Kamlesh Tiwari's wife to be new chief of Hindu Samaj Party

Aurangabad, Feb 21: The All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen (AIMIM) will seek an explanation from its leader Waris Pathan over his alleged '15 crore Muslims can be heavy on 100 crore' remark he recently made in Karnataka, a party leader said here on Friday.

Pathan had made the purported remarks while addressing an anti-Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) rally at Kalaburagi in North Karnataka on February 16.

"We have to move together. We have to take Azadi (freedom), things that we don't get by asking, we have to take it by force, remember it...(We maybe) 15 crore, but are heavy on 100 (crore), remember it," Pathan can be heard purportedly saying in a video of his speech that has gone viral.

Talking to reporters here, AIMIM's Maharashtra unit chief and Aurangabad MP Imtiyaz Jaleel said, "Our party does not support the statement made by Waris Pathan. The party will seek an explanation from him over the remarks."

"If needed, we will come out with a set of dos and don'ts for the party workers to be while giving speech," he said.

"BJP leaders Anurag Thakur and Yogi Adityanath had also given some hateful statements, but none questioned them about it," Jaleel added.

On Thursday, a young woman had raised "Pakistan Zindabad" slogan in Bengaluru during a protest against CAA, NRC and NPR, where AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi was also present. Owaisi had denounced her action.

Talking about the incident, Jaleel said, "That event was not organised by the AIMIM. It was organised by JD(S) and leaders of all parties were there. Asaduddin Owaisi stopped the woman and also condemned her act. But it is being projected that it was AIMIM's stage."

Meanwhile, the BJP and the Raj Thackeray-led Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) held protests in Aurangabad against Pathan, seeking stern action against him.

The BJP protested in Gulmandi area and burnt an effigy of Pathan.

"Waris Pathan has hurt the feelings of 100 crore people. He has tried to divide the people of the country. The state government should take action against him and send him out of Mumbai," BJP MLA Atul Save said.

The MNS took out a symbolic funeral procession of Pathan and raised slogans against the AIMIM.

"The language of Waris Pathan was disgusting. He should be banned from giving public speeches in the state and also be arrested," MNS lader Prakash Mahajan said.

Bengaluru, May 14: ABB India has posted a profit after tax of Rs 66 crore during the first quarter (January to March) due to lower volumes including service revenue and unfavourable mix.

In Q1 CY19, it had reported a profit after tax of Rs 89 crore. ABB India follows calendar year as its fiscal year.

The company reported a profit including exceptional items and before tax of Rs 87 crore. The resultant under-absorption and mark-to-market impact due to forex volatility were partly offset by refund incomes and a one-time gain on sale of solar business during the quarter.

Revenues for the first quarter stood at Rs 1,522 crore, impacted by lower sales, non-receipt of delivery clearance, lower service revenue in the nationwide lockdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This impact primarily occurred in March, the company said in a statement.

ABB India said it continues to maintain a stable cash position of Rs 1,464 crore as on March 31 in a market where cash collection continues to be a challenge.

Besides, despite many activities coming to a standstill in March, the quarter was marked by commissioning for a mining major at Raigarh in Chhattisgarh, electrical and automation systems for a cement major and port and electrics, drives and automation for a leading mill in Bangladesh.

Terminal installation and commissioning for LPG, power management electrical control system for a leading refinery and commissioning of two units of a power plant in Kerala are some of the other projects where ABB's involvement ensured continuity and safe operations, it said.

On a global scale, the impact of COVID-19, as well as the fall in oil prices, has significantly impacted the short-term outlook. The global economy is expected to contract in 2020 after a rapid deterioration in outlook driven by the pandemic.

Despite unprecedented stimuli by governments and central banks around the world and initial signs of recovering economic activity in China, macro-indicators point to a global recession of uncertain duration as many countries continue to face restrictions with anticipated long-term economic consequences, said ABB India.

While the company is taking prompt action to adapt its operations and cost base to safeguard profitability, it expects the results in the coming quarter to be impacted due to the loss of volumes.

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.