In his first interview while leaving office, outgoing West Bengal Governor <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/it-was-a-courtesy-call-informed-about-general-situation-in-state-west-bengal-governor-keshari-nath-tripathi-meets-pm-modi-225913">Keshari Nath Tripathi</a> told WION that the law and order situation needs improvement in the state. Tripathi said that law enforcement isn’t fair and the police in the lower ranks are biased.&nbsp;

"There is law and order problem in the state. Violence is taking place every day, throughout the state for some reason," he said. "There should not be any discrimination in implementing law and order," Tripathi stated adding that the violence is because of the immigration from across the border.&nbsp;

"The chief minister started blaming a particular political party for it, forgetting that it was created from the within," he told WION.&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo">Calling Aparna Sen’s activism “fraudulent”, Tripathi said some people are wrongly trying to malign the image of the country. On being asked why electoral and political violence remains rampant in Bengal, Tripathi said that it’s because of Rohingya and illegal immigrants. He added that NRC should be introduced in the state and Bengal will benefit from it.&nbsp;</div>

"People have welcomed NRC, it is only hue and very by certain political parties," he said.&nbsp;

The outgoing governor also spoke about <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/poll-debacle-mamata-banerjee-holds-10-trinamool-congress-meet-after-lok-sabha-poll-drubbing-235443">Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee</a> not taking his calls, or even <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/i-bow-my-head-to-brave-soldiers-says-pm-modi-in-tribute-to-kargil-bravehearts-238885">PM Modi</a>'s for that matter. He slammed the media for “wrongly reporting” that he had submitted a 48-page report to the Centre. Tripathi said he “did not submit even a 48-word report.” He refused to confirm or deny if the imposition of President’s rule was ever recommended.&nbsp;

Speaking about Mamata Banerjee’s “politics of appeasement”, he said that the 'Jai Shri Ram' comment was wrong and unfortunate and that the Trinamool Congress chief said what she did only to attract a certain constituency.&nbsp;

Keshari Nath Tripathi is leaving office after the completion of his tenure as the Governor of West Bengal.&nbsp;

In his first interview while leaving office, outgoing West Bengal Governor Keshari Nath Tripathi told WION that the law and order situation needs improvement in the state.

In his first interview while leaving office, outgoing West Bengal Governor Keshari Nath Tripathi told WION that the law and order situation needs improvement in the state. Tripathi said that law enforcement isn’t fair and the police in the lower ranks are biased. "There is law and order problem in the state. Violence is taking place every day, throughout the state for some reason," he said. "There should not be any discrimination in implementing law and order," Tripathi stated adding that the violence is because of the immigration from across the border. "The chief minister started blaming a particular political party for it, forgetting that it was created from the within," he told WION. Calling Aparna Sen’s activism “fraudulent”, Tripathi said some people are wrongly trying to malign the image of the country. On being asked why electoral and political violence remains rampant in Bengal, Tripathi said that it’s because of Rohingya and illegal immigrants. He added that NRC should be introduced in the state and Bengal will benefit from it. "People have welcomed NRC, it is only hue and very by certain political parties," he said. The outgoing governor also spoke about Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee not taking his calls, or even PM Modi's for that matter. He slammed the media for “wrongly reporting” that he had submitted a 48-page report to the Centre. Tripathi said he “did not submit even a 48-word report.” He refused to confirm or deny if the imposition of President’s rule was ever recommended. Speaking about Mamata Banerjee’s “politics of appeasement”, he said that the 'Jai Shri Ram' comment was wrong and unfortunate and that the Trinamool Congress chief said what she did only to attract a certain constituency. Keshari Nath Tripathi is leaving office after the completion of his tenure as the Governor of West Bengal.

'Law and order situation in West Bengal needs improvement,' outgoing Governor Keshari Nath Tripathi tells WION

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/mukhtar-abbas-naqvi-those-abusing-pm-narendra-modi-now-insulting-security-forces-205047">Union Minister of Minority Affairs Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi</a>&nbsp;has expressed confidence that the BJP is going to be the first choice of Muslims in elections.

Speaking to WION's Palki Sharma Upadhyay, Naqvi said that his party the BJP's commitment is development with dignity, and empowerment without appeasement.

Here's the full transcript of the interview:

WION: When it comes to reports of violence against Muslims, do you think these incidents are happening?

Naqvi: Modi government's track record since 2014 is tremendous. It's commitment towards inclusive development is being fulfilled. Muslims have been the primary beneficiaries of many schemes rolled out by the government. Every other political party wants the Muslim vote but they don't want to do anything for their empowerment.&nbsp;

Out commitment is development with dignity, empowerment without appeasement.&nbsp;

All these reports are fake and fabricated, propaganda of some frustrated people.&nbsp;

WION: Have you ever been discriminated in this country because of being a Muslim?

Naqvi: No. I have never felt this way, right from my college till now. We have tried to end the environment of any sort of discrimination. Ours is the commitment of development without discrimination.&nbsp;

WION: Do you believer that the BJP will ever be the first choice of a Muslim voter?

Naqvi: Yes, I strongly believe so. In 2014, around 12-15 per cent Muslims had voted for the BJP. In 2019 it grew to 25 per cent. This was a major revolutionary change in the mindset of the people. You will see further change in the next elections.&nbsp;

WION: Will triple talaq bill be passed this time?

Naqvi: We hope it gets passed this time. This has nothing to do with Islam, it is something which should come to an end. It is not a good practice, it is not a political issue. Risks are associated with running the government, if you don't take risks, reforms can't happen and without reforms a government cannot perform.&nbsp;

WION: United States, which is traditionally seen as an ally, came out with a report which was critical of your government and its treatment of minorities, your views?

Naqvi: That country should see its own track record when it comes to the minorities. In our country, the constitutional, democratic and religious rights of all minorities are safe and well protected. We don't need any advice from anyone.&nbsp;

We therefore reject such reports.&nbsp;

WION: Global leaders are of the view that religious minorities in Pakistan are suffering, what would you say?

Naqvi: At the time of partition, 22-23 per cent minorities existed in Pakistan, which is not even two per cent now. This is a cause of worry. Ours have grown from 8 to around 18-20 per cent as people say. This is the difference which we need to understand. This country is secular because the majority of people here, the major community has the DNA of secularism and unity.&nbsp;

WION: Your thoughts on China’s detaining ethnic <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/pompeo-calls-chinas-treatment-of-uighurs-stain-of-the-century-237014">Uighurs and other Muslims in Xinjiang</a>?

Naqvi: I know of such reports but I don't have much to comment on this but I can say that people's rights cannot be crushed. &nbsp;

Union Minister of Minority Affairs Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi has expressed confidence that the BJP is going to be the first choice of Muslims in elections. Speaking to WION's Palki Sharma Upadhyay, Naqvi said that his party the BJP's commitment is development with dignity, and empowerment without appeasement.

Union Minister of Minority Affairs Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi has expressed confidence that the BJP is going to be the first choice of Muslims in elections. Speaking to WION's Palki Sharma Upadhyay, Naqvi said that his party the BJP's commitment is development with dignity, and empowerment without appeasement. Here's the full transcript of the interview: WION: When it comes to reports of violence against Muslims, do you think these incidents are happening? Naqvi: Modi government's track record since 2014 is tremendous. It's commitment towards inclusive development is being fulfilled. Muslims have been the primary beneficiaries of many schemes rolled out by the government. Every other political party wants the Muslim vote but they don't want to do anything for their empowerment. Out commitment is development with dignity, empowerment without appeasement. All these reports are fake and fabricated, propaganda of some frustrated people. WION: Have you ever been discriminated in this country because of being a Muslim? Naqvi: No. I have never felt this way, right from my college till now. We have tried to end the environment of any sort of discrimination. Ours is the commitment of development without discrimination. WION: Do you believer that the BJP will ever be the first choice of a Muslim voter? Naqvi: Yes, I strongly believe so. In 2014, around 12-15 per cent Muslims had voted for the BJP. In 2019 it grew to 25 per cent. This was a major revolutionary change in the mindset of the people. You will see further change in the next elections. WION: Will triple talaq bill be passed this time? Naqvi: We hope it gets passed this time. This has nothing to do with Islam, it is something which should come to an end. It is not a good practice, it is not a political issue. Risks are associated with running the government, if you don't take risks, reforms can't happen and without reforms a government cannot perform. WION: United States, which is traditionally seen as an ally, came out with a report which was critical of your government and its treatment of minorities, your views? Naqvi: That country should see its own track record when it comes to the minorities. In our country, the constitutional, democratic and religious rights of all minorities are safe and well protected. We don't need any advice from anyone. We therefore reject such reports. WION: Global leaders are of the view that religious minorities in Pakistan are suffering, what would you say? Naqvi: At the time of partition, 22-23 per cent minorities existed in Pakistan, which is not even two per cent now. This is a cause of worry. Ours have grown from 8 to around 18-20 per cent as people say. This is the difference which we need to understand. This country is secular because the majority of people here, the major community has the DNA of secularism and unity. WION: Your thoughts on China’s detaining ethnic Uighurs and other Muslims in Xinjiang? Naqvi: I know of such reports but I don't have much to comment on this but I can say that people's rights cannot be crushed.

BJP's commitment is development without appeasement: Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi to WION

As Prime Minister Modi wraps up his first multilateral summit after his re-election, the question is what was India doing at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation or SCO? What's India's position, role and target?

Let's start from the beginning. India was inducted as a full member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation on Russia's insistence. It wanted to counter China. But the Russia-China equation has changed since. They have become strategic allies. So India must figure out its place and agenda. At the SCO, India's biggest opportunities are also its biggest challenges.

Trade: The yawning gap

The SCO has eight member countries. They cover 20 per cent of the world's GDP and 42 per cent of the world's population. The commercial potential is immense. Yet Central Asia hasn't been the traditional focus of India when it comes to trade. Look at the numbers. India's bilateral trade with Central Asia is one-fiftieth that of China's. While India's figures stood at less than $2 billion, China's trade with Central Asia crossed $50 billion in 2018. Same with Russia. The bilateral trade between India and Russia is barely $10 billion. That number for China and Russia is more than $100 billion. Why hasn't India done more? That brings us to the next challenge/opportunity.

Connectivity: The China-Pakistan Cordon

India shares no land border with any of the Central Asian countries. It must travel via Pakistan or China. Poor connectivity results in poor trade, that's a no-brainer. The operationalisation of the Chabahar port may change that, but it's early days. Geography remains a constraint. As does policy (though in this case, we're following the best). India is the only SCO country that has not endorsed China's Belt and Road Initiative. By the looks of it, that may not change. So India will have to create alternatives.

Counter-terrorism: With Pakistan?

Terrorism the biggest talking point and the biggest challenge too. The elephant in the room is Pakistan, an established state sponsor of terrorism. But it won't be singled out at China's insistence. So under SCO, India participates in counter-terror military exercises with Pakistan and China, the two countries that are the most likely adversaries of India in war, the only two countries with which India has fought a war. Sounds ridiculous? There's more. All member countries are part of RATS - the Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure. It requires all members to share intelligence to combat terrorism. India should share intelligence with a group that has Pakistan on board?

It is one thing to say that multi-lateral forums keep bilateral differences at bay. It's quite another to walk the talk. PM Modi of India and PM Imran Khan of Pakistan came face to face in Bishkek seven times. They did not talk, or so the reports say. It is hard to believe this strained relationship won't have a bearing on the summit.

Challenges vs opportunities

Plus India must balance ties with the Americans. Buying the S-400 missile defence system from Russia despite objections from Washington, working with China to counter trade protectionism in the middle of Beijing's trade war with Washington - it's walking the diplomatic tightrope. We call it strategic autonomy.

So challenges abound. As do opportunities. SCO isn't just about photo ops. Central Asian countries want a bigger role for India. They aren't beholden to China. They shot down Beijing's proposal for an SCO development bank and free trade agreement. If India makes the right moves, it can emerge as the more reliable partner and regional power for countries that have always lived under the shadow of Russia and China.

As Prime Minister Modi wraps up his first multilateral summit after his re-election, the question is what was India doing at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation or SCO?

As Prime Minister Modi wraps up his first multilateral summit after his re-election, the question is what was India doing at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation or SCO? What's India's position, role and target? Let's start from the beginning. India was inducted as a full member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation on Russia's insistence. It wanted to counter China. But the Russia-China equation has changed since. They have become strategic allies. So India must figure out its place and agenda. At the SCO, India's biggest opportunities are also its biggest challenges. Trade: The yawning gap The SCO has eight member countries. They cover 20 per cent of the world's GDP and 42 per cent of the world's population. The commercial potential is immense. Yet Central Asia hasn't been the traditional focus of India when it comes to trade. Look at the numbers. India's bilateral trade with Central Asia is one-fiftieth that of China's. While India's figures stood at less than $2 billion, China's trade with Central Asia crossed $50 billion in 2018. Same with Russia. The bilateral trade between India and Russia is barely $10 billion. That number for China and Russia is more than $100 billion. Why hasn't India done more? That brings us to the next challenge/opportunity. Connectivity: The China-Pakistan Cordon India shares no land border with any of the Central Asian countries. It must travel via Pakistan or China. Poor connectivity results in poor trade, that's a no-brainer. The operationalisation of the Chabahar port may change that, but it's early days. Geography remains a constraint. As does policy (though in this case, we're following the best). India is the only SCO country that has not endorsed China's Belt and Road Initiative. By the looks of it, that may not change. So India will have to create alternatives. Counter-terrorism: With Pakistan? Terrorism the biggest talking point and the biggest challenge too. The elephant in the room is Pakistan, an established state sponsor of terrorism. But it won't be singled out at China's insistence. So under SCO, India participates in counter-terror military exercises with Pakistan and China, the two countries that are the most likely adversaries of India in war, the only two countries with which India has fought a war. Sounds ridiculous? There's more. All member countries are part of RATS - the Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure. It requires all members to share intelligence to combat terrorism. India should share intelligence with a group that has Pakistan on board? It is one thing to say that multi-lateral forums keep bilateral differences at bay. It's quite another to walk the talk. PM Modi of India and PM Imran Khan of Pakistan came face to face in Bishkek seven times. They did not talk, or so the reports say. It is hard to believe this strained relationship won't have a bearing on the summit. Challenges vs opportunities Plus India must balance ties with the Americans. Buying the S-400 missile defence system from Russia despite objections from Washington, working with China to counter trade protectionism in the middle of Beijing's trade war with Washington - it's walking the diplomatic tightrope. We call it strategic autonomy. So challenges abound. As do opportunities. SCO isn't just about photo ops. Central Asian countries want a bigger role for India. They aren't beholden to China. They shot down Beijing's proposal for an SCO development bank and free trade agreement. If India makes the right moves, it can emerge as the more reliable partner and regional power for countries that have always lived under the shadow of Russia and China.

Analysis: What is India doing at the SCO?

It has been more than a week since the deadly attacks in Sri Lanka in which 250 people were killed. The attacks have left a deep scar in the live of the people of Sri Lanka and raised questions on the response of the government.

Sri Lankan leader Namal Rajapaksa spoke to WION's Palki Sharma about the attacks and why he thinks the government has not done enough. Here are the excerpts:

WION: It's been more than a week since the attacks in Sri Lanka. Do you think the country is safe now? Has the government been able to secure Sri Lanka?

Namal Rajapaksa: The forces are doing their level best. If you look at last eight days, they have been very active and acting very fast on information they get. And public has been very cooperative. We see on television, we hear from security forces that how public shares information. But as far as the government is concerned, we don't have faith in the President and the Prime Minister (looking at the way) they acted - before the incident, during the incident and after the incident.

WION: The US ambassador to Sri Lanka has said they still have information about more attacks possibly in the days ahead. At a time like this, what can you as a leader also do? You have raised your concern, you have said the government needs to come together. But beyond that, what do you want to do?

Namal Rajapaksa: We will work with the civil and military organisations, and also with the community to bring back normalcy in the lives of the people of Sri Lanka. The Sri Lankan people have to get back to their normal lives. I was meeting my local leaders today (Tuesday) and political organisations in my constituency. People are not moving out of their houses because they are scared as they do not have confidence in the government that it will look after them, that the government can make people safe. So people have to come back to their normal lives. And normalcy has to be brought to the country.

WION: Many would say that at a time when your country is going through this crisis, the fact that you are saying all of this - even your uncle said he will contest for President - and blaming the government, is political opportunism. How do you respond to that?

Namal Rajapaksa: It's not that he announced it, he said he is ready for it. It is upto the party to decide who is going to be the candidate. Candidates are not decided by me, my father or my uncle. It is the party and the people who decide. And this is not the time to talk about who is going to be the candidate. Anyone can say they are ready for elections, but candidacy should be decided when the elections are called.

WION: But blaming the government at a time like this. Don't you think it weakens their morale?

Namal Rajapaksa: There is nothing to weaken in this government and we are not blaming the government. We are telling what the government is saying. It is a government minister who said his father knew beforehand. It is not Namal Rajapksa who is saying this, but the government is saying. When they blame themselves, and when they don't take any sort of action, what else can we do?

WION: Are you going to ask for an early election because the government is in disarray and the country needs a stable, decisive government?

Namal Rajapaksa: See, Parliament should have been dissolved then and there when we dissolved it. If we would have dissolved it at that time and gone for parliamentary election, something like this would have never happened. I am talking about October. Then and there, we should have gone for election. But now, today, tomorrow or for next 15 days is not the time to talk about election. But definitely, if this government has some sort of courtesy, it should resign.

It has been more than a week since the deadly attacks in Sri Lanka in which 250 people were killed. The attacks have left a deep scar in the live of the people of Sri Lanka and raised questions on the response of the government.

It has been more than a week since the deadly attacks in Sri Lanka in which 250 people were killed. The attacks have left a deep scar in the live of the people of Sri Lanka and raised questions on the response of the government. Sri Lankan leader Namal Rajapaksa spoke to WION's Palki Sharma about the attacks and why he thinks the government has not done enough. Here are the excerpts: WION: It's been more than a week since the attacks in Sri Lanka. Do you think the country is safe now? Has the government been able to secure Sri Lanka? Namal Rajapaksa: The forces are doing their level best. If you look at last eight days, they have been very active and acting very fast on information they get. And public has been very cooperative. We see on television, we hear from security forces that how public shares information. But as far as the government is concerned, we don't have faith in the President and the Prime Minister (looking at the way) they acted - before the incident, during the incident and after the incident. WION: The US ambassador to Sri Lanka has said they still have information about more attacks possibly in the days ahead. At a time like this, what can you as a leader also do? You have raised your concern, you have said the government needs to come together. But beyond that, what do you want to do? Namal Rajapaksa: We will work with the civil and military organisations, and also with the community to bring back normalcy in the lives of the people of Sri Lanka. The Sri Lankan people have to get back to their normal lives. I was meeting my local leaders today (Tuesday) and political organisations in my constituency. People are not moving out of their houses because they are scared as they do not have confidence in the government that it will look after them, that the government can make people safe. So people have to come back to their normal lives. And normalcy has to be brought to the country. WION: Many would say that at a time when your country is going through this crisis, the fact that you are saying all of this - even your uncle said he will contest for President - and blaming the government, is political opportunism. How do you respond to that? Namal Rajapaksa: It's not that he announced it, he said he is ready for it. It is upto the party to decide who is going to be the candidate. Candidates are not decided by me, my father or my uncle. It is the party and the people who decide. And this is not the time to talk about who is going to be the candidate. Anyone can say they are ready for elections, but candidacy should be decided when the elections are called. WION: But blaming the government at a time like this. Don't you think it weakens their morale? Namal Rajapaksa: There is nothing to weaken in this government and we are not blaming the government. We are telling what the government is saying. It is a government minister who said his father knew beforehand. It is not Namal Rajapksa who is saying this, but the government is saying. When they blame themselves, and when they don't take any sort of action, what else can we do? WION: Are you going to ask for an early election because the government is in disarray and the country needs a stable, decisive government? Namal Rajapaksa: See, Parliament should have been dissolved then and there when we dissolved it. If we would have dissolved it at that time and gone for parliamentary election, something like this would have never happened. I am talking about October. Then and there, we should have gone for election. But now, today, tomorrow or for next 15 days is not the time to talk about election. But definitely, if this government has some sort of courtesy, it should resign.

Sri Lankan government playing politics over crisis: Namal Rajapaksa to WION

As Sri Lanka reels in the aftermath of the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/sri-lanka-plotters-planning-more-attacks-us-ambassador-teplitz-214704">suicide attacks</a>, PM Wickremesinghe in a candid interview to WION conceded that the country needs to "<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/islamic-state-airs-video-purporting-to-be-leader-abu-bakr-al-baghdadi-214624">face up to terrorism</a>" and ensure "it doesn't drag on for too long" while adding that intelligence related to the attack didn't "flow up" which could have helped to prevent the blasts.

"There have been some shortcomings in the security establishment. Let's see who is responsible," the Lankan prime minister said while informing that those responsible for the lapses will be held accountable.

"We could have prevented all the blasts or many other blasts, that is where our fault lies," he said.

The April 21st Easter bombings shook the island nation as it reverberated around the world. Authorities have said at least 253 people have died so far, the toll could still rise further as several are still critically injured.

The Lankan prime minister said there were "shortcomings" in the security establishment. President Sirisena tried has tried to shake up the security agencies in the past week by asking police chief Pujith Jayasundara and defence secretary Hemasiri Fernando to quit to pave the way for a probe and put a new structure in place.

PM &nbsp;Ranil Wickremesinghe felt let down by the fact that no one acted on the impending threat and he too was left out of the loop.

"The problem is there are dead bodies, people have died, the economy has suffered and there was information which wasn't acted upon, that's really the issue," he said.

After the blasts there have been several angles linking the attacks, some said there was a "political conspiracy". The prime minister said if there was any evidence of a conspiracy, it will be probed.

The prime minister said the political backlash was expected after the magnitude of the attack comparing it to the LTTE era in the 80s.

"We are entering a new phase in global terrorism as against homegrown terrorism which was on domestic political issues," he said, adding, "this is internal jihad, can we tackle it? That will be answered in the coming few weeks."

The prime minister said the confidence of the people can now only be restored on the basis of how the government tackles various issues including the economy and bringing back normalcy in the country scarred by the attack.

As Sri Lanka reels in the aftermath of the suicide attacks, PM Wickremesinghe in a candid interview to WION conceded that the country needs to "face up to terrorism" and ensure "it doesn't drag on for too long" while adding that intelligence related to the attack didn't "flow up" which could have helped to prevent the blasts.

As Sri Lanka reels in the aftermath of the suicide attacks, PM Wickremesinghe in a candid interview to WION conceded that the country needs to "face up to terrorism" and ensure "it doesn't drag on for too long" while adding that intelligence related to the attack didn't "flow up" which could have helped to prevent the blasts. "There have been some shortcomings in the security establishment. Let's see who is responsible," the Lankan prime minister said while informing that those responsible for the lapses will be held accountable. "We could have prevented all the blasts or many other blasts, that is where our fault lies," he said. The April 21st Easter bombings shook the island nation as it reverberated around the world. Authorities have said at least 253 people have died so far, the toll could still rise further as several are still critically injured. The Lankan prime minister said there were "shortcomings" in the security establishment. President Sirisena tried has tried to shake up the security agencies in the past week by asking police chief Pujith Jayasundara and defence secretary Hemasiri Fernando to quit to pave the way for a probe and put a new structure in place. PM Ranil Wickremesinghe felt let down by the fact that no one acted on the impending threat and he too was left out of the loop. "The problem is there are dead bodies, people have died, the economy has suffered and there was information which wasn't acted upon, that's really the issue," he said. After the blasts there have been several angles linking the attacks, some said there was a "political conspiracy". The prime minister said if there was any evidence of a conspiracy, it will be probed. The prime minister said the political backlash was expected after the magnitude of the attack comparing it to the LTTE era in the 80s. "We are entering a new phase in global terrorism as against homegrown terrorism which was on domestic political issues," he said, adding, "this is internal jihad, can we tackle it? That will be answered in the coming few weeks." The prime minister said the confidence of the people can now only be restored on the basis of how the government tackles various issues including the economy and bringing back normalcy in the country scarred by the attack.

Global terrorism has entered Sri Lanka, PM Wickremesinghe tells WION

After 17 years of war, Afghanistan is on the cusp of peace. The kind of peace Ronald Reagan spoke about — not the absence of conflict, but the ability to manage conflict by peaceful means. The Americans are pushing forth with a ceasefire agreement. The Russians are holding an intra-Afghan dialogue. Simultaneous attempts are underway. It’s the course that suits all sides.

All but two. The Government of Afghanistan and the Government of India. One has been left out of the peace talks, the second remains reluctant to join them.

Let’s begin with India. Some things have remained constant in the evolving matrix of Indian foreign policy. One is the assertion that talks and terror don’t go hand in hand. The second is India’s refusal to send troops to a foreign land without a United Nations mandate. Exceptions have been made, but Afghanistan may not qualify for that just yet. It’s an election year in India. Talking to the Taliban is just the kind of foreign policy hot potato any government would avoid, especially this one.

You could call it dithering. You could say India is weighing its options. You could also say that India is waiting to see how the chips fall. Delhi has tested the waters. In a major departure from policy, it sent two “unofficial representatives” to Moscow last year to “observe” the peace talks. But it’s not something the government wants to discuss. When the Army Chief in India said we should talk to the Taliban without preconditions, the government pretended the episode never took place. Radio silence. Some off-the-record reactions called it the Army Chief’s “personal opinion”.

The fact is that India is too deeply invested in Afghanistan, both in terms of money and diplomatic capital. India is Afghanistan’s biggest regional donor. Development assistance from New Delhi to Kabul stands at more than $2 billion. India started pouring in help right after the fall of the Taliban regime.&nbsp;

Over the years, India has built infrastructure — roads, dams, schools, hospitals, a cricket stadium and the country’s new Parliament (with a library now made famous by the American President). India is seen as a friendly nation with ties to all ethnic groups. India can leverage this, but not without recognising the party that rules Kabul. That could soon be the Taliban.

They’re now being treated as legitimate stakeholders. The Afghan politicians call them “one of us”. The outsiders are only too happy to accept, bury the hatchet and move on. Look at the peace talks and those brokering them.

The US wants to exit Afghanistan after having fought a long, frustrating and costly war. $45 billion every year, says President Donald Trump. He wants out and in his desperation trusts the Taliban to espouse peace and keep their word. The Pakistanis want these talks. They have nurtured the Taliban at the risk of upsetting the world and now want to seize their chance to play kingmakers in the strategically vital neighbourhood. The Russians are still coming to terms with their unceremonious exit a few decades ago, have revived their presence, and now want peace to safeguard their Central Asian assets.&nbsp;

And of course, the Taliban themselves. They control more than 60 per cent of Afghan territory. They want foreign forces to exit their land. They’re talking on their terms and have already secured the promise of America’s exit without giving anything in return. The Taliban strikes in Afghanistan haven’t abated with progress in the talks.

India has maintained that peace in Afghanistan should be an Afghan-led process. India is the only one still sticking to that position, apart from President Ghani who is out on a limb. He wants to be part of the peace talks but the Taliban won’t have him. They don’t recognise this government. They call it America’s puppet, not worth talking to. He wants the Americans to stay, he’s offering concessions, but Donald Trump would have none of it. The US President says his country is done with nation-building. Nobody is betting on the incumbent Afghan government.

Meanwhile, the Taliban have reached out to New Delhi. They’re offering dialogue, promising to safeguard India’s investments in Chabahar, even promising to protect minorities, including Hindus and Sikhs, in Afghanistan. They’re sounding like a political party. They seem to want to morph into one and seek legitimacy to rule a country they already pretty much control.

The choice before India is not really a choice. It’s a question of when rather than if. It’s a tough question in an election year. And the Modi government seems to be in no hurry to answer it. 
 
(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-afghan-peace-talks-why-india-won-t-spell-its-stand-just-yet-2716946">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

&nbsp;

After 17 years of war, Afghanistan is on the cusp of peace. The kind of peace Ronald Reagan spoke about — not the absence of conflict, but the ability to manage conflict by peaceful means.

After 17 years of war, Afghanistan is on the cusp of peace. The kind of peace Ronald Reagan spoke about — not the absence of conflict, but the ability to manage conflict by peaceful means. The Americans are pushing forth with a ceasefire agreement. The Russians are holding an intra-Afghan dialogue. Simultaneous attempts are underway. It’s the course that suits all sides. All but two. The Government of Afghanistan and the Government of India. One has been left out of the peace talks, the second remains reluctant to join them. Let’s begin with India. Some things have remained constant in the evolving matrix of Indian foreign policy. One is the assertion that talks and terror don’t go hand in hand. The second is India’s refusal to send troops to a foreign land without a United Nations mandate. Exceptions have been made, but Afghanistan may not qualify for that just yet. It’s an election year in India. Talking to the Taliban is just the kind of foreign policy hot potato any government would avoid, especially this one. You could call it dithering. You could say India is weighing its options. You could also say that India is waiting to see how the chips fall. Delhi has tested the waters. In a major departure from policy, it sent two “unofficial representatives” to Moscow last year to “observe” the peace talks. But it’s not something the government wants to discuss. When the Army Chief in India said we should talk to the Taliban without preconditions, the government pretended the episode never took place. Radio silence. Some off-the-record reactions called it the Army Chief’s “personal opinion”. The fact is that India is too deeply invested in Afghanistan, both in terms of money and diplomatic capital. India is Afghanistan’s biggest regional donor. Development assistance from New Delhi to Kabul stands at more than $2 billion. India started pouring in help right after the fall of the Taliban regime. Over the years, India has built infrastructure — roads, dams, schools, hospitals, a cricket stadium and the country’s new Parliament (with a library now made famous by the American President). India is seen as a friendly nation with ties to all ethnic groups. India can leverage this, but not without recognising the party that rules Kabul. That could soon be the Taliban. They’re now being treated as legitimate stakeholders. The Afghan politicians call them “one of us”. The outsiders are only too happy to accept, bury the hatchet and move on. Look at the peace talks and those brokering them. The US wants to exit Afghanistan after having fought a long, frustrating and costly war. $45 billion every year, says President Donald Trump. He wants out and in his desperation trusts the Taliban to espouse peace and keep their word. The Pakistanis want these talks. They have nurtured the Taliban at the risk of upsetting the world and now want to seize their chance to play kingmakers in the strategically vital neighbourhood. The Russians are still coming to terms with their unceremonious exit a few decades ago, have revived their presence, and now want peace to safeguard their Central Asian assets. And of course, the Taliban themselves. They control more than 60 per cent of Afghan territory. They want foreign forces to exit their land. They’re talking on their terms and have already secured the promise of America’s exit without giving anything in return. The Taliban strikes in Afghanistan haven’t abated with progress in the talks. India has maintained that peace in Afghanistan should be an Afghan-led process. India is the only one still sticking to that position, apart from President Ghani who is out on a limb. He wants to be part of the peace talks but the Taliban won’t have him. They don’t recognise this government. They call it America’s puppet, not worth talking to. He wants the Americans to stay, he’s offering concessions, but Donald Trump would have none of it. The US President says his country is done with nation-building. Nobody is betting on the incumbent Afghan government. Meanwhile, the Taliban have reached out to New Delhi. They’re offering dialogue, promising to safeguard India’s investments in Chabahar, even promising to protect minorities, including Hindus and Sikhs, in Afghanistan. They’re sounding like a political party. They seem to want to morph into one and seek legitimacy to rule a country they already pretty much control. The choice before India is not really a choice. It’s a question of when rather than if. It’s a tough question in an election year. And the Modi government seems to be in no hurry to answer it. (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Afghan peace talks: Why India won’t spell its stand just yet

'Identity crisis is defined as the failure to achieve ego identity. This stage of psychological development is called identity cohesion versus role confusion. Successful resolution depends on one's progress through previous developmental stages, centering on issues like trust.'

When German psychologist Erik Erikson coined the term and defined the concept, he was referring to adolescents. At 71, the state of Pakistan seems to be behaving like one.&nbsp;

Two statements made over the last two days betray Pakistan's identity crisis. One was by their Army Chief General Qamar Jawed Bajwa. He said he supports peace initiatives vis a vis India and that they're not a sign of weakness. The second was Prime Minister Imran Khan's unsolicited advise to India on how to treat minorities and the fanciful assertion that he will show how to right such wrongs.&nbsp;

The little said about the first statement the better. Pakistan's record on fomenting terror and launching unprovoked border attacks is no secret. Neither is the fact that hurting India is their raison d'etre. General Bajwa has reiterated the fact that his army exists as a force relative to India, not an absolute entity. India defines their identity.&nbsp;

As for Mr Khan, his statement has riled up many in India, and rightly so. He's got a good dose of sentiment. Let's introduce him to some facts now.&nbsp;

In 1947, religious minorities constituted over 20 per cent of Pakistan's population. That number has now fallen to 3 per cent.&nbsp;

A report by the US State Department claims that religious minorities are harassed in Pakistan. The report condemns state-sanctioned discrimination against the Ahmadis and other minorities.&nbsp;

In 2017, at least 231 people belonging to minority communities were killed in several incidents of violence in Pakistan.

Now Prime Minister Imran Khan says he'll be their knight in shining armour. That's all very well, except that nobody believes him. He's been in office for a little more than a hundred days. The biggest headline to come out of Pakistan during this period, apart from the collapsing economy, was the story of a Christian woman and the persecution she faces.&nbsp;

Asia Bibi is a Pakistani Christian who was accused of blasphemy. Asia Bibi was on death row for eight years. She was cleared of all charges on 31st October 2018. Almost two months later, she's still in jail. That's where she'll celebrate Christmas.&nbsp;

Imran Khan's govt hasn't found the courage to release her yet because it is under pressure from hardliners. Her acquittal had led to violent demonstrations that paralysed a large part of Pakistan. Angry mobs of protesters took to the streets calling for her beheading. And what did the government do? Imran Khan who wants to show the world how to treat minorities has kept Asia Bibi in jail. &nbsp;

The second case in point is that of Atif Mian, an internationally-renowned economist. Atif Mian was Imran Khan's pick for Pakistan's Economic Advisory Council. But he was soon fired. Reason? He's an Ahmadi - a religious minority.&nbsp;

The Ahmadis are an Islamic group that Pakistan doesn't recognise as Muslims. The second amendment to the constitution of Pakistan prohibits Ahmadis from identifying themselves as Muslims. When you apply for a passport in Pakistan, you must declare that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was an "impostor prophet" and that his followers are non-Muslims.&nbsp;

In 1985, the government of Pakistan divided the country's electorate into Muslim and non-Muslim. Voters were required to declare whether they accepted Muhammed as the final Prophet. Since then, most Ahmedis have not participated in the electoral process. &nbsp;

Then there are the Pashtuns who constitute about 15 per cent of Pakistan's population but remain marginalised and persecuted. Earlier this year, tens of thousands of them poured out on the streets of Peshawar to demand their rights. Led by a young activist Manzoor Pashteen, they rallied against forced disappearances and atrocities on tribal groups.&nbsp;

Pakistan's cupboard is stuffed with such skeletons, which is why political pundits wonder why Imran Khan brought this upon himself. Why wade into a controversy unbidden? Why draw the world's attention to Pakistan's poor record on minorities with a boast that failed to impress anyone?

Perhaps just one of the many political hit wickets of Mr Khan. Or the reflection of the identity crisis of his country's rulers. 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

'Identity crisis is defined as the failure to achieve ego identity. This stage of psychological development is called identity cohesion versus role confusion. Successful resolution depends on one's progress through previous developmental stages, centering on issues like trust.

'Identity crisis is defined as the failure to achieve ego identity. This stage of psychological development is called identity cohesion versus role confusion. Successful resolution depends on one's progress through previous developmental stages, centering on issues like trust.' When German psychologist Erik Erikson coined the term and defined the concept, he was referring to adolescents. At 71, the state of Pakistan seems to be behaving like one. Two statements made over the last two days betray Pakistan's identity crisis. One was by their Army Chief General Qamar Jawed Bajwa. He said he supports peace initiatives vis a vis India and that they're not a sign of weakness. The second was Prime Minister Imran Khan's unsolicited advise to India on how to treat minorities and the fanciful assertion that he will show how to right such wrongs. The little said about the first statement the better. Pakistan's record on fomenting terror and launching unprovoked border attacks is no secret. Neither is the fact that hurting India is their raison d'etre. General Bajwa has reiterated the fact that his army exists as a force relative to India, not an absolute entity. India defines their identity. As for Mr Khan, his statement has riled up many in India, and rightly so. He's got a good dose of sentiment. Let's introduce him to some facts now. In 1947, religious minorities constituted over 20 per cent of Pakistan's population. That number has now fallen to 3 per cent. A report by the US State Department claims that religious minorities are harassed in Pakistan. The report condemns state-sanctioned discrimination against the Ahmadis and other minorities. In 2017, at least 231 people belonging to minority communities were killed in several incidents of violence in Pakistan. Now Prime Minister Imran Khan says he'll be their knight in shining armour. That's all very well, except that nobody believes him. He's been in office for a little more than a hundred days. The biggest headline to come out of Pakistan during this period, apart from the collapsing economy, was the story of a Christian woman and the persecution she faces. Asia Bibi is a Pakistani Christian who was accused of blasphemy. Asia Bibi was on death row for eight years. She was cleared of all charges on 31st October 2018. Almost two months later, she's still in jail. That's where she'll celebrate Christmas. Imran Khan's govt hasn't found the courage to release her yet because it is under pressure from hardliners. Her acquittal had led to violent demonstrations that paralysed a large part of Pakistan. Angry mobs of protesters took to the streets calling for her beheading. And what did the government do? Imran Khan who wants to show the world how to treat minorities has kept Asia Bibi in jail. The second case in point is that of Atif Mian, an internationally-renowned economist. Atif Mian was Imran Khan's pick for Pakistan's Economic Advisory Council. But he was soon fired. Reason? He's an Ahmadi - a religious minority. The Ahmadis are an Islamic group that Pakistan doesn't recognise as Muslims. The second amendment to the constitution of Pakistan prohibits Ahmadis from identifying themselves as Muslims. When you apply for a passport in Pakistan, you must declare that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was an "impostor prophet" and that his followers are non-Muslims. In 1985, the government of Pakistan divided the country's electorate into Muslim and non-Muslim. Voters were required to declare whether they accepted Muhammed as the final Prophet. Since then, most Ahmedis have not participated in the electoral process. Then there are the Pashtuns who constitute about 15 per cent of Pakistan's population but remain marginalised and persecuted. Earlier this year, tens of thousands of them poured out on the streets of Peshawar to demand their rights. Led by a young activist Manzoor Pashteen, they rallied against forced disappearances and atrocities on tribal groups. Pakistan's cupboard is stuffed with such skeletons, which is why political pundits wonder why Imran Khan brought this upon himself. Why wade into a controversy unbidden? Why draw the world's attention to Pakistan's poor record on minorities with a boast that failed to impress anyone? Perhaps just one of the many political hit wickets of Mr Khan. Or the reflection of the identity crisis of his country's rulers. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Living in a glass house, suffering from an identity crisis

For a country still reeling from the aftermath of the recent assembly election results, this may be easy to miss: <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/with-president-solihs-visit-maldives-resets-india-first-policy-india-reciprocates-with-14-bn-aid-package-184877">an election India won outside its borders</a>. &nbsp;

While Indian political leaders were busy criss-crossing states for poll yatras, the prime minister was attending a swearing-in ceremony outside the country — the only one he'd not visited in the neighbourhood in the four years he'd been in office. (And that's saying a lot for a man accused of spending more time globe-trotting than governing.) In November, in the thick of election season, Prime Minister Narendra Modi witnessed Ibrahim Mohammed Solih take oath as the president of the Maldives. In diplomatic terms — India had beaten China in an election in Male. Not many expected this win, but most welcomed it.&nbsp;

It was hardly surprising then that President Solih's first foreign visit was to India. Today, in a string of meetings, India and the Maldives have pressed the reset button to revive a relationship that was being ruined by Chinese money. India has promised more than a billion dollars in aid. Bilateral pacts have been signed. But this visit is as significant in bilateral terms, as for its larger geopolitical impact. &nbsp;

All business, including business of the political kind, is driven by money. Asia needs a lot of it, $26 trillion dollars according to one estimate. That's how much this region needs for investment in highways, railways and other infrastructure projects. The big moneybags is Beijing. It splurges in the garb of being a benign harbinger of development. It extracts market access and strategic influence in return. It's what we call China's debt diplomacy.&nbsp;

But history is no mean player in geopolitics. India has been an unofficial security guarantor to smaller neighbours in the Indian ocean. Island states like Mauritius, the Maldives and Seychelles depend on New Delhi for military training and equipment. India has the access China desires. These countries sit on key sea routes. Hence the tug of war between New Delhi and Beijing.&nbsp;

As China launched a charm offensive with its Belt and Road Initiative, most of India's neighbours were awed by its cash. They began slipping into China's orbit. India worried about this "policy of encirclement" but it did not have money to match China's. It used diplomatic dexterity. China's aggression played in India's favour too. Country after country began seeing through the plot. Chinese influence became a domestic political issue. From Malaysia to Sri Lanka to the Maldives, the political players changed on the promise of containing China. &nbsp;

For India, it's an opportunity worth converting. But Delhi's record on delivery is hardly inspiring. Plus, many of these countries with their crushing burden of debt are too far gone in China's fold to fully exit. For the Maldives alone, its debt to China is equivalent to 20 per cent &nbsp;of its GDP. There is an unspecified number of islands leased to China for building tourist resorts. There's a free trade agreement that has helped spike Chinese imports to 18 per cent. There's no clarity on how much money the government owes to Beijing. &nbsp;

This is a test for President Solih. This is also a test for India. It must deliver on promises. Prime Minister Modi's diplomacy will have to be followed up with deft action. &nbsp; 
&nbsp;

For a country still reeling from the aftermath of the recent assembly election results, this may be easy to miss: an election India won outside its borders. While Indian political leaders were busy criss-crossing states for poll yatras, the prime minister was attending a swearing-in ceremony outside the country — the only one he'd not visited in the neighbourhood in the four years he'd been in office.

For a country still reeling from the aftermath of the recent assembly election results, this may be easy to miss: an election India won outside its borders. While Indian political leaders were busy criss-crossing states for poll yatras, the prime minister was attending a swearing-in ceremony outside the country — the only one he'd not visited in the neighbourhood in the four years he'd been in office. (And that's saying a lot for a man accused of spending more time globe-trotting than governing.) In November, in the thick of election season, Prime Minister Narendra Modi witnessed Ibrahim Mohammed Solih take oath as the president of the Maldives. In diplomatic terms — India had beaten China in an election in Male. Not many expected this win, but most welcomed it. It was hardly surprising then that President Solih's first foreign visit was to India. Today, in a string of meetings, India and the Maldives have pressed the reset button to revive a relationship that was being ruined by Chinese money. India has promised more than a billion dollars in aid. Bilateral pacts have been signed. But this visit is as significant in bilateral terms, as for its larger geopolitical impact. All business, including business of the political kind, is driven by money. Asia needs a lot of it, $26 trillion dollars according to one estimate. That's how much this region needs for investment in highways, railways and other infrastructure projects. The big moneybags is Beijing. It splurges in the garb of being a benign harbinger of development. It extracts market access and strategic influence in return. It's what we call China's debt diplomacy. But history is no mean player in geopolitics. India has been an unofficial security guarantor to smaller neighbours in the Indian ocean. Island states like Mauritius, the Maldives and Seychelles depend on New Delhi for military training and equipment. India has the access China desires. These countries sit on key sea routes. Hence the tug of war between New Delhi and Beijing. As China launched a charm offensive with its Belt and Road Initiative, most of India's neighbours were awed by its cash. They began slipping into China's orbit. India worried about this "policy of encirclement" but it did not have money to match China's. It used diplomatic dexterity. China's aggression played in India's favour too. Country after country began seeing through the plot. Chinese influence became a domestic political issue. From Malaysia to Sri Lanka to the Maldives, the political players changed on the promise of containing China. For India, it's an opportunity worth converting. But Delhi's record on delivery is hardly inspiring. Plus, many of these countries with their crushing burden of debt are too far gone in China's fold to fully exit. For the Maldives alone, its debt to China is equivalent to 20 per cent of its GDP. There is an unspecified number of islands leased to China for building tourist resorts. There's a free trade agreement that has helped spike Chinese imports to 18 per cent. There's no clarity on how much money the government owes to Beijing. This is a test for President Solih. This is also a test for India. It must deliver on promises. Prime Minister Modi's diplomacy will have to be followed up with deft action.

Maldives: The election win India should not forget

Pakistan is unravelling. Protests have erupted like a rash. Hardliners are baying for blood. Their target is a Christian woman. Asia Bibi spent nine years in jail, on death row over a cup of water. She was charged under the draconian blasphemy law. The Supreme Court has commuted the death sentence. But the darbar-e-awaam won't let her live. They want her hanged.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
And they're gunning for everyone in the way.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
The Tehreek e Labaik is openly asking soldiers to revolt, calling into question the suitability of an Ahmadi like Gen Bajwa to head the Pakistani armed forces. They've threatened the Supreme Court judges, forcing them to justify their order. They're mighty upset with Prime Minister Imran Khan who warned them against protesting and promptly flew to Beijing.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
None of this is very surprising, given that it's happening in Pakistan. What's surprising is the certificate of merit being handed out to those in the line of fire. The judiciary has been commended as "bold". The Prime Minister is being congratulated for "displaying political courage." It's the same judiciary that has been dragging its feet on every terror case including 26/11. This is the same Imran Khan who orchestrated crippling protests against Nawaz Sharif. The same man who repeatedly and publicly endorsed the blasphemy law to pander to a section of the electorate. Today he's become the shining beacon of political uprightness. As for the army, the chickens have come home to roost. The fundamentalists they gave teeth to, are now biting them. &nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
The public challenge being issued by the protestors is limiting the maneuverability of those being challenged. They have no choice but to respond with tough words. Tough action may follow, if they have any spine left. But these won't be guided by goodness. The army, the courts and the government in Pakistan are making a virtue out of necessity. 
&nbsp; 
Asia Bibi doesn't deserve this persecution. Just as those being projected as her "protectors" don't deserve any praise. By doing away with her death sentence, they're buying a new lease of life for themselves. &nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Pakistan is unravelling. Protests have erupted like a rash. Hardliners are baying for blood. Their target is a Christian woman. Asia Bibi spent nine years in jail, on death row over a cup of water.

Pakistan is unravelling. Protests have erupted like a rash. Hardliners are baying for blood. Their target is a Christian woman. Asia Bibi spent nine years in jail, on death row over a cup of water. She was charged under the draconian blasphemy law. The Supreme Court has commuted the death sentence. But the darbar-e-awaam won't let her live. They want her hanged. And they're gunning for everyone in the way. The Tehreek e Labaik is openly asking soldiers to revolt, calling into question the suitability of an Ahmadi like Gen Bajwa to head the Pakistani armed forces. They've threatened the Supreme Court judges, forcing them to justify their order. They're mighty upset with Prime Minister Imran Khan who warned them against protesting and promptly flew to Beijing. None of this is very surprising, given that it's happening in Pakistan. What's surprising is the certificate of merit being handed out to those in the line of fire. The judiciary has been commended as "bold". The Prime Minister is being congratulated for "displaying political courage." It's the same judiciary that has been dragging its feet on every terror case including 26/11. This is the same Imran Khan who orchestrated crippling protests against Nawaz Sharif. The same man who repeatedly and publicly endorsed the blasphemy law to pander to a section of the electorate. Today he's become the shining beacon of political uprightness. As for the army, the chickens have come home to roost. The fundamentalists they gave teeth to, are now biting them. The public challenge being issued by the protestors is limiting the maneuverability of those being challenged. They have no choice but to respond with tough words. Tough action may follow, if they have any spine left. But these won't be guided by goodness. The army, the courts and the government in Pakistan are making a virtue out of necessity. Asia Bibi doesn't deserve this persecution. Just as those being projected as her "protectors" don't deserve any praise. By doing away with her death sentence, they're buying a new lease of life for themselves. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Why Asia Bibi's 'protectors' deserve no praise

Day after <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/mahinda-rajapaksa-sri-lankas-lord-of-the-rings-back-in-power-174789">Mahinda Rajapaksa</a> took oath as the new Prime Minister of Sri Lanka, his son and Member of Parliament Namal has reached out to India. New Delhi is yet to endorse Rajapaksa's prime ministership, saying it is "watching developments closely." In an exclusive interview to WION, Namal Rajapaksa, who in the past has accused India of influencing elections and acting against his father's presidency, has said they're "ready to put the past behind."

"Indian influence in the region is very important. India has to play a bigger role when it comes to the region's development - we have always believed that. Before 2015, there was a misrepresentation of his (Rajapaksa's) policies. Now we want to talk about the future, and not the past. We were non-aligned and we always want to be non-aligned," said Namal.

When asked about China's dominance and mounting debt, he called Beijing Colombo's partner. "My father offered Hambantota port to India first. Since the deal with India did not materialise, we had to go to China. There is nothing for India to be worried about. China and Sri Lanka are economic partners. China has invested a huge amount of money in our country. But we want friendly relations with every country."

Namal also defended President Maithripala Sirisena's decision to sack the Wickremesinghe government, saying, "Appointing Rajapaksa as Prime Minister was in national interest. Valid reasons were given which were purely based on national interest and keeping in mind national security."

President Sirisena, in a sudden turn of events, sacked Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe on Friday and replaced him with former President Mahinda Rajapaksa. The President then <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/sri-lankas-president-to-reconvene-parliament-on-november-5-says-new-pm-174824">prorogued the Sri Lankan Parliament</a> prompting protests and a demand for the House to be reconvened, to allow lawmakers to choose their leader.

Wickremesinghe has <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/sri-lanka-attorney-general-refuses-to-endorse-sacking-of-ranil-wickremesinghe-174723">called his removal unconstitutional</a> and has demanded he be allowed to prove his parliamentary majority.

Observers call it the first such unconstitutional transfer of power in Sri Lanka. But Namal today insisted that it is not a constitutional crisis. He called it a "political crisis" and was confident that his father Mahinda Rajapaksa has the required numbers to prove majority in Parliament.

Attacking Wickremesinghe, he said, "I ask: What reforms have taken place here during Wickremesinghe's term? They promised to amend the Constitution, but did nothing. They promised reforms but nothing happened. They postponed the provincial election for three years. Now they are talking about all this. What happened in their government?"

The return of Rajapaksa, a former president who crushed a decades-old Tamil insurgency, has stoked fears of fresh political and ethnic division in the island nation of 21 million mostly Sinhalese Buddhists, with Tamil and Muslim minorities.

Namal Rajapakse said his party was prepared to put the past behind. Listing out his father's priorities, Namal said, "We are looking at bringing economic and social stability in the country, rehabilitation of former LTTE cadres and of course the constitutional amendment which should be acceptable to everyone."

India and western countries have expressed concern about Rajapaksa's ties to China, as he ushered in billions of dollars of investments from Beijing during his tenure as President, to help rebuild the country after a 26-year civil war against ethnic Tamil separatists ended in 2009. In fact, China was the first country to congratulate Rajapaksa and endorse him as the new Prime Minister.&nbsp;

The power struggle in Sri Lanka comes at a critical time for its economy, with credit rating agencies warning that the turmoil could raise financing costs and lower foreign capital inflows as it attempts to refinance sizeable government debts.

Day after Mahinda Rajapaksa took oath as the new Prime Minister of Sri Lanka, his son and Member of Parliament Namal has reached out to India. New Delhi is yet to endorse Rajapaksa's prime ministership, saying it is "watching developments closely.

Day after Mahinda Rajapaksa took oath as the new Prime Minister of Sri Lanka, his son and Member of Parliament Namal has reached out to India. New Delhi is yet to endorse Rajapaksa's prime ministership, saying it is "watching developments closely." In an exclusive interview to WION, Namal Rajapaksa, who in the past has accused India of influencing elections and acting against his father's presidency, has said they're "ready to put the past behind." "Indian influence in the region is very important. India has to play a bigger role when it comes to the region's development - we have always believed that. Before 2015, there was a misrepresentation of his (Rajapaksa's) policies. Now we want to talk about the future, and not the past. We were non-aligned and we always want to be non-aligned," said Namal. When asked about China's dominance and mounting debt, he called Beijing Colombo's partner. "My father offered Hambantota port to India first. Since the deal with India did not materialise, we had to go to China. There is nothing for India to be worried about. China and Sri Lanka are economic partners. China has invested a huge amount of money in our country. But we want friendly relations with every country." Namal also defended President Maithripala Sirisena's decision to sack the Wickremesinghe government, saying, "Appointing Rajapaksa as Prime Minister was in national interest. Valid reasons were given which were purely based on national interest and keeping in mind national security." President Sirisena, in a sudden turn of events, sacked Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe on Friday and replaced him with former President Mahinda Rajapaksa. The President then prorogued the Sri Lankan Parliament prompting protests and a demand for the House to be reconvened, to allow lawmakers to choose their leader. Wickremesinghe has called his removal unconstitutional and has demanded he be allowed to prove his parliamentary majority. Observers call it the first such unconstitutional transfer of power in Sri Lanka. But Namal today insisted that it is not a constitutional crisis. He called it a "political crisis" and was confident that his father Mahinda Rajapaksa has the required numbers to prove majority in Parliament. Attacking Wickremesinghe, he said, "I ask: What reforms have taken place here during Wickremesinghe's term? They promised to amend the Constitution, but did nothing. They promised reforms but nothing happened. They postponed the provincial election for three years. Now they are talking about all this. What happened in their government?" The return of Rajapaksa, a former president who crushed a decades-old Tamil insurgency, has stoked fears of fresh political and ethnic division in the island nation of 21 million mostly Sinhalese Buddhists, with Tamil and Muslim minorities. Namal Rajapakse said his party was prepared to put the past behind. Listing out his father's priorities, Namal said, "We are looking at bringing economic and social stability in the country, rehabilitation of former LTTE cadres and of course the constitutional amendment which should be acceptable to everyone." India and western countries have expressed concern about Rajapaksa's ties to China, as he ushered in billions of dollars of investments from Beijing during his tenure as President, to help rebuild the country after a 26-year civil war against ethnic Tamil separatists ended in 2009. In fact, China was the first country to congratulate Rajapaksa and endorse him as the new Prime Minister. The power struggle in Sri Lanka comes at a critical time for its economy, with credit rating agencies warning that the turmoil could raise financing costs and lower foreign capital inflows as it attempts to refinance sizeable government debts.

Rajapaksa's appointment in national interest, India shouldn't be worried, son Namal tells WION

When it comes to diplomatic ambiguity, India has taken the cake on Jerusalem. Consider the statement from the Ministry of External Affairs -&nbsp;

&quot;India&#39;s position on Palestine is independent and consistent. It is shaped by our views and interests, and not determined by any third country&quot;

What does it tell you about India&#39;s position on Jerusalem? That the position remains what the last official submission said? Or that we have a position but we won&#39;t share it? Or that we&#39;ve spoken because we had to, but we&#39;d rather pretend what&#39;s happening isn&#39;t happening. To put it mildly, it&#39;s unbecoming for a country that hopes to secure a seat at the global high table. Jerusalem is the biggest point of debate in geopolitics today. To dither on it is to squander diplomatic capital.

The crisis should, instead, be made the most of. It&#39;s an opportunity for New Delhi. While Washington has undermined its role as a fair mediator, other players are jumping in. Russia&#39;s Vladimir Putin, after having played a decisive role in Syria and touring Turkey and Egypt, is being seen as a strong contender willing to get his hands dirty. He is emerging as the strongest outsider in this region with a finger in every pie.

China, earlier this year, sought to play a more prominent role in the region by issuing a four-point proposal on the Palestine conflict. President Xi Jinping offered to invest in industrial parks and solar power plants in Palestine. China already has substantial investments in Israel and would have been a defence partner too, had it not been for American roadblocks. Beijing also came up with a strongly worded response to Trump&#39;s decision to declare Jerusalem the capital of Israel, saying it will potentially flare up regional tensions. It is taking a stand.

France&#39;s Macron has been showing increasing interest in West Asia. He visited Saudi Arabia and invited Lebanese Prime Minister Hariri to his country. He told Israeli PM Netanyahu that Trump&#39;s moves are a threat to regional stability. Even Singapore has spoken out against unilateral decisions that might impede the peace process.

India, in contrast, remains conspicuous by its vague response. It&#39;s a pity because India is also the best poised to play a more substantial role. The Palestinians trust India, the first non-Arab country to have recognised the PLO&#39;s authority as &quot;the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.&quot; Isreal calls India a strategic partner and a lot of other things that made headlines this summer when Modi became the first Indian PM to visit Tel Aviv.

The bilateral defence cooperation is worth billions&nbsp;and growing. India has no political stakes in the region and can leverage its good offices with both sides. It is seen favourably by the Arab players and has ties with Iran. In short, it is a neutral player with an international stature and a reputation for being a responsible state.

The current regime in New Delhi made a lot of fuss and lofty pronouncements on doing away with hypocrisy on the Israel-Palestine issue. The Prime Minister then walked the talk by skipping a visit to Ramallah when he went to Israel. It&#39;s time to demonstrate the same position of strength by offering to resuscitate the peace process.

Fears of such a move opening the Pandora&#39;s box on Kashmir are unfounded. Kashmir is not Jerusalem. The conflict is different. The dynamics are different. India has stood firm on the contention that this is a bilateral issue and rightly refused all offers of international mediation. The West Asian players have taken no such position.

India has successfully played a constructive role in the Afghan situation. It is seen as a reliable force in rebuilding the country. It is training the military and police force. It whittled away the chance it had in Myanmar by again taking a myopic view of the Rohingya crisis. Delhi shouldn&#39;t repeat the mistake in Jerusalem. To be recognised as a global leader, it has to demonstrate leadership and the willingness to deal with sticky affairs.

(Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).

The current regime in New Delhi made a lot of fuss and lofty pronouncements on doing away with hypocrisy on the Israel-Palestine issue

When it comes to diplomatic ambiguity, India has taken the cake on Jerusalem. Consider the statement from the Ministry of External Affairs - "India's position on Palestine is independent and consistent. It is shaped by our views and interests, and not determined by any third country" What does it tell you about India's position on Jerusalem? That the position remains what the last official submission said? Or that we have a position but we won't share it? Or that we've spoken because we had to, but we'd rather pretend what's happening isn't happening. To put it mildly, it's unbecoming for a country that hopes to secure a seat at the global high table. Jerusalem is the biggest point of debate in geopolitics today. To dither on it is to squander diplomatic capital. The crisis should, instead, be made the most of. It's an opportunity for New Delhi. While Washington has undermined its role as a fair mediator, other players are jumping in. Russia's Vladimir Putin, after having played a decisive role in Syria and touring Turkey and Egypt, is being seen as a strong contender willing to get his hands dirty. He is emerging as the strongest outsider in this region with a finger in every pie. China, earlier this year, sought to play a more prominent role in the region by issuing a four-point proposal on the Palestine conflict. President Xi Jinping offered to invest in industrial parks and solar power plants in Palestine. China already has substantial investments in Israel and would have been a defence partner too, had it not been for American roadblocks. Beijing also came up with a strongly worded response to Trump's decision to declare Jerusalem the capital of Israel, saying it will potentially flare up regional tensions. It is taking a stand. France's Macron has been showing increasing interest in West Asia. He visited Saudi Arabia and invited Lebanese Prime Minister Hariri to his country. He told Israeli PM Netanyahu that Trump's moves are a threat to regional stability. Even Singapore has spoken out against unilateral decisions that might impede the peace process. India, in contrast, remains conspicuous by its vague response. It's a pity because India is also the best poised to play a more substantial role. The Palestinians trust India, the first non-Arab country to have recognised the PLO's authority as "the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people." Isreal calls India a strategic partner and a lot of other things that made headlines this summer when Modi became the first Indian PM to visit Tel Aviv. The bilateral defence cooperation is worth billions and growing. India has no political stakes in the region and can leverage its good offices with both sides. It is seen favourably by the Arab players and has ties with Iran. In short, it is a neutral player with an international stature and a reputation for being a responsible state. The current regime in New Delhi made a lot of fuss and lofty pronouncements on doing away with hypocrisy on the Israel-Palestine issue. The Prime Minister then walked the talk by skipping a visit to Ramallah when he went to Israel. It's time to demonstrate the same position of strength by offering to resuscitate the peace process. Fears of such a move opening the Pandora's box on Kashmir are unfounded. Kashmir is not Jerusalem. The conflict is different. The dynamics are different. India has stood firm on the contention that this is a bilateral issue and rightly refused all offers of international mediation. The West Asian players have taken no such position. India has successfully played a constructive role in the Afghan situation. It is seen as a reliable force in rebuilding the country. It is training the military and police force. It whittled away the chance it had in Myanmar by again taking a myopic view of the Rohingya crisis. Delhi shouldn't repeat the mistake in Jerusalem. To be recognised as a global leader, it has to demonstrate leadership and the willingness to deal with sticky affairs. (Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).

Opinion: India and the Jerusalem crisis, silence isn't always gold

I never thought I&#39;d be saying this, but Donald Trump, for once, is making sense. &quot;We cannot solve problems by making the same failed assumptions. Old problems need new solutions&quot;, he said.&nbsp; It was a pleasant change to see him sticking to the script. (It&#39;s time the world recognised the virtues of the teleprompter too!) Low on his trademark garbled rhetoric, more coherent. He declared his commitment to achieving peace, announcing the shift of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and recognised the latter as the capital of Israel.

Bad in law, unjust to the Palestinians, unfair on the part of a mediator, a blow to decades of US foreign policy, diplomatic arson, the kiss of death for peace - the naysayers have spared no effort in crafting the choicest expressions of criticism. And yet, the move makes sense.

Did anyone have illusions about where the American loyalties lay in this conflict? Others pretended to be fair, Trump wore his bias on his sleeve.

Did the so-called peace process make any tangible progress when America stuck to the previous strategy of maintaining a precarious balance? Previous Presidents failed. There&#39;s nothing to suggest that Trump&#39;s advisor and son-in-law Jared Kushner&#39;s efforts and visits had made any headway.

Will the Arab world and America&#39;s European allies do anything beyond the token protests? The EU is mulling pushing for the Palestinian capital in Jerusalem. Only, Jerusalem is under Israeli control and under the current circumstances, the idea is impractical.

The Arab League is meeting&nbsp;on Saturday, but it&#39;s going through the motions. The Sunni states, led by Saudi Arabia see Israel as a potential partner, no more a pariah, as they prepare to deal with the perceived threat from Iran. There are elements who care about the &quot;Palestinian cause&quot; but no Arab ally of Ramallah has offered more than lip service for a while now.

Protests have begun, there&#39;s a call for another intifada or uprising by Hamas leader Ismail Haniya. But can the decision of one sovereign nation to recognise the right of another sovereign nation to determine its capital be held hostage to threats of protests?

To Trump&#39;s credit, he has made good on an election promise that most of his predecessors broke. Yes, he undermines America&#39;s stature as a peace broker. Yes, it&#39;s a gamble. But it&#39;s a better bet than seven decades of a bloody status quo which, by the way, is also a misnomer. The American President promised an unconventional approach to policymaking and governance. He&#39;s doing it. Shifting the orbit. Jolting a system. If the gambit doesn&#39;t pay off, you cannot accuse him of not having tried.

(Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).

Donald Trump is shifting the orbit. Jolting a system. If the gambit doesn't pay off, you cannot accuse him of not having tried.

I never thought I'd be saying this, but Donald Trump, for once, is making sense. "We cannot solve problems by making the same failed assumptions. Old problems need new solutions", he said. It was a pleasant change to see him sticking to the script. (It's time the world recognised the virtues of the teleprompter too!) Low on his trademark garbled rhetoric, more coherent. He declared his commitment to achieving peace, announcing the shift of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and recognised the latter as the capital of Israel. Bad in law, unjust to the Palestinians, unfair on the part of a mediator, a blow to decades of US foreign policy, diplomatic arson, the kiss of death for peace - the naysayers have spared no effort in crafting the choicest expressions of criticism. And yet, the move makes sense. Did anyone have illusions about where the American loyalties lay in this conflict? Others pretended to be fair, Trump wore his bias on his sleeve. Did the so-called peace process make any tangible progress when America stuck to the previous strategy of maintaining a precarious balance? Previous Presidents failed. There's nothing to suggest that Trump's advisor and son-in-law Jared Kushner's efforts and visits had made any headway. Will the Arab world and America's European allies do anything beyond the token protests? The EU is mulling pushing for the Palestinian capital in Jerusalem. Only, Jerusalem is under Israeli control and under the current circumstances, the idea is impractical. The Arab League is meeting on Saturday, but it's going through the motions. The Sunni states, led by Saudi Arabia see Israel as a potential partner, no more a pariah, as they prepare to deal with the perceived threat from Iran. There are elements who care about the "Palestinian cause" but no Arab ally of Ramallah has offered more than lip service for a while now. Protests have begun, there's a call for another intifada or uprising by Hamas leader Ismail Haniya. But can the decision of one sovereign nation to recognise the right of another sovereign nation to determine its capital be held hostage to threats of protests? To Trump's credit, he has made good on an election promise that most of his predecessors broke. Yes, he undermines America's stature as a peace broker. Yes, it's a gamble. But it's a better bet than seven decades of a bloody status quo which, by the way, is also a misnomer. The American President promised an unconventional approach to policymaking and governance. He's doing it. Shifting the orbit. Jolting a system. If the gambit doesn't pay off, you cannot accuse him of not having tried. (Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).

Opinion: Trump's orbit shift, this year in Jerusalem

Author

Zee News Rajasthan

Editor

Palki Sharma

Home

Live Tv

Latest

World

India

Business

Entertainment

Sports

Opinions

Videos

Photos

Gravitas

Lifestyle

Science

Tech

Rajasthan News in Hindi: In-depth coverage of Rajasthan Crime, Political News, Education, Rajasthan Weather Update and Latest Rajasthan News on Zee News Rajasthan.