Amit Shah arrives in Kerala to attend 90th Mahasamadhi of Sree Narayana Guru

Mar 3: Just hours after the ending of a week-long “reduction” in violence that was crucial for Donald Trump’s peace deal in Afghanistan, the Taliban struck again: On Monday, they killed three people and injured about a dozen at a football match in Khost province. This resumption of violence will not surprise anyone actually invested in peace for that troubled country. The point of the U.S.-Taliban deal was never peace. It was to try and cover up an ignominious exit for the U.S., driven by an election-bound president who feels no responsibility toward that country or to the broader region.

Seen from South Asia, every point we know about in the agreement is a concession by Trump to the Taliban. Most importantly, it completes a long-term effort by the U.S. to delegitimize the elected government in Kabul — and, by extension, Afghanistan’s constitution. Afghanistan’s president is already balking at releasing 5,000 Taliban prisoners before intra-Afghan talks can begin — a provision that his government did not approve.

One particularly cringe-worthy aspect: The agreement refers to the Taliban throughout  as “the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan that is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban.” This unwieldy nomenclature validates the Taliban’s claim to be a government equivalent to the one in Kabul, just not the one recognised at the moment by the U.S. When read together with the second part of the agreement, which binds the U.S. to not “intervene in [Afghanistan’s] domestic affairs,” the point is obvious: The Taliban is not interested in peace, but in ensuring that support for its rivals is forbidden, and its path to Kabul is cleared.

All that the U.S. has effectively gotten in return is the Taliban’s assurance that it will not allow the soil of Afghanistan to be used against the “U.S. and its allies.” True, the U.S. under Trump has shown a disturbing willingness to trust solemn assurances from autocrats; but its apparent belief in promises made by a murderous theocratic movement is even more ridiculous. Especially as the Taliban made much the same promise to an Assistant Secretary of State about Osama bin Laden while he was in the country plotting 9/11.

Nobody in the region is pleased with this agreement except for the Taliban and their backers in the Pakistani military. India has consistently held that the legitimate government in Kabul must be the basic anchor of any peace plan. Ordinary Afghans, unsurprisingly, long for peace — but they are, by all accounts, deeply skeptical about how this deal will get them there. The brave activists of the Afghan Women’s Network are worried that intra-Afghan talks will take place without adequate representation of the country’s women — who have, after all, the most to lose from a return to Taliban rule.

But the Pakistani military establishment is not hiding its glee. One retired general tweeted: “Big victory for Afghan Taliban as historic accord signed… Forced Americans to negotiate an accord from the position of parity. Setback for India.” Pakistan’s army, the Taliban’s biggest backer, longs to re-install a friendly Islamist regime in Kabul — and it has correctly estimated that, after being abandoned by Trump, the Afghan government will have sharply reduced bargaining power in any intra-Afghan peace talks. A deal with the Taliban that fails also to include its backers in the Pakistani military is meaningless.

India, meanwhile, will not see this deal as a positive for regional peace or its relationship with the U.S. It comes barely a week after Trump’s India visit, which made it painfully clear that shared strategic concerns are the only thing keeping the countries together. New Delhi remembers that India is not, on paper, a U.S. “ally.” In that respect, an intensification of terrorism targeting India, as happened the last time the U.S. withdrew from the region, would not even be a violation of Trump’s agreement. One possible outcome: Over time the government in New Delhi, which has resolutely sought to keep its ties with Kabul primarily political, may have to step up security cooperation. Nobody knows where that would lead.

The irresponsible concessions made by the U.S. in this agreement will likely disrupt South Asia for years to come, and endanger its own relationship with India going forward. But worst of all, this deal abandons those in Afghanistan who, under the shadow of war, tried to develop, for the first time, institutions that work for all Afghans. No amount of sanctimony about “ending America’s longest war” should obscure the danger and immorality of this sort of exit.

Jun 3: Emphasising that airlines are clearly the safest mode of transportation, IndiGo CEO Ronojoy Dutta on Tuesday said there is no evidence yet of coronavirus infection getting transmitted among passengers onboard an aeroplane.

His comments against the backdrop of instances of some passengers, who had taken flights after resumption of domestic air services on May 25, testing positive for coronavirus.

"Those people had the virus before they got on to the aeroplane. What is noteworthy is that they have done the tracing after that. There is no evidence of transmission onboard there... that is a very encouraging sign on the safety of airline travel," he said during an earnings call.

According to him, airlines are clearly the safest mode of transportation and there is no evidence yet of contamination on an aircraft.

"You can come in contaminated but so far there is no evidence of passing it on to a fellow passenger," he noted.

Amid concerns over the coronavirus pandemic, aviation regulator DGCA has asked airlines to ensure that to the extent possible, middle seat in flights should be kept empty.

In this regard, Dutta said the airline would keep the middle seat empty wherever it can and "where we have to fill the middle seat, we will have the extra protective gown".

To a query about possible hedging of fuel prices, he said it would be a dumb idea and that airlines adjust to ups and downs in fuel prices.

"I can't overemphasise what a dumb idea it will be for an airline to hedge fuel prices. I looked at it from different angles and it is not a good idea... we looked at hedging and we talked about it at the board level and we said no," he noted.

New Delhi, Jun 14: Petrol price on Sunday was hiked by a record 62 paise per litre and that of diesel by 64 paise as oil companies for the eighth day in a row adjusted retail rates in line with cost since ending an 82-day hiatus in rate revision.

Petrol price in Delhi was hiked to Rs 75.78 per litre from Rs 75.16 while diesel rates were increased to Rs 74.03 a litre from Rs 73.39, according to a price notification of state oil marketing companies.

Rates have been increased across the country and vary from state to state depending on the incidence of local sales tax or VAT.

The 62 paise a litre increase in petrol and 64 paise hike in diesel price is the highest surge in rates since the daily price revision was started in June 2017.

This is the eighth daily increase in rates in a row since oil companies on June 7 restarted revising prices in line with costs, after ending an 82-day hiatus.

In eight hikes, petrol price has gone up by Rs 4.52 per litre and diesel by Rs 4.64 -- a record increase in rates in any eight days since the daily price revision was introduced.

The freeze in rates was imposed in mid-March soon after the government hiked excise duty on petrol and diesel to shore up additional finances.

Oil PSUs Indian Oil Corp (IOC), Bharat Petroleum Corp Ltd (BPCL) and Hindustan Petroleum Corp Ltd (HPCL), instead of passing on the excise duty hikes to customers, adjusted them against the fall in the retail rates that was warranted because of international oil prices falling to two-decade lows.

The government had first raised excise duty on petrol and diesel by Rs 3 per litre each on March 14 and then again on May 5 by a record Rs 10 per litre in case of petrol and Rs 13 on diesel. The two hikes gave the government Rs 2 lakh crore in additional tax revenues.

State-owned fuel retailers IOC, BPCL and HPCL had frozen petrol and diesel prices since March 16, as if anticipating the government move and set off gains they accrued from continuing drop in international oil prices against the excise duty hike.

They, however, promptly passed the increase in local sales tax or VAT by state governments such as Rs 1.67 increase in VAT on petrol and Rs 7.10 in diesel by the Delhi government on May 4.

The total incidence of excise duty on petrol has risen to Rs 32.98 per litre and that on diesel to Rs 31.83. The excise tax on petrol was Rs 9.48 per litre when the Narendra Modi government took office in 2014 and that on diesel was Rs 3.56 a litre.

The government had between November 2014 and January 2016 raised excise duty on petrol and diesel on nine occasions to take away gains arising from plummeting global oil prices.

In all, duty on petrol rate was hiked by Rs 11.77 per litre and that on diesel by 13.47 a litre in those 15 months that helped government's excise mop up more than double to Rs 2,42,000 crore in 2016-17 from Rs 99,000 crore in 2014-15.

It cut excise duty by Rs 2 in October 2017 and by Rs 1.50 a year later. But it raised excise duty by Rs 2 per litre in July 2019.

It again raised excise duty on March 14 by Rs 3 per litre.