I think I should stay away from this debate: Modi on judicial crisis

Davos, Jan 24: Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan claimed that he met with a “brick wall” when he approached Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi with a peace proposal, soon after assuming office.

In an interview to Foreign Policy magazine on the sidelines of WEF 2020 here, Khan also said he told Modi that Pakistan will act firmly if it was given evidence of any involvement in the Pulwama terror attack, but India instead “bombed” Pakistan.

Tensions have escalated between the two countries, following India withdrawing the special status of Jammu and Kashmir in August 2019. Even since, Khan has been trying to seek global intervention to de-escalate the tensions between the two countries.

On Thursday, India's External Affairs Ministry spokesperson Raveesh Kumar categorically ruled out any third party role on the Kashmir issue, asserting that any issue between the two countries should be resolved bilaterally.

In the interview, Khan said that he is a firm believer that military means are not a solution to ending conflicts. “After assuming office, I immediately reached out to Prime Minister Modi. I was amazed by the reaction I got, which was quite weird.

The subcontinent hosts the greatest number of poor people in the world, and the best way to fight poverty is to have a trading relationship between the two countries rather than spending money on arms. This is what I said to the Indian Prime Minister. But I was met by brick wall,” Khan said.

Khan took charge as Prime Minister in August 2018. Referring to the suicide attack in Pulwama, Khan said he immediately told Modi ,“if you can give us any actionable intelligence (that Pakistanis were involved), we will act on it. But rather than do so, they bombed us.”

Noting that the both countries are not close to conflict right now, Khan said that it is important that the UN and the US act.

When asked about US President Donald Trump’s close relationship with Modi, Khan said the relationship is understandable because India is a huge market. “My concern is not about the US-India relationship. My concern is the direction in which India is going,” Khan said.

Khan also sought to compare the events in India to what happened in Nazi Germany.

“Between 1930 and 1934, Germany went from a liberal democracy to a fascist, totalitarian, racist state. If you look at what is happening in India under the BJP in the last five years, look where it's heading, you'll see the danger. And you're talking about a huge country of 1.3 billion people that is nuclear-armed,” he said.

New Delhi, Feb 14: Senior Congress leader P Chidambaram on Thursday said there must be a "huge mass movement" if any Muslim was sent to detention camps in case the Supreme Court upheld the validity of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).

Speaking at the JNU campus, the former Union minister said the CAA was an outcome of the "NRC fiasco" in Assam that left 19 lakh people out of the document.

The CAA was brought to accommodate the 12 lakh Hindus among the 19 lakh people who could not be included in the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam, he claimed.

Replying to a question by a student on the best course of action if the CAA was upheld by the apex court, Chidambaram said, "When they touch the excluded...they will only be Muslims, to identify and throw them out, declare them stateless, there must be a huge mass movement, resisting any Muslim being thrown out or kept in detention camps."

He also said the Congress believed that the CAA must be repealed and there should be a political struggle so that the National Population Register (NPR) was pushed beyond 2024.

Claiming that the NRC, CAA and NPR were "closely connected" to each other, Chidambaram said, "The CAA was brought due to the NRC fiasco in Assam and the opposition to the CAA gave way to the NPR."

He asserted that the Congress was protesting against the CAA and the NRC across the country, but had consciously avoided going to Shaheen Bagh, as in that case, the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) would brand the demonstration against the amended citizenship law as a "political" one.

"See, we are not going to Shaheen Bagh because that would be falling into the BJP's trap. If we go there, they (BJP) will say it is political," the senior Congress leader said.

Slamming the CAA and the NRC as instruments undermining the very basis of the formation of India, he said the country, instead, needed a "broad law" on refugees.

Speaking at an event against the NRC, CAA and NPR hosted by the Congress's student wing, NSUI, at the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), Chidambaram accused the BJP of spreading lies against Opposition parties.

"The BJP says the Congress, the Left and other liberal parties are against citizenship to persecuted Hindus, Sikhs from Pakistan, Bangladesh. But we are not against those included, our opposition is against exclusion," he said.

Questioning the rationale behind the CAA, the former finance minister said it excluded people on the basis of religion.

"Why only three countries, what about other neighbouring countries — Nepal, Bhutan, China? What about others treated much worse? The Ahmadiyas and Shias of Pakistan, the Rohingyas of Myanmar, Tamil Hindus are equally persecuted, why are they left out?" he questioned.

Chidambaram also said the CAA did not cover persecution based on language, political ideology and economic deprivation.

Slamming the NRC, he wondered which country would accept those left out of the document.

"Which country is going to accept them? How will they go? Where will you send them? (Home Minister) Amit Shah saying that they are termites and he will throw them out by 2024 is talking through his hat," the senior Congress leader said.

New Delhi, Jun 19: RJD and AAP were not invited to the all-party meeting called by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday to discuss the situation at the India-China border after 20 Indian soldiers were killed in a "violent face-off," leaving the parties fuming.

Top RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav criticised the government for not inviting the party to the meeting, asking on Twitter late Thursday night, "Just wish to know the criteria for inviting political parties for tomorrow's (Friday's) all-party meet on Galwan Valley. I mean the grounds of inclusion/exclusion. Because our party hasn't received any message so far."

AAP's Rajya Sabha leader Sanjay Singh joined the chorus, "there is a strange ego-driven government at the centre. AAP has a government in Delhi and is the main opposition in Punjab. We have four MPs. But on a vital subject, AAP's views are not needed? The country is waiting for what the Prime Minister will say at the meeting."

Sources said the government has set a criteria to invite only parties with five or more MPs in Parliament for the digital meet, where the Prime Minister will brief the top leaders of parties and hear their views on the way ahead. There are at least 27 parties in the Parliament, which have less than five members, while 17 have more than five members or more than five MPs.

Interestingly, RJD has five MPs in Rajya Sabha and its senior MP Manoj K Jha shared the Rajya Sabha website link on Twitter, which showed the party has five MPs. "We have not been invited and the government's bogus argument has been exposed," Jha said.

CPI leaders said General Secretary D Raja received a call from Defence Minister Rajnath Singh inviting him to the meeting and with a message that the Prime Minister's Office would coordinate but there was no follow-up after that.

"Exclusion of AAP and RJD in the all-party meet on a National debate does not augment well. AAP is ruling Delhi and has its CM. Why should people of Delhi be kept out in such an important debate on National integrity and Sovereignty?" former NCP MP Majeed Memon tweeted.

During the all-party meeting on COVID-19 too, the government had not called all parties with representation in Parliament to the all-party meeting in April and had set five MPs as a benchmark to be invited.

Raja had then written a letter to Modi demanding that the government should not get into "technicalities" and discuss the issue with all parties in Parliament.