Lockdown hits Indian expats in Saudi Arabia hard. Will govt of India pay heed to their woes?

Mangaluru, May 15: The second evacuation flight from Dubai to Mangaluru is expected to bring nearly 180 stranded UAE Kannadigas on May 18.

Air India Express B737-800NG aircraft will take off from terminal 2 of Dubai International Airport at 1.30 pm UAE time and land in Mangaluru International Airport at 6.30 pm local time, sources said.

Mangaluru Airport had witnessed chaos when the first repatriation flight arrived on May 12. Now many passengers of the first flight tested positive for the covid-19.

New Delhi, Apr 26: The Centre will bring back the Indian citizens stranded abroad due to the ban on arrival of international passenger aircraft, only if the respective states they belong to agree to allow them to come back home and make necessary arrangements to quarantine them after their return.

The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has started consultations with the State Governments on bringing back the Indians, who got stranded in the United States, United Kingdom, France, Italy, Canada and many other foreign countries due to the ban on arrival of international passenger aircraft to any airport in the country. The decision on facilitating their return to the country would be taken after getting feedback on preparedness of the States and the Union Territory to receive them following all required health precautions, Cabinet Secretary Rajiv Gauba said.

Gauba on Saturday had a video-conference with the Chief Secretaries of all States and Union Territories to review the implementation of the restrictions on travel and transport as well as the lockdown imposed across the country to contain the COVID-19 pandemic.

Though the Government earlier either evacuated or facilitated the return of nearly 28000 Indians from a number of foreign countries affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, it almost stopped doing so after the ban on arrival of international passenger aircraft was enforced on March 23 in the wake of the spurt in the number of COVID-19 cases in India.

Thousands of Indian students, tourists, professionals and others are stranded around the world, including in the countries, where respective governments had imposed lockdowns to contain the pandemic. They have been desperately requesting the government on social media to evacuate them.

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.