''Mars mission is a publicity stunt'': Madhavan Nair

New Delhi, June 22: Former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Monday asked Prime Minister Narendra Modi to be “mindful of the implication of his words” as a controversy raged over his “no intrusion” remark about the violent face-off with Chinese troops in the Galwan Valley.

“The Prime Minister must always be mindful of the implications of his words and declarations on our Nation’s security as also strategic and territorial interests,” Singh said in a statement here as Chinese media welcomed Modi’s ‘no intrusion’  remarks contending that it may lead to a de-escalation of tensions between China and India.

Congress has been maintaining that Modi’s assertions at Friday’s all-party meeting that neither was there any intrusion nor was any Indian post captured ran counter to the statements made by the Indian Army and the External Affairs Ministry.

Singh said the prime minister cannot allow his words to be used by China as a vindication of its position and all organs of the government should work together to tackle this crisis and prevent it from escalating further.

“We remind the Government that disinformation is no substitute for diplomacy or decisive leadership. The truth cannot be suppressed by having pliant allies spout comforting but false statements,” the former prime minister said.

Singh said the prime minister and the government should rise to the occasion to ensure justice for Colonel B Santosh and the army jawans who made the supreme sacrifice and resolutely defended the nation’s territorial integrity.

“To do any less would be a historic betrayal of the people’s faith,” the former prime minister said.

“At this moment, we stand at historic crossroads. Our Government’s decisions and actions will have serious bearings on how the future generations perceive us,” Singh said.

Singh said China was brazenly and illegally seeking to claim parts of Indian territory such as the Galwan Valley and the Pangong Tso Lake by committing multiple incursions between April 2020 till date.  

“We cannot and will not be cowed down by threats and intimidation nor permit a compromise with our territorial integrity,” said Singh. 

The former prime minister said this was a moment where “we must stand together as a nation and be united in our response to this brazen threat.”

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.

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.