UAE to tow giant icebergs from Antarctic for water need

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.

New Delhi, Jun 25: India registered its worst single-day increase in COVID-19 cases on Thursday, recording more than 16,000 coronavirus infections, to push the overall tally to 4.73 lakh as the number of fatalities also jumped by 418, the Union Health Ministry said.

This was the sixth consecutive day when coronavirus cases increased by more than 14,000. On June 20, the country registered an increase of 14,516 cases. On June 21, the increase was of 15,413 cases; 14,821 cases on June 22; 14,933 cases on June 23; and 15,968 cases on June 24.

Consequently, India added 92,573 cases since June 20, and over 2.82 lakh this month since June 1.

The health ministry data updated at 8am on Thursday showed the daily tally increased by the highest-ever 16,922 cases to reach 4,73,105, while the total deaths climbed to 14,894 with 418 new fatalities.

However, according to the data, the recovery rate has improved to 57.43 per cent. The number of active cases stands at 1,86,514 while 2,71,696 people have recovered; one patient has migrated.

The total number of confirmed cases included foreigners.

According to ICMR, a total of 75,60,782 samples have been tested up to June 24 with 2,07,871 samples being tested on Wednesday.

Of the 418 new deaths, 208 were in Maharashtra, 64 in Delhi, 33 in Tamil Nadu, 25 in Gujarat, 14 in Karnataka, 11 in West Bengal, 10 each in Rajasthan and Haryana, nine in Madhya Pradesh, eight each in Uttar Pradesh and Punjab, five each in Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Uttarakhand.

Bihar, Goa and Jammu and Kashmir have reported one COVID-19 fatality each.

Of the total fatalities, Maharashtra tops the tally with 6,739 deaths followed by Delhi (2,365), Gujarat (1,735), Tamil Nadu (866), Uttar Pradesh (596), West Bengal (591), Madhya Pradesh (534), Rajasthan (375) and Telangana (225).

The COVID-19 death toll reached 188 in Haryana, 164 in Karnataka, 124 in Andhra Pradesh, 113 in Punjab, 88 in Jammu and Kashmir, 57 in Bihar, 35 in Uttarakhand, 22 in Kerala and 17 in Odisha.

Chhattisgarh has registered 12 deaths, Jharkhand 11, Assam and Puducherry nine each, Himachal Pradesh eight, Chandigarh six, Goa two and Meghalaya, Tripura and Ladakh have reported one fatality each.

More than 70 per cent deaths took place due to comorbidities, the health ministry said.

Maharashtra has reported the highest number of cases at 1,42,900 followed by Delhi at 70,390, Tamil Nadu at 67,468, Gujarat at 28,943, Uttar Pradesh at 19,557, Rajasthan at 16,009 and West Bengal at 15,173, according to ministry data.

The number of COVID-19 cases has gone up to 12,448 in Madhya Pradesh, 12,010 in Haryana, 10,444 in Telangana,10,331 in Andhra Pradesh and 10,118 in Karnataka.

It has risen to 8,209 in Bihar, 6,422 in Jammu and Kashmir, 6,198 in Assam and 5,752 in Odisha. Punjab has reported 4,627 novel coronavirus infections so far, while Kerala has 3,603 cases.

A total of 2,623 people have been infected by the virus in Uttarakhand, 2,419 in Chhattisgarh, 2,207 in Jharkhand, 1,259 in Tripura, 970 in Manipur, 951 in Goa, 941 in Ladakh and 806 in Himachal Pradesh.

Puducherry has recorded 461 COVID-19 cases, Chandigarh has 420, Nagaland has 347, Arunachal Pradesh has 158 and Mizoram has 142 cases.

Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu together have reported 120 COVID-19 cases.

Sikkim has 84, Andaman and Nicobar Islands has registered 56 infections so far while Meghalaya has recorded 46 cases.

"Our figures are being reconciled with the ICMR (Indian Council of Medical Research)," the ministry said, adding 8,493 cases are being reassigned to states.

State-wise distribution is subject to further verification and reconciliation, it added.

The coronavirus can stay aloft for hours in tiny droplets in stagnant air, infecting people as they inhale, mounting scientific evidence suggests.

This risk is highest in crowded indoor spaces with poor ventilation, and may help explain superspreading events reported in meatpacking plants, churches and restaurants.

It’s unclear how often the virus is spread via these tiny droplets, or aerosols, compared with larger droplets that are expelled when a sick person coughs or sneezes, or transmitted through contact with contaminated surfaces, said Linsey Marr, an aerosol expert at Virginia Tech.

Follow latest updates on the Covid-19 pandemic here

Aerosols are released even when a person without symptoms exhales, talks or sings, according to Marr and more than 200 other experts, who have outlined the evidence in an open letter to the World Health Organization.

What is clear, they said, is that people should consider minimizing time indoors with people outside their families. Schools, nursing homes and businesses should consider adding powerful new air filters and ultraviolet lights that can kill airborne viruses.

What does it mean for a virus to be airborne?

For a virus to be airborne means that it can be carried through the air in a viable form. For most pathogens, this is a yes-no scenario. HIV, too delicate to survive outside the body, is not airborne. Measles is airborne, and dangerously so: It can survive in the air for up to two hours.

For the coronavirus, the definition has been more complicated. Experts agree that the virus does not travel long distances or remain viable outdoors. But evidence suggests it can traverse the length of a room and, in one set of experimental conditions, remain viable for perhaps three hours.

How are aerosols different from droplets?

Aerosols are droplets, droplets are aerosols — they do not differ except in size. Scientists sometimes refer to droplets fewer than 5 microns in diameter as aerosols. (By comparison, a red blood cell is about 5 microns in diameter; a human hair is about 50 microns wide.)

From the start of the pandemic, the WHO and other public health organizations have focused on the virus’s ability to spread through large droplets that are expelled when a symptomatic person coughs or sneezes.

These droplets are heavy, relatively speaking, and fall quickly to the floor or onto a surface that others might touch. This is why public health agencies have recommended maintaining a distance of at least 6 feet from others, and frequent hand washing.

But some experts have said for months that infected people also are releasing aerosols when they cough and sneeze. More important, they expel aerosols even when they breathe, talk or sing, especially with some exertion.

Scientists know now that people can spread the virus even in the absence of symptoms — without coughing or sneezing — and aerosols might explain that phenomenon.

Because aerosols are smaller, they contain much less virus than droplets do. But because they are lighter, they can linger in the air for hours, especially in the absence of fresh air. In a crowded indoor space, a single infected person can release enough aerosolized virus over time to infect many people, perhaps seeding a superspreader event.

For droplets to be responsible for that kind of spread, a single person would have to be within a few feet of all the other people, or to have contaminated an object that everyone else touched. All that seems unlikely to many experts: “I have to do too many mental gymnastics to explain those other routes of transmission compared to aerosol transmission, which is much simpler,” Marr said.

Can I stop worrying about physical distancing and washing my hands?

Physical distancing is still very important. The closer you are to an infected person, the more aerosols and droplets you may be exposed to. Washing your hands often is still a good idea.

What’s new is that those two things may not be enough. “We should be placing as much emphasis on masks and ventilation as we do with hand washing,” Marr said. “As far as we can tell, this is equally important, if not more important.”

Should I begin wearing a hospital-grade mask indoors? And how long is too long to stay indoors?

Health care workers may all need to wear N95 masks, which filter out most aerosols. At the moment, they are advised to do so only when engaged in certain medical procedures that are thought to produce aerosols.

For the rest of us, cloth face masks will still greatly reduce risk, as long as most people wear them. At home, when you’re with your own family or with roommates you know to be careful, masks are still not necessary. But it is a good idea to wear them in other indoor spaces, experts said.

As for how long is safe, that is frustratingly tough to answer. A lot depends on whether the room is too crowded to allow for a safe distance from others and whether there is fresh air circulating through the room.

What does airborne transmission mean for reopening schools and colleges?

This is a matter of intense debate. Many schools are poorly ventilated and are too poorly funded to invest in new filtration systems. “There is a huge vulnerability to infection transmission via aerosols in schools,” said Don Milton, an aerosol expert at the University of Maryland.

Most children younger than 12 seem to have only mild symptoms, if any, so elementary schools may get by. “So far, we don’t have evidence that elementary schools will be a problem, but the upper grades, I think, would be more likely to be a problem,” Milton said.

College dorms and classrooms are also cause for concern.

Milton said the government should think of long-term solutions for these problems. Having public schools closed “clogs up the whole economy, and it’s a major vulnerability,” he said.

“Until we understand how this is part of our national defense, and fund it appropriately, we’re going to remain extremely vulnerable to these kinds of biological threats.”

What are some things I can do to minimize the risks?

Do as much as you can outdoors. Despite the many photos of people at beaches, even a somewhat crowded beach, especially on a breezy day, is likely to be safer than a pub or an indoor restaurant with recycled air.

But even outdoors, wear a mask if you are likely to be close to others for an extended period.

When indoors, one simple thing people can do is to “open their windows and doors whenever possible,” Marr said. You can also upgrade the filters in your home air-conditioning systems, or adjust the settings to use more outdoor air rather than recirculated air.

Public buildings and businesses may want to invest in air purifiers and ultraviolet lights that can kill the virus. Despite their reputation, elevators may not be a big risk, Milton said, compared with public bathrooms or offices with stagnant air where you may spend a long time.

If none of those things are possible, try to minimize the time you spend in an indoor space, especially without a mask. The longer you spend inside, the greater the dose of virus you might inhale.