India's Agni long-range missiles broke UN limits, says China

New Delhi, Jul 7: The University Grants Commission (UGC) has issued revised guidelines regarding the conduct of terminal semesters and final year exams by Universities and educational institutions. It has been suggested that exams may be completed by September in online or offline modes.

Releasing a statement, the UGC said it accepted the recommendations suggested by the expert committee. "In continuation to earlier Guidelines issued on 29.04.2020 and based on the Report of the Expert Committee, the UGC Revised Guidelines on Examination and Academic Calendar for the Universities in view of COVID-19 Pandemic were also approved by the Commission in its emergent meeting held on 6th July 2020," the statement read.

The Commission further said that while it was important to safeguard principles of health, safety and equal opportunities, it was also very important to ensure academic credibility, career opportunities and future progress of students.

"The Commission approved the recommendations of the Expert Committee regarding the conduct of terminal semester(s)/ final year(s) examinations by the universities/ institutions to be completed by the end of September 2020 in offline (pen & paper online/ blended (online + offline) mode," it added.

The UGC also said that if required it would also issue relevant details related to admissions and academic calendar in the universities and colleges. It asked the students to adopt the latest guidelines and complete the terminal semester or final year exams accordingly. 

Mumbai, Apr 14: The Shiv Sena and NCP said Prime Minister Narendra Modis address to the nation on Tuesday lacked substance as he did not suggest ways to strengthen the economy or a relief package for the poor and those worst hit by the lockdown.

Shiv Sena spokesperson Manisha Kayande also took a dig at the prime minister, saying he thankfully did not give any activity to people this time like clanging utensils or lighting lamps.

Modi on Tuesday announced that the lockdown across the country will be extended till May 3, saying the measure has produced a significant outcome in containing the infection.

He said implementation of the lockdown will be strictly ensured in its second phase and detailed guidelines will be brought out on Wednesday to ensure that outbreak does not spread to new areas.

Some relaxations may be allowed after April 20 in places where there are no hotspots, he said.

Kayande said Modi could have announced extension of the lockdown on Wednesday itself along with the new guidelines, instead of declaring it separately.

"He could have elaborated steps to be taken to tackle the coronavirus, relaxing restrictions on movements in different areas (depending upon threat posed by the disease)," she said.

"His speech normally is more of a rhetoric than substance. Thankfully, he did not give any other event to the people like lighting up lamps or clanging utensils. There was nothing substantial (in the address), the only takeaway was that the lockdown has been extended, she added.

Maharashtra Minister and NCP national spokesman Nawab Malik noted that Modi talked about helping the poor.

"But, he could have announced a package on behalf of the central government to help the poor, those working in the unorganised sector who are the worst hit due to the lockdown.

There was no mention of it anywhere," Malik said.

Another NCP spokesman Mahesh Tapase said it was expected that the prime minister would address the economic concerns being faced by the country.

"The least to expect was the announcement of a slew of measures to kick-start the economy in a phased manner as and when the restrictions are lifted, he added.

Tapase said the employers and employees wanted to know from the government how recession and unemployment will be tackled in the time to come.

"Access to capital for business, especially for MSMEs and agriculture, is a big concern. Supply and logistics is the cornerstone of economic activity which has come to a virtual standstill," he said.

The 2020-21 fiscal looks grim and hence, the right stimulus from the government coupled with a renewed zeal by the industry will only bring the economy back on track, he suggested.

Jun 9: Prime Minister Narendra Modi wants all 1.3 billion Indians to be “vocal for local” — meaning, to not just use domestically made products but also to promote them. As an overseas citizen living in Hong Kong, I’m doing my bit by very vocally demanding Indian mangoes on every trip to the grocery. But half the summer is gone, and not a single slice so far.

My loss is due to India’s COVID-19 lockdown, which has severely pinched logistics, a perennial challenge in the huge, infrastructure-starved country. But more worrying than the disruption is the fruity political response to it. Rather than being a wake-up call for fixing supply chains, the pandemic seems to be putting India on an isolationist course. Why?

Granted that the liberal view that trade is good and autarky bad isn’t exactly fashionable anywhere right now. What makes India’s lurch troublesome is that the pace and direction of economic nationalism may be set by domestic business interests. The Indian liberals, many of whom are Western-trained academics, authors and — at least until a few years ago — policy makers, want a more competitive economy. They will be powerless to prevent the slide.

Modi’s call for a self-reliant India has been echoed by Home Minister Amit Shah, the cabinet’s unofficial No. 2, in a television interview. If Indians don’t buy foreign-made goods, the economy will see a jump, he said. The strategy — although it’s too nebulous yet to call it that — has a geopolitical element. A military standoff with China is under way, apparently triggered by India’s completion of a road and bridge near the common border in the tense Himalayan region of Ladakh. It’s very expensive to fight even a limited war there. With India’s economy flattened by COVID, New Delhi may be looking for ways to restore the status quo and send Beijing a signal.

Economic boycotts, such as Chinese consumers’ rejection of Japanese goods over territorial disputes in the East China Sea, are well understood as statecraft. In these times, it’s not even necessary to name an enemy. An undercurrent of popular anger against China, the source of both the virus and India’s biggest bilateral trade deficit, is supposed to do the job. But is it ever that easy?

A hastily introduced policy to stock only local goods in police and paramilitary canteens became a farcical exercise after the list of banned items ended up including products by the local units of Colgate-Palmolive Co., Nestle SA, and Unilever NV, which have had significant Indian operations for between 60 and 90 years, as well as Dabur India Ltd., a New Delhi-based maker of Ayurveda brands. The since-withdrawn list demonstrates the practical difficulty of bureaucrats trying to find things in a globalized world that are 100% indigenous.

Free-trade champions fret that the prime minister, whom they saw as being on their side six years ago, is acting against their advice to dismantle statist controls on land, labor and capital to help make the country more competitive. Engage with the world more, not less, they caution. But Modi also has to satisfy the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the umbrella Hindu organisation that gets him votes. Its backbone of small traders, builders and businessmen — the RSS admits only men — was losing patience with the anemic economy even before the pandemic. Now, they’re in deep trouble, because India’s broken financial system won’t deliver even state-guaranteed loans to them.

The U.S.-China tensions — over trade, intellectual property, COVID responsibility and Hong Kong’s autonomy — offer a perfect backdrop. A dire domestic economy and trouble at the border provide the foreground. Big business will dial economic nationalism up and down to hit a trifecta of goals: Block competition from the People's Republic; make Western rivals fall in line and do joint ventures; and tap deep overseas capital markets. The first goal is being achieved with newly placed restrictions on investment from any country that shares a land border with India. The second aim is to be realized by corporate lobbying to influence India's whimsical economic policies. As for the third objective, with the regulatory environment becoming tougher for U.S.-listed Chinese companies like Alibaba Group Holding Ltd., an opportunity may open up for Indian firms.

All this may bring India Shenzhen-style enclaves of manufacturing and trade, but it will concentrate economic power in fewer hands, something that worries liberals. They’re moved by the suffering of India’s low-wage workers, who have borne the brunt of the COVID shutdown. But when their vision of a more just society and fairer income distribution prompts them to make common cause with the ideological Left, they’re quickly repelled by the Marxist voodoo that all cash, property, bonds and real estate held by citizens or within the nation “must be treated as national resources available during this crisis.” Who will invest in a country that does that instead of just printing money?

At the same time, when liberals look to the business class, they see a sudden swelling of support for ideas like a universal basic income. They wonder if this isn’t a ploy by industry to outsource part of the cost of labor to the taxpayer. Slogans like Modi’s vocal-for-local stir the pot and thicken the confusion. The value-conscious Indian consumer couldn’t give two hoots for calls to buy Indian, but large firms will know how to exploit economic nationalism. One day soon, I’ll get my mangoes — from them.