Lot of evidence to prove that you are a terrorist: BJP to Arvind Kejriwal

New Delhi, Jun 18: Republican Party of India (RPI-A) leader Ramdas Athawale on Thursday urged Indians to boycott Chinese food and asked for a ban on all restaurants which serve the cuisine.

"Restaurants selling Chinese food should be banned. Restaurants should be closed by the order of the state government. I appeal to people who consume Chinese food to boycott it," Athawale told ANI here.

The Union Minister also said that both the products which come from China and its literature should also be banned in the country.

"The Chinese literature should also be banned, its products too should be banned and its companies too should not be given business here. We should develop such companies in the country which can manufacture the same products here," he added.

Athawale also warned China to reconsider its actions and stop its nefarious activities on the border by saying, "You took Buddha from us but we don't want yuddha (war) with you. A war will prove to be costly for both countries, economically and loss of lives will also occur. If we (Indians) are not crossing the border then why are you doing so?"

Athawale's statements came after at least 20 Indian Army personnel, including a Colonel rank officer, lost their lives in the violent face-off in the Galwan valley area of Ladakh on June 15.

The clash happened as a result of an attempt by the Chinese troops to "unilaterally change" the status quo during de-escalation in eastern Ladakh and the situation could have been avoided if the agreement at the higher level been scrupulously followed by the Chinese side, India said on June 16.

New Delhi, April 3: With 478 cases reported in the last 24 hours, the highest spike so far, India's tally of positive coronavirus cases on Friday rose to 2,547 including 162 cured/discharged and 62 deaths, as per the latest data of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.

As many as 647 positive coronavirus cases have been reported so far from across 14 States whose linkage can be traced to the Tablighi Jamaat cluster at Nizamuddin, the Centre said on Friday.

"A total of 647 cases of positive coronavirus cases have been reported from across 14 States whose linkage can be traced to the Tablighi Jamaat cluster at Nizamuddin," Lav Aggarwal, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare said.

"The cases can be traced in Andaman and Nicobar, Assam, Delhi, Himachal, Haryana, Jammu and Kashmir, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Uttarakhand and Uttar Pradesh," added Aggarwal.

The Tablighi Jamaat event in Delhi has emerged as a hotspot for COVID-19 after several positive cases from across India were linked to the gathering including deaths in Maharashtra, Karnataka, and Telangana.

An FIR was earlier registered against Tablighi Jamaat head Maulana Saad and others under the Epidemic Disease Act 1897, in the national capital.

Jan 13: For the first time in years, the government of India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi is playing defense. Protests have sprung up across the country against an amendment to India’s laws — which came into effect on Friday — that makes it easier for members of some religions to become citizens of India. The government claims this is simply an attempt to protect religious minorities in the Muslim-majority countries that border India; but protesters see it as the first step toward a formal repudiation of India’s constitutionally guaranteed secularism — and one that must be resisted.

Modi was re-elected prime minister last year with an enhanced majority; his hold over the country’s politics is absolute. The formal opposition is weak, discredited and disorganized. Yet, somehow, the anti-Citizenship Act protests have taken hold. No political party is behind them; they are generally arranged by student unions, neighborhood associations and the like.

Yet this aspect of their character is precisely what will worry Modi and his right-hand man, Home Minister Amit Shah. They know how to mock and delegitimize opposition parties with ruthless efficiency. Yet creating a narrative that paints large, flag-waving crowds as traitors is not quite that easy.

For that is how these protests look: large groups of young people, many carrying witty signs and the national flag. They meet and read the preamble to India’s Constitution, into which the promise of secularism was written in the 1970’s.

They carry photographs of the Constitution’s drafter, the Columbia University-trained economist and lawyer B. R. Ambedkar. These are not the mobs the government wanted. They hoped for angry Muslims rampaging through the streets of India’s cities, whom they could point to and say: “See? We must protect you from them.” But, in spite of sometimes brutal repression, the protests have largely been nonviolent.

One, in Shaheen Bagh in a Muslim-dominated sector of New Delhi, began simply as a set of local women in a square, armed with hot tea and blankets against the chill Delhi winter. It has now become the focal point of a very different sort of resistance than what the government expected. Nothing could cure the delusions of India’s Hindu middle class, trained to see India’s Muslims as dangerous threats, as effectively as a group of otherwise clearly apolitical women sipping sweet tea and sharing their fears and food with anyone who will listen.

Modi was re-elected less than a year ago; what could have changed in India since then? Not much, I suspect, in most places that voted for him and his party — particularly the vast rural hinterland of northern India. But urban India was also possibly never quite as content as electoral results suggested. India’s growth dipped below 5% in recent quarters; demand has crashed, and uncertainty about the future is widespread. Worse, the government’s response to the protests was clearly ill-judged. University campuses were attacked, in one case by the police and later by masked men almost certainly connected to the ruling party.

Protesters were harassed and detained with little cause. The courts seemed uninterested. And, slowly, anger began to grow on social media — not just on Twitter, but also on Instagram, previously the preserve of pretty bowls of salad. Instagram is the one social medium over which Modi’s party does not have a stranglehold; and it is where these protests, with their photogenic signs and flags, have found a natural home. As a result, people across urban India who would never previously have gone to a demonstration or a political rally have been slowly politicized.

India is, in fact, becoming more like a normal democracy. “Normal,” that is, for the 2020’s. Liberal democracies across the world are politically divided, often between more liberal urban centers and coasts, and angrier, “left-behind” hinterlands. Modi’s political secret was that he was that rare populist who could unite both the hopeful cities and the resentful countryside. Yet this once magic formula seems to have become ineffective. Five of India’s six largest cities are not ruled by Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party in any case — the financial hub of Mumbai changed hands recently. The BJP has set its sights on winning state elections in Delhi in a few weeks. Which way the capital’s voters will go is uncertain. But that itself is revealing — last year, Modi swept all seven parliamentary seats in Delhi.

In the end, the Citizenship Amendment Act is now law, the BJP might manage to win Delhi, and the protests might die down as the days get unmanageably hot and state repression increases. But urban India has put Modi on notice. His days of being India’s unifier are over: From now on, like all the other populists, he will have to keep one eye on the streets of his country’s cities.