Only 40K local tourists to be allowed to enter Taj Mahal in a day

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.

Thiruvananthapuram, Apr 23: Amid opposition charges, the Kerala government on Tuesday constituted a two-member committee to examine whether the privacy of personal and sensitive data of COVID-19 patients has been protected under the agreement entered by it with US-based IT firm Sprinklr.

The committee, headed by former Special IT Sscretary M Madhavan Nambiar and former health secretary Rajeev Sadanandan, will also ascertain whether adequate procedures were followed while finalising the arrangements with the private company.

The Opposition Congress has been levelling charges that the collection of data by the US firm violated the fundamental rights of the patients.

In its order, state government said it had initiated steps to set up a Data Analytics platform to integrate data from various sources available in the government to meet the "exigency of a massive and unprecedented surge of epidemic".

The committee will also examine whether deviations, if any, are fair, justified and reasonable considering the extraordinary and critical situation faced by the state, it said.

Meanwhile, the Kerala High Court on Tuesday asked the state government to file its reply by April 24 on a plea seeking to quash its contract with the US-based firm.

Expressing concern over the confidentiality of the citizen's data processed by a third party, the court sought to know why the sanction of the law department was not taken before finalising the agreement.

The court hailed the state government's fight against COVID-19, but said it is concerned about data confidentiality.

The government informed the court that the agreement with Sprinklr has safeguards for data protection "as per standard practices of software as a service model."

The ward-level committees, set up by the government for the anti-coronavirus fight, collect information of those under home isolation, the elderly and those at the risk of the disease, using a questionnaire and later uploads it on the server of the private agency.

New Delhi, Jun 3: Seasoned diplomat and former spokesperson of the External Affairs Ministry Raveesh Kumar has been appointed as India's next Ambassador to Finland, the government announced on Wednesday.

Raveesh Kumar, a 1995-batch Indian Foreign Service officer, served as the spokesperson of the MEA from July 2017 to April 2020 during which he deftly articulated India's position on a number of sensitive issues including last year's Balakot strike, reorganisation of Jammu and Kashmir and the controversy surrounding the National Register of Citizens.

"He is expected to take up the assignment shortly," the MEA said.

Before becoming the MEA spokesperson, Kumar was serving as Consul General of India in Frankfurt.

Kumar started his career at the Indian Mission in Jakarta and it was followed by his postings in Thimpu and London.

In his nearly 25-year career, Kumar also looked after the East Asia desk in the headquarters of the MEA in Delhi and served as Deputy Chief of Mission in Jakarta followed by his posting as Consul General in Frankfurt from August 2013 to July 2017.

In Finland, he succeeds Vani Rao.

Finland is an important country for India in Europe, and bilateral trade has been on an upswing in the last few years.

Around 35 Indian companies have invested in Finland in IT, healthcare, hospitality and automotive sectors while over 100 Finnish companies have operations in India in energy, textiles, power plants and electronics sectors.