Indian envoy to Pakistan arrives in Delhi for consultations on Pulwama terror attack

Agencies
February 16, 2019

New Delhi, Feb 16: Indian High Commissioner to Pakistan Ajay Bisaria arrived on Saturday for consultations with senior officials and leadership over the Pulwama terror attack, sources said.

The Indian envoy has been called for consultations at a time when the government is looking at options for giving a befitting reply to Pakistan over the dastardly terror attack in Pulwama which claimed the lives of 40 CRPF personnel.

In the wake of the attack, the Centre on Friday announced its decision to withdraw the Most Favoured Nation (MFN) status granted unilaterally to Pakistan while asserting that there is 'incontrovertible evidence' about Islamabad's involvement in the gruesome terror attack.

"Most Favoured Nation status to Pakistan stands withdrawn," said Finance Minister Arun Jaitley after a meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) on Friday.

India will also make all possible efforts to ensure 'complete isolation' of Pakistan in the international community and work for early adoption of the long-pending Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT), which is pending before the United Nations, he added.

India had granted MFN status to Pakistan in 1996, a year after the formation of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), but Pakistan never accorded the same status to India.

Under the international trade rules, MFN is a treatment accorded to a trade partner to ensure non-discriminatory trade between two countries.

A CRPF convoy, while moving from Jammu to Srinagar, was attacked by a suicide bomber in Lethpora area on the national highway at around 3.15 pm on Thursday.

Pakistan-based terror outfit Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) claimed responsibility for the attack.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
February 6,2020

New Delhi, Feb 6: Unemployment rate in the country as per a new survey was 6.1 per cent in 2017-18, the government informed Rajya Sabha on Wednesday.

Minister of State for Labour Santosh Gangwar said the government is conducting a new Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS) with new parameters and bigger sample size, and its results cannot be compared with previous surveys in this regard.

"As per the new Periodic Labour Force Survey being conducted by the government, the labour force participation is 36.9 per cent and the rate of unemployment for 2017-18 is 6.1 per cent," he said.

Replying to supplementaries during the Question Hour, the minister said the report of this survey is very different than the surveys conducted in previous years.

This survey is not comparable to previous surveys, he said, adding it was an attempt to provide authentic data with the new survey conducted through the Ministry of Statistics.

"We are focusing on infrastructure development and ease of doing business and India's position in the world has improved. India has improved its position to 63rd rank now in 2019 against 196 in previous years," he said.

"Our government is very conscious of creating employment opportunities and is running such programme which generates employment.

"The way our government is functioning, employment opportunities are being created and the youths are getting jobs also," the minister said.

Gangwar said the government has stopped the previous survey as the sample size was low and an attempt is being made to improve the data by adding various parameters and provide more authentic data.

The minister said it will take time for collection of data as households have to be visited on the ground for authentic data collection in rural areas also.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
January 4,2020

Stockholm, Jan 4: “I’m not the kind of person who celebrates birthdays,” Greta Thunberg said as she turned 17 on Friday, marking the occasion in inimitable style - with a seven-hour hour protest outside the Swedish parliament.

The climate activist braved winter conditions in her native Stockholm to continue the weekly Friday School Strike for the Climate campaign that helped catapult her to international fame.

“I stand here striking from 8am until 3pm as usual ... then I’ll go home,” Thunberg, Time magazine’s Person of the Year for 2019, told Reuters.

“I won’t have a birthday cake but we’ll have a dinner.”

It’s been a busy 12 months for Thunberg, who crisscrossed the globe by car, train and boat - but not plane - to demand action on climate change.

“It has been a strange and busy year, but also a great one because I have found something I want to do with my life and what I am doing is having an impact,” she said.

When she was 15, Thunberg began skipping school on Fridays to demonstrate outside the Swedish parliament to push her government to curb carbon emissions. Her campaign gave rise to a grassroots movement that has gone global, inspiring millions of people to take action.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 3,2020

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.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.