<p>Melania Trump has threatened to sue Hunter Biden for $1 billion for defamation over his comments linking the US First Lady to late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. But in reality, the former model turned wife of US President Donald Trump is not completely in the clear yet when it comes to her links with Epstein and her jailed associate Ghislaine Maxwell. She had been photographed with both of them a couple of decades ago. Here is the real situation that you should know.</p><h2>What did Hunter Biden claim about Melania Trump and Jeffrey Epstein?</h2><p>In an interview this month on Channel 5 with Andrew Callaghan titled "Hunter Biden Returns," the son of the Democratic ex-president Joe Biden claimed: “Epstein introduced Melania to Trump. The connections are, like, so wide and deep.”</p><p>He cited Trump biographer Michael Wolff as the source of his remarks.</p><h2>What did Melania Trump’s legal team tell Hunter Biden over Epstein remarks?</h2><p>Melania Trump's attorney Alejandro Brito sent Hunter Biden a legal notice, demanding a retraction and public apology, calling his statement “false, defamatory, disparaging, and inflammatory.”</p><p>Brito said Hunter's remarks caused “overwhelming financial and reputational harm” as they were widely disseminated throughout various digital media.</p><p>“The video has since been re-published by various media outlets, journalists, and political commentators with millions of social media followers who have disseminated the false and defamatory statements therein to tens of millions of people worldwide.</p><p>“Failure to comply will leave Mrs Trump with no choice but to pursue any and all legal rights and remedies available to her to recover the overwhelming financial and reputational harm that you have caused her to suffer," Brito wrote.</p><h2>What did Michael Wolff claim about Melania Trump and Jeffrey Epstein?</h2><p>Michael Wolff, a journalist-author who Brito called a “serial fabulist,” wrote in his biography of Donald Trump, <i>Landslide</i>, that it was Epstein who introduced Melania to Trump. He doubled down on this claim in a 2017 Daily Beast interview. Wolff even quoted Epstein as allegedly saying that the first time Trump and Melania “slept together was on my plane.” He also claimed Melania was introduced to Trump via Paolo Zampolli, a modelling agent, and that she was “very involved” in Epstein’s social circles.</p><h2>How Melania Trump pursued Wolff to retract claims about her links with Epstein</h2><p>After pressure from Melania's legal team,The Daily Beast on August 1 retracted the original story containing Wolff's claims. Melania’s memoir, <i>Melania</i>, recounts meeting Donald Trump at New York’s Kit Kat Klub in September 1998.</p><p><a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/ghislaine-maxwell-shifted-to-lower-security-prison-wion-1754140444941/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/ghislaine-maxwell-shifted-to-lower-security-prison-wion-1754140444941/embed</a></p><h2>Photographic evidence and known interactions between Melania and Epstein</h2><p>The only known photo of Melania Trump with Epstein was taken on 12 February 2000 at the Mar-a-Lago resort, also showing Donald Trump and Epstein's now-jailed associate Ghislaine Maxwell. There are a couple of other photos of Melania with Trump and Maxwell, without Epstein. The photo in Mar-a-Lago was from a social gathering. There are no solo photos of Melania and Epstein.</p><h2>Melania’s response to Epstein allegations</h2><p>Melania has consistently denied any significant relationship with Epstein and has actively refuted Wolff’s narrative both in her memoir and through legal steps. The $1 billion threat against Hunter Biden marks a significant escalation in defending her reputation amid continuing scrutiny around Maxwell.<br>&nbsp;</p>

Hunter Biden's claims are sourced from Michael Wolff, a journalist-author who claimed in the past that it was Epstein who introduced Melania to Trump. Wolff even quoted Epstein as allegedly saying that the first time Trump and Melania ‘slept together was on my plane.’

Melania Trump has threatened to sue Hunter Biden for $1 billion for defamation over his comments linking the US First Lady to late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. But in reality, the former model turned wife of US President Donald Trump is not completely in the clear yet when it comes to her links with Epstein and her jailed associate Ghislaine Maxwell. She had been photographed with both of them a couple of decades ago. Here is the real situation that you should know. What did Hunter Biden claim about Melania Trump and Jeffrey Epstein? In an interview this month on Channel 5 with Andrew Callaghan titled "Hunter Biden Returns," the son of the Democratic ex-president Joe Biden claimed: “Epstein introduced Melania to Trump. The connections are, like, so wide and deep.” He cited Trump biographer Michael Wolff as the source of his remarks. What did Melania Trump’s legal team tell Hunter Biden over Epstein remarks? Melania Trump's attorney Alejandro Brito sent Hunter Biden a legal notice, demanding a retraction and public apology, calling his statement “false, defamatory, disparaging, and inflammatory.” Brito said Hunter's remarks caused “overwhelming financial and reputational harm” as they were widely disseminated throughout various digital media. “The video has since been re-published by various media outlets, journalists, and political commentators with millions of social media followers who have disseminated the false and defamatory statements therein to tens of millions of people worldwide. “Failure to comply will leave Mrs Trump with no choice but to pursue any and all legal rights and remedies available to her to recover the overwhelming financial and reputational harm that you have caused her to suffer," Brito wrote. What did Michael Wolff claim about Melania Trump and Jeffrey Epstein? Michael Wolff, a journalist-author who Brito called a “serial fabulist,” wrote in his biography of Donald Trump, Landslide, that it was Epstein who introduced Melania to Trump. He doubled down on this claim in a 2017 Daily Beast interview. Wolff even quoted Epstein as allegedly saying that the first time Trump and Melania “slept together was on my plane.” He also claimed Melania was introduced to Trump via Paolo Zampolli, a modelling agent, and that she was “very involved” in Epstein’s social circles. How Melania Trump pursued Wolff to retract claims about her links with Epstein After pressure from Melania's legal team,The Daily Beast on August 1 retracted the original story containing Wolff's claims. Melania’s memoir, Melania, recounts meeting Donald Trump at New York’s Kit Kat Klub in September 1998. https://www.wionews.com/videos/ghislaine-maxwell-shifted-to-lower-security-prison-wion-1754140444941/embed Photographic evidence and known interactions between Melania and Epstein The only known photo of Melania Trump with Epstein was taken on 12 February 2000 at the Mar-a-Lago resort, also showing Donald Trump and Epstein's now-jailed associate Ghislaine Maxwell. There are a couple of other photos of Melania with Trump and Maxwell, without Epstein. The photo in Mar-a-Lago was from a social gathering. There are no solo photos of Melania and Epstein. Melania’s response to Epstein allegations Melania has consistently denied any significant relationship with Epstein and has actively refuted Wolff’s narrative both in her memoir and through legal steps. The $1 billion threat against Hunter Biden marks a significant escalation in defending her reputation amid continuing scrutiny around Maxwell.

<p>Hunter Biden's claims are sourced from Michael Wolff, a journalist-author who claimed in the past that it was Epstein who introduced Melania to Trump. Wolff even quoted Epstein as allegedly saying that the first time Trump and Melania ‘slept together was on my plane.’</p>

Melania Trump vows to sue Hunter Biden for $1 billion over Epstein comments. But what are her links with the late sex offender?

<p>As this story is being written, the US Army's National Guard is roaming the night streets of Washington DC, as part of President Donald Trump's law and order crackdown on the American capital. The troops deployment began on the night of Tuesday (Aug 12). The deployment, including at the Washington Monument, is ostensibly to tackle rising crime and homelessness in the US capital. Here is what we know:</p><h2>How many National Guard troops are deployed in Washington DC?</h2><p>Senior Army officials said that the troops were deploying with DC police on Tuesday night at the start of the mobilisation. Trump's Attorney General Pam Bondi is overseeing the operations.</p><p>In a post on X, US Army said: "DC National Guard reporting for duty. The #USArmy has activated the DC National Guard as directed by the President under Title 32 to assist Federal and Washington DC law enforcement within the national capitol." &nbsp;</p><p>According to reports, nearly 800 DC National Guard soldiers were activated, though the number is not officially confirmed.<br>Between 100 to 200 soldiers are expected to be actively supporting law enforcement. Their duties would include administrative support and logistics, besides giving a visible enforcement presence on the DC streets.</p><h2>What is the Title 32 status of National Guard?</h2><p>The National Guard is operating under the ‘Title 32’ status. This means they will be under local authority but federally funded. They are exempted from the Posse Comitatus Act, which restricts active-duty military from law enforcement operations. The deployment is part of the Trump-ordered "D.C. Safe and Beautiful Task Force," with some 500 federal law enforcement agents from FBI, DEA and other agencies backing &nbsp;the city’s police force during this period.</p><h2>Where all are the National Guard troops deployed in Washington DC?</h2><p>National Guard soldiers have been spotted at the District of Columbia National Guard Headquarters, which is near the Capitol, the seat of the US Congress.</p><p>They were seen loading supplies such as ammunition and ready-to-eat meals, as per social media images. One post from the 273rd Military Police Company showed armoured Humvees parked near the Washington Monument. This indicates the troops are present in the National Mall area.<br>Five armoured personnel carriers were seen parked at the base of the Washington Monument, said another X post.</p><p>The deployment appears to be along high-traffic areas and known hotspots of crime.</p><h2>How is the National Guard helping local law enforcement of DC?</h2><p>The National Guard is working with the Metropolitan Police Department, and is tasked with protecting federal property. This includes national monuments and federal buildings. They're also bolstering the law enforcement presence in public spaces, including near homeless camps such as parks and underpasses. &nbsp;It is expected that they'll help remove the homeless encampments.</p><p>Military personnel were also seen at the US Park Police Anacostia Operations Facility, meaning they are deployed in Southeast DC as well.</p><p>They willl help law enforcement agencies like the Metropolitan Police, FBI, DEA, and ATF.</p><p><a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/trump-on-deal-we-will-know-in-2-minutes-national-guard-in-washington-d-c-1754946860169/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/trump-on-deal-we-will-know-in-2-minutes-national-guard-in-washington-d-c-1754946860169/embed</a></p><p>&nbsp;</p><h2>What powers do National Guard troops have in DC and how long will they stay?</h2><p>The National Guard cannot make arrests, as they're prevented from it under the District’s Home Rule Act. Any detainees will have to be handed over to local or federal law enforcement.<br>The troops are carrying standard-issue firearms, typically rifles, but are not actively armed for law enforcement duties, according to reports.</p><p>As of now, the National Guard will be deployed till September 25, unless the US Congress either extends or terminates their presence. They will be removed if Trump determines that law and order have been restored.&nbsp;</p><h2>Why is National Guard patrolling Washington DC? Trump claims vs data on crime</h2><p>Trump and his supporters have been slamming recent high-profile crimes, like an attempted carjacking of a Department of Government Efficiency staffer on August 3.<br>Even as Trump called DC a lawless city overrun by violent gangs and "drugged-out maniacs," actual data showed that violent crime in the city is down 26 per cent compared to 2024, a 30-year low.&nbsp;<br>Homicides were down 12 per cent, and carjackings decreased nearly 50 per cent since 2023.</p><p>Trump has faced opposition, with the DC Mayor Muriel Bowser terming the deployment unnecessary and unsettling, while opposition lawmakers labelled it a "brazen power grab."<br>The National Homelessness Law Center argued that the deployment could worsen conditions for DC's nearly 900 homeless individuals, while The Brennan Center for Justice called it 'unprecedented.'</p><h2>Trump's takeover of American cities</h2><p>The Washington DC deployment comes after Trump federalised California’s National Guard in June for immigration protests. This move has been challenged in court.<br>In the past, Trump deployed the National Guard in June 2020. He ordered some 5,000 troops to address the Black Lives Matter protests after the police killing of George Floyd. In January 2021, he ordered the National Guard amid the January Capitol Hill riots after he rejected the outcome of 2020 November presidential elections, which he lost.<br>&nbsp;</p>

National Guard troops are bolstering the law enforcement presence in public spaces, including near homeless camps such as parks and underpasses.  It is expected that they'll help remove the homeless encampments.

As this story is being written, the US Army's National Guard is roaming the night streets of Washington DC, as part of President Donald Trump's law and order crackdown on the American capital. The troops deployment began on the night of Tuesday (Aug 12). The deployment, including at the Washington Monument, is ostensibly to tackle rising crime and homelessness in the US capital. Here is what we know: How many National Guard troops are deployed in Washington DC? Senior Army officials said that the troops were deploying with DC police on Tuesday night at the start of the mobilisation. Trump's Attorney General Pam Bondi is overseeing the operations. In a post on X, US Army said: "DC National Guard reporting for duty. The #USArmy has activated the DC National Guard as directed by the President under Title 32 to assist Federal and Washington DC law enforcement within the national capitol." According to reports, nearly 800 DC National Guard soldiers were activated, though the number is not officially confirmed. Between 100 to 200 soldiers are expected to be actively supporting law enforcement. Their duties would include administrative support and logistics, besides giving a visible enforcement presence on the DC streets. What is the Title 32 status of National Guard? The National Guard is operating under the ‘Title 32’ status. This means they will be under local authority but federally funded. They are exempted from the Posse Comitatus Act, which restricts active-duty military from law enforcement operations. The deployment is part of the Trump-ordered "D.C. Safe and Beautiful Task Force," with some 500 federal law enforcement agents from FBI, DEA and other agencies backing the city’s police force during this period. Where all are the National Guard troops deployed in Washington DC? National Guard soldiers have been spotted at the District of Columbia National Guard Headquarters, which is near the Capitol, the seat of the US Congress. They were seen loading supplies such as ammunition and ready-to-eat meals, as per social media images. One post from the 273rd Military Police Company showed armoured Humvees parked near the Washington Monument. This indicates the troops are present in the National Mall area. Five armoured personnel carriers were seen parked at the base of the Washington Monument, said another X post. The deployment appears to be along high-traffic areas and known hotspots of crime. How is the National Guard helping local law enforcement of DC? The National Guard is working with the Metropolitan Police Department, and is tasked with protecting federal property. This includes national monuments and federal buildings. They're also bolstering the law enforcement presence in public spaces, including near homeless camps such as parks and underpasses. It is expected that they'll help remove the homeless encampments. Military personnel were also seen at the US Park Police Anacostia Operations Facility, meaning they are deployed in Southeast DC as well. They willl help law enforcement agencies like the Metropolitan Police, FBI, DEA, and ATF. https://www.wionews.com/videos/trump-on-deal-we-will-know-in-2-minutes-national-guard-in-washington-d-c-1754946860169/embed What powers do National Guard troops have in DC and how long will they stay? The National Guard cannot make arrests, as they're prevented from it under the District’s Home Rule Act. Any detainees will have to be handed over to local or federal law enforcement. The troops are carrying standard-issue firearms, typically rifles, but are not actively armed for law enforcement duties, according to reports. As of now, the National Guard will be deployed till September 25, unless the US Congress either extends or terminates their presence. They will be removed if Trump determines that law and order have been restored. Why is National Guard patrolling Washington DC? Trump claims vs data on crime Trump and his supporters have been slamming recent high-profile crimes, like an attempted carjacking of a Department of Government Efficiency staffer on August 3. Even as Trump called DC a lawless city overrun by violent gangs and "drugged-out maniacs," actual data showed that violent crime in the city is down 26 per cent compared to 2024, a 30-year low. Homicides were down 12 per cent, and carjackings decreased nearly 50 per cent since 2023. Trump has faced opposition, with the DC Mayor Muriel Bowser terming the deployment unnecessary and unsettling, while opposition lawmakers labelled it a "brazen power grab." The National Homelessness Law Center argued that the deployment could worsen conditions for DC's nearly 900 homeless individuals, while The Brennan Center for Justice called it 'unprecedented.' Trump's takeover of American cities The Washington DC deployment comes after Trump federalised California’s National Guard in June for immigration protests. This move has been challenged in court. In the past, Trump deployed the National Guard in June 2020. He ordered some 5,000 troops to address the Black Lives Matter protests after the police killing of George Floyd. In January 2021, he ordered the National Guard amid the January Capitol Hill riots after he rejected the outcome of 2020 November presidential elections, which he lost.

<p>National Guard troops are bolstering the law enforcement presence in public spaces, including near homeless camps such as parks and underpasses. &nbsp;It is expected that they'll help remove the homeless encampments.</p>

'Trump takeover' of US capital is on: Army National Guard roams night streets of Washington DC - Why, when, where, how many? Details here

<p>Volodymyr Zelensky's five-year term as Ukraine's president officially ended on 20 May 2024, but how does he remain in office? The ongoing war with Russia has enabled him to stay in power, by imposing martial law. A grey area in the Ukrainian Constitution is also helping him. Here is what you should know.</p><h2>How Zelensky banned elections in Ukraine</h2><p>After the Russian invasion, Zelensky imposed martial law on Ukraine on 24 February 2022. Ukraine's Martial Law Act essentially halted presidential, parliamentary, and local elections during wartime. The reasoning is that fair elections and voter safety are not possible amid war.<br>Amid the bombardment from Russia, it would have been impossible to secure polling stations or allow voting for displaced citizens and soldiers on the frontline.</p><h2>What's the constitutional basis for Zelensky to stay in power?</h2><p>The Article 108 of Ukraine constituion says the president should continue with duties till a successor takes office in order to ensure continuity of power. This, in practice, allows Zelenskyy to remain in office during martial law, as long as elections are not held. There are no clear guidelines on how a president can extend terms, but the continuity of government is being given more stress at this time.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/zelensky-begs-trump-dictates-ukraines-agenda-gravitas-8812772/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/zelensky-begs-trump-dictates-ukraines-agenda-gravitas-8812772/embed</a></p><p>&nbsp;</p><h2>Does Zelensky have public support to stay in power?</h2><p>It's a grey area. Zelensky has reshuffled his team several times during the war, and ousted several political and military leaders. So whatever political and military support he has, one has to take into account that the government and military are filled with people who are amenable to him. The Russian propaganda machine tries to paint him as unpopular. Opinion polls in Ukraine cannot be completely relied upon. One such poll in February 2024 by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology showed 69 per cent of respondents supporting Zelensky staying in office until martial law ends.</p><p>Overall, there is political consensus, with political parties agreeing to postpone elections in November 2023.</p><h2>Zelensky is criticised for holding on to power</h2><p>There is, however, some criticism over Zelensky's continuation in power, much of it amplified by Russian propagandists and pro-Putin elements.<br>They argue that Ukraine &nbsp;Constitution doesn’t explicitly authorise term extensions for presidents. This, they claim, meant that Zelensky’s continued presidency is illegitimate.</p><p>This narrative is being used by Russian elements for the political destabilisation of Ukraine.</p><p>The Ukrainian Constitutional Court is yet to give a ruling on this grey area.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

Ukraine constituion says the president should continue with duties till a successor takes office in order to ensure continuity of power. This, in practice, allows Zelenskyy to remain in office 

Volodymyr Zelensky's five-year term as Ukraine's president officially ended on 20 May 2024, but how does he remain in office? The ongoing war with Russia has enabled him to stay in power, by imposing martial law. A grey area in the Ukrainian Constitution is also helping him. Here is what you should know. How Zelensky banned elections in Ukraine After the Russian invasion, Zelensky imposed martial law on Ukraine on 24 February 2022. Ukraine's Martial Law Act essentially halted presidential, parliamentary, and local elections during wartime. The reasoning is that fair elections and voter safety are not possible amid war. Amid the bombardment from Russia, it would have been impossible to secure polling stations or allow voting for displaced citizens and soldiers on the frontline. What's the constitutional basis for Zelensky to stay in power? The Article 108 of Ukraine constituion says the president should continue with duties till a successor takes office in order to ensure continuity of power. This, in practice, allows Zelenskyy to remain in office during martial law, as long as elections are not held. There are no clear guidelines on how a president can extend terms, but the continuity of government is being given more stress at this time. https://www.wionews.com/videos/zelensky-begs-trump-dictates-ukraines-agenda-gravitas-8812772/embed Does Zelensky have public support to stay in power? It's a grey area. Zelensky has reshuffled his team several times during the war, and ousted several political and military leaders. So whatever political and military support he has, one has to take into account that the government and military are filled with people who are amenable to him. The Russian propaganda machine tries to paint him as unpopular. Opinion polls in Ukraine cannot be completely relied upon. One such poll in February 2024 by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology showed 69 per cent of respondents supporting Zelensky staying in office until martial law ends. Overall, there is political consensus, with political parties agreeing to postpone elections in November 2023. Zelensky is criticised for holding on to power There is, however, some criticism over Zelensky's continuation in power, much of it amplified by Russian propagandists and pro-Putin elements. They argue that Ukraine Constitution doesn’t explicitly authorise term extensions for presidents. This, they claim, meant that Zelensky’s continued presidency is illegitimate. This narrative is being used by Russian elements for the political destabilisation of Ukraine. The Ukrainian Constitutional Court is yet to give a ruling on this grey area.

<p>Ukraine constituion says the president should continue with duties till a successor takes office in order to ensure continuity of power. This, in practice, allows Zelenskyy to remain in office&nbsp;</p>

But how is Zelensky still the Ukraine president if his term ended? What you probably didn't know about how he stays in power

<p>Mahatma Gandhi, who led India's freedom struggle, was a deeply anguished man when the nation gained Independence from Britain on 15 August 1947. He had no time for celebrations, as the father of the nation was working hard to quell the Hindu-Muslim violence and riots that broke out along with the Partition of the subcontinent. Here is a look into what he did and said during those fateful days of 14-15 August 1947.</p><h2>What was Gandhi doing on 14 August 1947?</h2><p>As Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, who went on to become India's first prime minister, announced India's 'tryst with destiny' in the intervening night of 14 and 15th August, 1947, Gandhi chose not to join the Independence Day celebrations in Delhi.&nbsp;</p><p>On 14 August 1947, Gandhi was staying at Hydari Manzil, a house in the Muslim-dominated Beliaghata area of Calcutta (now Kolkata) in east India, amid communities most affected by the riots. That day, he met local leaders, including the Muslim League's Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy, the former premier of Bengal. In an appeal for peace, Gandhi undertook a 24-hour fast. He addressed a prayer meeting in the evening, and urged people to maintain peace and brotherhood. He expressed hope that Calcutta could set an example of communal harmony for the rest of India.</p><h2>What was Gandhi doing on 15 August 1947?</h2><p>As Indians celebrated Independence Day, Gandhi continued to be in Calcutta. He spent the day visiting riot-hit areas, meeting victims and holding more prayer meetings. His presence contributed to Calcutta becoming relatively calm on 15th August. In the prayer meetings, there were readings from the Quran, the Bhagwat Gita, and the Bible to symbolise interfaith unity.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gandhi-jayanti-2023-india-celebrates-154th-birth-anniversary-of-mahatma-gandhi-641808/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/gandhi-jayanti-2023-india-celebrates-154th-birth-anniversary-of-mahatma-gandhi-641808/embed</a></p><h2>What did Gandhi say during the days of India's Independence?</h2><p>Gandhi's statements from these days are both hopeful and full of sorrow. As recorded in <i>The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi</i>, he said at a prayer meeting on 14 August 1947: “I am not going to Delhi to participate in the festivities of August 15. My place is here with you, in the midst of this suffering. If Calcutta can remain peaceful, it will be a miracle and a lesson for the whole of India.”<br>He shared his thinking in a message to the nation on 15 August: “This is a day of rejoicing, but for me, it is also a day of sorrow. Freedom has come, but it is stained with blood. We must pledge to wipe out this stain with our love and unity.”</p><p>The same day, in a letter to a friend, Gandhi wrote: “I am not able to rejoice as others do. My heart is with those who are suffering in this hour of freedom.”</p><p>In the book <i>Mahatma Gandhi: The Last Phase</i>, his secretary Pyarelal wrote that Gandhi was heartbroken over the partition and the ensuing violence, feeling that his lifelong mission of Hindu-Muslim unity had been undermined.&nbsp;</p><p>Gandhi said, according to Pyarelal: “I have no desire to live if India is to be engulfed in this bloodshed.”<br>In letters and speeches from the time, Gandhi said his "heart is heavy", as freedom "has come at a terrible price.” As an advocate of non-violence, Gandhi saw the riots and violence as a personal failure.<br>&nbsp;</p>

As Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru announced India's 'tryst with destiny' in the intervening night of 14 and 15th August, 1947, Gandhi chose not to join the Independence Day celebrations in Delhi. What was he doing?

Mahatma Gandhi, who led India's freedom struggle, was a deeply anguished man when the nation gained Independence from Britain on 15 August 1947. He had no time for celebrations, as the father of the nation was working hard to quell the Hindu-Muslim violence and riots that broke out along with the Partition of the subcontinent. Here is a look into what he did and said during those fateful days of 14-15 August 1947. What was Gandhi doing on 14 August 1947? As Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, who went on to become India's first prime minister, announced India's 'tryst with destiny' in the intervening night of 14 and 15th August, 1947, Gandhi chose not to join the Independence Day celebrations in Delhi. On 14 August 1947, Gandhi was staying at Hydari Manzil, a house in the Muslim-dominated Beliaghata area of Calcutta (now Kolkata) in east India, amid communities most affected by the riots. That day, he met local leaders, including the Muslim League's Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy, the former premier of Bengal. In an appeal for peace, Gandhi undertook a 24-hour fast. He addressed a prayer meeting in the evening, and urged people to maintain peace and brotherhood. He expressed hope that Calcutta could set an example of communal harmony for the rest of India. What was Gandhi doing on 15 August 1947? As Indians celebrated Independence Day, Gandhi continued to be in Calcutta. He spent the day visiting riot-hit areas, meeting victims and holding more prayer meetings. His presence contributed to Calcutta becoming relatively calm on 15th August. In the prayer meetings, there were readings from the Quran, the Bhagwat Gita, and the Bible to symbolise interfaith unity. https://www.wionews.com/videos/gandhi-jayanti-2023-india-celebrates-154th-birth-anniversary-of-mahatma-gandhi-641808/embed What did Gandhi say during the days of India's Independence? Gandhi's statements from these days are both hopeful and full of sorrow. As recorded in The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, he said at a prayer meeting on 14 August 1947: “I am not going to Delhi to participate in the festivities of August 15. My place is here with you, in the midst of this suffering. If Calcutta can remain peaceful, it will be a miracle and a lesson for the whole of India.” He shared his thinking in a message to the nation on 15 August: “This is a day of rejoicing, but for me, it is also a day of sorrow. Freedom has come, but it is stained with blood. We must pledge to wipe out this stain with our love and unity.” The same day, in a letter to a friend, Gandhi wrote: “I am not able to rejoice as others do. My heart is with those who are suffering in this hour of freedom.” In the book Mahatma Gandhi: The Last Phase, his secretary Pyarelal wrote that Gandhi was heartbroken over the partition and the ensuing violence, feeling that his lifelong mission of Hindu-Muslim unity had been undermined. Gandhi said, according to Pyarelal: “I have no desire to live if India is to be engulfed in this bloodshed.” In letters and speeches from the time, Gandhi said his "heart is heavy", as freedom "has come at a terrible price.” As an advocate of non-violence, Gandhi saw the riots and violence as a personal failure.

<p>As Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru announced India's 'tryst with destiny' in the intervening night of 14 and 15th August, 1947, Gandhi chose not to join the Independence Day celebrations in Delhi. What was he doing?</p>

Mahatma Gandhi was a sad, worried man when India got Independence, due to this reason. Here's what he said and did on 14-15 August 1947

<p>Ahead of his meeting with Vladimir Putin, US President Donald Trump hinted at some ‘land swaps’ for Russia in order to end the Ukraine war. Given that the US had bought Alaska pretty cheap back in the day, it's quite ironic that the northern American state is the venue of the proposed ‘new land deal’. Here is a look at how Alaska was the place of 'land transfers' between the US and Russia and the irony of it being the venue of the Putin-Trump summit on Friday (Aug 15).</p><h2>When the US bought Alaska from Russia for $7.2 million on a bargain</h2><p>At the time of the purchase in 1867, the deal led by then US secretary of state William Seward was derided as "Seward’s Folly", as many thought that Alaska was a frozen wasteland with no value.</p><p>Russia was hard-pressed to sell the territory to the US due to economic woes and the fall in fur trade, the only thing Alaska was known for at the time.</p><p>But today, Alaska is literally sitting on a goldmine: It has natural resources in gold, oil, and critical minerals.</p><h2>Alaska's transition from being part of Russia to the US</h2><p>Back in the 19th century, Alaska was part of what's known as Russian America. Russian nationalists even today view its sale to America as a historic mistake.&nbsp;<br>Some of them often raised the need for Russia to reclaim Alaska, but in 2014, Putin dismissed this as a pointless idea, even saying the place was “too cold.”</p><p>Note that it was sold at 2 cents per acre to the US, making it the most valuable acquisition of the US when one looks at its economic potential today.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/russia-ukraine-war-us-ambassador-to-nato-says-zelenskyy-could-attend-alaska-summit-1754882956148/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/russia-ukraine-war-us-ambassador-to-nato-says-zelenskyy-could-attend-alaska-summit-1754882956148/embed</a></p><p>&nbsp;</p><h2>The Russian influence in Alaska continues</h2><p>The Russian Orhodox Church still functions in Alaska, and communities with Russian heritage, like the Old Believers, still live in the US state. And if one looks at the map, the US and Russia are only 2.5 miles apart at the Diomede Islands in Alaska.</p><h2>Trump's potential ‘land swap’ deal with Russia at Alaska summit</h2><p>Cut to 2025, and Trump has already floated the idea of a "swapping of territories" as part of a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. Ahead of his summit with Putin, Trump said such a land deal would be for the "betterment of both" Russia and Ukraine.<br>This land proposal, in several ways, mirrors the 1867 Alaska purchase. The land swap, if it happens, will have far-reaching consequences for Ukraine and Russia, like the Alaska deal had for the US and Russia.</p><p>Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has rejected any such land concessions, insisting that Russia must not receive any rewards for its aggression.<br>This stance is also a sharp contrast with Russia’s own past decision to sell Alaska voluntarily. (Note that Ukraine was once part of the larger, Russia-led Soviet Union).</p><h2>Will Trump give Alaska back to Russia?</h2><p>Interesting side note here: On Monday (Aug 11), while addressing the media, Trump mistakenly said he would meet Putin "in Russia" before correcting himself to Alaska. This led to mockery online, with critics saying Trump might think Alaska is still Russian and might even offer it back to Putin.<br>But there is a view that Trump's choice of Alaska for the summit is full of symbolism and a show of American strength: meeting Putin in a land his nation once owned.<br>Pro-Putin propagandists could, however, play up the nationalist aspects of this if he wins some territory from Ukraine. He could paint it as Russia reclaiming lost territories.</p><h2>Will the miscalculations of Alaska Purchase repeat in 2025?</h2><p>It would be a strategic loss for Ukraine, and a miscalculation for the US and West, if Ukrainian territories like Donetsk or Luhansk are given to Russia in a Trump-mediated deal, much worse if it happens without the presence or consent of Zelensky.</p><p>The sale of Alaska was a historical blunder for Russia and a geopolitical victory for the US. At the Alaska summit, the themes of undervaluation, nationalism, and misjudged diplomacy will play out again, and the irony will not be lost on anyone who knows history.</p>

Russia was hard-pressed to sell the territory to the US due to economic woes and the fall in fur trade, the only thing Alaska was known for at the time. But today, Alaska is literally sitting on a goldmine: It has natural resources in gold, oil, and critical minerals.



Ahead of his meeting with Vladimir Putin, US President Donald Trump hinted at some ‘land swaps’ for Russia in order to end the Ukraine war. Given that the US had bought Alaska pretty cheap back in the day, it's quite ironic that the northern American state is the venue of the proposed ‘new land deal’. Here is a look at how Alaska was the place of 'land transfers' between the US and Russia and the irony of it being the venue of the Putin-Trump summit on Friday (Aug 15). When the US bought Alaska from Russia for $7.2 million on a bargain At the time of the purchase in 1867, the deal led by then US secretary of state William Seward was derided as "Seward’s Folly", as many thought that Alaska was a frozen wasteland with no value. Russia was hard-pressed to sell the territory to the US due to economic woes and the fall in fur trade, the only thing Alaska was known for at the time. But today, Alaska is literally sitting on a goldmine: It has natural resources in gold, oil, and critical minerals. Alaska's transition from being part of Russia to the US Back in the 19th century, Alaska was part of what's known as Russian America. Russian nationalists even today view its sale to America as a historic mistake. Some of them often raised the need for Russia to reclaim Alaska, but in 2014, Putin dismissed this as a pointless idea, even saying the place was “too cold.” Note that it was sold at 2 cents per acre to the US, making it the most valuable acquisition of the US when one looks at its economic potential today. https://www.wionews.com/videos/russia-ukraine-war-us-ambassador-to-nato-says-zelenskyy-could-attend-alaska-summit-1754882956148/embed The Russian influence in Alaska continues The Russian Orhodox Church still functions in Alaska, and communities with Russian heritage, like the Old Believers, still live in the US state. And if one looks at the map, the US and Russia are only 2.5 miles apart at the Diomede Islands in Alaska. Trump's potential ‘land swap’ deal with Russia at Alaska summit Cut to 2025, and Trump has already floated the idea of a "swapping of territories" as part of a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. Ahead of his summit with Putin, Trump said such a land deal would be for the "betterment of both" Russia and Ukraine. This land proposal, in several ways, mirrors the 1867 Alaska purchase. The land swap, if it happens, will have far-reaching consequences for Ukraine and Russia, like the Alaska deal had for the US and Russia. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has rejected any such land concessions, insisting that Russia must not receive any rewards for its aggression. This stance is also a sharp contrast with Russia’s own past decision to sell Alaska voluntarily. (Note that Ukraine was once part of the larger, Russia-led Soviet Union). Will Trump give Alaska back to Russia? Interesting side note here: On Monday (Aug 11), while addressing the media, Trump mistakenly said he would meet Putin "in Russia" before correcting himself to Alaska. This led to mockery online, with critics saying Trump might think Alaska is still Russian and might even offer it back to Putin. But there is a view that Trump's choice of Alaska for the summit is full of symbolism and a show of American strength: meeting Putin in a land his nation once owned. Pro-Putin propagandists could, however, play up the nationalist aspects of this if he wins some territory from Ukraine. He could paint it as Russia reclaiming lost territories. Will the miscalculations of Alaska Purchase repeat in 2025? It would be a strategic loss for Ukraine, and a miscalculation for the US and West, if Ukrainian territories like Donetsk or Luhansk are given to Russia in a Trump-mediated deal, much worse if it happens without the presence or consent of Zelensky. The sale of Alaska was a historical blunder for Russia and a geopolitical victory for the US. At the Alaska summit, the themes of undervaluation, nationalism, and misjudged diplomacy will play out again, and the irony will not be lost on anyone who knows history.

<p>Russia was hard-pressed to sell the territory to the US due to economic woes and the fall in fur trade, the only thing Alaska was known for at the time. But today, Alaska is literally sitting on a goldmine: It has natural resources in gold, oil, and critical minerals.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

Historical IRONY: Russians sold Alaska cheap to US, now Trump offers some Ukraine 'land swap' to Putin as they meet in the same place

<p>US President Donald Trump and Russian leader Vladimir Putin are scheduled to discuss a way out of the Ukraine war in Alaska on Friday (Aug 15). The choice of Alaska is significant, after intial speculation of Saudi Arabia and Rome as potential ventues. Alaska, once a remote Russian outpost, is currently a crucial aspect of US military strategy and showcases its dominance. It has several US bases, performing a vast range of operations from missile defence to air superiority to space monitoring. Alaska has a strategic location, being near both Asia and Russia. Located near the Arctic, it will also be a crucial theatre in the future competition for natural resources. Here is a breakdown of Alaska's military significance for the US.</p><h2>Why Alaska is strategically important for the US</h2><p>Alaska is close to both Asia and Russia, with its westernmost point just 55 miles from Russia’s Chukotka Peninsula. It is, therefore, a crucial point for the US to monitor Russian military activity.</p><p>As the US gateway to the Arctic, the state is emerging as a hub for new shipping routes, like the Northwest Passage. As the Arctic ice melts, more opportunities are arising for exploring natural wealth in Alaska, which also makes it an area of competition for oil, gas and critical minerals.<br>Alaska is a crucial component of American power projection in the Indo-Pacific, with bases like JBER and Eielson enabling rapid response to future potential conflicts with China and North Korea.</p><p>The air defence system in Fort Greely is a key aspect of US defence against ICBMs from adversaries like North Korea or China.</p><p>Bolstering the space force, Alaska's Clear Space Force Station enhances early warning capabilities.</p><p>Here are further details:</p><p><a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-detects-russian-military-aircraft-operating-in-alaskan-air-defense-identification-zone-8736187/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-detects-russian-military-aircraft-operating-in-alaskan-air-defense-identification-zone-8736187/embed</a></p><p>&nbsp;</p><h2>US military establishments in Alaska</h2><p>Alaska hosts key military installations of the US, like the Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, which consists of Elmendorf Air Force Base and Fort Richardson. Together, they support the US air superiority, rapid deployment, and Arctic operations.<br>The Eielson Air Force Base is used for Arctic air operations and the Red Flag-Alaska exercises.<br>Fort Greely hosts the Ground-Based Midcourse Defence (GMD) system, which is a crucial defence against intercontinental ballistic missiles or ICBMs.<br>Alaska is also part of the US Space Force, with the Clear Space Force Station near Anderson conducting operations for missile warning, space domain awareness, tracking satellites and potential threats.</p><p>The US Coast Guard has several bases in Alaska, the largest at Kodiak, with smaller stations in Juneau, Sitka and Ketchikan. Kodiak base ensures maritime security in the Bering Sea and Arctic Ocean, which are critical for fisheries, trade, and for countering illegal activities. The Naval Special Warfare Cold Weather Detachment at Kodiak trains Navy SEALs for cold-weather operations.<br>The Fort Wainwright army base in Fairbanks is focused on the Arctic and rapid-response missions. The Eareckson Air Station in Shemya Island is a remote radar and intelligence-gathering outpost.</p><h2>Alaska is a theatre of future Arctic competitions for oil, gas and critical minerals &nbsp;</h2><p>The Arctic is increasingly getting militarised, as climate change has caused the melting of ice in the region. American bases in Alaska will play a crucial role in countering the growing Arctic ambitions of China and Russia. Russia’s Northern Fleet is a threat for the US, as is China’s polar investments in natural resources.<br>In view of the future power tussle, the US Army has specially trained the 11th Airborne Division for Arctic warfare.<br>Alaska is a hub of intelligence and surveillance, providing real-time data on missile launches, satellite activity, and future regional threats.<br>Alaska is also used for cold-weather training of soldiers, given its vast terrain and extreme climate.</p><h2>Military history and development of Alaska</h2><p>From around 1741 until 1867, Alaska was under Russian control. Known for its fur trade, securing trade routs was a main concern, for which the St Michael Fort was established.<br>The US acquired Alaska in 1867, after which its army established Fort Wrangell, Fort Kenay and other bases to maintain order and protect settlers.<br>&nbsp;During World War II, Alaska was a critical theatre. The Japanese invaded the Aleutian Islands of Attu and Kiska in 1942, making it the only North American territory occupied by the Axis forces. The US launched the Aleutian Campaign and recaptured the islands by 1943. The expansion of bases like Fort Richardson and Elmendorf Field and the building of Alaska Highway took place after this.</p><p>During the Cold War, Alaska was a frontline due to its proximity to the Soviet Union. The US set up radar stations and air bases to monitor Soviet activity.</p><p>Alaska hosted missile defence systems and nuclear weapons testing, like the since-cancelled Project Chariot and Amchitka Island tests.</p><p>After the end of Cold War in the 1990s, Alaska became a key frontline of US power projection in the Pacific, counterterrorism, and missile defence, hosting several joint exercises with allies.</p>

As the US gateway to the Arctic, Alaska is emerging as a hub for new shipping routes, like the Northwest Passage. As the Arctic ice melts, more opportunities are arising for exploring natural wealth in Alaska, which also makes it an area of competition for oil and gas 


US President Donald Trump and Russian leader Vladimir Putin are scheduled to discuss a way out of the Ukraine war in Alaska on Friday (Aug 15). The choice of Alaska is significant, after intial speculation of Saudi Arabia and Rome as potential ventues. Alaska, once a remote Russian outpost, is currently a crucial aspect of US military strategy and showcases its dominance. It has several US bases, performing a vast range of operations from missile defence to air superiority to space monitoring. Alaska has a strategic location, being near both Asia and Russia. Located near the Arctic, it will also be a crucial theatre in the future competition for natural resources. Here is a breakdown of Alaska's military significance for the US. Why Alaska is strategically important for the US Alaska is close to both Asia and Russia, with its westernmost point just 55 miles from Russia’s Chukotka Peninsula. It is, therefore, a crucial point for the US to monitor Russian military activity. As the US gateway to the Arctic, the state is emerging as a hub for new shipping routes, like the Northwest Passage. As the Arctic ice melts, more opportunities are arising for exploring natural wealth in Alaska, which also makes it an area of competition for oil, gas and critical minerals. Alaska is a crucial component of American power projection in the Indo-Pacific, with bases like JBER and Eielson enabling rapid response to future potential conflicts with China and North Korea. The air defence system in Fort Greely is a key aspect of US defence against ICBMs from adversaries like North Korea or China. Bolstering the space force, Alaska's Clear Space Force Station enhances early warning capabilities. Here are further details: https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-detects-russian-military-aircraft-operating-in-alaskan-air-defense-identification-zone-8736187/embed US military establishments in Alaska Alaska hosts key military installations of the US, like the Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, which consists of Elmendorf Air Force Base and Fort Richardson. Together, they support the US air superiority, rapid deployment, and Arctic operations. The Eielson Air Force Base is used for Arctic air operations and the Red Flag-Alaska exercises. Fort Greely hosts the Ground-Based Midcourse Defence (GMD) system, which is a crucial defence against intercontinental ballistic missiles or ICBMs. Alaska is also part of the US Space Force, with the Clear Space Force Station near Anderson conducting operations for missile warning, space domain awareness, tracking satellites and potential threats. The US Coast Guard has several bases in Alaska, the largest at Kodiak, with smaller stations in Juneau, Sitka and Ketchikan. Kodiak base ensures maritime security in the Bering Sea and Arctic Ocean, which are critical for fisheries, trade, and for countering illegal activities. The Naval Special Warfare Cold Weather Detachment at Kodiak trains Navy SEALs for cold-weather operations. The Fort Wainwright army base in Fairbanks is focused on the Arctic and rapid-response missions. The Eareckson Air Station in Shemya Island is a remote radar and intelligence-gathering outpost. Alaska is a theatre of future Arctic competitions for oil, gas and critical minerals The Arctic is increasingly getting militarised, as climate change has caused the melting of ice in the region. American bases in Alaska will play a crucial role in countering the growing Arctic ambitions of China and Russia. Russia’s Northern Fleet is a threat for the US, as is China’s polar investments in natural resources. In view of the future power tussle, the US Army has specially trained the 11th Airborne Division for Arctic warfare. Alaska is a hub of intelligence and surveillance, providing real-time data on missile launches, satellite activity, and future regional threats. Alaska is also used for cold-weather training of soldiers, given its vast terrain and extreme climate. Military history and development of Alaska From around 1741 until 1867, Alaska was under Russian control. Known for its fur trade, securing trade routs was a main concern, for which the St Michael Fort was established. The US acquired Alaska in 1867, after which its army established Fort Wrangell, Fort Kenay and other bases to maintain order and protect settlers. During World War II, Alaska was a critical theatre. The Japanese invaded the Aleutian Islands of Attu and Kiska in 1942, making it the only North American territory occupied by the Axis forces. The US launched the Aleutian Campaign and recaptured the islands by 1943. The expansion of bases like Fort Richardson and Elmendorf Field and the building of Alaska Highway took place after this. During the Cold War, Alaska was a frontline due to its proximity to the Soviet Union. The US set up radar stations and air bases to monitor Soviet activity. Alaska hosted missile defence systems and nuclear weapons testing, like the since-cancelled Project Chariot and Amchitka Island tests. After the end of Cold War in the 1990s, Alaska became a key frontline of US power projection in the Pacific, counterterrorism, and missile defence, hosting several joint exercises with allies.

<p>As the US gateway to the Arctic, Alaska is emerging as a hub for new shipping routes, like the Northwest Passage. As the Arctic ice melts, more opportunities are arising for exploring natural wealth in Alaska, which also makes it an area of competition for oil and gas&nbsp;<br>&nbsp;</p>

Not just another talks venue: How Alaska, the site of Trump-Putin summit, showcases US military muscle, from missile defence to space force | LIST

<p>President Donald Trump could announce the deployment of National Guard in Washington DC as early as this week, as he threatened a 'federal takeover' in the US capital that he claimed is ruined by violent crime, carjackings and homeless people, or 'hobos' as they're called in America. But is crime and homelessness in DC really such a big crisis? Here is a briefing on the situation.</p><h2>‘DC chaos’: Trump unleashes Feds, seeks military help amid ‘crime crisis’</h2><p>In Washington DC, it’s a summer of sirens, surveillance, and sweeping crackdowns. Trump has declared war on what “lawless and unsafe” Washington, DC. In a stunning development, the agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation are already patrolling the streets. The US military is set to send in the National Guard amid crimes like carjackings and homelessness, as per reports.</p><h2>FBI agents on streets, National Guard on standby</h2><p>For the first time since the post-election unrest of 2020, Trump reportedly deployed 450 federal officers, including 120 FBI agents to roam the US capital.<br>The aim? To crack down on violent crime and carjackings. Since August 9, they have been patrolling DC's streets at night in a sweeping, week-long operation dubbed by insiders as 'Operation Restore Order'.</p><p>It doesn't stop there.<br>Reports said the US military is likely to activate up to 1,000 National Guard troops, as Trump is considering their deployment. No final orders are signed, but reports, including the Reuters news agency, claimed the president could sign off on the mission as soon as this week.</p><p><a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/donald-trump-threatens-to-send-national-guard-into-the-us-capital-1754581470298/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/donald-trump-threatens-to-send-national-guard-into-the-us-capital-1754581470298/embed</a></p><p>&nbsp;</p><h2>DC is 'out of control': Trump's threat of federal takeover</h2><p>In a chilling post on Truth Social, Trump dropped a bombshell, threatening to "federalize Washington, D.C" entirely, if local leaders don’t “get crime under control.” Trump is flirting with the dangerous idea of overturning DC’s Home Rule, a 50-year-old law that grants the city limited self-governance.</p><p>“I may exert my powers to run the city the way it should be run,” Trump wrote.</p><h2>But really, is crime up in Washington DC?</h2><p>But data shows that crime in DC is at a 30-year low. According to DC police and federal prosecutors, violent crime is down 26 per cent in 2025 compared to last year.<br>Homicides are down 12 per cent, with 14 fewer deaths than the same time last year. Assaults with a dangerous weapon have dropped by 19 per cent. Robberies are down 39 per cent.</p><p>Even carjackings — the crime at the centre of Trump’s new law-and-order blitz — have likely come down.&nbsp;</p><p>Carjacking incidents are not new in the US capital. Still, the FBI’s night patrols are focused almost entirely on carjackings.</p><p>The one that shocked everyone was an attempted carjacking of Edward Coristine, a former Department of Government Efficiency staffer. He was reportedly left bloodied and traumatised.</p><p>While overall data is down, some of the recent crimes have been shocking, including the murder of a congressional intern and the fatal shooting of two Israeli embassy workers.</p><h2>Is homelessness really a big crisis in DC?</h2><p>As per official data , homelessness in DC has dropped 12 per cent since 2020.</p><p>As part of a Trump executive order, the government has cleared 64 homeless encampments, even as Trump vowed to relocate the homeless “FAR from the Capital.”</p><p>That order, named ‘Making the District of Columbia Safe and Beautiful’, was slammed by critics as 'cosmetic cruelty' and a PR stunt.</p><p>Trump is also pushing a 40 per cent budget cut to the Department of Housing and Urban Development.</p><h2>Who really runs Washington DC?</h2><p>Washington DC has a unique status of self-rule. But the National Guard, being a part of the military, answers directly to the President, not a governor. This makes military deployments easier for Trump.</p><p>Local officials were reportedly blindsided by the sudden influx of federal agents, with<br>DC Mayor Muriel Bowser's office denying the approval of the new surge.</p><p>Trump's moves mirror his tactics in 2020 and 2021, at the fag end of his first term, when federal agents and National Guard clashed with protesters and patrolled city streets.</p><p>The writing is clear on the wall for DC residents: Feds are here, and the army is coming.</p>

Are crime and homelessness in DC really such a big crisis? Here is a briefing on the situation with recent data 

President Donald Trump could announce the deployment of National Guard in Washington DC as early as this week, as he threatened a 'federal takeover' in the US capital that he claimed is ruined by violent crime, carjackings and homeless people, or 'hobos' as they're called in America. But is crime and homelessness in DC really such a big crisis? Here is a briefing on the situation. ‘DC chaos’: Trump unleashes Feds, seeks military help amid ‘crime crisis’ In Washington DC, it’s a summer of sirens, surveillance, and sweeping crackdowns. Trump has declared war on what “lawless and unsafe” Washington, DC. In a stunning development, the agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation are already patrolling the streets. The US military is set to send in the National Guard amid crimes like carjackings and homelessness, as per reports. FBI agents on streets, National Guard on standby For the first time since the post-election unrest of 2020, Trump reportedly deployed 450 federal officers, including 120 FBI agents to roam the US capital. The aim? To crack down on violent crime and carjackings. Since August 9, they have been patrolling DC's streets at night in a sweeping, week-long operation dubbed by insiders as 'Operation Restore Order'. It doesn't stop there. Reports said the US military is likely to activate up to 1,000 National Guard troops, as Trump is considering their deployment. No final orders are signed, but reports, including the Reuters news agency, claimed the president could sign off on the mission as soon as this week. https://www.wionews.com/videos/donald-trump-threatens-to-send-national-guard-into-the-us-capital-1754581470298/embed DC is 'out of control': Trump's threat of federal takeover In a chilling post on Truth Social, Trump dropped a bombshell, threatening to "federalize Washington, D.C" entirely, if local leaders don’t “get crime under control.” Trump is flirting with the dangerous idea of overturning DC’s Home Rule, a 50-year-old law that grants the city limited self-governance. “I may exert my powers to run the city the way it should be run,” Trump wrote. But really, is crime up in Washington DC? But data shows that crime in DC is at a 30-year low. According to DC police and federal prosecutors, violent crime is down 26 per cent in 2025 compared to last year. Homicides are down 12 per cent, with 14 fewer deaths than the same time last year. Assaults with a dangerous weapon have dropped by 19 per cent. Robberies are down 39 per cent. Even carjackings — the crime at the centre of Trump’s new law-and-order blitz — have likely come down. Carjacking incidents are not new in the US capital. Still, the FBI’s night patrols are focused almost entirely on carjackings. The one that shocked everyone was an attempted carjacking of Edward Coristine, a former Department of Government Efficiency staffer. He was reportedly left bloodied and traumatised. While overall data is down, some of the recent crimes have been shocking, including the murder of a congressional intern and the fatal shooting of two Israeli embassy workers. Is homelessness really a big crisis in DC? As per official data , homelessness in DC has dropped 12 per cent since 2020. As part of a Trump executive order, the government has cleared 64 homeless encampments, even as Trump vowed to relocate the homeless “FAR from the Capital.” That order, named ‘Making the District of Columbia Safe and Beautiful’, was slammed by critics as 'cosmetic cruelty' and a PR stunt. Trump is also pushing a 40 per cent budget cut to the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Who really runs Washington DC? Washington DC has a unique status of self-rule. But the National Guard, being a part of the military, answers directly to the President, not a governor. This makes military deployments easier for Trump. Local officials were reportedly blindsided by the sudden influx of federal agents, with DC Mayor Muriel Bowser's office denying the approval of the new surge. Trump's moves mirror his tactics in 2020 and 2021, at the fag end of his first term, when federal agents and National Guard clashed with protesters and patrolled city streets. The writing is clear on the wall for DC residents: Feds are here, and the army is coming.

<p>Are crime and homelessness in DC really such a big crisis? Here is a briefing on the situation with recent data&nbsp;</p>

‘Federal takeover’: Is Washington DC so RUINED by crime, homelessness, that Trump unleashed FBI, wants National Guard? Here are the facts

<p>Indian media is awash with stories of how RIC - an imagined alliance of Russia, India and China - could take on the Donald Trump-led US amid tariff threats by the American president against New Delhi. While it might be a good clickbait headline for articles and videos, it is a bad idea. In case you are too busy, here is the fast answer: India-China trust deficit, &nbsp;low alignment of strategic goals, and huge disparities in the economies are factors. The public and political opinion in India is against China. India, China and Russia do not have military capabilities that can take on the US. Political values are different: India is the only true democracy among the three. India’s alliances are generally West-leaning, and therefore the threat perception against the US and West is almost non-existent for it, and not aligned with that of China and Russia. &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;<br>If you have more time, let me break it down for you.</p><h2>Why a likely RIC alliance of Russia, India and China against the US is strategically flawed</h2><p>If formalised, RIC would have the goal of countering the US under Trump’s administration. But it is a deeply flawed and unrealistic geopolitical idea because of mistrust, differing national interests, incompatible economic goals, and asymmetric power dynamics among India, Russia and China.</p><p><a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/breaking-why-is-us-imposing-tariff-on-india-trump-tariff-news-1754495938671/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/breaking-why-is-us-imposing-tariff-on-india-trump-tariff-news-1754495938671/embed</a></p><p>&nbsp;</p><h2>India-China hostility and mistrust trump even Trump tantrums</h2><p>There's a massive trust deficit between India and China in spite of their continuing economic cooperation and current alignment against the US. The two countries still have unresolved border disputes, particularly in Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh, and military tensions despite recent attempts at a thaw.</p><p>The 2020 Galwan Valley clash led to casualties on both sides, severely damaging diplomatic trust, coming close on the heels of the Doklam clash along the border with Bhutan. Despite ongoing diplomatic engagements since 2024, India and China have not fully restored trust.</p><h2>Indian public and politicians view China with suspicion</h2><p>In the court of Indian public opinion, China is still the enemy. Any move toward an alliance involving China would lead to political backlash in India, and public outrage.</p><p>India is not anti-US, per se, but seeks to maintain its strategic autonomy. India has acted as a democratic counterbalance to China in the Indo-Pacific, which in fact is the reason why it's seen by the West as an important player in the region, and is invited to all kinds of strategic alliances like the Quad.<br>China, on the other hand, seeks regional hegemony, and given the context of Taiwan invasion fears and South China Sea territorial ambitions, can best be called a regional bully. Beijing dreams of a China-led world order under the single-party rule of communism, which fundamentally clashes with India's multi-party democratic ethos.<br>Russia and China jointly oppose the US-led world order, while India selectively aligns with the West when in its interest: this is why India is invited to G7, and is a key player in the G20.<br>&nbsp;</p><h2>India is an active partner of the US and West</h2><p>India is an active partner in the India-US-Japan-Australia Quad, which is fundamentally about checkmating China in the region.<br>The IPEF or Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, is another grouping that goes against a potential India-China alignment. India supports a rules-based international order and freedom of navigation, things that are in contrast to China’s assertiveness in the Indo-Pacific.</p><h2>Russia’s tilt towards China at India’s expense</h2><p>Russia and China have increasingly been sharing notes for a strategic alignment against the West's opposition to them, particularly since the Ukraine war.<br>Russia has become economically and strategically dependent on China, specifically in oil and gas trade, where Beijing is the biggest buyer.<br>China remains the economic lifeline for Russia amidst Western sanctions over the war. This has led Russia to covertly support China on Taiwan and the South China Sea. In both of these, India does not share the positions of China and Russia.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><h2>Russia-China friendship can impact India-Russia ties</h2><p>While India has had a long-standing economic and defence partnership with Russia, the question remains if Russia will be neutral in an India-China conflict scenario.<br>India has not had the best treatment recently in groupings like the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. SCO, which is dominated by China and Russia, recently disappointed India by not including language on terrorism in the wake of the Pahalgam attack, during a ministerial meeting.&nbsp;<br>India has also been diversifying defence suppliers away from Russia, buying its fighter jets from France and drones from the US and Israel, for instance. India's defence purchase dependence on Russia is already waning.</p><h2>Except for the current downturn, the India-US strategic partnership has been growing</h2><p>In the post-9/11 world, India and the US extended their cooperation in defence with arrangements and pacts like BECA and COMCASA. The two nations continue intelligence sharing, counterterrorism operations, and have advanced technology cooperation, like in the iCET initiative.<br>In spite of the Trump-led tensions, the US is India’s largest export market, worth over $130 billion.<br>The current levels of India-US cooperation in investment, technology, education and people-to-people cooperation cannot immediately be replaced by Russia or China.<br>Suddenly aligning against the US could jeopardise India's critical economic sectors and affect its national development.</p><h2>No meaningful economic convergence between India, China and Russia</h2><p>India and China are regional economic competitors, not partners. India has a major trade deficit with China. The Chinese infrastructure project, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) was seen by India as a geopolitical threat. Except for energy and defence deals, there's not much that Russia’s economy can offer India.</p><h2>An issue of values and political systems: Democratic India vs autocratic Russia and China</h2><p>India is a vibrant democracy with civil liberties, electoral institutions, and a free press, while &nbsp;China is a single-party authoritarian regime, and Russia has become increasingly autocratic with one ruler, Vladimir Putin, at the helm for decades now. Thus, India is a natural ally of liberal democracies in the West rather than with authoritarian regimes. An alliance with Russia and China could damage India’s credibility as a leader of the democratic world.</p><h2>Can India, China and Russia have a military or strategic alliance?</h2><p>It's tough as the ingredients for such an alliance are missing: a shared threat perception, mutual trust, and operational compatibility.<br>India does not trust China, and Russia lacks the capacity or neutrality to bridge this gap. There is no institutional structure or commitment, or military planning to coordinate the three nations in case of a joint external threat.</p><h2>China is really the big brother among the three</h2><p>With Russia boxed in by years of sanctions and economic apartheid from the West, China is really the big brother among the three, both in military and money.</p><p>China’s GDP is nearly 10 times that of India. In spite of Western rhetoric, China still has more than 30 per cent of global manufacturing, while India is only 3 per cent. Russia's economic dependency on China is making it a junior partner in the arrangement.<br>India could be marginalised or relegated to a junior role in a China-dominated alliance.</p><h2>US would retaliate against any strategic alliance between India, Russia and China</h2><p>US retaliation to any strategic, defence or economic alliance between India, Russia and China could be severe. Already, Trump has threatened BRICS - a grouping of the three nations that also includes South Africa and Brazil. He has slapped tariffs on India, China and Brazil.&nbsp;<br>Any alignment by India with China and Russia might draw New Delhi into foreign conflicts it has nothing to do with, particularly Ukraine and Taiwan.<br>Furthermore, it would be a contradiction of India’s non-alignment policy.</p><h2>A huge risk for India's international standing</h2><p>Any alignment with Russia and China would dent India's aspirations to play a global role. India's participation in groupings and fora like G7, G20, BRICS, Quad, IPEF will be affected. India's continuing aspiration for a permanent seat at the UN Security Council could take a hit.</p><p>India’s image as a responsible, independent, democratic actor in the international system would be damaged if it aligns with Russia and China, and undermines India’s leadership of the Global South.</p><h2>Don't buy into the RIC narrative</h2><p>Therefore, next time you see that YouTube video with a thumbnail that screams ‘India, China, Russia to take on Trump’, please take these factors into account. RIC is neither feasible nor beneficial for India. It would be unstable and counterproductive.</p><p>India’s current strategy is the best: multiple alignments, balancing relations with the West while having open lines with Russia and regional powers. Keeping its strategic autonomy intact is the way forward for India. Attempting to join an authoritarian bloc to counter the US - and probably only as long as Trump is in power - would undermine India’s global aspirations, harm its economy, alienate vital partners, and trap it in alliances that serve others’ interests more than its own.</p>

Next time you see that YouTube video with a thumbnail that screams ‘India, China, Russia to take on Trump’, please take these factors into account. RIC is neither feasible nor beneficial for India. It would be unstable and counterproductive.

Indian media is awash with stories of how RIC - an imagined alliance of Russia, India and China - could take on the Donald Trump-led US amid tariff threats by the American president against New Delhi. While it might be a good clickbait headline for articles and videos, it is a bad idea. In case you are too busy, here is the fast answer: India-China trust deficit, low alignment of strategic goals, and huge disparities in the economies are factors. The public and political opinion in India is against China. India, China and Russia do not have military capabilities that can take on the US. Political values are different: India is the only true democracy among the three. India’s alliances are generally West-leaning, and therefore the threat perception against the US and West is almost non-existent for it, and not aligned with that of China and Russia. If you have more time, let me break it down for you. Why a likely RIC alliance of Russia, India and China against the US is strategically flawed If formalised, RIC would have the goal of countering the US under Trump’s administration. But it is a deeply flawed and unrealistic geopolitical idea because of mistrust, differing national interests, incompatible economic goals, and asymmetric power dynamics among India, Russia and China. https://www.wionews.com/videos/breaking-why-is-us-imposing-tariff-on-india-trump-tariff-news-1754495938671/embed India-China hostility and mistrust trump even Trump tantrums There's a massive trust deficit between India and China in spite of their continuing economic cooperation and current alignment against the US. The two countries still have unresolved border disputes, particularly in Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh, and military tensions despite recent attempts at a thaw. The 2020 Galwan Valley clash led to casualties on both sides, severely damaging diplomatic trust, coming close on the heels of the Doklam clash along the border with Bhutan. Despite ongoing diplomatic engagements since 2024, India and China have not fully restored trust. Indian public and politicians view China with suspicion In the court of Indian public opinion, China is still the enemy. Any move toward an alliance involving China would lead to political backlash in India, and public outrage. India is not anti-US, per se, but seeks to maintain its strategic autonomy. India has acted as a democratic counterbalance to China in the Indo-Pacific, which in fact is the reason why it's seen by the West as an important player in the region, and is invited to all kinds of strategic alliances like the Quad. China, on the other hand, seeks regional hegemony, and given the context of Taiwan invasion fears and South China Sea territorial ambitions, can best be called a regional bully. Beijing dreams of a China-led world order under the single-party rule of communism, which fundamentally clashes with India's multi-party democratic ethos. Russia and China jointly oppose the US-led world order, while India selectively aligns with the West when in its interest: this is why India is invited to G7, and is a key player in the G20. India is an active partner of the US and West India is an active partner in the India-US-Japan-Australia Quad, which is fundamentally about checkmating China in the region. The IPEF or Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, is another grouping that goes against a potential India-China alignment. India supports a rules-based international order and freedom of navigation, things that are in contrast to China’s assertiveness in the Indo-Pacific. Russia’s tilt towards China at India’s expense Russia and China have increasingly been sharing notes for a strategic alignment against the West's opposition to them, particularly since the Ukraine war. Russia has become economically and strategically dependent on China, specifically in oil and gas trade, where Beijing is the biggest buyer. China remains the economic lifeline for Russia amidst Western sanctions over the war. This has led Russia to covertly support China on Taiwan and the South China Sea. In both of these, India does not share the positions of China and Russia. Russia-China friendship can impact India-Russia ties While India has had a long-standing economic and defence partnership with Russia, the question remains if Russia will be neutral in an India-China conflict scenario. India has not had the best treatment recently in groupings like the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. SCO, which is dominated by China and Russia, recently disappointed India by not including language on terrorism in the wake of the Pahalgam attack, during a ministerial meeting. India has also been diversifying defence suppliers away from Russia, buying its fighter jets from France and drones from the US and Israel, for instance. India's defence purchase dependence on Russia is already waning. Except for the current downturn, the India-US strategic partnership has been growing In the post-9/11 world, India and the US extended their cooperation in defence with arrangements and pacts like BECA and COMCASA. The two nations continue intelligence sharing, counterterrorism operations, and have advanced technology cooperation, like in the iCET initiative. In spite of the Trump-led tensions, the US is India’s largest export market, worth over $130 billion. The current levels of India-US cooperation in investment, technology, education and people-to-people cooperation cannot immediately be replaced by Russia or China. Suddenly aligning against the US could jeopardise India's critical economic sectors and affect its national development. No meaningful economic convergence between India, China and Russia India and China are regional economic competitors, not partners. India has a major trade deficit with China. The Chinese infrastructure project, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) was seen by India as a geopolitical threat. Except for energy and defence deals, there's not much that Russia’s economy can offer India. An issue of values and political systems: Democratic India vs autocratic Russia and China India is a vibrant democracy with civil liberties, electoral institutions, and a free press, while China is a single-party authoritarian regime, and Russia has become increasingly autocratic with one ruler, Vladimir Putin, at the helm for decades now. Thus, India is a natural ally of liberal democracies in the West rather than with authoritarian regimes. An alliance with Russia and China could damage India’s credibility as a leader of the democratic world. Can India, China and Russia have a military or strategic alliance? It's tough as the ingredients for such an alliance are missing: a shared threat perception, mutual trust, and operational compatibility. India does not trust China, and Russia lacks the capacity or neutrality to bridge this gap. There is no institutional structure or commitment, or military planning to coordinate the three nations in case of a joint external threat. China is really the big brother among the three With Russia boxed in by years of sanctions and economic apartheid from the West, China is really the big brother among the three, both in military and money. China’s GDP is nearly 10 times that of India. In spite of Western rhetoric, China still has more than 30 per cent of global manufacturing, while India is only 3 per cent. Russia's economic dependency on China is making it a junior partner in the arrangement. India could be marginalised or relegated to a junior role in a China-dominated alliance. US would retaliate against any strategic alliance between India, Russia and China US retaliation to any strategic, defence or economic alliance between India, Russia and China could be severe. Already, Trump has threatened BRICS - a grouping of the three nations that also includes South Africa and Brazil. He has slapped tariffs on India, China and Brazil. Any alignment by India with China and Russia might draw New Delhi into foreign conflicts it has nothing to do with, particularly Ukraine and Taiwan. Furthermore, it would be a contradiction of India’s non-alignment policy. A huge risk for India's international standing Any alignment with Russia and China would dent India's aspirations to play a global role. India's participation in groupings and fora like G7, G20, BRICS, Quad, IPEF will be affected. India's continuing aspiration for a permanent seat at the UN Security Council could take a hit. India’s image as a responsible, independent, democratic actor in the international system would be damaged if it aligns with Russia and China, and undermines India’s leadership of the Global South. Don't buy into the RIC narrative Therefore, next time you see that YouTube video with a thumbnail that screams ‘India, China, Russia to take on Trump’, please take these factors into account. RIC is neither feasible nor beneficial for India. It would be unstable and counterproductive. India’s current strategy is the best: multiple alignments, balancing relations with the West while having open lines with Russia and regional powers. Keeping its strategic autonomy intact is the way forward for India. Attempting to join an authoritarian bloc to counter the US - and probably only as long as Trump is in power - would undermine India’s global aspirations, harm its economy, alienate vital partners, and trap it in alliances that serve others’ interests more than its own.

<p>Next time you see that YouTube video with a thumbnail that screams ‘India, China, Russia to take on Trump’, please take these factors into account. RIC is neither feasible nor beneficial for India. Here is why:</p>

Those touting India, Russia, China alliance, HOLD YOUR HORSES and read this. It's not...

The US-India relationship has grown stronger in recent decades, particularly in defence and counterterrorism, but there have been many instances that highlight persistent challenges in the bilateral ties, the latest being the tariff threats by President Donald Trump. 


<p>The US-India relationship has grown stronger in recent decades, particularly in defence and counterterrorism, but there have been many instances that highlight persistent challenges in the bilateral ties, the latest being the tariff threats by President Donald Trump.&nbsp;<br>&nbsp;</p>

With friends like these... US betrayals of India, misunderstandings and differences: 6 times the relationship soured

<p>India is being attacked by US President Donald Trump over its energy and defence trade with Russia, alleging it's fuelling Moscow's war with Ukraine. But Trump is hiding more than what he reveals. Many Western nations, including NATO members and the US, continue to trade in Russian energy—directly or indirectly—using exemptions, loopholes and round-tripping. The overview below focuses solely on oil and gas trade, and even that is shocking.</p><h2>Western nations, including NATO members, continue to import Russian energy</h2><p>If you're too busy to read the whole thing, here's a snapshot: As recently as June, the European Union was the largest buyer of Russian Liquified Natural Gas (LNG), purchasing 51 per cent of Russia's LNG exports. The EU also bought 37 per cent of piped natural gas (PNG), while NATO member Turkiye bought 27 per cent. Turkiye is, in fact, the largest buyer of Russian oil products, accounting for 26 per cent of exports.</p><p>Five top EU importers of Russian fossil fuels paid Russia a total of 1.2 billion euros. Crucially, over 72 per cent of these imports were in natural gas, which the EU has not sanctioned. May be because this gas is essential for heating European homes during cold months.</p><p>Belgium, host of the EU headquarters, was the second-largest importer in June, spending 300 million euros on LNG alone—a 12 per cent increase from May. France followed, importing 232 million euros worth of Russian LNG.</p><p>Then, there’s the indirect trade. In June, more than half of Russian seaborne oil exports were transported on G7+ tankers, up from 36 per cent in January to 56 per cent. This shows Western logistical involvement in sustaining Russian exports.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/trump-vs-india-us-president-s-aide-makes-shocking-claim-india-funding-russia-war-1754293436745/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/trump-vs-india-us-president-s-aide-makes-shocking-claim-india-funding-russia-war-1754293436745/embed</a></p><h2>US still imports enriched uranium from Russia</h2><p>According to Rosatom Director General Alexey Likhachev, the US continues to import enriched uranium from Russia because it’s economically sensible. In 2023, Russia supplied 27 per cent of enriched uranium used by US nuclear operators—more than any other foreign supplier, he said in May this year.</p><p>This trade continues despite the US passing the Prohibiting Russian Uranium Imports Act in 2024, banning the imports from 2028 to 2040. Interestingly, waivers to this law till 2028 allow the trade to legally continue. Likhachev even claimed that ongoing discussions with the Trump administration were happening on uranium cooperation.</p><h2>Shocking details of Russia's energy trade with Western nations in spite of sanctions, Ukraine war</h2><p>The Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) exposed how energy trade with Russia persists through loopholes, exemptions, and re-routed supply chains. Here is a breakdown:</p><h3>European Union is still among top buyers</h3><p>The EU continues to lead in Russian LNG imports (51 per cent) and pipeline gas (37 per cent). Neither is sanctioned, which allows legal trade.</p><p>Seaborne oil and oil products continue entering Europe, despite formal bans. Crude oil flows to Hungary and Slovakia via the southern Druzhba pipeline under EU exemptions. Refined oil from Slovakia is possibly re-exported to other EU nations.</p><p>Hungary is the largest fossil fuel importer among EU countries, valued by CREA at 356 million euros in June, including 165 mn in crude oil and €191 mn in pipeline gas.<br>Slovakia imported 178 mn euros in crude oil and has been refining and re-exporting Russian crude to Czechia, till recent restrictions kicked in.<br>Netherlands bought 99 million euros worth of Russian LNG.</p><h2>Many importers from Russia are NATO members</h2><p>NATO countries like Belgium, France, Hungary, Slovakia, The Netherlands and Turkiye are among the largest importers of Russian energy.</p><p>Hungary and Slovakia exploit legal exemptions to refine and re-export Russian crude.<br>G7+ tankers, &nbsp;many from NATO nations, transport Russian seaborne oil, with 41 per cent of crude oil and 80 per cent of oil products moved by Western-owned or insured ships.</p><h2>Turkiye: The middleman playing both sides amid NATO - Russia tussle</h2><p>Turkiye was the third-largest importer of Russian fossil fuels in June this year, worth 2.3 billion euros. This included 1 billion in oil products (44 per cent of its total imports), as well as LNG and other fuels. Its Port of Ceyhan saw a 33 per cent increase in refined oil product imports, 88 per cent of which were Russian. Some of this are likely re-exported to the EU.</p><h2>Greece and Spain facilitate indirect trade</h2><p>Greek-owned tankers and G7+ maritime fleets play a significant role in shipping Russian oil, which is indirect complicity in the trade. According to CREA, EU waters saw Russian oil worth 218 million per day being moved through ship-to-ship (STS) operations in June, out of which 87 per cent used G7+ vessels.&nbsp;</p><h2>Shadow fleets and maritime loopholes</h2><p>A ‘shadow’ fleet of old, poorly insured tankers are still handling some Russian exports. Many transit EU waters under limited enforcement, using so-called "flags of convenience." G7+ vessels are increasingly conducting such STS operations to avoid scrutiny.</p><h2>So, it's not just India that prioritises economic interests</h2><p>It’s clear that India is not alone in prioritising energy security over geopolitical rhetoric. Unlike others, India is unapologetic about buying Russian oil. Western and NATO countries continue their robust energy trade with Russia, either through legal exemptions or indirect methods like refining and maritime rerouting, as explained above.</p><p>Countries such as Hungary, Slovakia, Belgium, and France remain key players in this trade despite their public posturing. G7+ tankers and facilities enable Russian fossil fuel trade, while the US quietly continues its uranium imports.</p><p>Western nations are doing exactly what they criticise others for—prioritising their own interests. In short, energy security trumps geopolitics. Trump can’t trump that.<br>&nbsp;</p>

If you're too busy to read the whole thing, here's a snapshot: As recently as June, the European Union was the largest buyer of Russian Liquified Natural Gas, buying up 51 per cent of Russia's LNG exports. The EU also bought 37 per cent of piped natural gas

India is being attacked by US President Donald Trump over its energy and defence trade with Russia, alleging it's fuelling Moscow's war with Ukraine. But Trump is hiding more than what he reveals. Many Western nations, including NATO members and the US, continue to trade in Russian energy—directly or indirectly—using exemptions, loopholes and round-tripping. The overview below focuses solely on oil and gas trade, and even that is shocking. Western nations, including NATO members, continue to import Russian energy If you're too busy to read the whole thing, here's a snapshot: As recently as June, the European Union was the largest buyer of Russian Liquified Natural Gas (LNG), purchasing 51 per cent of Russia's LNG exports. The EU also bought 37 per cent of piped natural gas (PNG), while NATO member Turkiye bought 27 per cent. Turkiye is, in fact, the largest buyer of Russian oil products, accounting for 26 per cent of exports. Five top EU importers of Russian fossil fuels paid Russia a total of 1.2 billion euros. Crucially, over 72 per cent of these imports were in natural gas, which the EU has not sanctioned. May be because this gas is essential for heating European homes during cold months. Belgium, host of the EU headquarters, was the second-largest importer in June, spending 300 million euros on LNG alone—a 12 per cent increase from May. France followed, importing 232 million euros worth of Russian LNG. Then, there’s the indirect trade. In June, more than half of Russian seaborne oil exports were transported on G7+ tankers, up from 36 per cent in January to 56 per cent. This shows Western logistical involvement in sustaining Russian exports. https://www.wionews.com/videos/trump-vs-india-us-president-s-aide-makes-shocking-claim-india-funding-russia-war-1754293436745/embed US still imports enriched uranium from Russia According to Rosatom Director General Alexey Likhachev, the US continues to import enriched uranium from Russia because it’s economically sensible. In 2023, Russia supplied 27 per cent of enriched uranium used by US nuclear operators—more than any other foreign supplier, he said in May this year. This trade continues despite the US passing the Prohibiting Russian Uranium Imports Act in 2024, banning the imports from 2028 to 2040. Interestingly, waivers to this law till 2028 allow the trade to legally continue. Likhachev even claimed that ongoing discussions with the Trump administration were happening on uranium cooperation. Shocking details of Russia's energy trade with Western nations in spite of sanctions, Ukraine war The Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) exposed how energy trade with Russia persists through loopholes, exemptions, and re-routed supply chains. Here is a breakdown: European Union is still among top buyers The EU continues to lead in Russian LNG imports (51 per cent) and pipeline gas (37 per cent). Neither is sanctioned, which allows legal trade. Seaborne oil and oil products continue entering Europe, despite formal bans. Crude oil flows to Hungary and Slovakia via the southern Druzhba pipeline under EU exemptions. Refined oil from Slovakia is possibly re-exported to other EU nations. Hungary is the largest fossil fuel importer among EU countries, valued by CREA at 356 million euros in June, including 165 mn in crude oil and €191 mn in pipeline gas. Slovakia imported 178 mn euros in crude oil and has been refining and re-exporting Russian crude to Czechia, till recent restrictions kicked in. Netherlands bought 99 million euros worth of Russian LNG. Many importers from Russia are NATO members NATO countries like Belgium, France, Hungary, Slovakia, The Netherlands and Turkiye are among the largest importers of Russian energy. Hungary and Slovakia exploit legal exemptions to refine and re-export Russian crude. G7+ tankers, many from NATO nations, transport Russian seaborne oil, with 41 per cent of crude oil and 80 per cent of oil products moved by Western-owned or insured ships. Turkiye: The middleman playing both sides amid NATO - Russia tussle Turkiye was the third-largest importer of Russian fossil fuels in June this year, worth 2.3 billion euros. This included 1 billion in oil products (44 per cent of its total imports), as well as LNG and other fuels. Its Port of Ceyhan saw a 33 per cent increase in refined oil product imports, 88 per cent of which were Russian. Some of this are likely re-exported to the EU. Greece and Spain facilitate indirect trade Greek-owned tankers and G7+ maritime fleets play a significant role in shipping Russian oil, which is indirect complicity in the trade. According to CREA, EU waters saw Russian oil worth 218 million per day being moved through ship-to-ship (STS) operations in June, out of which 87 per cent used G7+ vessels. Shadow fleets and maritime loopholes A ‘shadow’ fleet of old, poorly insured tankers are still handling some Russian exports. Many transit EU waters under limited enforcement, using so-called "flags of convenience." G7+ vessels are increasingly conducting such STS operations to avoid scrutiny. So, it's not just India that prioritises economic interests It’s clear that India is not alone in prioritising energy security over geopolitical rhetoric. Unlike others, India is unapologetic about buying Russian oil. Western and NATO countries continue their robust energy trade with Russia, either through legal exemptions or indirect methods like refining and maritime rerouting, as explained above. Countries such as Hungary, Slovakia, Belgium, and France remain key players in this trade despite their public posturing. G7+ tankers and facilities enable Russian fossil fuel trade, while the US quietly continues its uranium imports. Western nations are doing exactly what they criticise others for—prioritising their own interests. In short, energy security trumps geopolitics. Trump can’t trump that.

<p>If you're too busy to read the whole thing, here's a snapshot: As recently as June, the European Union was the largest buyer of Russian Liquified Natural Gas, buying up 51 per cent of Russia's LNG exports. The EU also bought 37 per cent of piped natural gas</p>

Bad if we do it, good if you do? US, West's Russia energy trade HYPOCRISY EXPOSED as Trump browbeats India with tariffs, fines

<p>Amid the tariff war with US President Donald Trump, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has advocated a revival of the Swadeshi movement, a part of India's freedom struggle, stressing indigenous production of goods and cultural pride, which once shook the British Empire. In a speech over the weekend, Modi exhorted every party, leader and citizen to promote indigenous goods for India to become the world's third-largest economy. His words have created a buzz about the Indian Swadeshi movement. Here is its story:</p><h2>What did Modi say about going Swadeshi?</h2><p>Speaking in the northern city of Varanasi on Saturday (Aug 2), Modi asked traders to vow to sell only 'Swadeshi goods' in shops and markets. He said that the promotion of Made-in-India goods will be a service to the nation.<br>"Whatever we buy, we should ask if an Indian worked to make it," he said. He said a product is 'Swadeshi' if it's made with the sweat and skills of Indians.<br>He asked Indians to adopt one of his favourite catchphrases, ‘Vocal for Local’. He said it would be a true tribute to Mahatma Gandhi, India's founding father.</p><h2>The Swadeshi movement was about a self-reliant India</h2><p>The Swadeshi movement closely aligns with some of Modi's major initiatives: Make in India, Vocal for Local and ‘Atmanirbhar Bharat’ or self-reliant India. During the 'Swadeshi Andolan', Indian anti-colonial leaders opposed the repurposing of goods and reselling of the same to Indian consumers by the British, particularly textiles. It made Indian freedom struggle a mass movement across the subcontinent. It became the seed for Independent India to make goods locally.</p><h2>Origins and purpose of the Swadeshi Movement</h2><p>The Swadeshi Movement emerged in 1905 as a direct response to the British decision to partition Bengal, which the indian leaders saw as a strategy to weaken Indian nationalism by dividing the Bengali-speaking population along communal lines. The objective of the Swadeshi movement was to promote economic self-reliance by encouraging the use of Indian-made goods and boycotting British products. The movement combined economic resistance with cultural revival, stressing the unique identity and national pride of Indians.</p><h2>The Bengal Partition, the catalyst for Swadeshi Movement</h2><p>The British justified the partition by claiming that Bengal was too large to administer effectively. But Indian leaders saw a political agenda, with real intent being the suppression of the growing nationalist sentiment. The Bengali middle class, which had embraced English education and liberal ideas, became prominent in anti-British activism, provoking retaliation from the British imperial rulers. The Bengal partition had its predecessor in the 1874 separation of Assam from Bengal, to which the British had added Sylhet. This was among the several instances of the British policy of divide and rule.</p><h2>How the Swadeshi movement unfolded</h2><p>The main activity under the Swadeshi movement was a boycott of British textiles and other goods. Leaders emphasised swadeshi production, with the focus on reviving and promoting Indian industries like handlooms, khadi, soaps and matches. Under the Swadeshi movement, the leaders established indigenous schools, colleges, banks, and enterprises. Cultural assertion with nationalist themes was another area of action, including the promotion of local festivals and songs like <i>Vande Mataram</i>, as well as Indian literature, to unify people under a common Indian identity.</p><h2>How Swadeshi movement got nationwide appeal</h2><p>After emerging in Bengal, the Swadeshi movement expanded to various erstwhile British provinces like Bombay, Madras, and much of northern India. Leaders like Bal Gangadhar Tilak played key roles in spreading the movement across India through cultural events and political mobilisation. In Andhra, it was called the Vandemataram Movement.</p><h2>Swadeshi movement saw participation from across Indian society</h2><p>The Indian National Congress spearheaded the movement, with the moderates and radicals unifying in opposition to the Bengal Partition. The Swadeshi movement saw massive participation from all walks of life, including students, women, artisans, peasants, and the middle class. It became a rare instance of urban-rural unity in India's anti-colonial struggle.</p><h2>How Swadeshi movement impacted Indian economy</h2><p>The Swadeshi movement helped revive cottage industries and traditional handicrafts of India. Production of indigenous goods grew, helping reduce dependency on British imports. It laid the seeds for Indian entrepreneurship and helped develop the country's technical skills. At the social level, &nbsp;Swadeshi movement boosted Indian pride in local craftsmanship. It encouraged community-level participation and fostered a pan-Indian identity, helping spread nationalist ideas beyond elite circles to the broader population.</p><h2>From Swadeshi to Swaraj</h2><p>The Swadeshi movement was also a catalyst for the Swaraj or self-governance movement that followed. The Swadeshi movement laid the foundation for future nationalistic campaigns, and influenced Indian political activism in subsequent decades.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/pm-modi-inspires-fervour-acclaim-support-among-warriors-at-adampur-airbase-9065872/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/pm-modi-inspires-fervour-acclaim-support-among-warriors-at-adampur-airbase-9065872/embed</a></p><p>&nbsp;</p><h2>British response to Swadeshi movement</h2><p>British imperialists resorted to arrests and censorship to suppress the movement, which lost its momentum by 1908. In spite of the national spirit, the British succeeded in sowing seeds of communal divisions, affecting the movement’s unity and strength, which was also hurt by rifts within the moderates and radicals among Indian freedom movement's leadership.</p><h2>Swadeshi movement never really ended</h2><p>Swadeshi movement was a turning point in India's freedom struggle, best known for the mass participation in the freedom struggle, which till then was limited to elite circles.&nbsp;</p><p>Even after Independence, the idea of Swadeshi remained in India's cultural and economic conscience. &nbsp;Mahatma Gandhi, India's founding father, instilled elements of Swadeshi in his subsequent movements, advocating khadi, civil disobedience and self-reliance.&nbsp;</p><p>Even in the 21st century, there have been attempts to revive Swadeshi, broadly a stress on economic nationalism, as a tool against colonial and imperial influences or globalisation.</p><p>It is this spirit of Swadeshi that Modi was appealing to in his weekend speech.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

The Swadeshi Movement focused on reviving and promoting Indian industries like handlooms, khadi, soaps and matches. Its leaders established indigenous schools, colleges, banks, and enterprises. Cultural assertion with nationalist themes was another area of action

Amid the tariff war with US President Donald Trump, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has advocated a revival of the Swadeshi movement, a part of India's freedom struggle, stressing indigenous production of goods and cultural pride, which once shook the British Empire. In a speech over the weekend, Modi exhorted every party, leader and citizen to promote indigenous goods for India to become the world's third-largest economy. His words have created a buzz about the Indian Swadeshi movement. Here is its story: What did Modi say about going Swadeshi? Speaking in the northern city of Varanasi on Saturday (Aug 2), Modi asked traders to vow to sell only 'Swadeshi goods' in shops and markets. He said that the promotion of Made-in-India goods will be a service to the nation. "Whatever we buy, we should ask if an Indian worked to make it," he said. He said a product is 'Swadeshi' if it's made with the sweat and skills of Indians. He asked Indians to adopt one of his favourite catchphrases, ‘Vocal for Local’. He said it would be a true tribute to Mahatma Gandhi, India's founding father. The Swadeshi movement was about a self-reliant India The Swadeshi movement closely aligns with some of Modi's major initiatives: Make in India, Vocal for Local and ‘Atmanirbhar Bharat’ or self-reliant India. During the 'Swadeshi Andolan', Indian anti-colonial leaders opposed the repurposing of goods and reselling of the same to Indian consumers by the British, particularly textiles. It made Indian freedom struggle a mass movement across the subcontinent. It became the seed for Independent India to make goods locally. Origins and purpose of the Swadeshi Movement The Swadeshi Movement emerged in 1905 as a direct response to the British decision to partition Bengal, which the indian leaders saw as a strategy to weaken Indian nationalism by dividing the Bengali-speaking population along communal lines. The objective of the Swadeshi movement was to promote economic self-reliance by encouraging the use of Indian-made goods and boycotting British products. The movement combined economic resistance with cultural revival, stressing the unique identity and national pride of Indians. The Bengal Partition, the catalyst for Swadeshi Movement The British justified the partition by claiming that Bengal was too large to administer effectively. But Indian leaders saw a political agenda, with real intent being the suppression of the growing nationalist sentiment. The Bengali middle class, which had embraced English education and liberal ideas, became prominent in anti-British activism, provoking retaliation from the British imperial rulers. The Bengal partition had its predecessor in the 1874 separation of Assam from Bengal, to which the British had added Sylhet. This was among the several instances of the British policy of divide and rule. How the Swadeshi movement unfolded The main activity under the Swadeshi movement was a boycott of British textiles and other goods. Leaders emphasised swadeshi production, with the focus on reviving and promoting Indian industries like handlooms, khadi, soaps and matches. Under the Swadeshi movement, the leaders established indigenous schools, colleges, banks, and enterprises. Cultural assertion with nationalist themes was another area of action, including the promotion of local festivals and songs like Vande Mataram, as well as Indian literature, to unify people under a common Indian identity. How Swadeshi movement got nationwide appeal After emerging in Bengal, the Swadeshi movement expanded to various erstwhile British provinces like Bombay, Madras, and much of northern India. Leaders like Bal Gangadhar Tilak played key roles in spreading the movement across India through cultural events and political mobilisation. In Andhra, it was called the Vandemataram Movement. Swadeshi movement saw participation from across Indian society The Indian National Congress spearheaded the movement, with the moderates and radicals unifying in opposition to the Bengal Partition. The Swadeshi movement saw massive participation from all walks of life, including students, women, artisans, peasants, and the middle class. It became a rare instance of urban-rural unity in India's anti-colonial struggle. How Swadeshi movement impacted Indian economy The Swadeshi movement helped revive cottage industries and traditional handicrafts of India. Production of indigenous goods grew, helping reduce dependency on British imports. It laid the seeds for Indian entrepreneurship and helped develop the country's technical skills. At the social level, Swadeshi movement boosted Indian pride in local craftsmanship. It encouraged community-level participation and fostered a pan-Indian identity, helping spread nationalist ideas beyond elite circles to the broader population. From Swadeshi to Swaraj The Swadeshi movement was also a catalyst for the Swaraj or self-governance movement that followed. The Swadeshi movement laid the foundation for future nationalistic campaigns, and influenced Indian political activism in subsequent decades. https://www.wionews.com/videos/pm-modi-inspires-fervour-acclaim-support-among-warriors-at-adampur-airbase-9065872/embed British response to Swadeshi movement British imperialists resorted to arrests and censorship to suppress the movement, which lost its momentum by 1908. In spite of the national spirit, the British succeeded in sowing seeds of communal divisions, affecting the movement’s unity and strength, which was also hurt by rifts within the moderates and radicals among Indian freedom movement's leadership. Swadeshi movement never really ended Swadeshi movement was a turning point in India's freedom struggle, best known for the mass participation in the freedom struggle, which till then was limited to elite circles. Even after Independence, the idea of Swadeshi remained in India's cultural and economic conscience. Mahatma Gandhi, India's founding father, instilled elements of Swadeshi in his subsequent movements, advocating khadi, civil disobedience and self-reliance. Even in the 21st century, there have been attempts to revive Swadeshi, broadly a stress on economic nationalism, as a tool against colonial and imperial influences or globalisation. It is this spirit of Swadeshi that Modi was appealing to in his weekend speech.

<p>The Swadeshi Movement focused on reviving and promoting Indian industries like handlooms, khadi, soaps and matches. Its leaders established indigenous schools, colleges, banks, and enterprises. Cultural assertion with nationalist themes was another area of action</p>

Swadeshi Movement: Why Modi's Make in India call amid Trump tariffs harks back to freedom struggle and is an idea close to his heart

<p>Shibu Soren, one of the most important tribal leaders of India, died on Monday (Aug 4) after a prolonged illness. He was 81. Soren’s leadership was central to the formation of the tribal state of Jharkhand in 2000. The state empowered tribals with political representation that included 28 reserved Assembly seats for Adivasi communities. Soren was known for his confrontational style of functioning, but that was the oxygen for his movement.&nbsp;</p><p>Here is a brief timeline of his storied life:</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

<h2>Shibu Soren early life and activism</h2><p>Shibu Soren was born on 11 January 1944, in Nemra village in present-day Jharkhand to a Santhal tribal family. When Soren was young, his father was murdered allegedly by moneylenders, leading him to leave school and turn to activism for tribal resistance. At the age of 18, Soren founded the Santhal Navyuvak Sangh to mobilise tribal youth against exploitation. In later life, he worked as a school teacher.</p><h2>Shibu Soren political life: Founding of JMM and tribal mobilisations</h2>

<p>In 1972, Soren co-founded the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha or JMM with AK Roy, Binod Bihari Mahato and other leaders. The JMM aimed to reclaim tribal lands and demand a separate, tribal-majority state. This was achieved through a combination of mass agitations, cultural mobilisation, and political alliances.</p><p>The JMM addressed exploitation in the Chotanagpur and Santhal Pargana regions, and agitated for tribal land rights, cultural preservation, and control over natural resources, with the slogan 'jal, jungal, zameen' (water, forest, land).</p><p>Soren led the Dhankatni Movement, which encouraged tribals or 'adivasis' to forcibly harvest crops from land seized by outsiders. This movement was a symbol of resistance to economic marginalisation.</p><h2>Shibu Soren's career in Indian and Jharkhand politics</h2><p>Between 1980 and 2019, Shibu Soren was elected to the Lok Sabha from Dumka, becoming a key voice for Adivasi rights at the centre. Fondly called 'Dishom Guru', he led the Jharkhand statehood movement for nearly three decades, fulfilling his dream when the state was formed by the division of Bihar on 15 November 2000.</p><p>He served as chief minister of Jharkhand three times (2005, 2008–2009 and 2009–2010). At the centre, he was the Union Coal Minister in 2004–2006, though legal troubles interrupted most of his terms. In 2020, he was elected to the Rajya Sabha, the upper house of Indian parliament.</p><p>Soren paved the way for his son, Hemant Soren, who currently leads the JMM and serves as Jharkhand’s chief minister.</p><p>The politics of JMM, however, was later diluted by the fragmentation and factionalism of its leaders, who later joined, or formed alliances with, major parties like the Congress and BJP.</p><h2>Shibu Soren's legal controversies and murder allegations faced by him</h2><p>Throughout his political career, Shibu Soren faced legal cases. Soren was accused in a 1974 double murder case, in which two people were killed over a dispute over goat slaughter. He was cleared of the case in 2010.</p><p>The Chirudih Massacre of 1975 is another major one. Soren was among the accused in the killing of 10 people during a clash between tribals and 'outsiders'. He was issued an arrest warrant in 2004 and went underground. In 2008, he was acquitted due to insufficient evidence.<br>But perhaps the most damning for Soren's political career was the &nbsp;Shashi Nath Jha murder of 1994. Jha was Soren's secretary, and the allegation was that he was murdered because he had knowledge of a bribery scandal. Soren was convicted in the case in 2006 and sentenced to life. But he was acquitted in 2007, which was upheld in 2018.</p><h2>Shibu Soren legacy: JMM bribery scandal of 1993 marred his reputation</h2><p>The JMM bribary scandal dates back to 1993. The alllegation was that Soren or his party accepted bribes to support the Narasimha Rao government of Congress. He was not convicted in the case, but the Jha murder case was linked to the bribery scandal. Soren was also criticised for holding “kangaroo courts” and extrajudicial methods during his time in power. In 2007, he survived a bomb attack targeting his convoy.</p><p>Though Soren was acquitted in most of the criminal cases he was linked to, his legacy suffered as a result. While he championed tribal rights, the JMM was accused of creating dynastic politics. Several JMM leaders left to join other major national parties, including the BJP, thus diluting JMM's original role as a beacon of tribal rights.</p><p>In spite of all this, Shibu Soren remains a pivotal figure in Jharkhand’s history, revered for his contribution to Adivasi empowerment.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

Soren was known for his confrontational style of functioning, but that was the oxygen for his movement. 

Shibu Soren, one of the most important tribal leaders of India, died on Monday (Aug 4) after a prolonged illness. He was 81. Soren’s leadership was central to the formation of the tribal state of Jharkhand in 2000. The state empowered tribals with political representation that included 28 reserved Assembly seats for Adivasi communities. Soren was known for his confrontational style of functioning, but that was the oxygen for his movement. Here is a brief timeline of his storied life:

<p>Soren was known for his confrontational style of functioning, but that was the oxygen for his movement.&nbsp;</p>

Shibu Soren dies: A timeline of the political life of Jharkhand Mukti Morcha leader who helped form Indian tribal state

Author

Zee News Rajasthan

Editor

Vinod Janardhanan

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.