Political storm in Punjab after minor girl molested, thrown off bus owned by CM’s family

New Delhi, Apr 14: Prime Minister Narendra Modi has announced the extension of a nationwide lockdown till May 3 to contain the spread of Covid-19 as the number of novel coronavirus cases surged past 10,000-mark on Tuesday. Hinting at partial relief, however, the Prime Minister said there could be some relaxations after April 20 in places where there is no hotspot.

Lockdown 2.0 will come into force from April 14 till May 3, PM Modi said in a televised address to the nation on Tuesday. The 19-day extension of the lockdown till May 3 is an attempt to contain the spread of novel coronavirus which has affected over 10,000 people in India. 

Even before #COVID19 cases touched 100, India made it compulsory for foreign returnees to remain in 14 days isolation. We imposed 21-day lockdown when we had 550 cases: PM Narendra Modi https://t.co/qi8MgG8qPQ

— ANI (@ANI) April 14, 2020
PM Modi said the Centre will closely monitor hotspots in states across India and added that those areas where there are no hotspots will get partial relief. “Till April 20, all districts, localities, states will be closely monitored, as to how strictly they are implementing norms. States where hotspots are contained could be allowed to resume some important activities, but with certain conditions,” the PM said.

The Prime Minister, in his address to India on Tuesday, began by lauding the efforts of Indians in the fight against novel coronavirus. “Covid-19 is spreading fast but India’s fight against coronavirus is going strong. It is because of your efforts that we are able to put up a fight,” the PM said as he thanked people for their co-operation.

PM Modi said, “People have gone through hardships to save India. I know how many difficulties you faced. I respectfully bow to the people of India for their sacrifice.”

The national lockdown first came into force from March 25 when the PM took an unprecedented measure in the fight against Covid-19. The lockdown was scheduled to end today.

STATES PUSHED FOR LOCKDOWN 2.0

The decision to extend the lockdown followed after a broad consensus emerged that the national lockdown should be extended by at least two weeks following a meeting between PM Modi and state chief ministers on Saturday.

It was reportedly after this meet with the Prime Minister that it was decided that the nationwide lockdown will be extended to tackle the spread of Coivid-19. The extension request from states came despite concerns that the shutdown will put millions out of work.

PM has taken correct decision to extend lockdown. Today, India’s position is better than many developed countries because we started lockdown early. If it is stopped now, all gains would be lost. To consolidate, it is imp to extend it

— Arvind Kejriwal (@ArvindKejriwal) April 11, 2020
"If it is stopped now, all gains would be lost. To consolidate, it is imp (important) to extend it," Arvind Kejriwal had written on Twitter after the meeting while he added that PM Modi had "taken (a) correct decision to extend (the) lockdown”.

Several states had, however, pushed for resumption of some economic activities like in the farming sector in areas where no cases of the novel coronavirus have been reported.

ALL THAT HAS HAPPENED TILL NOW

Prime Minister Narendra Modi first addressed an anxious nation on March 19 as the coronavirus pandemic emerged as a serious concern for the country. In his televised address, the PM asked the people to observe ‘Janata Curfew’ for March 22.
The Prime Minister urged Indians to remain indoors as much as possible as he suggested ways to battle the coronavirus pandemic.

On March 24, the Prime Minister came back and announced a 21-day lockdown across the country. In his second address, PM Modi said the step was taken as it was the only way to break the chain of infection. The lockdown was to be in effect till April 14.

PM Modi later asked citizens to make noise at 5 pm to show their appreciation for medics, nurses and sanitation workers. This call was well received as Indians came out to clap, clang metal vessels and ring bells to cheer workers battling the spread of the coronavirus.

Ten days into the lockdown, the Prime Minister addressed the nation again and asked people to light candles, lamps and hold mobile phone torches for nine minutes from 9 pm on April 5 to demonstrate a collective will to fight coronavirus.

As of Tuesday morning, the death toll due to coronavirus has climbed to 339 with over 50 deaths within 24 hours. The number of cases in the country, meanwhile, had crossed the 10,000-mark, according to the Union Health Ministry. Over a thousand have been cured and discharged.

Jun 9: Prime Minister Narendra Modi wants all 1.3 billion Indians to be “vocal for local” — meaning, to not just use domestically made products but also to promote them. As an overseas citizen living in Hong Kong, I’m doing my bit by very vocally demanding Indian mangoes on every trip to the grocery. But half the summer is gone, and not a single slice so far.

My loss is due to India’s COVID-19 lockdown, which has severely pinched logistics, a perennial challenge in the huge, infrastructure-starved country. But more worrying than the disruption is the fruity political response to it. Rather than being a wake-up call for fixing supply chains, the pandemic seems to be putting India on an isolationist course. Why?

Granted that the liberal view that trade is good and autarky bad isn’t exactly fashionable anywhere right now. What makes India’s lurch troublesome is that the pace and direction of economic nationalism may be set by domestic business interests. The Indian liberals, many of whom are Western-trained academics, authors and — at least until a few years ago — policy makers, want a more competitive economy. They will be powerless to prevent the slide.

Modi’s call for a self-reliant India has been echoed by Home Minister Amit Shah, the cabinet’s unofficial No. 2, in a television interview. If Indians don’t buy foreign-made goods, the economy will see a jump, he said. The strategy — although it’s too nebulous yet to call it that — has a geopolitical element. A military standoff with China is under way, apparently triggered by India’s completion of a road and bridge near the common border in the tense Himalayan region of Ladakh. It’s very expensive to fight even a limited war there. With India’s economy flattened by COVID, New Delhi may be looking for ways to restore the status quo and send Beijing a signal.

Economic boycotts, such as Chinese consumers’ rejection of Japanese goods over territorial disputes in the East China Sea, are well understood as statecraft. In these times, it’s not even necessary to name an enemy. An undercurrent of popular anger against China, the source of both the virus and India’s biggest bilateral trade deficit, is supposed to do the job. But is it ever that easy?

A hastily introduced policy to stock only local goods in police and paramilitary canteens became a farcical exercise after the list of banned items ended up including products by the local units of Colgate-Palmolive Co., Nestle SA, and Unilever NV, which have had significant Indian operations for between 60 and 90 years, as well as Dabur India Ltd., a New Delhi-based maker of Ayurveda brands. The since-withdrawn list demonstrates the practical difficulty of bureaucrats trying to find things in a globalized world that are 100% indigenous.

Free-trade champions fret that the prime minister, whom they saw as being on their side six years ago, is acting against their advice to dismantle statist controls on land, labor and capital to help make the country more competitive. Engage with the world more, not less, they caution. But Modi also has to satisfy the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the umbrella Hindu organisation that gets him votes. Its backbone of small traders, builders and businessmen — the RSS admits only men — was losing patience with the anemic economy even before the pandemic. Now, they’re in deep trouble, because India’s broken financial system won’t deliver even state-guaranteed loans to them.

The U.S.-China tensions — over trade, intellectual property, COVID responsibility and Hong Kong’s autonomy — offer a perfect backdrop. A dire domestic economy and trouble at the border provide the foreground. Big business will dial economic nationalism up and down to hit a trifecta of goals: Block competition from the People's Republic; make Western rivals fall in line and do joint ventures; and tap deep overseas capital markets. The first goal is being achieved with newly placed restrictions on investment from any country that shares a land border with India. The second aim is to be realized by corporate lobbying to influence India's whimsical economic policies. As for the third objective, with the regulatory environment becoming tougher for U.S.-listed Chinese companies like Alibaba Group Holding Ltd., an opportunity may open up for Indian firms.

All this may bring India Shenzhen-style enclaves of manufacturing and trade, but it will concentrate economic power in fewer hands, something that worries liberals. They’re moved by the suffering of India’s low-wage workers, who have borne the brunt of the COVID shutdown. But when their vision of a more just society and fairer income distribution prompts them to make common cause with the ideological Left, they’re quickly repelled by the Marxist voodoo that all cash, property, bonds and real estate held by citizens or within the nation “must be treated as national resources available during this crisis.” Who will invest in a country that does that instead of just printing money?

At the same time, when liberals look to the business class, they see a sudden swelling of support for ideas like a universal basic income. They wonder if this isn’t a ploy by industry to outsource part of the cost of labor to the taxpayer. Slogans like Modi’s vocal-for-local stir the pot and thicken the confusion. The value-conscious Indian consumer couldn’t give two hoots for calls to buy Indian, but large firms will know how to exploit economic nationalism. One day soon, I’ll get my mangoes — from them.

Mar 10: Indian energy tycoon Mukesh Ambani is no longer Asia’s richest man, relinquishing the title to Jack Ma after oil prices collapsed along with global stocks.

The rout, exacerbated by mounting fears that the spread of the novel coronavirus will thrust the world into a recession, erased $5.8 billion from Ambani’s net worth on Monday and pushed him to No. 2 on the list of Asia’s richest people, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. Ma, the Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. founder who relinquished the No. 1 ranking in mid-2018, is back on top with a $44.5 billion fortune, about $2.6 billion more than Ambani.

Oil plunged the most in 29 years on Monday as Saudi Arabia and Russia vowed to pump more in a struggle for market share. The slump comes just as the coronavirus is spurring the first decline in demand in more than a decade. That raises questions about whether Ambani’s flagship Reliance Industries Ltd. will be able to cut net debt to zero by early 2021, as he has pledged. The plan hinges on a proposal to sell a stake in the group’s oil and petrochemicals division to Saudi Arabian Oil Co., the world’s biggest crude producer.

While the coronavirus has curtailed some of tech giant Alibaba’s businesses, the damage has been mitigated by increased demand for its cloud computing services and mobile apps.

Reliance Industries, by comparison, has no such silver lining. The Indian conglomerate’s shares plunged 12% on Monday, the most since 2009, extending this year’s decline to 26%. Alibaba’s American depositary receipts have slipped 6.8% so far in 2020.

Ma reclaims crown after Reliance shares were pummeled in 2020.

Few of the world’s billionaires fared well in Monday’s collapse as the S&P 500 Index and Dow Jones Industrial Average each plunged more than 7.5%, the most since the 2008 financial crisis, threatening to end the longest bull market in history. But no one did worse than those whose fortunes are underpinned by oil. Wildcatter Harold Hamm’s fortune was cut almost in half to $2.4 billion and fellow oil magnate Jeff Hildebrand lost $3 billion, bumping both from Bloomberg’s 500-member wealth ranking.

In a pivot toward new businesses such as telecommunications, technology and retail, Ambani’s Reliance Industries has piled on billions of dollars of debt over the years.

It spent almost $50 billion -- most of it funded by borrowings -- to build Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd., which became India’s No. 1 wireless carrier within about three years of its debut. As the mobile venture took off, Ambani also unveiled plans for an e-commerce empire to rival Amazon.com Inc. in India.

Addressing concerns over the liabilities, Ambani pledged in August to cut the group’s net debt to zero from about $21 billion as of last March. The Aramco deal is crucial to that plan for which Reliance Industries has valued its oil-to-chemicals division at $75 billion including debt, implying a $15 billion valuation for the 20% stake that’s for sale.

Signs of a potential delay to that deal unnerved some investors, hammering the stock since it touched a record high on Dec. 19.

Reliance Industries expected the Aramco transaction to be completed by March, but people familiar with the matter said in February that talks were still ongoing to bridge differences between the two parties over the deal’s structure.

Adding to the uncertainty, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration has petitioned a court to halt the proposed stake sale, threatening a key source of funds needed to pare net debt.

But Ambani, 62, may soon bounce back from the setback, said Harish H.V., managing partner at ECube Investment Advisors in Bengaluru, India.

“The game isn’t over,” he said. “Ambani has successfully built a robust business model which would keep him in the game. Moreover, his telecom business will start yielding results in coming years.”