A tribute to Mirza Ghalib, the legendary poet

United Nations, Apr 28: UN chief Antonio Guterres has warned that extremist groups are taking advantage of the COVID-19 lockdowns and intensifying efforts on social media to recruit youths online by exploiting their anger and despair, asserting that the world cannot afford a lost generation due to the unprecedented global health crisis.

The UN Secretary-General made the remarks on Monday during a video conference to review the five years since its adoption of a landmark resolution on youth, peace and security.

We can already see such groups taking advantage of the COVID-19 lockdowns, intensifying their efforts on social media to spread hatred and to recruit young people who may be spending more time at home and online, he said.

Guterres told the Security Council that even before the current crisis, young people were facing enormous challenges.

Listing startling numbers, he said one of every five young people was already not in education, training or employment and one of every four is affected by violence or conflict. Every year, 12 million girls become mothers while they themselves are still children.

These frustrations and, frankly, failures to address them by those in power today, fuel declining confidence in political establishments and institutions. And when such a cycle takes hold, it is all too easy for extremist groups to exploit the anger and despair, and the risk of radicalisation climbs, he said.

Issuing a call to action on youth, peace and security, Guterres said the world cannot afford a lost generation of youth, their lives set back by COVID-19 and their voices stifled by a lack of participation. Let us do far more to tap their talents as we tackle the pandemic and chart a recovery that leads to a more peaceful, sustainable and equitable future for all.

With over 1.54 billion children and youth out-of-school and young people acutely feeling the impact of the COVID-19 crisis, Guterres said countries must do more to harness the talents of young people to address the crisis and its aftermath.

In presenting his first report on the Security Council resolution, the UN chief said youth were already confronting numerous challenges even before the pandemic, including in accessing education, or through being affected by violence and conflict. Those pressing for peace or upholding human rights have been threatened.

Despite these obstacles, young people across the world have joined the common fight against the coronavirus disease, supporting both frontline workers and people in need. And they continue to push for change.

UN Youth Envoy Jayathma Wickramanayake spoke of the need for more meaningful partnerships between young people and the civil society organisations and government institutions that work on the youth, peace and security (YPS) agenda.

To date, there are no national action plans on YPS but I'm pleased to note that in some countries, these are in the process of development, she said.

For a national roadmap to be successful, a participatory, transparent and youth-led process with adequate resources are needed, she said.

Issuing his four-point call to action for the Council, Guterres urged members to do more to address the various challenges facing young people.

He also called for investment in youth participation, but also in their organisations and initiatives.

We must strengthen human rights protections and protect the civic space on which youth participation depends, he said. And fourth, we must emerge from the COVID-19 crisis with a determination to recover better - massively increasing our investment in young people's capacities as we deliver the Sustainable Development Goals.

New Delhi, Jan 30: Tension spiralled in Jamia Nagar on Thursday after a man fired a pistol at a group of anti-CAA protesters, injuring a Jamia Millia Islamia student before walking away while waving the firearm above his head and shouting "Yeh lo aazadi" amid heavy police presence in the area.

Massive protests erupted in the area after the incident with hundreds of agitated people gathering near the university, breaking barricades and clashing with police personnel.

The man, who identified himself as "Rambhakt Gopal", was subsequently overpowered by police and detained. He was taken into custody and was being interrogated, police said.

The entire drama, which triggered panic in the area, was captured by television cameras that showed the man in light coloured pants and a dark jacket, walking away on an empty road barricaded by police, turning around and shouting at the protesters in Hindi, "Here, take this freedom."

The gunman went live on Facebook before the brandishing the gun. Police said they were verifying whether it is his real name.

Before the attack, the man also put out messages on Facebook stating "Shaheen Bhag Khel Khatam" (Run Shaheen, the game is over). Another message stated, "Please wrap me in saffron in my last journey with slogans of Jai Shri Ram". His Facebook profile was deleted after screenshots of his posts were circulated widely on social media platforms.

Several students recapped how their peaceful march on Gandhi's death anniversary became violent.

"We were moving towards the Holy Family Hospital where the police had raised barricades. Suddenly, a gun-wielding man came out and opened fire. One bullet hit my friend's hand," Aamna Asif, a student of economics at the university, told PTI.

She said her friend, Shadab Farooq, a mass communication student, was trying to calm the attacker but he shot at him injuring his left hand.

Farooq, who belongs to Kashmir, was taken to the AIIMS Trauma Centre.

Ragibh Naushad, an LLB student at the university, said, "The Jamia Coordination Committee organised a march to pay homage to Gandhi ji on his death anniversary. It started at 12 noon from Gate number 7, but police denied the permission and stopped the march near the Holy Family hospital.

"A man named Gopal, came there and started brandishing a weapon and later shot a round. He was also chanting pro-CAA slogans."

The incident led to panic in the area.

Khalid Hassan, a JMI alumnus, said initially many were not sure whether it was a gunshot or a tyre burst.

There was heavy police and media presence when the incident took place.

The students were heading from Jamia to Mahatma Gandhi's memorial Rajghat. The march was stopped at the Holy Family Hospital near the university.

Chinmoy Biswal, DCP (southeast), said the students wanted to take out a march from Jamia to Rajghat but were denied permission.

"They were being repeatedly told that the protest should be carried out peacefully. We had barricaded the road just before the Holy Family hospital. Meanwhile, a person was seen in the crowd who waved something which appeared to be a weapon."

"We have detained him and are interrogating him. One person has also been injured," Biswal said.

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.