid.”

Alvord notes changes in patient preferences, with children increasingly requesting in-person sessions, while adults prefer virtual meetings after one or two initial in-person appointments.

The survey exposed the toll on mental health care providers, with 36% of psychologists admitting to feeling burned out. Although slightly lower than the 2021 peak of 41%, the report underscores the substantial number of practitioners struggling to meet the demands of their profession. However, a positive aspect revealed in the survey is that two-thirds of psychologists actively practice self-care to combat work pressures and burnout, with nearly half relying on peer support to enhance their well-being.

While not part of the survey, Alvord attests to the significance of peer support in managing stress. “We have peer consult groups throughout the week, and this is where we really support one another,” she reveals. Personally, she emphasizes physical activity, walking 3 to 5 miles a day, as a crucial means of stress relief.

India’s Role in Rebuilding and Revival of Post-War Middle East

Amb. Pradeep Kapur & Dr. Joseph M. ChalilOpinion, World 0

Can there be a Permanent Solution to the Plight of Palestinians and Israelis?

Feature and Cover India’s Role in Rebuilding and Revival of Post War Middle East

The recent release of a number of Israeli and Palestinian hostages and the temporary week long truce, which ended on December 1st should have been an occasion for the global community to reflect on how we could try to strive for not just a cease-fire but for long-lasting peace and economic development in the region.

While on the one hand, Israel has achieved significant economic development despite being surrounded by Islamic countries, on the other hand, Gaza remains backward and dependent primarily on Israel for even its basic needs of water, electricity, fuel, and employment for quite a few of its residents.

The attack by Hamas on Israel on October 7 demonstrated to the world the brutality and the barbarism of the terrorists. The reprisals by Israel have resulted in a lot of destruction, death, and misery for the people of Gaza in the West Bank. There is a much greater sense of insecurity for both the Israelis and the Palestinians.

This has also led to a very significant surge in anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim hate crimes not only in the region but in the US, Europe, and other countries.

Is the world destined to continue down the spiral of more wars, hatred, death, and destruction? Or is there an alternative vision or path possible?

Brief background

A lot has already been written and discussed about the conflict’s historical evolution and origins. The Israel-Palestine issue has persisted for decades and has resulted in considerable human suffering. Resolving the plight of the Palestinians and Israelis is of utmost importance for regional peace. Focusing on economic empowerment, employment opportunities, and education for the Palestinians could perhaps serve as a powerful tool to counter the allure of extremist ideologies and promote peace. The acceptance by the Islamic countries of the right of Israel to exist as a free country is also an essential requirement.

The dust of war eventually settles, but its scars are often long-lasting, especially in regions plagued by protracted conflicts like the Middle East. Yet, as daunting as the task of rebuilding might seem, the post-war era can serve as an inflection point, an opportunity to sow seeds of lasting peace and prosperity.

War robs individuals, particularly youth, of their aspirations, thrusting them into a vortex of despair and, often, extremist ideologies. So, the question is, how can we pivot from devastation to a renaissance in the post-war Middle East?

How can we aspire for a prosperous Palestinian and Israeli population living in peace and harmony, reaping the benefits of regional economic cooperation, and providing a model for conflict resolution worldwide?

Economic Integration: The Power of Unity

The prospect of the India-Middle East Europe Economic Corridor (IMEEEC) need not be seen only as an economic initiative but also as a gesture for peace in a conflict-prone region. By linking Bharat to Europe via the Middle East, we’re not merely talking about trade and investment; we’re fostering an environment where economies are interdependent, thus making conflict detrimental to all.

The India-Middle East Europe Economic Corridor (IMEEEC) can possibly bring significant investments and trade opportunities for Palestinians and others in the region. Developing Special Economic Zones (SEZ) within Palestine in collaboration with Israel and other countries involved in IMEEEC would focus on manufacturing, technology, and services, drawing investment from nations. This would be a win-win situation, as the corridor will bolster the economies of all participant countries.

Imagine the ripple effects of infrastructure projects intertwining Gaza, the West Bank, and Israel into this corridor. These aren’t just roads, ports, and rails but lifelines of hope, conduits of opportunity.

Investing in Youth and Women: The Beacon of Hope

Youth and women are the torchbearers of our future. However, radical voices can seductively intercept a future shadowed by unemployment. By aligning with nations like Bharat, known for its prowess in the IT sector, we can equip the youth and women with sought-after skills. The twofold vision is to reduce unemployment and nurture ambassadors of peace, who have far more to lose in times of conflict. Bharat has already been extending phenomenal support under the ITEC (Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation) Program to the citizens of many of these countries for many decades now. Bharat, therefore, has the experience and the expertise in this regard.

Moreover, let’s incentivize peace. If companies from the IMEEEC region employ Palestinian youths, they should benefit from tax breaks and other incentives.

  1. Skill Development: Collaborate with international agencies to establish vocational training centers. Partner with countries like India, which has vast experience in IT and service sectors, to train youth in these domains.
  2. Job Fairs and Employment Drives: Regularly organize job fairs featuring companies from Israel, Saudi Arabia, and other Middle Eastern countries to promote employment among Palestinian youths.
  3. Incentives for Employers: Provide tax breaks and financial incentives to companies from the IMEEEC region that employ a significant percentage of Palestinians.

Education: The Pillar of Progress

Schools must become the sanctuaries of hope and enlightenment in our quest for lasting peace. Through partnerships with global universities, we can elevate academic standards and instill values of coexistence and unity. When children are taught stories of camaraderie, not conflict, they’ll pen a different, peaceful chapter for the region.

  1. Educational Exchange Programs: Collaborate with universities in Israel, India, Europe, and the Middle East to offer scholarships for Palestinian students.
  2. Upgraded Curriculum: Ensure that the curriculum in Palestinian schools is in line with international standards. Focus on teaching critical thinking, STEM, peace education, and coexistence.
  3. Teacher Training Programs: Collaborate with international educational organizations to train teachers, ensuring high academic standards.

Promoting Peace, Countering Terrorism, and Anti-Semitism:

Bharat has always condemned terrorism in the strongest terms and has shown zero tolerance for terrorism in any shape or form. Promoting peace, countering terrorism, and addressing anti-Semitism requires a multi-pronged approach, encompassing education, dialogue, policy reform, and community engagement.

  1. Media and Education: Promote peace, unity, and coexistence narratives in Palestinian media and educational content. Counter any narratives of hatred and division. Incorporate lessons on the Holocaust, the history of Jews, and the contributions of diverse groups to human civilization to foster understanding and dispel myths.
  2. Youth Engagement: Establish peace clubs in schools and universities that organize events promoting peace and understanding. Promote exchange programs where individuals can immerse themselves in different cultures and religions to foster understanding.
  3. Interfaith Dialogues: Encourage interfaith dialogues within Palestine and between Palestinians and Israelis to foster understanding and unity. Set up interfaith discussions where religious leaders can address common misconceptions about their beliefs and highlight similarities.
  4. Hate Crime Legislation: Strengthen laws that penalize hate crimes, ensuring they are adequately enforced.
  5. Counter-radicalization Programs: Develop programs explicitly targeting individuals at risk of radicalization, offering them support, education, and alternative perspectives.
Ambassador Pradeep Kapur

Ambassador Pradeep Kapur is an acknowledged “luminary diplomat,” with a distinguished career working with leaders and policymakers in different continents of the world: Asia, Africa, Europe, North America, and South America. He was the author and editor of many books. Kapur was Ambassador of India to Chile and Cambodia and Secretary at the Indian Ministry of External Affairs before joining as an academic in reputed universities in the USA and India. A graduate of the globally acclaimed Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi (IIT-D), he is Executive Director of Smart Village Development Fund (SVDF); International Economic Strategic Advisor, Intellect Design Arena; and Chairman, Advisory Council, DiplomacyIndia.com. His healthcare contributions include setting up of BP Koirala Institute of Health Sciences in Eastern Nepal, which is acclaimed as an exemplary bilateral India Nepal initiative.

Joseph M Chalil

Dr. Joseph M. Chalil, Chief Medical Officer at Novo Integrated Sciences, Inc., is a renowned physician executive with international recognition for his extensive contributions to healthcare innovation and research. Currently pursuing an LLM in Medical Law and Ethics at the University of Edinburgh Law School, he holds influential roles as Chairman of the Complex Health Systems Advisory Board and Adjunct Professor at Nova Southeastern University, Florida. Dr. Chalil, a U.S. Navy Medical Corps veteran, also serves as Chief Strategic Advisor for the American Association of Physicians of Indian Origin (AAPI) and is a Fellow of the American College of Healthcare Executives. His impactful book, “Beyond the Covid-19 Pandemic,” reflects his commitment to transforming global healthcare systems. A respected figure in healthcare and media, Dr. Chalil is known for his leadership in healthcare administration, balanced media representation, and insightful discussions on Indian TV news channels, showcasing his expertise in areas such as US-India relations, geopolitical issues, and public policy.

The Abraham Accords 2.0: A New Dawn in Middle Eastern Diplomacy

The Middle East, often perceived as a complex web of animosities and alliances, witnessed a historical turn with the signing of the Abraham Accords in 2020. These agreements, brokered with the significant involvement of the United States, marked a paradigm shift in the diplomatic relations between Israel and several Arab nations.

Named after the patriarch Abraham, a revered figure in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, the Abraham Accords are a series of normalization agreements between Israel and various Arab countries, including the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco.

Before 2020, only two Arab nations—Egypt (1979) and Jordan (1994)—had established full diplomatic relations with Israel. The Abraham Accords, therefore, represent a significant expansion of Israel’s formal recognition within the Arab world.

The Accords entail the establishment of full diplomatic ties, including the opening of embassies, direct flights, trade deals, and broader cooperation in sectors such as technology, energy, and medicine.

The stymied Israel-Saudi Arabia Peace Accord needs to be restarted. This isn’t just about peace agreements; it’s a cultural and economic confluence. We’re not just linking economies; we’re linking destinies. Mutual investments and cultural exchanges between nations have historically proven to be robust peacekeepers.

MBS and Biden with Modi
Picture: PMO India

India/Bharat: A Potential Peace Broker in the Middle East

India’s unique positioning in global politics and its historical ties and soft power make it a potential mediator in the volatile Middle East, particularly between Arabs and Israelis. Bharat has managed to maintain cordial relations with both Arab nations and Israel. Historically, Bharat has supported the Palestinian cause, while in recent decades, it has fostered robust ties with Israel, particularly in the defense, agriculture, and technology sectors. This dual affinity ensures that India is seen as a neutral player, which is essential for effective mediation.

The significant Indian diaspora in the Middle East, especially in the Gulf countries, strengthens Bharat’s cultural and economic ties with the region. This diaspora contributes to their resident countries’ economies and acts as a bridge between their homeland and the Middle East. Their presence can be leveraged as they symbolize the mutual respect and shared values between Bharat and the Middle East.

Every brick we lay in the post-war Middle East can be a stepping stone towards an enduring peace or another block in an endless maze of conflicts. By integrating our economies, investing in the youth and women, and reimagining education, we don’t just rebuild post-war Palestine and ensure the future security of Israel; we revive hope, unity, and a promise of a brighter, peaceful tomorrow.

A prosperous and peaceful Palestinian society living in peace with Israel can be realized through a combination of regional cooperation, economic initiatives, and education. A focus on these areas will provide Palestinian youth with hope and purpose, making the ideologies of hate and extremism less attractive. Bharat has emerged as an essential global player, as was apparent during the G20 Summit and the Voice of Global South Summit recently in Bharat. Due to the high stakes for all countries and its greater acceptance as an essential global entity, Bharat can endeavor to line up the support of the USA, Europe, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, and other like-minded countries in these efforts. With the cooperation of regional powers and the international community, a brighter future for Palestine, Israel, and the entire region is within reach.

Given its deep-rooted connections, neutrality, and the respect it commands in the Middle East, Bharat can play a pivotal role in fostering peace in the region. While the challenges in the Middle East are complex, Bharat’s involvement can provide a fresh perspective and a neutral ground for dialogue. As the world’s largest democracy, Bharat can be a beacon of hope for a peaceful Middle East.

Delhi Police Ramp Up Security Amidst Threats to Parliament’s Foundation on Anniversary of 2001 Attack

Staff ReporterDiplomacy, Opinion 0

The Delhi Police have heightened their vigilance in response to a video message from Gurpatwant Singh Pannu, a Khalistani supporter based in the United States. In the video, Pannu issued a threat to “shake the very foundation of Parliament” on December 13, coinciding with the anniversary of the 2001 terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament. The authorities are taking the threat seriously, with a senior police officer confirming the implementation of enhanced security measures in and around Parliament.

The senior officer emphasized the commitment to maintaining law and order, stating, “No one will be allowed to disturb law and order. When Parliament is in session, we remain alert.” These assurances were accompanied by a clear message that all necessary precautionary measures are being taken to prevent any untoward incidents. Security has been bolstered not only in the vicinity of Parliament but throughout the entire city of Delhi.

The video message, delivered by Pannu, who is the chief of the banned organization Sikhs for Justice, also featured a photograph of Afzal Guru, the convict in the 2001 Parliament attack. In the video, Pannu made serious allegations against the Narendra Modi government, claiming an attempt on his life and vowing to respond on December 13. His ominous promise asserted that his retaliation would “shake the very foundation of the Indian Parliament.”

The threat issued by Pannu has raised concerns and prompted a proactive response from law enforcement agencies. The reference to the 2001 Parliament attack, a dark chapter in India’s history, adds gravity to the situation. Authorities are not taking any chances, and the increased security measures are indicative of the seriousness with which they are approaching this potential threat.

While the specific nature of Pannu’s allegations against the Modi government remains unclear, the mere mention of an attempt on his life suggests a heightened level of tension and animosity. Such claims, when made by individuals with affiliations to proscribed organizations, demand thorough investigation and a robust security response.

The timing of the threat, coinciding with the anniversary of the 2001 Parliament attack, adds a layer of historical significance to the situation. December 13 is a solemn day in the memory of the brave individuals who lost their lives in the 2001 attack. The threat to disrupt Parliament on this particular day is not only a security concern but also a potential attempt to exploit the emotional resonance associated with the anniversary.

As the authorities work to ensure the safety and security of Parliament and the people of Delhi, the larger question looms regarding the motivations and objectives behind such threats. Pannu’s affiliation with Sikhs for Justice, an organization that has been banned in India, raises questions about the broader implications of the threat and its potential impact on the socio-political landscape.

The heightened security measures in response to Gurpatwant Singh Pannu’s video threat reflect the seriousness with which law enforcement is treating the situation. The anniversary of the 2001 Parliament attack adds historical significance to the threat, emphasizing the need for a robust and comprehensive security response. As the authorities remain vigilant, the coming days will be crucial in determining the credibility of the threat and ensuring the safety of Parliament and the citizens of Delhi.

Al Gore Challenges COP28 Host UAE’s Leadership, Exposes Rising Emissions, and Slams Fossil Fuel Companies at Climate Summit

Staff ReporterEnvironment, Opinion 0

Former U.S. Vice President and climate advocate Al Gore criticized the United Arab Emirates (UAE), host of the COP28 climate summit, for what he deemed an abuse of public trust in overseeing international negotiations on global warming. Speaking to Reuters at the conference in Dubai, Gore expressed skepticism about COP28 President Sultan al-Jaber, who heads the UAE’s national oil company ADNOC, being an impartial broker of a climate deal.

Gore remarked, “They are abusing the public’s trust by naming the CEO of one of the largest and least responsible oil companies in the world as head of the COP.”

During a presentation at the COP’s main plenary hall, Gore revealed data indicating a 7.5% increase in the UAE’s greenhouse gas emissions in 2022 compared to the previous year, contrasting with a 1.5% global rise. This data, sourced from the Climate TRACE coalition—a group Gore co-founded—utilizes artificial intelligence and satellite data to monitor carbon emissions from specific companies.

The UAE did not immediately respond to Gore’s comments or the TRACE data.

Gore, who previously ran for the U.S. presidency in 2000 as the Democratic Party’s nominee, criticized the presence of oil and gas companies at the annual climate summit. He particularly opposed their endorsement of technologies like carbon capture as a means of mitigating fossil fuel emissions.

Addressing the first-ever appearance of Exxon Mobil CEO Darren Woods at a COP conference, Gore dismissed the significance, asserting that the oil giant’s engagement doesn’t negate its historical resistance to climate policies. Gore stated, “He should not be taken seriously. He’s protecting his profits and placing them in a higher priority than the survival of human civilization.”

Exxon Mobil declined to provide a comment on Gore’s remarks.

In urging summit delegates, Gore emphasized the need for language in the final text that commits to phasing out fossil fuels without conditional statements or references to carbon capture technology. He criticized the current state of carbon capture and direct air capture technology as a long-term research project, highlighting a lack of cost reduction over the past 50 years. Gore accused fossil fuel companies of falsely presenting these technologies as readily available and economically viable.

“The current state of the technology for carbon capture and direct air capture is a research project,” Gore said. “There’s been no cost reduction for 50 years, and there is a pretense on the part of the fossil fuel companies that it is a readily available, economically viable technology.”

Hopes And Expectations From COP28: The World Is At A Tipping Point On Climate Change

Rajendra ShendeEnvironment, Opinion, World 0

What happens in COP28 on Dubai’s climate conference battleground in the first half of December 2023 may not result in bloodshed but its consequences could be drenched in blood, mass migration, and starvation.

Happily, about 70,000 participants including political leaders, diplomats, business managers, academicians, and researchers will be participating in COP28. The COP -Conference of Parties – is held annually by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). This is the 28th COP scheduled to start in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, known as the expo-city, ever happy to welcome tourists and visitors.

Hopes And Expectations From COP28 (Yahoo)
Picture: Yahoo

Sadly, it is the time when the number of battlegrounds around the world is on the rise without any end in sight! Ukraine and Russia in northern Europe; Israel and Palestine in the Middle East; internal wars in Syria, Sudan and Sahel. United Nations Security Council, which is charged with ensuring international peace and security, continues the efforts to stall the battles but has not succeeded in ensuring the peace.

One more battleground, on the Gulf of Oman and the Persian Gulf, is opening from 30th November to 12th December in the expo-city of Dubai. The battleground will be over on 12th December, but the planetary-level war will certainly continue. It has the potential to be termed World War III, the war between humanity and nature. The UN Security Council is not charged to even start a dialogue for a ceasefire and making peace in that war.  It is left to Bonn, Germany-based UNFCCC to fight the cause of WWII!

Categorically, all humans to varying degrees are responsible for starting and continuing this war. The choice of path to human development has now caused nearly irreversible damage to nature. It is the turn of nature now to hit back. Nature is reacting by causing droughts, floods, landslides, and wildfires that have started affecting human society across the borders of the countries. The hostages are poor of the world and they are rising in numbers.

World caught in a vicious cycle of chaos

As per a UN report released this year, extreme weather has caused the deaths of two million people and $4.3 trillion in economic damage over the past 50 years. The tragedy is that the poor suffer the most in extreme weather. Rich people have economic muscles, not only to ensure their survival but continue their onslaught on nature by emitting greenhouse gases. The richest one percent of the global population is responsible for the same amount of carbon emissions as the world’s poorest two-thirds, or five billion people, according to the research results released in  November 2023. The worst is that rich people continue to invest their money more in polluting industries.

The planet is caught in a vicious circle of chaos in which even the rich would perish. We do not know when but perish they will. Because the rich depend on the market consisting of these five billion people to make their money. As the market starts suffering the rich would suffer too! As the doomsday scenario says, ‘sixth planetary extinction’ is on the way. The fifth extinction was 65 million years ago when dinosaurs and the ecosystem vanished.

To use the United Nations term used in Agenda 21, rather sarcastically, ‘No one is left behind’ by nature in its climate onslaught. And nature has been literally ‘inclusive’ in the destruction of human habitats!  But let us not make a mistake, this larger war is also the result of the battles between factions. Factions include global south and global north, developed and developing countries. The list of factions also includes small-island-developing countries (SIDS), least developed countries (LDCs), indigenous groups, powerful fossil fuel businesses, farmers, and so on.

What happens in COP28 on Dubai’s climate conference battleground in the first half of December 2023 may not result in bloodshed but its consequences could be drenched in blood, mass migration, and starvation. COP after COP, the post-Paris Climate Agreement in 2015, the pledges and promises made by 198 countries that are party to climate conventions. 195 countries that are Parties to the Paris Climate Agreement committed through Nationally Determined Contributions NDCs to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. What is more, the commitments are made by the developed countries to provide USD 100 billion to the developing countries for reducing emissions. But the promises and pledges are not met, and implementation is not only slow but miserable and inadequate and almost suicidal.

The decade from 2010 to 2019 had the highest increase in greenhouse gas emissions in human history; the last four months of 2023 are the hottest on record; the last 11 months have caused the highest economic losses due to extreme climate events. The window to limit warming to 1.5°C, the target set by the world leaders in the Paris Climate Agreement, is rapidly closing; and the gap between where emissions should be and where they are is widening fast as per the UNEP Emission Gap Report (EGR) released recently.

So what one should expect from 2023

Experts have stated over the last year the expectations: strong action-oriented negotiations; making mitigation and adaptation finance available to developing countries as a matter of emergency; operationalizing loss and damage fund; focussing on non-CO2 greenhouse gases like methane; community-based and sub-national climate actions; undertaking out-of-box technologies, including carbon dioxide removal (CDR); space reflected solar electricity and so on.

And what is NOT expected from COP28

Firstly, the world is not expecting non-verified claims by countries, particularly by world leaders in COP28. Such claims promote greenwashing – misleading the public to believe that climate action is being taken for net zero. There is more risk from greenwashing than the climate crisis itself, as stated by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.

Secondly, the world is NOT  expecting that the vital issues related to mitigation, adaptation and finance are sidelined and duped by conned climate diplomacy. Recently, we have witnessed commotions like denouncing UAE’s presidency as ‘oil nation’s presidency’; prioritizing the action on mitigating fugitive methane by ignoring the reduction of emissions of carbon dioxide; including private finance in meeting the governmental public finance pledge of USD100 billion annually from 2020; asking China to contribute to the finances to developing countries; prioritizing carbon-offset;  changing the definitions of developing countries to ‘least-developing-countries; uncertain schemes like carbon-trading and carbon removal by overlooking the mitigation through lifestyle change.

Thirdly, the world is NOT expecting speeches by world leaders with deceptive declarations and diplomacy-coated false promises delivered in the COP. In this context decision of President Joe Biden not to attend COP28 is indeed welcome. Better not to be there than tricking the world with fake pledges!

Fourthly, the world is NOT expecting alternative technologies like battery-operated EVs and solar panels to be considered climate-friendly unless the environmentally friendly reuse, recycling and disposal of panels and batteries are integral parts of such technologies.

Fifthly, the world is not expecting the issue of climate justice to be discussed without historical context. Recently, the report has revealed that carbon emissions during colonial rules of Europeans and Japanese were assigned to the countries that were engaged in colonial rules after the industrial revolutions. The world, in this context, is not expecting to keep the International Court of Justice excluded from the issue of climate crimes during World War III. Punitive measures could range from exposing the countries by ‘naming and shaming’ to more serious ‘climate-sanctions’.

Can Dubai succeed in meeting these expectations? Let us wait to see by the end of COP28 if the negotiators are serious about delivering what the world is expecting and also not expecting.

(The author is a noted environmentalist, former Director UNEP, and Founder Director, Green TERRE Foundation, Pune, India. Views are personal)

Read more at: https://www.southasiamonitor.org/spotlight/hopes-and-expectations-cop28-world-tipping-point-climate-change

American Weapons Used in Gaza Trigger War Crime Accusations Against US

Thalif DeenOpinion 0

(IPS) – The widespread use of American weapons by Israel, which has killed thousands of civilians in Gaza, has triggered accusations of war crimes against the United States.

But US has always escaped these charges in contemporary military conflicts –particularly in the killing fields of Afghanistan and Iraq –and also in the use of American weapons in Yemen where thousands have been killed.

The United Nations once described the deaths and destruction in the eight-year-old civil war in Yemen as “the world’s worst humanitarian disaster”.

The killings of mostly civilians have been estimated at over 100,000, with accusations of war crimes against a coalition led by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), whose primary arms supplier is the US.

And now, the killings of Palestinians in Gaza have come back to haunt the Americans in a new war zone. But still, the US is unlikely to be hauled before the International Criminal Court (ICC).

American Weapons Used in Gaza Trigger War Crime Accusations Against US (Global Issues)
Picture: Global Issues

“If U.S. officials don’t care about Palestinian civilians facing atrocities using U.S. weapons, perhaps they will care a bit more about their own individual criminal liability for aiding Israel in carrying out these atrocities,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, executive director of Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), an American non-profit organization that advocates democracy and human rights in the Middle East.

“The American people never signed up to help Israel commit war crimes against defenseless civilians with taxpayer funded bombs and artillery,” she noted.

According to DAWN, U.S. law requires that United States monitor and ensure that weapons and munitions it provides to Israel are not used to commit war crimes in Gaza.

The advocacy group reminded both Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III in a letter sent last week.

“Failure to comply with end-use monitoring requirements not only breaches U.S. laws but also could expose U.S. officials to prosecution by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for aiding and abetting war crimes,” warned DAWN.

In a separate letter to ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan, DAWN asked the Prosecutor urgently to issue a public statement reminding the parties to the conflict of the ongoing investigation there and send an investigative team to the Gaza region of Palestine to document and investigate potential crimes under the Rome Statute.

Mouin Rabbani, Co-Editor, Jadaliyya, an independent ezine produced by the Arab Studies Institute, told IPS the United States is in violation of international law, as well as its own domestic legislation, by providing weapons to Israel in the full knowledge that these are being used for the express purpose of committing war crimes and crimes against humanity.

www.jadaliyya.com

“I would go further and state that it is providing them to Israel for precisely this reason. This is because the US is determined to see Israel achieve its objectives in the Gaza Strip; Washington recognizes that Israel does not have the military capacity and political will to physically occupy the Gaza Strip for a prolonged period and eradicate Hamas and other groups, and has instead — with unqualified US support — adopted as its primary objective the systematic destruction of the Gaza Strip and mass killings of Palestinian civilians”, he pointed out.

As for international law and domestic US legislation, these are as irrelevant as Palestinian lives in this context. That’s how the US-designed rules-based international order works and was designed to work, he said.

“US legislation, the laws of war, and international law more generally, are rigorously applied to rivals and adversaries, while the US and its partners are free to violate them with total impunity, Rabbani argued.

It would be fair to say that ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan is the personification of this system — fearlessly prosecuting official enemies and adversaries with rabid zeal, but more docile than a dead canary when similar or greater crimes are committed by states his government and its Western partners support without qualification, said Rabbani.

If there’s one thing US officials complicit in Israel’s war crimes don’t have to worry about, it is prosecution by the ICC, he declared.

Asked about US weapons in killings in Gaza, Matthew Miller, Spokesperson for the State Department told reporters last week that American weapons cannot be deliberately used against civilians.

“Of course – and one of the tragedies of war –is that there are always civilian deaths. It is one of the great tragedies of war, and what we try to do is work to minimize civilian deaths to the greatest extent possible,” he said.

Asked if there is “any concern among the administration that by supplying this military assistance, the US might be involved in any possible war crimes against civilians”, Miller said: “No, I would say that we have made very clear that we expect Israel to conduct its operations in compliance with international law.”

“That is the standard we hold – uphold – that’s the standard we hold ourselves to; it’s the standard we hold our partners to; it’s the standard every democracy ought to be held to. And we will continue to work with them and continue to deliver messages to them that they should conduct their military operations in – and to the maximum extent possible to protect civilians from harm,” he declared.

According to the Washington-based Stimson Center, Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. military assistance since the Second World War, amounting to more than $158 billion over the past seven decades– not adjusted for inflation.

In recent years, U.S. assistance to Israel has been outlined in a 10-year memoranda of understandings, the most recent of which was signed in 2016 and pledges $38 billion in military assistance between FY2019-FY2028.

Dr Ramzy Baroud, Palestinian journalist and author, told IPS asking the US to clarify the End Use Monitoring (EUM) measures, or Israel’s compliance with the use of American weapons in its war against Gaza, may give the impression that Washington lacks awareness of how US weapons, and US tax payers money are being used.

https://ramzybaroud.net/

“Never before in the history of the US’s relationship with the Middle East has Washington been so directly involved in an Israeli war. The closest was the 1973 war, and even then, the US involvement arrived a week later, and was hardly as direct,” he said.

Every statement made by top US officials, starting with Biden, to Blinken to Sullivan, to all others, indicate that the US is a party in the war, not an outsider, a benefactor, and certainly not a mediator. They even sat in on meetings to discuss Israeli war plans on Gaza. They cannot claim ignorance, Dr, Baroud pointed out.

“In the past, Israel has violated the US’s rules on the use of US arms against civilians, and repeatedly so. Much has been written about this subject, particularly in terms of Israeli violation of the Lehy Laws.”

But what is happening right now is a whole different reality. By sending massive arm shipments, aircraft carriers, and even soldiers to Israel, the US has become a party in the world, therefore it is responsible for the unprecedented war crimes in Gaza, he argued.

“The fingerprints of US weapons are on the body of every Palestinian killed in Gaza, from the Al-Ahli Baptist Hospital, to UN schools, to every house and every street.

We don’t demand clarification regarding the use of these weapons. We know precisely how they are being used. We demand accountability from war criminals, whether in Tel Aviv or Washington,” he noted.

Meanwhile, a report on Cable News Network (CNN) October 22 said the death toll in Gaza since October 7 has risen to 4,651, with more than 14,245 wounded, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Global Community Should Realize Futility Of War: Usher In Era Of Coexistence And Conflict Management

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

The post-Cold War era witnessed two distinct phases following the dismemberment of the USSR in 1991 and another significant shift a decade after the events of 9/11 in 2001. After looking at the current geo-political developments, the emergence of a new phase seems inevitable, i.e., the era of co-existence and conflict management. The crucial moment for the start of this phase was the withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan in 2021 and the Taliban regaining control there in the same year.

The dissolution of the USSR marked the end of a bipolar power structure, and despite the US aspiration to maintain sole supremacy, the dynamics of global power have evolved into a more balanced and multipolar landscape. The geopolitical landscape has become more complex, with multiple centers of influence shaping international affairs.

Israeli attacks continue on the 27th day in Gaza
Picture: Middle East Monitor

Despite the US’s determined efforts to assert itself as the singular global superpower, events unfolded in a manner contrary to its aspirations, contributing to the emergence of a more interdependent and distributed power structure on the world stage.

The contemporary global landscape is marked by several competitors to the “once considered” sole superpower, the USA, with China taking the lead, alongside contenders such as India, and Japan, and robust European economies like Germany. Notably, in the realm of international conflicts, the US has adopted a strategy of collaborative engagement rather than unilateral action. Instances such as Afghanistan and Iraq demonstrate a reliance on alliances, reflecting the evolving nature of global collaboration.

Avoiding armed conflicts:

The concept of coexistence has found resonance, especially in regions where armed conflicts were avoided or approached diplomatically. Take the Arab Spring, for instance, where the USA supported a revolutionary uprising without being overtly involved in any armed conflict.

A critical case is Syria, where the USA navigated complex dynamics without directly confronting Russia in armed conflict. This exemplifies a shift towards a new phase of global interactions, one characterized by a subtle management of relationships. Instead of plunging into crises—be they political, economic, or security-related—the world appears to be steering towards a more measured and cooperative mode of coexistence.

Another illustration is the aftermath of the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan. The United States, having experienced a previous intervention in Afghanistan, opted not to reengage militarily. This strategic decision reflects a recognition by other powers that nations have the right to determine their own path, and imposing Western values may not be feasible. The focus has shifted from attempting to Westernize or modernize every inch of the world to respecting diverse ways of life and letting nations pursue their chosen paths without interference. This marks a departure from previous interventionist approaches.

Normalizing various long-standing conflicts:

Examining various sectors of global relations reveals a noteworthy trend in handling political crises—a shift toward coexistence. One compelling example is the diplomatic breakthrough in Arab-Israeli relations, where several Arab countries have embraced a coexistent approach with Israel and have started to develop diplomatic relations with it.

In the case of the long-standing conflict between Pakistan and India over Kashmir, a significant development occurred when India revoked Article 370 which gave special status to Jammu and Kashmir in its constitution. Surprisingly, Pakistan’s response was quite passive, avoiding any massive escalation. This demonstrated a nuanced approach, allowing India to proceed with the reconfiguration of Kashmir’s administration without triggering a full-scale crisis.

Incidents like the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi American at the Saudi embassy in Istanbul and in Saudi Arabia the execution of a Shia cleric Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, popular in Iran, led to a diplomatic crisis but were resolved by compromises without any escalation. The recent case of the murder of a Sikh separatist leader in Canada shall also close without any serious and long-term diplomatic deadlock between India and Canada.

Economic Interdependency:

A necessity of coexistence and interdependency has evolved even in the realm of economy. The ascendant economic competency of China drew considerable attention and, at times, frustration from Western powers, particularly the US. In response, the US deployed sanctions to bolster its own local economy and counteract China’s growth. However, the reality unfolded differently—China not only weathered these sanctions but continued to flourish economically.

A standout illustration is the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a flagship project of the Belt and Road Initiative. Despite initial concerns and attempts to limit China’s economic influence, the US acknowledged the impracticality of halting the economic rollercoaster that China has become. The coexistence principle became evident as the US shifted focus from attempting to stifle others’ growth to nurturing its own economic development.

Similarly, the world’s dependence on Asia, particularly in terms of manpower and being a global production factory, is undeniable.

The emergence of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) further exemplifies this era of coexistence. Despite being serious economic competitors and occasional clashes at the border, India and China, in particular, recognized the mutual benefits of collaboration. The formation of BRICS underscores the understanding that joining forces, rather than impeding one another, fosters collective growth and prosperity. This cooperative approach reflects a departure from confrontational economic strategies and emphasizes the importance of shared prosperity in the global economic landscape.

Common threats

The world is demonstrating a united front in facing common threats like terrorism, climate change,  pandemic, etc. After 9/11, terrorism was seen as a preserve of Muslim communities. However witnessing examples of incidents like the Christchurch shooting in New Zealand, Quran burnings in European cities, and persecution and harassment of minorities in Myanmar and India, terrorism is now recognized as a global concern transcending religious boundaries.

The COVID-19 crisis has showcased global cooperation and a shared sense of humanity. Nations collaboratively navigated the pandemic, emphasizing a collective response and coexistence during challenging times. This solidarity highlights the interconnectedness of the world, emphasizing a shared responsibility for each other’s well-being in the face of calamities like epidemics or natural disasters.

Another common thread unifying humanity is the urgent battle against climate change. Every country is actively addressing and managing this threat to avert serious damage to the planet. The commitment to tackling climate change underscores a collective understanding that environmental challenges require global cooperation and joint efforts to ensure the well-being of the entire world and humanity.

Global cultural connectedness

The global embrace of modernization and, to a certain extent, Westernization signifies a collective willingness to coexist amid diverse cultures. While not an absolute adoption of Western values, this acceptance is evident in the migration of Muslims and Arabs to Western countries in search of economic opportunities and a good standard of living. The welcoming of refugees from various parts of the world by developed nations exemplifies a broader acceptance, demonstrating that advanced societies acknowledge and accommodate individuals from developing nations. This trend reflects a growing understanding of the interconnectedness of the world and a shared commitment to fostering inclusivity.

Similarly, the welcome of non-Muslims in oil-rich Middle Eastern countries is another example of acceptance and harmony on the basis of merit and equal participation in the required fields.

Red Zones, turbulent realms

However, this perspective doesn’t imply that the world will turn into heaven—there will still persist conflict zones that the world must learn to navigate and live with. Regions like Israel, Palestine, Iran, and North Korea present ongoing challenges of potential confrontation for the rest of the world. The key emphasis lies in developing strategies to coexist with these ‘angry birds’ rather than allowing them to escalate into major catastrophes. While acknowledging the existence of conflict zones, the predominant trend is toward global efforts to avoid catastrophic events such as world wars. It’s a pragmatic view that recognizes the complexities of international relations and strives for a balanced and peaceful cohabitation on a global scale.

The ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia demands attention, yet there’s a notable absence of its escalation into other regions. Instead, the conflict seems to be eroding Russia’s strength, pointing towards a potential resolution soon. It’s anticipated that Russia, too, will evolve to embrace a coexistence mindset rather than persisting in a confrontational stance.

The only viable solution to the Palestine-Israel conflict is to declare it a global zone accessible by everyone and not ruled by anyone, administered by the United Nations and secured by the UN peacekeeping force.

War is not a solution

Efficient diplomacy, characterized by across-the-table talks, negotiations, and compromises, emerges as the optimal approach to overcome conflicts in the current multipolar world. Drawing lessons from history, such as the aftermath of World War II, where the devastation led European powers to unite in the form of the European Union for enduring peace, reinforces the idea that cooperation is the pathway to prosperity and development.

The notion here is clear: war is not a solution. The global community should learn from the lessons of the past and realize that managing differences through dialogue is the only sustainable way forward. Reflecting this mindset, there may come a time when even nuclear powers decide to diminish their reliance on nuclear weapons. The ultimate blessing for the world would be the dismantling of these destructive arsenals, signaling a commitment to peaceful coexistence and conflict management without resorting to a scenario like Armageddon.

(The author is an entrepreneur and a lecturer in history and development studies at Iqra University, Army Public School And College (COD), Karachi, Pakistan. Views are personal. He can be contacted at [email protected])

Read more at: https://www.southasiamonitor.org/spotlight/global-community-should-realise-futility-war-usher-era-coexistence-and-conflict

Michigan Judge Dismisses Challenge to Remove Trump from 2024 Ballot

Staff ReporterOpinion, USA 0

In a significant development on Tuesday, a Michigan judge dismissed a lawsuit attempting to utilize the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban” to prevent Donald Trump from appearing on the state’s 2024 ballot. The judge also affirmed that Michigan’s secretary of state lacks the authority under state law to determine the former president’s eligibility based on the 14th Amendment, which prohibits individuals who engaged in insurrection from holding office.

The rulings represent a substantial victory for Trump, who currently leads the 2024 Republican presidential primary race, despite facing legal challenges in various states alleging his involvement in the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol.

Last week, the Minnesota Supreme Court rejected a similar constitutional challenge against Trump, and a comparable case is pending in Colorado, with a ruling expected later this week. Experts anticipate that, regardless of the initial rulings, these cases are likely to reach the US Supreme Court, potentially settling the issue nationwide.

The liberal advocacy group involved in the Michigan case has announced an “immediate appeal” and intends to request the state Supreme Court’s intervention. The 14th Amendment, enacted after the Civil War, bars individuals who took an oath to uphold the Constitution from future office if they engaged in insurrection. However, the Constitution does not specify how to enforce this ban, and it has been applied only twice since 1919, making these challenges widely viewed as a long shot.

While these rulings maintain Trump’s position on key GOP primary ballots, they leave the door open to future challenges regarding his eligibility in the November 2024 general election.

Michigan Court of Claims Judge James Redford emphasized that questions about Trump’s role in the January 6 insurrection should be addressed by elected representatives in Congress, characterizing the matter as a “political question” outside the jurisdiction of the judicial branch. Redford stated, “A court disqualifying Trump would’ve taken that decision away from a body made up of elected representatives of the people of every state in the nation.”

He further argued that he lacked the authority under state law to compel election officials to scrutinize Trump’s eligibility based on the 14th Amendment. Redford’s decision was made in response to two cases seeking to block Trump from the Michigan ballot and a countersuit filed by Trump to preserve his position.

Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, had already announced the list of names for the 2024 presidential primaries in the state, including Trump. Rejecting arguments from anti-Trump challengers, the judge deemed it premature to disqualify Trump, considering he has not secured the GOP nomination and the 2024 general election has not taken place.

Redford acknowledged that even if Trump were to win the presidency and subsequently face new lawsuits questioning his eligibility, the 20th Amendment provides a process for addressing a president-elect no longer “qualified” to serve, wherein the vice president-elect would ascend to the presidency.

The Trump campaign welcomed the decision, highlighting victories in similar cases in Minnesota and New Hampshire. Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung criticized these legal challenges as “un-Constitutional left-wing fantasies orchestrated by monied allies of the Biden campaign.”

Conversely, Free Speech For People, the advocacy group behind the Michigan and Minnesota cases, condemned the judge’s decision, asserting that he adopted a “discredited theory” about Congress’ role in enforcing the 14th Amendment. The group plans to appeal the decision and continue legal actions in other states to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment against Donald Trump, as stated by Ron Fein, the group’s legal director.

Obama Emphasizes Need for Acknowledging Complexity in Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Resolution

Staff ReporterNation USA, Opinion 0

Former President Barack Obama emphasized the need to recognize the “complexity” of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a prerequisite for any constructive resolution. In an interview on the podcast “Pod Save America,” Obama stated, “If there’s any chance of us being able to act constructively to do something, it will require an admission of complexity and maintaining what on the surface may seem contradictory ideas that what Hamas did was horrific, and there’s no justification for it. And… that the occupation and what’s happening to Palestinians is unbearable.”

These remarks by the former president coincided with heightened Israeli military operations against Hamas in Gaza City and northern parts of the region. Additionally, American officials believe that Israel has limited time to achieve its stated goal of weakening Hamas in its ongoing operation before concerns about humanitarian suffering and civilian casualties reach a critical level.

Obama specifically criticized the discourse on social media and the activism seen on platforms like TikTok regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He argued that to truly address the issue, one must confront the complete truth and acknowledge that no one’s hands are entirely clean; everyone bears some level of complicity in the conflict.

Many people have turned to platforms like TikTok and Instagram to gain insights into the ongoing conflict. However, Obama expressed a preference for people engaging in direct conversations, especially with those they disagree with. He emphasized the importance of understanding differing perspectives and avoiding dismissive attitudes. Obama stated, “Including people who you disagree with. If you genuinely want to change this… you’ve got to figure out how to speak to somebody on the other side and listen to them and understand what they are talking about and not dismiss it.”

Washington Is Losing Credibility Over the Canada-India Spat

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

Nearly five years ago, acting on a warrant from a federal judge in New York, Canadian police arrested a high-profile Chinese businesswoman, Meng Wanzhou, as she was changing planes at Vancouver’s international airport on her way from Hong Kong to Mexico City and points beyond.

The charges against Meng, the chief financial officer of Chinese mobile phone and electronics giant Huawei, had nothing to do with Canada. They involved allegations that she had knowingly used a Huawei subsidiary, Skycom, to do business with Iran in violation of U.S. sanctions against that country. In arresting her, Ottawa was merely complying with a U.S. request in accordance with standing extradition arrangements between the two countries. But it also complied for another, less tangible reason: Canada and the United States have long been among the world’s closest allies.

Picture: FP

The economic, military, and civilian ties linking two countries with similar histories, and which stretch along either side of the world’s longest border, is so solid that one hears little hyperventilation or chest-beating about it in either country. It’s nothing like the United States’ relationship with Britain, which seems to require constant political reminders of the greatness of their partnership, or with Japan, which gets its own slightly less ritualized restatements of its importance to the United States.

In fact, Canada paid a high price for living up to its side of the relationship with Washington. Beijing condemned Meng’s arrest as arbitrary and illegal, warning Canada that there would be “grave consequences” for its actions. This proved no idle threat: Nine days after Meng’s arrest, China detained two Canadians, Michael Kovrig, a former diplomat, and Michael Spavor, an entrepreneur, on espionage charges. The two were held for the next three years, effectively as hostages, until Meng and her lawyers reached a deferred prosecution agreement with the U.S. government, allowing her to fly home. China, in return, released Kovrig and Spavor.

This saga, which consumed Canadian public attention from start to finish but rarely generated comparable attention south of Canada’s border, has been in my mind as I’ve watched Canada work its way through another sticky and delicate international spat. In this recent crisis, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau publicly expressed suspicion that India had been involved in the assassination of a Sikh activist named Hardeep Singh Nijjar on Canadian soil. This drew a furious response from New Delhi, resulting in the two countries expelling some of each other’s diplomats and India suspending new visas for Canadian applicants, among other measures.

Why India’s Warnings About Sikh Separatism Don’t Get Much Traction In The West

Staff ReporterOpinion 0

The current crisis between India and Canada has brought to light a significant divergence in their perspectives on Sikh separatism. This divide was laid bare when Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau suggested that India might have had a hand in the assassination of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Sikh separatist leader in British Columbia, back in June. New Delhi responded by emphasizing a long-standing grievance: that Canada harbors dangerous anti-India extremists whom Ottawa refuses to rein in. This is a contentious claim, and Ottawa has never officially endorsed it.

In India’s view, individuals like Nijjar epitomize these anti-India elements. Nijjar is known for his support of the Khalistan movement, which seeks to establish a separate Sikh homeland in India’s Punjab state. Indian officials accuse him of leading the Khalistan Tiger Force (KTF), a banned violent group, and formally designated him as a terrorist in 2020. Recent leaked Indian intelligence reports have alleged that Nijjar financed terrorism in India and organized arms training camps in Canada.

India’s response to this situation included issuing a new travel advisory cautioning Indians to “exercise utmost caution” in Canada and suspending visa services for Canadians. The intention behind this move is to convey that with anti-India elements allegedly operating freely in Canada, Indians are at risk. In response, Canada issued its own travel advisory advising Canadian citizens in India to “stay vigilant and exercise caution.” Additionally, Indian External Affairs Ministry spokesman Arindam Bagchi referred to Canada as a “growing reputation as a safe haven for terrorists, for extremists, and for organized crime.”

When it comes to counterterrorism, India typically aligns its positions, especially on Islamist militancy, with those of Washington and other Western capitals. However, Sikh extremism presents a different story.

Mourners carry the casket of Sikh community leader and temple president Hardeep Singh Nijjar during Antim Darshan, the first part of a day-long funeral service for him, in Surrey, British Columbia, Sunday, June 25, 2023. Canada expelled a top Indian diplomat Monday, Sept. 18, as it investigates what Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called credible allegations that India’s government may have had links to the Sikh activist’s assassination. (Darryl Dyck/The Canadian Press via AP)

In the aftermath of 9/11, counterterrorism was a central focus of U.S.-India cooperation, especially following the 2008 Mumbai attacks attributed to Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), a Pakistan-sponsored terrorist group. These attacks resulted in the deaths of 166 people, including six Americans. Both U.S. and Indian officials identified LeT as the perpetrator and, subsequently, Washington increased its covert presence in Pakistan to gather intelligence on LeT.

While the U.S. and India generally see eye to eye on the threats posed by groups like LeT, al-Qaida, Jaish-e-Mohammad, and the Islamic State, Western officials have not explicitly condemned violent Sikh separatism. U.S. officials and lawmakers did denounce two incidents involving pro-Khalistan protesters at the Indian Consulate in San Francisco this year. However, Washington hasn’t officially designated any violent Khalistan groups as terrorist organizations, although it did designate the Baluchistan Liberation Army in Pakistan as such in 2019.

Several factors may explain why India’s warnings about Sikh separatism haven’t garnered stronger support from Western governments. Firstly, unlike Islamist terrorism, the Khalistan movement rarely poses a direct threat to the West. Its violence primarily targets India, though there have been instances of threats against Indian diplomats in the West, and in 1985, Sikh terrorists bombed an Air India jet departing from Montreal, killing all on board, most of whom were Canadians.

Moreover, Sikh separatist violence has diminished in recent years, reducing its visibility in Western headlines. Many in the West, especially outside Canada, may be unaware of the seriousness of this threat in the past. During the 1980s and 1990s, a Khalistan insurgency raged in India, and U.S. officials expressed significant concern at the time. A declassified CIA memo from 1987 referred to Sikh extremism as a “long-term terrorism threat.” In 1984, radical Khalistan supporters seized a Sikh temple in Amritsar, India, leading to a violent government crackdown and the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi by two of her Sikh bodyguards. This triggered reprisal attacks on Sikhs, resulting in significant religious violence, one of the worst since the 1947 Partition of British-ruled India.

However, these historical events are not as well-remembered in the West, contributing to reduced threat perceptions. Democracy also plays a role in Western restraint. While India believes that many dangerous Sikh separatists are based in Western countries such as Canada, Great Britain, Australia, and the U.S., these nations uphold democratic principles that allow nonviolent Sikh activists to gather and demonstrate. They are cautious about implementing policies that might conflate a small number of violent Sikh separatists with a larger community of nonviolent Sikh individuals, some of whom advocate peacefully for a separate Sikh state.

In the coming days, India is likely to press Washington on the growing Khalistan threat originating from Western soil and the need for the U.S. and its Five Eyes allies to take more decisive action against it. This will be a sensitive discussion, not only due to New Delhi’s perception of Western inaction but also due to growing concerns among Sikhs in the U.S., intensified by FBI warnings, about potential threats to their safety. Furthermore, historical grievances come into play. Some prominent Indians, including Indira Gandhi and former senior intelligence officer B. Raman, have alleged that the U.S. covertly supported Sikh separatists in the 1970s and 1980s when Washington was allied with Islamabad, a likely sponsor of the Khalistan movement. While there is no concrete evidence to support this claim, it underscores the lingering mistrust in U.S.-India relations, despite their deepening partnership, particularly in the context of countering Chinese power. The differing U.S. and Indian positions on Khalistan today serve as a reminder that historical baggage can persist even in otherwise strong relationships.

-+=