UK MP calls on India to end demonetisation stress for NRIs

Feb 26: Looking out over the world’s largest cricket stadium, the seats jammed with more than 100,000 people, India’s prime minister heaped praise on his American visitor.

“The leadership of President Trump has served humanity,” Prime Minister Narendra Modi said Monday, highlighting Trump’s fight against terrorism and calling his 36-hour visit to India a watershed in India-U.S. relations.

The crowds cheered. Trump beamed.

“The ties between India and the U.S. are no longer just any other partnership,” Modi said. “It is a far greater and closer relationship.”

India, it seems, loves Donald Trump. It seemed obvious from the thousands who turned out to wave as his motorcade snaked through the city of Ahmedabad, and from the tens of thousands who filled the city’s new stadium. It seemed obvious from the hug that Modi gave Trump after he descended from Air Force One, and from the hundreds of billboards proclaiming Trump’s visit.

But it’s not so simple.

Because while Trump is genuinely popular in India, his clamorous and carefully choreographed welcome was also about Asian geopolitics, China’s growing power and a masterful Indian politician who gave his American visitor exactly what he wanted.

Modi “is doing this not necessarily because he loves Trump,” said Tanvi Madan, the director of the India Project at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. “It’s very much about Trump as the leader of the U.S. and recognizing what it is that Trump himself likes.”

Trump likes crowds — big crowds — and the foot soldiers of India’s political parties have long known how to corral enough people to make any politician look popular. In a city like Ahmedabad, the capital of Modi’s home state of Gujarat and the center of his power base, it wouldn’t take much effort to fill a cavernous sports stadium. It was more surprising that a handful of seats remained empty, and that some in the stands had left even before Trump had finished his speech.

For India, good relations with the U.S. are deeply important: They signal that India is a serious global player, an issue that has long been important to New Delhi, and help cement an alliance that both nations see as a counterweight to China’s rise.

“For both countries, their biggest rival is China,” said John Echeverri-Gent, a professor at the University of Virginia whose research often focuses on India. “China is rapidly expanding its presence in the Indian Ocean, which India has long considered its backyard and its exclusive realm for security concerns.”

“It’s very clearly a major concern for both India and the United States,” he said.

Trump isn’t the first U.S. president that Modi has courted. In 2015, then-President Barack Obama was the first American chief guest at India’s Republic Day parade, a powerful symbolic gesture. Obama also got a Modi hug, and the media in both countries were soon writing about the two leaders’ “bromance.”

Trump is popular in India, even if some of that is simply because he’s the U.S. president. A 2019 Pew Research Center poll showed that 56% of Indians had confidence in Trump’s abilities in world affairs, one of only a handful of countries where he has that level of approval. But Obama was also popular: Before he left office, he had 58% approval in world affairs among Indians.

The Pew poll also indicated that Trump’s support was higher among supporters of Modi’s Hindu nationalist party.

That’s not surprising. Both men have fired up their nationalist bases with anti-Muslim rhetoric and government policies, from Trump’s travel bans to Modi’s crackdown in Kashmir, India’s only Muslim-majority state.

And Trump’s Indian support is far from universal. Protests against his trip roiled cities from New Delhi to Hyderabad to the far northeastern city of Gauhati, although those demonstrations were mostly overshadowed by protests over a new Indian citizenship law that Modi backs.

Modi, who is widely popular in India, has faced weeks of protests over the law, which provides fast track naturalization for some foreign-born religious minorities — but not Muslims. While Trump talked about ties with India on Tuesday, Hindus and Muslims fought in violent clashes that left at least 10 people dead over two days.

In some ways, Modi and Trump are powerful echoes of each other.

They have overlapping political styles. Both are populists who see themselves as brash, rule-breaking outsiders who disdain their countries’ traditional elites. Both are seen by their critics as having authoritarian leanings. Both surround themselves with officials who rarely question their decisions.

But are they friends?

Trump says yes. “Really, we feel very strongly about each other,” he said at a New Delhi press briefing.

But many observers aren’t so sure.

“The question is how much of this is real chemistry, as opposed to what I’d call planned chemistry” orchestrated for diplomatic reasons, said Madan. “It’s so hard to know if you’re not in the room.”

Certainly, Modi understands America’s importance to India. While the two countries continue to bicker about trade issues, the prime minister organized a welcome that impressed even India’s news media, which have watched countless choreographed mass political rallies.

“There is no other country for whose leader India would hold such an event, and for which an Indian prime minister would lavish such rhetoric,” the Hindustan Times said in an editorial.

“The spectacle and the sound were worth a thousand agreements.”

Washington, May 30: The United States will end its relationship with the World Health Organization over the body’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic, U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday, accusing the U.N. agency of becoming a puppet of China.

The move to quit the Geneva-based body, which the United States formally joined in 1948, comes amid growing tensions between Washington and Beijing over the coronavirus outbreak. The virus first emerged in China’s Wuhan city late last year.

Speaking in the White House Rose Garden, Trump said Chinese officials “ignored their reporting obligations” to the WHO about the virus - that has killed hundreds of thousands of people globally - and pressured the agency to “mislead the world.”

“China has total control over the World Health Organization despite only paying $40 million per year compared to what the United States has been paying which is approximately $450 million a year,” he said.

Trump’s decision follows a pledge last week by Chinese President Xi Jinping to give $2 billion to the WHO over the next two years to help combat the coronavirus. The amount almost matches the WHO’s entire annual program budget for last year.

Trump last month halted funding for the 194-member organization, then in a May 18 letter gave the WHO 30 days to commit to reforms.

“Because they have failed to make the requested and greatly needed reforms, we will be today terminating our relationship with the World Health Organization and redirecting those funds to other worldwide and deserving urgent global public health needs,” Trump said on Friday.

It was not immediately clear when his decision would come into effect. A 1948 joint resolution of Congress on U.S. membership of the WHO said the country “reserves its right to withdraw from the organization on a one-year notice.”

The World Health Organization did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Trump’s announcement. It has previously denied Trump’s assertions that it promoted Chinese “disinformation” about the virus.

“It’s important to remember that the WHO is a platform for cooperation among countries,” said Donna McKay, executive director of Physicians for Human Rights. “Walking away from this critical institution in the midst of an historic pandemic will hurt people both in the United States and around the world.”

‘ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL’

The United States currently owes the WHO more than $200 million in assessed contributions, according to the WHO website. Washington also gives several hundred million dollars annually in voluntary funding tied to specific WHO programs such as polio eradication, HIV, hepatitis and tuberculosis.

Amesh A. Adalja, a senior scholar at Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, said that in practice Trump’s decision was unlikely to change the operations of the WHO.

“From a symbolic or moral standpoint it’s the wrong type of action to be taking in the middle of a pandemic and seems to deflect responsibility for what we in the U.S. failed to do and blame the WHO,” said Adalja.

When Trump halted funding to the WHO last month, two Western diplomats said the U.S. suspension was more harmful politically to the WHO than to the agency’s current programs, which are funded for now.

The WHO is an independent international body that works with the United Nations. U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said last month that the WHO is “absolutely critical to the world’s efforts to win the war against COVID-19.”

When asked about Trump’s decision, a U.N. spokesman said: “We have consistently called for all states to support WHO.”

Trump has long scorned multilateralism as he focuses on an “America First” agenda. Since taking office, he has quit the U.N. Human Rights Council, the U.N. cultural agency, a global accord to tackle climate change and the Iran nuclear deal. He has also cut funding for the U.N. population fund and the U.N. agency that aids Palestinian refugees.

“The WHO is the world’s early warning system for infectious diseases,” said U.S. Representative Nita Lowey, a Democrat who chairs the House Committee on Appropriations. “Now, during a global pandemic that has cost over 100,000 American lives, is not the time to put the country further at risk.”

Ramallah, Jul 2: Several world countries renew a call for Israel to halt contentious plans to annex parts of the occupied Palestinian territory after the regime delayed the implementation of the land garb bid in the face of a series of stumbling blocks, including internal rifts, global criticisms and the US’s failure to give Tel Aviv the go-ahead for the move.

Israel's ruling coalition, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, had announced July 1 as the date to begin moving forward with the plan to impose Tel Aviv’s “sovereignty” over about a third of the West Bank, including settlements and the fertile Jordan Valley.

Without clarifications, the regime, however, failed to launch the scheme on the set date amid widening differences between Netanyahu and his coalition partner, minister of military affairs Benny Gantz.

Meanwhile, there are signs that the administration of US President Donald Trump, a staunch Israel supporter, has cooled its backing for the Israeli move amid what is believed to be troubles at home and fears that it might hurt the president’s chances of re-election besides international pressure.

On Wednesday, Netanyahu's office said in a statement that he would continue to discuss a possible West bank annexation with the US administration.

“In the coming days there will be additional discussions,” the statement said.

Labor, Social Affairs and Social Services Minister Ofir Akunis said the Israel would annex portions of the West Bank in July but only after the US president issued a declaration on the matter.

The annexation “will only happen after a declaration by Trump,” he told Israeli Army Radio.

Trump had already given Tel Aviv the green light for the land grab in his self-proclaimed “deal of the century,” which was unveiled in January with the aim of re-drawing the Middle East map.

However, the Trump administration has so far refrained from offering official support for the annexation sought by Netanyahu and his right-wing allies.

Unlike the US, several countries, including some of Israel’s allies, have expressed their opposition to Israel’s planned push to consolidate its occupation of Palestine.

Germany passes anti-annexation resolution

On Wednesday, the German parliament approved a resolution calling on the government to dissuade Israel from annexing the West Bank.

The motion, which was brought in the German legislature by the three parties in Chancellor Angela Merkel's coalition, was approved without opposing votes. 

Berlin should use its “special relations and contacts [with Tel Aviv] to express to the Israeli government our concerns and our urgent demand to refrain from an annexation of parts of the West Bank and from the continued expansion of settlements, both of which contradict international law,” read the resolution.

Speaking at the parliamentary debate before the vote, German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said, “We reject unilateral changes of borders, and we won’t recognize them.”

He also stressed that peace “cannot be achieved through unilateral steps but only through serious negotiations.”

France warns of consequences

Similarly, French Foreign Minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian warned that any Israeli annexation would be a violation of international law and would bring about consequences.

“Annexation of Palestinian territories, whatever the perimeters, would seriously throw into question the parameters to resolve the conflict,” he told a parliamentary hearing. 

The top diplomat added, “An annexation decision could not be left without consequences and we are examining different options at a national level and also in coordination with our main European partners.”

Australia raises concerns

Additionally, Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne voiced worries about the Israeli scheme, saying she had directly expressed this view to Israeli Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi.

“We are following with concern possible moves towards the unilateral annexation or change in status of territory on the West Bank,” she said in a statement.

“The focus needs to be on a return to direct and genuine negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians for a durable and resilient peace arrangement, as soon as possible,” Payne added.

Vatican summons US, Israeli envoys

Meanwhile, the Vatican announced on Wednesday that it had summoned the American and Israeli ambassadors to protest Israel’s annexation bid.

In separate meetings, Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin told Israeli Ambassador Oren David and US Ambassador Callista Gingrich of concerns “regarding possible unilateral actions that may further jeopardize the search for peace between Israelis and Palestinians, as well as the delicate situation in the Middle East,”

“As already declared … the Holy See reiterates that ... Israel and the State of Palestine have the right to exist and to live in peace and security, within internationally recognized borders,” the Vatican said in a statement.

“It thus appeals to the parties to do everything possible to reopen the process of direct negotiation, on the basis of the relevant Resolutions of the United Nations,” it added.

Amnesty urges firm action

Amnesty International called on the international community to take firm action against Israel’s annexation plan and its “law of the jungle” mentality.

“Members of the international community must enforce international law and restate that annexation of any part of the occupied West Bank is null and void,” said Saleh Higazi, deputy regional director for Amnesty Middle East and North Africa.

“They must also work to immediately stop the construction or expansion of illegal Israeli settlements and related infrastructure in the Occupied Palestinian Territories as a first step towards removing Israeli civilians living in such settlements,” he added.

Palestinians mark ‘Day of Rage'

Also on Wednesday, Palestinians held “Day of Rage” rallies both in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip against the Israeli expansionism.

In Gaza city, several thousand protesters gathered, some brandishing Palestinian national flags and placards condemning Trump.

Some demonstrators carried signs in English reading, “We Can’t Breathe Since 1948” and “Palestinian Lives Matter,” in reference to the American Black Lives Matter movement.

“The occupation has killed us and killed our children and deprived us of a good life. May God grant the Resistance victory,” a protester told the al-Aqsa TV.

“The resistance must be revived,” Gaza protester Rafeeq Inaiah told media persons. “Israel is afraid of force.”

Similar demonstrations also took place in the West Bank cities of Ramallah and Jericho.