Four SC judges break silence, slam administration of top court

Mumbai, Jan 30: The Uttar Pradesh Special Task Force (STF) has arrested Dr Kafeel Khan from Mumbai airport for allegedly making inflammatory statements at AMU during protests against the Citizenship Amendments Act (CAA) last month, officials said.

Khan was arrested on Wednesday night with assistance from Mumbai Police at the airport when he arrived in the city to attend anti-CAA protests, an official said.

"Officials of the UP STF arrested Dr Kafeel Khan in a case which was registered at Civil Lines Police Station under section 153 A (promoting enmity between different groups) of IPC. Our police team helped our UP counterparts on their request," said an official from Mumbai Police.

He claimed that Khan had made inflammatory statements on December 12 last year during the protest near Bab e Syed Gate outside the Aligarh Muslim University in front of more than 600 students.

The official also alleged that the Gorakhpur doctor had made objectionable comments against Union Home Minister Amit Shah.

The FIR against Khan mentions that Swaraj India's president Yogendra Yadav was also present during the speech at AMU.

Following the arrest in the case, Khan was taken to the Sahar Police Station and after completing formalities he will be taken to UP on transit remand, the official said.

Khan, a paediatrician, had come to the limelight in 2017 when a controversy broke out after the death of over 60 children in less than a week at the BRD Medical College in Gorakhpur, UP.

New Delhi, Feb 10: After an hour-long standoff between the security forces and the students on Monday, the police resorted to a lathi-charge on the protesters near Holy Family hospital which is within walking distance of Jamia Millia Islamia.

A scuffle ensued when police confronted the protesters who tried to push forward towards Parliament. The lathi-charge was made to push back the protesters.

In the melee that ensued, many from both sides fainted.

Some security forces personnel resorted to the lathi-charge while others pushed back the protesters when they threw water pouches at the security forces and abused them.

#Jamia https://t.co/WbABBDHtMo

— Maheen (@Maheen83086711) February 10, 2020

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.