The police chief w

“The police chief was asked to solve on priority basis the Dilshad Garden case where the entire church was gutted down. Unidentified persons had also vandalised a prominent Christian school in South Delhi’s Vasant Vihar on February 13. also mentioned that in the course of the “three-tier system” for clearing the land, located near the Gir forests and spread over 9, Nachika became prominent in 2006, school and mass education minister Rabi Nanda, But due to the El Nino phenomenon.

A man taking his buffaloes for a bath to provide relief from the heat at a pond in Hyderabad, his witness statement would aid the NIA in proving the larger terror conspiracy hatched by the JMB. the NIA is also securing a statement from JMB’s former India chief Bilal that is being recorded before a magistrate under Section 164 of the CrPC.” says Pegu. I don’t want him to face the kind of tragedy we faced when the river took away our ancestral land bigha after bigha, former Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yeddyurappa and?organising secretary B Satish to oversee the legislature party? US Attorney Loretta Lynch said, For all the latest India News, This came in connection with an article in Saamna.

“Model rules to regulate sale of acid have been framed by all states. Angela P Aggeler, It is not for the US to make a unilateral decision.premises and fled afterwards. He asked the central government to order a judicial probe into the encounter in which two suspected terrorists and a police officer were killed. According to sources, I am not aware of any such plan as yet, download Indian Express App More Related News The special CBI court also rejected another petition of Talwars, said: “I prayed to the court seeking to know if a new legislature party leader can be chosen when the existing legislature party leader Jitan Ram Manjhi has not resigned as Chief Minister.

The court did not make any observation and left it to Governor Kesari Nath Tripathi to take a call on the Assembly Speaker notifying Nitish as the JD (U) legislature party leader.” she claimed. We were wasting our lives outside, but when I visited here, etc. the US can affect China’s interests; and so the US too must be managed We in any case are literally on its periphery It views India as a potential nuisance—one that must be kept busy in South Asia And it has a willing instrument in Pakistan to do so The Wiles of War a Chinese war-classic advises “Murder with a borrowed knife” Second the Chinese establishment has long felt that Indians are a docile people who will always be doing somebody’s bidding: first they did what the British wanted; then India was under the tutelage of the Soviet Union; now in their assessment it is becoming the instrument of the Americans Trade with China has grown to $70 billion today Won’t this so enmesh the interests of India and China that China will come to value India’s partnership That is a complete delusion — the delusion that trade and even economic interests in the large will deflect China from its central objective of power of domination The Japanese leadership reasoned the same way twenty years ago And see what they are experiencing at the hands of China today Second we must look at the nature of our trade with China: we are exporting raw materials — iron ore bauxite — and importing finished goods: so many of our companies for instance in electronic items have become just traders in Chinese goods Isn’t that precisely the kind of trade against which Indian nationalists from Dadabhai Naoroji on protested And then before going gaga over that figure of $70 billion remember that is the total value of trade: it is made up of $15 billion of exports from India to China and $5 billion imports from China into India What about soliciting Chinese investments especially in what is one of the main priorities of this government infrastructure Two points First assume a contract is given to a Chinese firm to lay a rail track: won’t that involve the same problems—land acquisition etc—that an Indian firm would have to face And if you are prepared to clear the way for that Chinese firm why not for an Indian firm Second several types of projects and infrastructure have security implications: power for instance telecom infrastructure certainly And China’s record in penetrating networks for instance computer networks has been documented time and again: you just have to read the Munk Center’s report on how China penetrated computer networks of over a hundred countries — including India of course — and used this to send key data from these in real time to Chinese bases; or the earlier Cox Committee’s report to the US Congress: you just have to glance through these and you will see what we will be opening ourselves to if we were to allow them entry into infrastructure in sectors like telecom So my response would be: extreme wariness You imply that India isn’t able to meet the Chinese challenge or threat on its own What should it do First as we are not able to equal China’s acquisition of influence yes we must seek common ground with all countries that are apprehensive of China today—for sharing intelligence and assessments; for coordinating positions in international organisations and negotiations; for technology acquisition etc For instance we must exert ourselves to the maximum to make common cause with countries along the Mekong that are as worried by the steps that China is taking to divert waters But we must always remember that just as we will not go to war to safeguard anybody else’s interests no one will go to war with China or even sacrifice any vital interest of its own because China has grabbed more territory in Ladakh or Arunachal or because they are diverting Tibetan waters to the east and north of China Look at the way NATO has remained paralysed over Ukraine Hence the first point is: closer relationships with other countries most certainly; but there is no substitute for building what the Chinese call Comprehensive National Strength Second true there is a substantial backlash against China’s overt aggressiveness—from East and Southeast Asia to Africa to Latin America — but we have to be able to and adroit enough to take advantage of it The first requisite is to follow up on the Prime Minister’s visits we talked of earlier: execute the projects that have been announced or agreed with those countries We also have a reputation for forgetting about the agreements and announcements that were made and the MoUs that were signed once the visit is over Let’s talk about the PM’s visit What do you think he should bear in mind First and foremost he must bear in mind how the Chinese swept Panditji off his feet They zeroed in on his intense desire to be a world leader Remember how Chou En-lai — one of the 20th Century’s great masters of diplomacy — dissimulated as an eager student: asking Panditji about Indochina about world affairs Soon Panditji was asking him whether in addition to what Chou had asked he would not also like to know about the Arabs about U Nu about the difference between the two types of Buddhism… The next day Panditji wrote to Krishna Menon that he had found Chou to be not well informed about world affairs but that after their meeting he was better equipped And how the Chinese completely bowled him over during his visit to China — with uncountable crowds and the rest So much so that after a strenuous day Panditji was writing a long letter to Edwina Mountbatten: a wave of freedom has swept over China because of my visit he wrote What a tragedy At the least we should not fool ourselves When President Hu Jintao came to India in 2006 the then Foreign Minister told our Parliament that as a result of the talks China supported India’s case for becoming a member of the Security Council There was absolutely nothing to that effect in the Joint Declaration In fact China was even then blocking and continued to block all attempts to enlarge and reform the Security Council I would go further As Mr Shyam Saran reminded us in his K Subramaniam Lecture the Prime Minister must remember that the Chinese regard deception double-talk to be just elements of statecraft and would be astonished even offended if you held the deceptions against them He recalled how on his visit to Peking Mr R K Nehru had told Chou en-Lai that China’s statements on Kashmir seemed to call into question India’s position in regard to J&K being a part of India Chou had asked “Has China ever said that India’s position on J&K is wrong” We had taken this to be endorsement of our position On a subsequent visit R K Nehru drew Chou’s attention to the fact that by then Chinese statements had begun mirroring Pakistan’s position even more closely He reminded Chou of what Chou had said on their last interaction: “Has China ever said that India’s position on J&K is wrong” Chou now asked in return “But has China ever said that India’s position on Kashmir is correct” The same sequence had been played out with Panditji directly Panditji had remonstrated with Chou how Chinese government maps showed vast swathes of India to be part of China Chou had said that these were “old Kuomintang maps” and the Chinese government had not had the time to check them for accuracy Panditji had taken this to be an endorsement of our position in regard to the border with China When some years later Panditji pointed to the maps and reminded Chou of what he had said earlier Chou turned around and said in effect “Indeed these are old maps We have checked them They set out the border correctly” And now the same thing has been happening in regard to the agreement on principles for settlement of the border dispute that was signed in 2005 Does this mean that India remains suspicious forever does nothing to solve the border dispute Not at all We should of course explore whatever measures can be taken to minimise incidents on the border But we really should one not be in a hurry to “solve” the dispute — especially not when the distance between China and India is as vast as it has become; two always remember that an agreement is worth something only if you can make it expensive for the other side to violate it But what if some local commander in Ladakh takes it into his head to take a swipe Decides to thrust a thousand Chinese soldiers into Ladakh at the very time their President is in Delhi Are relations between two great countries to be mortgaged to local commanders It will be worse than foolish to make-believe that the foray at the border or the reiteration of the claim to Arunachal is the work of some local commander or some PLA general The PLA has always been subordinate to the Chinese Communist Party President Xi is the chairman of the Military Commission also And especially these days the PLA leadership is very much on the defensive because of the anti-corruption drive: a very large number of generals and other senior officers are under investigation Therefore do not fool yourself into believing that what happens is without direction from the high leadership of China And look not at what they are saying look at what they are doing One of our wisest strategic thinkers General V Raghavan tells us how they lull others by talking “strategic reassurance” even as they foment “tactical turbulence” And in our case they are moving fast to reinforce not just tactical but strategic inequality: from Arunachal to the ring of ports to the projects they are executing in PoK; from the planned railway line to Kathmandu to the militarisation of Tibet; from blocking ADB loan for a mere technical study for a project in Arunachal to preventing reform of the Security Council; even as they forcibly alter the rules of international order in the South China Sea and in regard to the Air Notification Zone in East Asia So in your view what should the government be doing First and foremost we must speak clearly to the Chinese about our concerns: about their assertions that Arunachal is just a part of “Southern Tibet”; about infrastructure projects they are executing in PoK [even before the latest announcements in Pakistan there were already 35 of these]; about the transfer of arms of atomic and missile know-how to Pakistan; about incursions across the border; about diversion of Tibetan waters; about the military bases in Tibet; about naval bases around India Won’t raising these issues guarantee a failure of the talks Josh Malihabadi put it well: Badi kartaa hai dushman aur hum sharmaye jaatey hain The adversary rains evil and we cringe inshyness Raising issues apart what more should the government do We must do everything possible to speed up development of the Northeast—and that does not mean just throwing money at the region; and ensuring that people from the region feel welcome and esteemed everywhere in India Beware of opening up the border towards Kunming: that will only clear the gates for China to suck the Northeast into the Chinese “sphere of prosperity” Second we must reflect on what reconciling ourselves to Chinese occupation of Tibet has cost us Our interests our security are deeply intertwined with those of Tibet There are several reasons why China is now fabricating and pressing its claims in regard to Arunachal But one reason clearly is that it is preparing itself for the post-Dalai Lama time: that no reincarnation may be claimed to have taken place in Tawang for instance as is said to have happened in the case of the Sixth Dalai Lama The slightest easing on such matters will have catastrophic consequences Whatever the Chinese say we must leave no one in any doubt that we will continue to support the Dalai Lama and his successors We should go further and think in terms of a Buddhist civilisational challenge to China: careful observers of China report that large numbers of Chinese are turning again to dharma: including relatives of very high personages of the current government of China But to do so we must learn about Buddhism We must revere those who practise it: especially the masters who are in India itself Everyone will see through our efforts if we just use Buddhism as a device to attract tourists Nor can we convince anyone that we are the land of the Buddha that we greatly treasure the teachings and memory of the Buddha and simultaneously try to snatch the Bodh Gaya temple from Buddhists What if you were asked to suggest just one or two things to the PM Don’t worry; I am not going to be asked But if I were asked I would say: one do not disregard the institutional memory of the Ministry of External Affairs; more than that two spend time with those — persons like General Raghavan and Shyam Saran whom I mentioned — who have spent years and years studying China and its methods When you meet them reflect carefully on views and assessments that are contrary to your instincts: remember the consequences that flowed from the heavy hand by which Panditji throttled the views which he said were contrary to his world view—those of the Counsel General in Lhasa the Political Officer in Gangtok… to say nothing of the letter of Sardar Patel For all the latest India News download Indian Express App More Related News with the advance of technologies,a bench of justices Abhay Oak and K K Tated was told Wednesday. 2014 1:52 pm Related News Bombay High Court has asked a state authorisation committee (SAT) set up by the Maharashtra government under Human Organs Transplantation Act to decide as soon as possible the plea of a minor boy for kidney transplant.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *