Apology spree: Kejriwal says sorry to Jaitley too

London, Feb 19: Indian universities had a good performance year within the emerging economies of the world as a record 11 made it to the top 100 Times Higher Education's (THE) Emerging Economies University Rankings 2020.

Only China has more universities than India in the top 100 at 30 from a total of 47 countries and territories included in the analysis released in London on Tuesday evening.

A total of 56 Indian universities appear in the full ranking of a total of 533 universities across emerging economies of the world.

The Indian Institute of Science (IISc), ranked 16th, is India’s top-ranked institution followed by the Indian Institute of Technologies (IITs).

"There has long been a debate about the success of Indian universities in world rankings, and for too long they have been seen as underperforming on the global stage," notes Phil Baty, Chief Knowledge Officer for the THE.

"The Emerging Economies University Rankings 2020 suggests that real progress is being made by a number of institutions in a number of metrics across our robust methodology, and could mark an exciting turning point for Indian higher education, enabled in part by the Institutes of Eminence scheme," he said.

The Indian government’s Institutes of Eminence scheme was established in 2017 and one of its participating universities, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, has entered the top 100 for the first time, moving up a huge 51 places from joint 141st in 2019.

The other universities included in the Institutes of Eminence scheme that appear in the top 100 mark the biggest improvers in the ranking with IIT Kharagpur moving up 23 places to 32nd, IIT Delhi improving by 28 places to joint 38th and IIT Madras climbing 12 places to joint 63rd.

The Institutes of Eminence scheme provides participating universities with government funding and greater autonomy with the aim of moving them into the top 100 of the world university rankings, including Times Higher Education’s World University Ranking, over time.

The expectation is that this will be achieved through a number of changes including an increase in foreign students and staff, offering online courses and encouraging academic collaboration with other top universities around the world.

This year marks only the second time that 11 Indian institutions have held top 100 positions since the ranking began in 2014, when much fewer universities took part in the ranking globally.

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.

New Delhi, Jan 5: Senior Congress leader P Chidambaram on Sunday sàid it was "shameful" that Sadaf Jafar, SR Darapuri and Pavan Rao were arrested by the Uttar Pradesh Police for violence without any evidence against them.

He also said that it was a shocking admission by the police that there is no evidence of their involvement.

"Sadaf Jafar, S R Darapuri and Pavan Rao Ambedkar released on bail after police ADMITTED no evidence of their involvement in violence. Shocking admission," he said on Twitter.

"If that were so, why did the police arrest them in the first place? And how did the Magistrate remand them to custody without looking at the evidence," he asked.
"The law says 'find evidence, then arrest'. The reality is 'first arrest, then search for evidence'. Shameful," Chidambaram tweeted.