Show cause notice served to Mamata's Man Friday, Alapan, entails two-years imprisonment: 'Fear quotient' threatens rule of law in Bengal, says Guv

Show cause notice served to Alapan entails even two-years imprisonment

The Union Home Ministry has served a show-cause notice to former chief secretary of West Bengal, Alapan Bandyopadhyay, under a stringent provision of the Disaster Management Act that entails imprisonment up to two years.

Man of Action

Former Chief Secretary has been asked to reply within three days to the notice. 

In a nine-point rejoinder, the central government sources strongly rebutted Mamata Banerjee's claims that she was 'waiting' for the Prime Minister.

"PM (Narendra Modi) landed at Kalaikunda at 1.59 pm. Mamata Banerjee landed at Kalaikunda after the PM at 2.10 pm. It is clear that PM was kept waiting for Mamata Banerjee as he landed much before her. 

This was also confirmed by a TMC MP who tweeted that there was no big deal in the PM being kept waiting," said government sources. 

This is in reference to a tweet from Trinamool MP, Mahua Moitra, who wrote on May 28:

"So much fuss over an alleged 30 min wait? Indians waiting 7 years for ₹15 lakhs

Waiting hours at ATM queues. Waiting months for vaccines due . Thoda aap bhi wait kar lijiye kabhi kabhi..."

A home ministry source said that hours before Chief Minister announced his retirement on Monday, Bandyopadhyay was served the notice for refusing to comply with lawful direction of the central government in violation of Section 51-B of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.

Mamata has given "entirely false statements" and she "boycotted" a meeting with Prime Minister.

The Chief Minister has said she had another scheduled meeting and that she had asked the PM's permission before leaving. PM Modi never gave permission to Mamata Banerjee to leave the review meeting as she claims, sources said in Delhi. 

To her claim about being informed belatedly about the Prime Minister's schedule, the sources commented that a meeting to assess cyclone damage could hardly be finalised "before the cyclone comes".

Ms Banerjee's allegation that she was forced to wait for the PM was also rejected by government sources. On Ms Banerjee saying she had to wait for 20 minutes and her chopper had to hover because the PM's chopper was to land, the sources said she should have come in advance, "as everyone does when PM is supposed to land at any airport".

After her chopper landed at the air base, the Chief Minister reached the building where the meeting was to take place, around 500 metres away. "After meeting the PM, she departed for her next journey at 2.35 pm. So in effect, she travelled 500 metres to and fro, met PM and departed in 25 minutes. She left before the PM left, which is clearly contrary to accepted practices and protocol". 

It is clear that Mamata Banerjee's statement of being made to wait is entirely false and that she made the PM wait," government sources said.

The sources also said Mamata Banerjee had agreed to attend the PM's review but had changed her mind after learning that her former aide-turned-BJP MLA Suvendu Adhikari, who is the state's Leader of Opposition, would be in the meeting. 

Trinamool's landslide victory in assembly polls was also marred by her defeat to Mr Adhikari in Nandigram. 

"Mamata Banerjee chose to boycott the review meeting because the Leader of Opposition of WB was present. No issue was created by government on this, because what mattered was Cyclone relief activities". 

It was suggested to her that PM will meet her immediately after the review meeting as that was the reason for which he traveled to West Bengal. 

"Sensing that she may have to wait till the review meeting gets over, she chose to prevent other officers too from attending the meeting and in effect cancelled the review meeting scheduled by the Prime Minister," the sources alleged.

The Centre defended its moves against Alapan Bandyopadhyay, who was ordered to report to Delhi after the meeting controversy. 

"The order is perfectly constitutional since Chief Secretary is an All India Services officer. He chose to ignore his constitutional duties, as a result of which no presentation was given to PM and no officer of the West Bengal government attended the PM's review meeting," sources said.

Mamata decided to boycott PM's cyclone-review meet 'the previous night', says Governor

West Bengal Governor Jagdeep Dhankhar has flayed the conduct of Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and former Chief Secretary Alapan Bandyopadhyay for their conduct at Prime Minitser's review meeting on Cylcone Yaas and urged media to "introspectively check" how fear quotient works in the state.

"All constitutional principles were torn asunder by CM @MamataOfficial and functionaries of IAS association at PM Review Meet #CycloneYaas. Democracy imperilled by such unconstitutional stance. Time #Media to introspectively check fear quotient in WB that threatens rule of law," he wrote in a series of tweets. 

He also wrote, "With unparalleled trampling of constitutional values and affront to the office of PM, May 28 will go down as ‘a dark day’ in India’s long-standing ethos of cooperative federalism. At PM Review Meet #CycloneYaas democracy was shredded".  

"Constrained by false narrative to put record straight: On May 27 at 2316 hrs CM @MamataOfficial messaged “may i talk? urgent”. Thereafter on phone indicated boycott by her & officials of PM Review Meet #CycloneYaas if LOP Suvendu Adhikari attends it. Ego prevailed over Public service." 

The tweets from the Governor came amid reports that the centre may initiate disciplinary action against the former Chief Secretary Alapan Bandyopadhyay, who has 'retired' and has been given a political assignment as Chief Advisor to the Chief Minister. 

Ms Banerjee also appointed H K Dwivedi as the new Chief Secretary. 

BJP chief J P Nadda on Friday said West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee skipping the meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi was "murder of constitutional ethos". 

The centre now wants to act tough and send a strong signal to the IAS and IPS community.  

 

 

Jaishankar to chair BRICS foreign ministers' meet on Tuesday, June 1

New Delhi:  BRICS foreign ministers will hold a virtual conference on Tuesday and exchange views on the Covid-19 pandemic situation and terror related matters among other things.

An official source said they would also take up matters concerning the need for strengthening and reforming the Multilateral System with a view to enhancing its capacity to effectively address the diverse challenges.

"India as the current BRICS Chair will convene the standalone meeting of BRICS Ministers of Foreign Affairs/ International Relations. External Affairs Minister Dr S Jaishankar, will chair the meeting via video conferencing," an MEA release said,
Matters related to sustainable development, countering Terrorism besides discussing ways to enhance intra-BRICS cooperation and especially people-to-people cooperation would also figure.
The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Brazil, Ambassador Carlos Alberto Franco França, Russian Minister Sergey Lavrov, Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi, and their South African counterpart Grace Naledi Mandisa Pandor are expected to participate.
The rotating BRICS Chair would pass on to China in circa 2022.
Sources said, this is the third time India is holding the BRICS Chairship after 2012 and 2016.
BRICS brings together five of the largest developing countries of the world, representing 41 percent of the global population, 24 percent of the global GDP and 16 percent of global trade. 
As such, BRICS has emerged as a useful platform for consultations on a range of issues of common interest touching upon issues of political, economic and cultural cooperation.
 
BRICS Foreign Ministers first met in 2006, and the first BRICS Summit was held in 2009. 

Over the past fifteen years, the scope of BRICS has steadily expanded to include deliberations and exchange of views on strategic issues such as counter terrorism and cyber security as well as identification of new areas of practical cooperation such as health, education, science and technology and disaster management and resilience, sources said.
ends 
 

Has 'neo-communist' China triggered post-Covid Cold War 2.0? ::::: Delhi High Court says Central Vista is 'vital' national project

New Delhi: Where did it all begin? How has the US been caught napping? 
One argument, to begin with, is that the United States of America and even its allies have been complacent about the potential threats from China. 

Now, on the other hand Beijing has set priority to ‘annex’ Taiwan – the world largest manufacturer of semiconductor chips. 

This was stated by a top US military officer Admiral John Aquilino before a Congress panel. But in the process, the Chinese leadership was able to push a neo-nationalism in the backyards guided by the Communist ideology. 

Blogger: Great Wall of China

Accordingly, even the Galwan conflict with India in June 2020 was part of a plan.
China has opened troubles with India at the borders and also dragged itself into a permanent and long lasting bitter diplomatic rivalry with the US. 

By all these, the nationalistic feeling has been aroused among its own people; and the Xi Jinping dispensation has able to keep the citizens on the side of Communist Party of China (CCP).  

Observers say, China’s economic liberalism policy too was guided by a well orchestrated plan. It knew the powers of economy and hence worked over the years for a productive economy. In the process, multinationals from western world and especially the US were lured into making investments in China. 

In fact, a section of US leadership was also virtually lulled into a belief that if liberalism is allowed, it would bring in economic prosperity and these could subsequently open the scope for democracy in China.

From the time of Ronald Regan, it has been a policy of the US administration to encourage China to find a toehold and do well in the global trading system. 

The Americans were tempted to have China as their ally in the “increasingly democratic world order”. But democracy is something far off the Chinese radar. It may not be erroneous to argue that China has helped make the world safe for autocracies. And to a large extent, freedom has been on a sustained decline around the world at least during the past fifteen years. Of course, Donald Trump and Barack Obama must share the blame. 

It was also argued that a democratic China with such large-scale prosperity, image of a robust manufacturing hub and sizable population would be an asset as an ally of the US. The entire calculation seems to have gone wrong. 

China used its neo-found economic prowess for abundant military modernization. It also moved with abundant aid for smaller and needy countries in Asia to Africa and have ‘trapped’ most to be their subordinate allies and friends in times of need.

 

Slowly, it is now in competition with the US and hence there is the talk of Cold War 2.0.

In retrospect, the role of communist ideology was ‘underestimated’. China watchers in western countries – the likes of former deputy NSA US, Matthew Pottinger – say the issue is the combination of fear and aspirations. 

Communist Party of China (CPC) is ‘afraid’ of its own people. They have seen the collapse of the Soviet Union – also a previous communist powerhouse.

And thus Beijing was unwilling to allow liberalism to the level where the ‘aspirations’ could turn people, the common citizenry, rebellious. It is therefore extra ordinarily careful not to allow economic prosperity to make way for the 'luxury' of democracy.

At the same time, the apprehensions of Chinese designs vis-a-vis Taiwan cannot be ruled out. 
Of course dominating Taiwan will be a tall order for Beijing. The people of Taiwan do not want to be dominated and this sentiment has only increased. Even geographical terrain in and around Taiwan would only pose serious challenges to China if they desire any adventurism.  

But the problem has been that the US ‘commitment’ to Taiwan has only grown verbally stronger but crucially weaker militarily . ‘Losing Taiwan’ by the American leadership would be seen as the beginning of an end of the US-predominance strategically in the entire Asia.

Hong Kong is another area where the American leadership apparently has already failed. This signals one crucial initial gain for China. Could the US under both the Trump administration and its successor under Joe Biden do and act differently in Hong Kong?

Hong Kong's legislature has lately approved the biggest overhaul of its political system. The changes will reduce the proportion of seats in the legislature that are filled by direct elections. Moreover, a new body will now vet candidates and bar those deemed insufficiently patriotic towards China. 

In all these come the greater significance of India-US ties. Joe Biden has himself promised that his administration would “build on the great progress” made in the tie up with India during the Obama years. He also asserted that India and the US can and should be "natural allies''. 

Just to put things in right perspective, Atal Bihari Vajpayee had also described the India-US relationship as being that between two natural allies.

The Trump presidency had pushed an anti-China policy line and this would expectedly continue because of the continuous combative stance of Beijing. 

Congress gets it on face, Delhi High Court says Centra Vista is 'vital' national project

New Delhi: In an order that would have a significant impact politically, the Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed a plea seeking direction to suspend all construction activity of the Central Vista Avenue Redevelopment Project in view of the second wave of the Covid19.  

The court also slapped a Rs 1 lakh fine on petitioners and asserted that it was a 'motivated plea'. 

The order was passed by the division bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh.

The petition was filed by Anya Malhotra and Sohail Hashmi. 

BJP spokesman Sambit Patra quickly welcomed the court order.

"Congress’ #ToolKitExposed yet again. They tried their best to scuttle the CentralVistaProject by spreading Falsehoods and Canards but got it back from the Court today," he tweeted. Patra also wrote: "The Petitioner has been fined as well. BJP National President Sh J P Nadda rightly said Sadhak Vs Badhak. Sadhak wins".

In Hindi, Sadhav means a dedicated worker while Badhak is an eternal obstructionist.

The High Court also ruled that the Delhi Disaster Management Authority (DDMA) order in question nowhere prohibits construction work. The legality of the project has been upheld previously by the Supreme Court.

ends 

"....future of fundamentalism cannot be very good", this is what I said in 2011

10 years....means a lot !!
most flattering part is the 'dateline' !! and the name of website .....
Washington (DC), March 28 : Nirendra Narayan Dev is a well-known name in the world of political journalism in India.

Reporting by Washington Bangla Radio (an English website) "His books Ayodhya - Battle for Peace, The Talking Guns North East India, and Godhra - A Journey to Mayhem, have been critically acclaimed in observers and commentators on the political scenario of India. He is not only a writer, he is also associated with and a special correspondent of one of India’s and the World's most revered news dailies - The Statesman. Nirendra spared a few minutes to talk to Bidisha on WBRi about the political scene in India, about journalism, plagiarism and his current and future projects.

Nirendra was born and brought up in the state of Nagaland in North East India and his career in journalism started from there, from 1991. He was always addicted to writing and considers it to be his passion. As we mentioned above, Nirendra has written three books, with his latest work Ayodhya: Battle for Peace partly drawing on his experience on the ground when he was physically present in Ayodhya during the court proceedings and announcement of the verdict.

Sharing his views on the current patterns in Indian journalism, Nirendra says Indian journalism has changed a lot. Earlier there was more emphasis on serious news items. Nowadays it’s more of concentrating on one particular popular item, mostly based around the metros and not reaching to the interiors of the country. Earlier, a journalist had the responsibility of covering one particular sector, now he is required to write different stories from unrelated fields, often resulting in absence of required diligence in gathering facts. Newspapers now are more wanting of advertisement and big money flowing in from different sources and that certainly affects the quality of the news.

About plagiarism, with respect to India, Nirendra indicates plagiarism is there and it is mainly because the media has opened up to everyone through the internet. Journalists are expected to cover a lot more stories nowadays in comparison to earlier years and it often happens that they are not fully aware of that topic. Quite naturally there is a tendency to take help from other sources and complete the  assignment in often limited and insufficient time.

Nirendra's book Godhra: A Journey to Mayhem (2004) is based on the post riot situation in Godhra. The Talking Guns -North East India (2008) covers all the seven North eastern states of India, and the subject of Ayodhya - Battle for Peace (2010) is, of course, the Ayodhya dispute, court verdict and impact on society.

In a recent article titled Expatriates from South Asia spread fanaticism in the region, Nirendra discusses how immigrants from South Asian nations settled in the west also play a major role with regard to curbing the growth of communalism in the region. The future of fundamentalism cannot be very good for the sectarian forces, either in India or even in Pakistan and Bangladesh.  It would bury its ugly head soon and the return of Sheikh Hasina and a liberal progressive government in the political scene of Bangladesh is an example towards that.

Nirendra's future work is likely to be a book on Indian women as portrayed by respected and renowned Bengali writer Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay. Since the political scene in India is also brimming with news of corruption etc, there is likely to be a book on that as well.

source: Washington Bangla Radio

it was also reported in sinlung.com

sinlung.com

'Ayodhya: Battle for Peace' ----- Book Review in 'Power Politics'

A Gripping Tale

Coming amid high voltage drama in national polity over scams and alleged Hindu terror under RSS, the book at hand cautions the ruling Congress about going overboard on 'Hindu terror'. The Hindus in general are anguished as well as shell-shocked at the allegation that their faith, known for its tolerance, is being linked to terrorism. 

They believe that the Congress party led by a Christian and that too a foreign lady is indulging in politics to defame the Hindu organisations and thus win over its lost support base among Muslims. It is important to note that journalists should know their limits. We are observers and reporters of the events and should not aspire to be players. 

Nirendra Dev is no big name in journalism. But having seen from close range for the last decade, one would like to admire his passion for uncovering various facets of journalistic events. Little to dispute, he likes his job and in more ways than one wants to share his experience of covering those mega events. The September 30, 2010 was one of the great events of Indian journalism in 2010. Therefore, the author's latest offering 'Ayodhya: Battle for Peace' tries to reflect those shades of viewpoints rather acidly. 

In 2004, his earlier offering 'Godhra - A Journey to Mayhem' was equally absorbing.  

The new book is perhaps the first book after the Allahabad High Court judgement on the protracted dispute. That way, it has to be credited.

The book is thus timely and also gripping.

However, one does not miss certain limitations and thus in this reviewer's opinion, the book could have been written and edited better.  

Yet, I must say the pages are worth turning as using a variety of genres - the individual ruling of all the three judges, media reports and essays on history and the Hindu-Muslim relationship, the author scans the various facets of the dispute. 

He tries to present a panoramic view of the long-term as well as short-term challenges in sustaining a cordial relationship between the two communities. 

snap

Reference to London-based author Irfan Hussain's article in a Pakistani paper that, "After centuries of first Muslim and then British rule, the Hindus are finally in charge of their destiny. For the first time in modern history, Indians feel they can play a role on the world stage" - would leave very few disagreeing. 

On another plane, Dev says, ".... the Hindus should give up that prism of suspicion to look at their Muslim brothers". Again he argues that the verdict rightly opens up a new chapter for purposeful talks between the two sides.  

Importantly, the book also wonders whether the UP government officials over the years connived to help the Hindu cause. 

"When the documents, as desired by the court, did not reach them, the court had asked the state government to make it clear whether the documents have been destroyed, the documents could not be traceable or the documents did not exit at all. The mystery of the missing documents has not only remained unexplained but had also perhaps given a new direction to the case," it says.  

To sum up, the book could be an important addition to the literature on the Indian politics and also the raging debate on Hindu-Muslim relationship mainly for originality of its analysis. 

The book throws light on a possible future roadmap of polity, posing questions like - where is Congress heading or whether BJP's gamble on Nitin Gadkari has failed. The first book on post-Ayodhya verdict of Sept 30, 2010, among other things also hints at latent cold war between all powerful 10 Janpath and the PMO. 

The book says, "Dr Singh's admirers are reported to have floated the theory that the 2009 mandate for UPA was in effect a mandate for him (Dr Manmohan Singh)".

On matters concerning minorities, the book says the Muslims and "the protagonists who want to champion their cause" - the secular brigade need to be told the confrontationist line against the majority Hindus in India is a futile game plan and can only boomerang on the minoroties and the secular polity in the long run. 

Unlike many other works of journalists from English medium, this book makes an attempt for objective study of Muslims' mindset in the historic context of how Hindus look at Muslims.

Bengal Babudom: Steel frame, pliable officers and turning into convenient tools

Department of personnel and training has issued a show-cause notice to the now-retired West Bengal chief secretary Alapan Bandyopadhyay for not having reported to DoPT office in North Block, New Delhi on May 31. 

New Delhi: Mamata Banerjee's famous one-liner to Civil Service officers in 2016, "Your career begins in the state and will end here" has turned prophetic at least for one individual.

Alapan Bandyopadhyay, West Bengal chief secretary, making news rather for wrong reasons might have surprised Indian political circle and the media. 

But those in the know say West Bengal babudom has been mostly fashioned and used as convenient tools of the political bosses.

Of course, those who ruled the state for 34 years – the Leftists ought to get their share of the credit or blame. According to a former Secretary and a retired officer in the state, the likes of Anish Majumdar, N Krishnamurthi, Rathin Sengupta and T C Dutt were made Chief Secretaries during the erstwhile Basu government because they were “either not given to taking tough stance or they were viewed as the pro-communists”.

The state also had a unique cadre of officials and 'sympathisers' called the “street cadre". 

Similar vice might have existed in other states and perhaps still exists, but in West Bengal often senior most IAS officers missed the coveted Chief Secretary’s post over very ordinary or inane issues. Even Forward Bloc ministers during the Jyoti Basu regime often confronted with senior members of the civil service.

In the late 1960s, it is said, so much was the animosity that prominent CPI-M Minister Hare Krishna Konar (during United Front coalition regime with Bangla Congress), had described the bureaucrats as “gutter vermin”.    

Blogger

Some Left leaders also described the babudom as a “necessary evil” with whom “uprightness” was a dead wood. 

Another official familiar with the style and standards of governance in the eastern state said, the steel frame was hardly able to be firm and thus in most cases they crumbled under pressure.

In the 1990s, Somnath Chatterjee, a former Lok Sabha Speaker, had made news in Kolkata as the chairman of the West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation when he “got rid of” the managing director.

Another Marxist leader Sankar Sen, also the state Power Minister, had declined to ‘accept’ an officer whom he found difficult to ‘discipline and handle’.
Ever since she became Chief Minister, Mamata Banerjee started discouraging state cadre officials opting for central deputation. 

Thus, in 2011, West Bengal had 35 officers of the state cadre at the Centre and by 2017-18, it came down to seven.  

Even in the incumbent Chief Secretary Alapan Bandyopadhyay’s case, BJP leader Survendu Adhikari says he was pressurised by the political bosses. 

Bandyopadhyay had shocked state Governor Jagdeep Dhankhar earlier this month when he went to meet the Governor on summoning but did not submit any formal report to him on post-poll violence. 

So much has been Bandyopadhyay’s confidence in the Chief Minister, that he even sought to show disrespect to the office of the Prime Minister.

“We saw in front of our eyes how the PM was treated on Friday. This never happens in any state. The chief minister and chief secretary insulted the PM and governor,” Adhikari said. BJP sources say Prime Minister Modi waited for about 15 minutes and had enquired whether Mamata Banerjee and her chief secretary would be arriving.

My dad was also a 'babu'

Those who are familiar with the functioning of Indian bureaucracy would easily tell the tales of ‘political patronage’ or otherwise in Maharashtra. 

The western Indian state once was considered as a ‘role model’ for efficiency of the babudom in other states. But in the 1990s, the tag ‘Pawar man’ seemed to have made all the difference.

Even in northeast, babus made news. Late Nagaland Governor M M Thomas declined to ‘sign’ suspension order of a Chief Secretary despite the directives of the then Narasimha Rao government and was later ‘replaced’. 

In Assam, once after election results when there was change of government, for days the Chief Secretary and DGP were “untraceable” and even reported as missing.

In 2016, in a surprise move, former Kolkata Police Commissioner Rajeev Kumar was made the new Principal Secretary in the state Information Technology Department by the Mamata regime. This post is normally the preserve of  IAS cadre officers. 

And not to forget, in 2019, Chief Minister staged a dharna extending moral support to Rajeev Kumar vis-a-vis Saradha chit fund scam probe by the CBI.

 A day after swearing-in for the third time as the chief minister of West Bengal earlier this month, Mamata Banerjee quickly made several changes in the ranks of IAS and IPS officers.

In December 2020, the West Bengal government remained 'defiant' and decided not to send the state's chief secretary Bandyopadhyay and police chief to New Delhi in compliance with Union Home Ministry's summons in the wake of a mob attack on BJP chief J P Nadda's convoy. 

St. Anthony's gang: My IAS friend Palungthang in centre

ends 

Move over 'past and prejudice', India not to 'interfere' in internal matters of neighbours

New Delhi: Three small neighbouring countries are hitting headlines these days for different reasons.

But the South Asian 'giant' India wants to give a clear message that it does not interfere in internal matters of neighbouring countries.

The three countries are Myanmar, Sri Lanka and Nepal. In the past the Government of India since the 1970s and 1980s has faced the charge of 'interfering' in internal matters in these countries.

But it has taken "a step back" and essentially wants all the three countries to focus on their issues themselves.

In Myanmar, it is a military coup and an estimated 16,000 people from Myanmar including security personnel and lawmakers are now taking shelter in Mizoram.

In Nepal, the President and the Prime Minister duo have dissolved Parliament. Officially, MEA spokesman Arindam Bagchi said, "We view these as internal matters of Nepal to be dealt by them under their own domestic framework and democratic processes". 

One person in the know confided in this journalist that, "Last few months, we have consciously emphasised let's step back and let the system and people of Nepal figure out what they want to do".

This implies the fresh argument is that ultimately it is "Nepal's constitution" and thus India should stay away and see how things unfold. And the onus is on the people and system in Nepal to "own up" and firm up the entire process.

This is unlike the past; - say even during Manmohan Singh regime. Upendra Yadav, a former foreign minister of Nepal, had told this scribe in 2010 (at Kathmandu) that the issue of 'India's interference' in Nepal was at least "Ardha Satya" if not the entire truth. 

Change is a law

In this context, remarks of a source makes sense; and that says - the moment New Delhi mandarins open up and take a stand either way - one side or the other would say there is "interference".

On Myanmar, India's usual stance for decades used to be that democracy should return to that small nation bordering four sensitive and insurgency-hit Indian states of Mizoram, Nagaland, Manipur and Arunachal Pradesh.
In the process, for years, India has pushed the ruling military regime in Myanmar towards China.
But now there is a a policy of deliberate restraint. In fact, the Home Ministry has gone a step further by ordering the Chief Secretaries in these four northeastern states not to allow entry of 'Myanmar refugees'. 

The centre has also clarified that no state government has the power to declare any group of incoming people as 'refugees'.

Due to diplomatic and strategic issues, the Indian government has not recognized the incoming people from Myanmar as refugees.

In April, India condemned "any use of violence" in Myanmar. "We believe that the rule of law should prevail. We stand for the restoration of democracy in Myanmar,” MEA spokesman Arindam Bagchi has said. Similarly, there is another issue in Sri Lanka.

In terms of a raging debate over the China-backed Colombo Port City project in Sri Lanka, a source in the government maintains that - "at this point we think there are discussions within Sri Lanka....., queries and questions, what are the implications of this for Sri Lanka itself". 

The source also says, "the concerns that the Sri Lankans have themselves raised are addressed within the framework of the Sri Lankan democracy and that if there are other issues to it, it should follow the principles of transparency".

New Delhi has not yet formally raised this issue with Sri Lanka. But it goes without stating that Indian Ocean is definitely a matter of concern for India.

Therefore, the concerns on this matter are evident. This project is at a distance of about 300 kilometres from India. 

The project has been in the works for a while. The Sri Lankan parliament lately approved the Colombo Port City Economic Commission Bill but the Opposition parties are against it and say the project would lead to the creation of a Chinese colony in Sri Lanka. 

The theme being - enough people had alleged India of 'interfering' in the past; but India is not doing so now.

ends 

Mamata's 'absence' in PM meeting for Cyclone get snub from Guv and BJP leaders ::: Mamata’s storming of CBI office can set a bad precedent, says CBI

New Delhi: BJP chief J P Nadda on Friday said West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee skipping the meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi on cycle Yaas was "murder of constitutioal ethos".

PM reviews cyclone situation with Odisha CM: May 28

The state governor Jagdeep Dhankar flayed the conduct of the Chief Minister and the state officials while Leader of the Opposition in the state assembly, Suvendu Adhikari, termed it "a dark day". 

"When Hon PM Shri @narendramodi stands strong with the citizens of West Bengal in wake of cyclone Yaas, Mamata ji should also set aside her ego for the welfare of people," Nadda tweeted.

"Her absence from the PM’s meeting is murder of constitutional ethos and the culture of cooperative federalism," he wrote.

In another missive in the micro blogging site, the BJP chief further wrote: "PM @narendramodi ji holds the principle of Cooperative federalism very sacred & has been actively working with all CMs irrespective of party to give relief to the people. Unsurprisingly @MamataOfficial (Mamata Banerjee)'s tactics and petty politics has once again come to haunt the people of Bengal".

Suvendu Adhikari, Leader of the opposition in state assembly, in his tweet shared photographs of

PM with other opposition leaders like Omar Abdullah and Jayalalitha and wrote:

"On previous occasions, PM @narendramodi  has reviewed floods, cyclone situations with different CMs who 

belonged to non-NDA parties. None of these CMs behaved the way Mamata Didi behaved today. 

There is a time for politics and a time for governance. Didi can’t comprehend that".

 

In another missive Adhikari wrote: "Today is a dark day in India’s long-standing ethos of cooperative federalism, a principle held sacred by PM @narendramodi. CM Mamata Banerjee has shown once again that she is insensitive to the sufferings of the people of West Bengal".

In his tweet, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh wrote in Hindi: "Such behaviour meted out to a Prime Minister who goes to extend aid to the state during a natural calamity is painful".

Ms Banerjee skipped the meeting chaired by PM Modi for reviewing the damage caused by Cyclone Yaas.

The state Governor Jagdeep Dhankhar in his missive said by such conduct "neither public interest nor interest of  state has been served".

"At the Review Meet by PM #CycloneYaas to assess damage caused. CM and officials @MamataOfficial did not participate. Such boycott bot in consonance with constitution and federalism.

Certainly by such actions neither public interest nor interest of state has been served". 

Mamata’s storming of CBI office can set a bad precedent, says CBI

New Delhi : West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee’s conduct in storming into the CBI office in Kolkata can set a bad precedent and “unless checked”, this could be "replicated" in other states as well, the CBI told the Calcutta High Court on Thursday.

Appearing for CBI in the high profile legal battle on Narada bribery investigation, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said henceforth the issue of concern is not merely about “bail” for the Trinamool leaders. The more important issue is that such strategies - of storming into CBI offices - “can be adopted by politicians, gangsters and members of particular communities".

During the hearing Mehta submitted that the proceedings held before the special CBI court be nullified.

However, he said, "My submissions should not be seen as casting aspersions on the special court judge who granted bail. The issue is that proceedings should not be perceived as not inspiring public confidence". 

The observations came during the hearing of the Narada bribery scam in the court after the Supreme Court on May 24 said the CBI was at liberty to initiate actions against Mamata Banerjee and her Law Minister Moloy Ghatak.

".....Proceed against them if you wish to," the Supreme Court said, perhaps giving a virtual green signal to the CBI to initiate action or legal proceedings if it wished.

CBI sources have earlier said the entire hearing in the trial court on May 17 that gave bail to the arrested leaders were “vitiated”.

Mamata’s trusted aides Firhad Hakim, Subrata Mukherjee, Madan Mitra and Sovan Chatterjee, who had quit Trinamool on eve of elections, were arrested in Kolkata on May 17.

Two of them arrested by the CBI were Ministers and within minutes Mamata Banerjee herself stormed into the CBI office. 

While her Law Minister Ghatak made himself available at the trial court, thousands of TMC workers and supporters staged noisy protests in front of the CBI office in Kolkata and also in front of the Raj Bhawan.

Further hearing in the case is expected on Friday, May 28.

Technically speaking, the CBI is yet to challenge the bail order per se. On May 17 late evening, the Calcutta High Court had given a stay to the trial court order for bail and accordingly the arrested leaders were sent for judicial custody in the city’s premier Presidency Jail and two of them were taken to hospitals.

However, in a subsequent hearing the court in a split order said the arrested leaders including two ministers should be kept under house arrest and allowed to discharge their administrative responsibilities through virtual meetings.

Trinamool Congress observers say Mamata Banerjee was particularly irked by the CBI’s move to arrest Firhad Hakim – whom she treats not merely as a party colleague but more like her brother.

Farid Hakim was also made Kolkata’s first Muslim mayor since independence. If that is not enough to suggest Mamata’s ‘blessing’ for Hakim, he was also made the chairman of Tarakeswar Temple Trust, certainly remaining indifferent to Hindu sentiments.

The CBI is probing the Narada tape-bribery scam following a Calcutta High Court order issued in 2017.
Now, a five-judge bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal, Justices IP Mukerji, Harish Tandon, Soumen Sen and Arijit Banerjee is hearing the case.

ends 

Why and when Narendra Modi was 'darling' of western media, Chinese officials ?

A section of the middle class perceives Narendra Modi as a super-CEO. One of his biographers, Nirendra Dev, points out that he “functions like a modern day CEO laying emphasis on the outcome and often allegedly putting the rules and normal norms in the backburner” (Modi to Moditva: An Uncensored Truth, 2012). 

- thus wrote Christophe Jaffrelot, a noted French scholar and analyst

On May 26, 2021, Narendra Modi completed his seven years in office. All international headlines have changed over the decades. Now, no western media can see any virtue in Prime Minister Modi.

But years back when the same Modi was Gujarat Chief Minister and was just one of the possible candidates as PM-candidate, the same western media and even Chinese authorities had a lot of laudatory words and phrases kept reserved for him.
Why both the western media and China developed an abhorrence of Modi? 

Is it linked to Modi's assertive diplomacy when it comes to dealing with China and whether his explicit Hindutva stance has irked the Christian lobby in the west?

In the past, William Antholis, managing director of the Brookings Institution and a senior fellowin Governance Studies, had summed up his opinion on Modi stating - "....this was a man (Modi) America needed to know better...He has successfully tackled some of India's toughest problems. One thing is certain - he will continue to be a force in Indian politics".

'The Economist' in its July 7th, 2011 edition had remarked: "So many things work properly in Gujarat that it hardly feels like India".

Sometime in 2007-08, Canadian heavy machinery company Bombardier had won a contract to supply compartments to Delhi Metro. It needed a factory site. In Savli the factory was set up in just 18 months.

It was stated that the speed at which things moved braving all bureaucratic bottlenecks, the Bombardier director was impressed and he hailed it as a "world record within Bombardier". This episode too was widely reported in the western press.

BBC had covered Gujarat mayhem of 2002 extensively. But ten years later in its report on the eve of a decade of the mayhem, it admitted, "whilst the controversy is still being debated; it is not stopping business from flowing in Gujarat". 

The website journalism was just trying to brave through the dot.com failure era. But rediff.com was a prestigious site then and in an article it had noted: "The success of Gujarat has today put it in a place where it can negotiate and navigate international relations of direct economic consequence to it without being held back by the timidity in New Delhi".

Ram Temple at Ayodhya: Is this an issue

The western media and others hailed Modi's 'super CEO' style of functioning. 

In March 2014, Christophe Jaffrelot wrote in an 'Indian Express' article: "....a section of the middle class perceives Narendra Modi as a super-CEO. One of his biographers, points out that he “functions like a modern day CEO laying emphasis on the outcome and often allegedly putting the rules and normal norms in the backburner” (Modi to Moditva: An Uncensored Truth). 

IndianExpress link

Michael Kadoorie, a Hong Kong billionaire and chairman of Asian Power, hugged Modi in public during Vibrant Gujarat Summit and had said: "I would encourage you all to invest here". 
Ron Somers, head of an US trade group, called Modi a "progressive leader".

In terms Modi's equations with Chinese leaders, incumbent president Xi Jinping, has not been his first friend from China.

In 2011, Chinese envoy to India, Zhang Yan had reached out to Modi and expressed his country's interest to work together to sharpen Gujarat's industrial and manufacturing edge.

He also invited Modi to visit China.

In fact, according to observers, the Chinese invitation was seen as 'astute political move'. Some years ago, in 2005, the US had denied him visa. It was thus argued that the Chinese authorities were making calculated investment in the future. During Modi's visit to China, senior Chinese dignitaries hosted him at banquets. 

Half Glass: Full or Empty: Who is right ?

Even some sections of US officials were changing their stance gradually.

In 2012, the US Congressional Research Service said Gujarat under Modi had emerged as a good example of 'effective governance'.

Therefore, now an imperative and puzzling question is why all these changed all of a sudden?

ends    

Organiser Link   

Vaccine Maitri to help India get Mehul Choksi; New Delhi favours 'probe process' on Wuhanvirus 

New Delhi: The prophets of doom may get another knock on their noses as the Vaccine Maitri of the Modi government may help India get back the fugitive diamond trader Mehul Choksi.

Sources said the Indian government is pursuing with both the Antiguan and Dominican governments and authorities to get back Choksi who is wanted in India in the PNB scam.

Mehul Choksi went missing on May 23 around 1700 hours after he left his Jolly Harbour residence in a car in Antigua and later a missing case was filed by the Antiguan police.

Choksi was reportedly 'fleeing' to Cuba but was held in Dominica, based on Yellow Notice by Interpol.

In February 2021, the Indian government in pursuance of its much talked about Vaccine Maitri policy had donated Covid vaccines to Dominica and the gesture was well appreciated by the government there.

 
Dominican Prime Minister, Roosevelt Skerrit, in his ‘Thank you’ note to Indian counterpart Narendra Modi and had said, “Thanks to the kindness of the Indian nation, 35,000 Dominicans will be vaccinated by April 2021 India has once again come to Dominica's aid, and this too will not be forgotten.”

The government sources have always maintained that the Vaccine Maitri ought to have positive impact for India winning new friends and strengthening the bond further among existing friends.

Foreign Secretary Harsh V Shringla has said last month during the peak of global assistance during second wave that India is getting the international assistance and support simply based on age-old humanitarian formula, "We have given assistance and so; we are getting assistance".

Now, Choksi's return to India would be another important chapter.

The fugitive diamantaire and owner of Gitanjali group of jewelers has been residing in Antigua and Barbuda after he left India.

He is wanted and charged for criminal conspiracy, criminal breach of trust, cheating and money laundering. 

Wuhanvirus probe and India:  

India is not much concerned about what its own 'opinion' is on the major global controversy that

the Covid19 originated from Wuhan in China. But it certainly favours the "process of investigation" to continue.

"What we say as a nation or personally is not important. We have said earlier also that there should be investigation so that the truth comes out. The issue is the process (of investigation) must be there," a government source said here on Thursday.

"Let us see what comes out. The WHO is an international body, we would like to know what comes out".

The comment of an Indian official in this context is significant as only recently the US President Joe Biden also has said that there must be a probe. 

Biden in a statement on May 26 said, "I have asked the Intelligence Community to redouble their efforts to collect and analyze information that could bring us closer to a definitive conclusion, and to report back to me in 90 days. 

As part of that report, I have asked for areas of further inquiry that may be required, including specific questions for China".

 

A global study, convened by the World Health Organization (WHO), had earlier deemed it “extremely unlikely” that there was a lab leak or so. But final report is yet to come.

However, infectious disease expert Dr Anthony Fauci also director of the National Institute of Allergy and  Infectious Diseases in the US, has said, ".... I think we should continue to investigate what went on in China until we find out to the best of our ability exactly what happened".

ends 

Twitter helped Trump win in 2016 and ensured defeat in 2020 : CBI may 'proceed against' Mamata ‘subverting' law, says Supreme Court

New Delhi: ".....Proceed against them if you wish to," the Supreme Court gave a virtual green signal to the CBI to initiate action or legal proceeding against West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and state Law Minister Moloy Ghatak for their alleged role attempted to subvert the rule of law when prominent Trinamool leaders were arrested.

Trinamool leaders and Mamata's aides Firhad Hakim, Subrata Mukherjee, Madan Mitra and Sovan Chatterjee, who had quit Trinamool on eve of elections, were arrested by the CBI in the Narada sting case.

Mamata Banerjee resorted to her antics and rushed to the CBI office on May 17 after her colleagues were arrested and passed 'derogatory and defamatory' comments about the probe agency. CBI counsel and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the Supreme Court on May 25 (Tuesday) that Mamata sat on dharna for six-long-hours, while an unruly mob continued to swell in an organized way, causing obstruction to the functioning of the CBI.

The CBI said a large number of Trinamool Congress workers and supporters laid siege on the CBI building at Nizam Palace in Kolkata and tried to disrupt the process of law.

Justices Vineet Saran and B R Gavai said they did not approve of the conduct of the chief minister (Mamata) and state Law minister (Ghatak) in laying siege to the CBI office.

The bench said, “Why should the accused persons be made to suffer because of a dharna by the chief minister and Law minister?…Proceed against them if you wish to.” Now it will be for the CBI to take a decision and initiate action against Mamata Banerjee and her Law Minister.

The Calcutta High Court on Friday ordered the house arrest of the two Bengal ministers Firhad Hakim and Subrata Mukherjee and two others Madan Mitra and Sovan Chatterjee in connection with the Narada sting case.

The CBI has also sought transfer of the Narada bribery case over the citing the 'extraordinary circumstances' wherein West Bengal Chief Minister sat on a dharna at the CBI office. 

However, the Supreme Court also wondered who is more in a position to influence the witnesses in the Narada case - those who were chargesheeted or those who have not been.

The five-member bench of the Calcutta High Court would now hear the case.

In the 52-hour footage videographed in 2016, Trinamool leaders Mukul Roy, Sougata Roy, Kakoli Ghosh Dastidar, Prasun Bannerjee, Suvendu Adhikari, Aparupa Poddar and Sultan Ahmad (now deceased) and state ministers Madan Mitra, Subrata Mukherjee and Firhad Hakim and Iqbal Ahmed were seen accepting alleged bribes in the form of wads of cash in exchange for extending favours for a non-existent company.

Mukul Roy and Suvendu Adhikari are now in the BJP. In fact, Adhikari defeated Mamata Banerjee in the high voltage poll at Nandigram. 

Twitter's confrontation with political parties and ruling regimes is not unique to India.

On Jan 8, 2021, Twitter announced permanent suspension of Donald Trump's account and said, "After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them — specifically how they are being received and interpreted on and off Twitter — we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence".

Co founder and CEO of Twitter, Jack Dorsey

Prior to that confrontation went on for months. At one point in 2019, Trump had complained that Twitter had done "shadow banning" of the Republicans. Contrast these with Nov 12-13, 2016. As 'President-elect' Donald Trump told 'CBS 60 Minutes' : "The fact that I have such power in terms of numbers with Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc...I think it helped me win all these races". 

Indian parliament's standing committee on IT in February 2019 had disallowed its executive director Mahima Kaul to appear before the panel.  BJP lawmaker and now Union Minister of State for Finance, Anurag Thakur, was the chairman of the panel and even BJP patriarch L K Advani was a member of the panel. 

Among others were P Karunakaran of CPI-M and also BJP lawmakers Vinay Sahasrabuddhe and Praesh Rawal. 

Twitter had fought with the US Congress and also legislature bodies of Singapore and European Union.

Now that the Twitter-Delhi police has come to the fore, various pros and cons are being debated.

BJP's Guru Prakash now says the Congress seems to have found an 'ally' in Twitter in its long drawn battle against the Modi government. For his part, Congress leader Salman Khurshid, also a former External Affairs Minister, says Delhi cops visiting the micro blogging platform's Gurugram and Delhi offices was like 'browbeating' the site.

Congress national convener Ruchira Chaturvedi even joined the bandwagon where 'demands' have started with hashtag #BanTwitterInIndia.

“And bhakts are trending #BanTwitterInIndia on Twitter. Didn’t they say they were moving to Koo? They are still here?” tweeted Ms Chaturvedi.

Advani was member of IT panel of MPs

After the US Presidential elections, it came to light even in the western media that much of the political content Americans saw on social media was actually 'not produced by human users'. 
It was reported one in every five election-related tweets from Sept. 16 to Oct. 21 in 2016, - that incidentally Trump won against Hillary Clinton was generated by computer software programs called social 'bots'.

In circa 2020, Scott Nover wrote: "Joe Biden may have won, but it was Twitter’s election".

Nover is a Washington-based reporter who writes about social media for Adweek.  

Bots are not only something fake and artificial and misleading, more importantly, they are biased.

Bots 'supporting' one candidate or political party 'A' can systematically produce overwhelmingly positive tweets in support of that particular view(s) about the candidate or party.

Studies across the world showed that this systematic bias can alter public perception and has influenced public mind. This is what makes social media platforms powerful and lethal. 

According to government sources, in India, these bots have been largely popular among Left-liberal thinking and political parties and hence have certainly put BJP and Prime Minister Narendra Modi in poor light.

Even the 'blue tick' measurement is most often misleading. It gives impression of genuine 'tweets' but they have been pro-Congress and anti-BJP in India. Around 2020 Presidential elections, these worked against President Trump and if analysts are to be believed, this resulted in Trump's defeat. 

Even Democrats got a pleasant surprise when the poll results came in.  The bots actually creates the 'false impression' that there is grassroots, positive, sustained support for a certain candidate or party. BJP believes these worked in India during anti-CAA protest and more recently during farmers protest.

Experts say Twitter provides metadata about the physical location of the device used to post a certain tweet. These create an impression that the tweets are localised but the fact could be bots operations may be in places like Georgia and Mississippi in the US. 

Even the BBC reported on Nov 4, 2020 that "Twitter had earlier taken similar action over a post in which Donald Trump said for the first time that his opponents "are trying to steal the election".

In India too, BJP leaders and sympathisers know pretty well how anti-Modi and anti-governments have been sharing more time and space on social media.

Many say, the popular microblogging site has given unto itself a new role.

It is no longer a technology enabler platform and hence rules of the game must change and if 'Twitter takes on the role of an editor', the FDI policies on the foreign media should fall on them, says a BJP leader.

ends 

Christian-majority Mizoram sheltering nearly 16,000 refugees from conflict-torn Myanmar 

Bloomberg Quint snap

Thousands of people from Myanmar, most of them Christians, are fleeing to bordering Mizoram state in India as the military continues its crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators in the Buddhist-majority nation.

Mizoram state has officially informed the federal government in New Delhi that nearly 16,000 Myanmar refugees are now residing in the state, which neighbors Myanmar’s Chin state.

Most who fled to India share an ethnic affinity with Mizo people in Mizoram and have family relations with people in the Christian-dominated state.  

In a letter to India's Ministry of External Affairs, senior Mizoram government official H. Rammawi said 15,438 people from Myanmar have taken shelter in Mizoram.

“The number of Myanmar refugees in Mizoram is increasing day by day,” he said.

State capital Aizwal alone has more than 6,000 people who fled Myanmar, according to the letter. With some 300,000 people in Aizwal, the influx would mean a 2 percent increase in the city’s population.

“The official figures might be still on the conservative side as many Myanmar nationals were staying in the homes of their relatives in Mizoram without disclosing their Myanmar background,” said Mozez Sailo, a social worker in Aizawl.

The refugees are residing in camps and individual houses with support from NGOs and social workers, Sailo said.

Christians, mostly Baptists and Presbyterians, make up about 87 percent of Mizoram's 1.15 million people. Catholics number only some 40,000. Mizoram Chief Minister Zoramthanga’s Mizo National Front (MNF) is an ally of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s pro-Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

Mizoram CM Zoramthanga recently said that the state would welcome any ethnic Mizo or other Myanmar citizens facing persecution for participating in pro-democracy protests in Myanmar.

The exodus of Myanmar refugees, mainly belonging to the Mizo ethnic group in Chin state, began following a brutal military crackdown on protesters in February.

The military, which took power by disposing of the elected government in a Feb. 1 coup, is continuing its armed action to crush a civil disobedience movement.

Sources said those who fled Myanmar include government employees, policemen and fire service personnel after the junta ordered them to take action against anti-coup protesters.

A Mizoram state official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said those who fled to Mizoram include at least 20 lawmakers elected in Myanmar’s November 2020 general election.

India shares an unfenced border stretching 1,643 kilometers with Myanmar, covering the four Indian states of Mizoram, Nagaland, Manipur and Arunachal Pradesh. Mizoram alone shares a 404-kilometer porous border with Myanmar.

Due to diplomatic and strategic issues, the Indian government has not recognized the incoming people from Myanmar as refugees.

The federal Home Ministry headed by Modi's trusted lieutenant Amit Shah recently directed the chief secretaries of four northeastern states “not to entertain” Myanmar refugees.

The federal government has also instructed para commandos of an anti-insurgency crackdown force to seal the border and prevent entry from Myanmar.

India does not have a national refugee protection framework. A Home Ministry letter to state governments said they have no power to grant refugee status to any foreigner and India is not a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention of 1951 and its 1967 Protocol.

Myanmar’s General Min Aung Hlaing has declared a state of emergency for one year. Close to 5,000 people have been arrested, including politicians, journalists, lawyers and community workers.

Thousands have gone into hiding or have fled across the borders into exile. Nearly 800 have been killed by the police and military since Min Aung Hlaing seized power.

see link 

UCAN report