2020 ജൂലൈ 14, ചൊവ്വാഴ്ച

Iran, China set to clinch 25-year deal Beijing will get larger role in Chabahar

 

Iran and China are close to finalising a 25-year Strategic Partnership which will include Chinese involvement in Chabahar’s duty-free zone, an oil refinery nearby, and possibly a larger role in Chabahar port as well.

According to leaked versions of the 18-page “Comprehensive Plan for Cooperation between Iran and China”, being finalised by officials in Tehran and Beijing, the cooperation will extend from investments in infrastructure, manufacturing and upgrading energy and transport facilities, to refurbishing ports, refineries and other installations, and will commit Iranian oil and gas supplies to China during that period.

Railway project

The proposed tie-up comes even as Iran decided last week to go ahead on its own with the construction of a railway line from Chabahar port to Zahedan, in Afghanistan for which an MoU had been signed with the PSU Indian Railways Construction Ltd (IRCON) four years ago.

The MoU, signed during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Tehran in 2016, was to construct the Chabahar-Zahedan railway as “part of transit and transportation corridor in trilateral agreement between India, Iran and Afghanistan”.

However, despite several site visits by IRCON engineers, and preparations by Iranian railways, India never began the work, ostensibly due to worries that these could attract U.S. sanctions.

The U.S. had provided a sanctions waiver for the Chabahar port and the rail line to Zahedan, but it has been difficult to find equipment suppliers and partners due to worries they could be targeted by the U.S., said officials.

The Ministry of External Affairs and IRCON declined to comment. However, asked if the MoU with IRCON had been cancelled, an official said India could still join at a “later date.”

Iranian officials denied a report that also suggested Chabahar port, where India took charge of operations at one terminal last December, would be leased to China.

However, Iran proposed a tie-up between the Chinese-run Pakistani port at Gwadar and Chabahar last year, and has offered interests to China in the Bandar-e-Jask port 350km away from Chabahar, as well as in the Chabahar duty-free zone.

Each of those possibilities should be watched closely by New Delhi, said former Ambassador to Iran, K.C. Singh. “[The Iran-China deal] impinges on India’s “strategic ties” with Iran and the use of Chabahar port,” he cautioned.

(With inputs from Yuthika Bhargava)


Iran drops India from Chabahar rail project, cites funding delay IRCON had signed MoU with Iranian Railways in 2016
 
No more waiting: Iran has begun laying tracks for the 628 km line which will be extended to Afghanistan.

Four years after India and Iran signed an agreement to construct a rail line from Chabahar port to Zahedan, along the border with Afghanistan, the Iranian government has decided to proceed with the construction on its own, citing delays from the Indian side in funding and starting the project.

Last week, Iranian Transport and Urban Development Minister Mohammad Eslami inaugurated the track-laying process for the 628 km Chabahar-Zahedan line, which will be extended to Zaranj across the border in Afghanistan. Officials told The Hindu that the entire project would be completed by March 2022, and that Iranian Railways will proceed without India’s assistance, using approximately $400 million from the Iranian National Development Fund.

The development comes as China finalises a massive 25-year, $400 billion strategic partnership deal with Iran, which could cloud India’s plans.

Trilateral agreement

The railway project, which was being discussed between the Iranian Railways and the state-owned Indian Railways Construction Ltd (IRCON), was meant to be part of India’s commitment to the trilateral agreement between India, Iran and Afghanistan to build an alternate trade route to Afghanistan and Central Asia.

In May 2016, during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Tehran to sign the Chabahar agreement with Iranian President Rouhani and Afghanistan President Ghani, IRCON had signed an MoU with the Iranian Rail Ministry.

(With inputs from

Yuthika Bhargava)


2020 ജൂലൈ 13, തിങ്കളാഴ്‌ച

To whomsoever it may concern in the INC The Congress Party needs to reinvent itself and work in a sustained manner if it is to stay politically relevant

 
Ritu Raj KonwarRitu_Raj_Konwar;Ritu_Raj_Konwar - Ritu Raj Konwar

India is facing turbulent times calling for statesman-like leadership to handle the complex task of rebuilding the nation affected by the twin challenges of economic troubles and the health pandemic. The premise here is that the Indian National Congress (INC) has a golden opportunity to reinvent itself as the Bharatiya Janata Party-led coalition government seems clueless about how revive the economy as well as gain the trust of the poor and the working class after the handling of the lockdown in an inhumane way. The INC should use the time between now and the next Lok Sabha elections, in 2024, to be in the reckoning.

The interim President of the INC, Sonia Gandhi, its past President, Rahul Gandhi, and leaders such as P. Chidambaram, to name only a few, have no doubt, raised the right questions and tried to cause embarrassment to Prime Minister Narendra Modi. But sadly that by itself is not enough. The party should come up with alternative policy perspectives to deal with the complex challenges facing the country.

It is appropriate to recall that a few thinking members of the party, such as Shashi Tharoor, Jairam Ramesh and Sanjay Jha, have expressed opinion on the need for not only serious introspection at the top level but also institutional reforms within the party. The following are some of the suggestions if the project of a revival of the Congress party is to bear fruit.

Tap talent

The party should constitute a Committee comprising talented partymen and outsiders drawn from public life who carry credibility and entrust them with the task of holding organisational elections at the national and State levels in an impartial and transparent manner in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic. There must be an emphasis on bringing in young blood to man party positions to keep the party future ready. Let it not be forgotten that Mrs. Indira Gandhi had Young Turks to usher in her socialist programmes after 1969; Rajiv Gandhi too had his own young team to work towards his vision of a technology-driven India. The United Progressive Alliance regimes too brought in some young people but failed to exploit their potential to the full as Sonia Gandhi who virtually held the reins of power was reluctant to give a free hand to the younger elements in the government.

It is also necessary to de-emphasise the role of the high command, which is antithetical to a vibrant democratic functioning of the party. While there seems to be a strong case for the Gandhi family to be kept out, it may not happen, sadly, because of the sycophancy of the old guard with whom Sonia Gandhi is comfortable and who plead for her continuance as the party chief. The bane of the Congress leadership has been its reluctance to develop a second line of leadership that is independent of the Gandhi dynasty.

Regain the social base

The party needs to reinvent itself ideologically and while doing so, the narrative should be build around a broad left-of-centre position, in support of the poor and socially economically oppressed sections while also taking into account the aspirations of educated urban voters for whom ideology does not really matter. The party should address itself to the needs of farmers, small and medium-term industrialists, rather than siding with big business.

It needs to make serious efforts to regain its social base among Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes, which has eroded in recent times as borne out by the outcome of the 2019 Lok Sabha and subsequent Assembly elections. Minority appeasement also will not work the way as it used to in the past.

Most crucially, the Congress has to rebuild the morale of its party workers, which stands eroded after successive defeats either electorally or losing power after being in government in rather quick succession in States.

The leadership at the central and State levels will also have to accord priority to enrol new members to the party to make it cadre-based. Figures are not available about recruitment of new members to the party-fold in recent years.

Side by side, serious efforts ought to be made to root out the bane of factionalism in the party. And that can happen if the leadership is persuasive and inclusive in its intent. The high command which has concentrated decision-making powers should make way for decentralised functioning of the party.

At the State level, it has to align itself with regional parties if it has to successfully capture power. More pertinently, the party State-level leadership needs to be nurtured and allowed to function independently keeping in mind the ground realities.

Project views

It is high time the party set up a shadow cabinet at the central level, drew up and publicised its alternative policy prescriptions and presented them in Parliament rather than getting fixated in obstructing official business. Unparliamentary behaviour by members of the Opposition and ruling party members is detested by the public.

Additionally, the party leadership would do well to involve experts in drawing up medium- and long-term solutions to problems which are increasingly becoming complex in the interdependent and technology-driven ecosystem.

In these days of the powerful role played by the media, especially the electronic media which are owned by business houses, the party may have to take the help of some such group to project its image and points of view.

The conclusion is inescapable: The Indian National Congress needs to work tirelessly and strain itself in a sustained manner on all fronts if it has to play an effective role in our democratic polity and to stake its claim for power in future.

P.S. Jayaramu is a former professor of political science, Bangalore University and a former Senior Fellow, Indian Council of Social Science Research

Iran drops India from Chabahar rail project, cites funding delayIRCON had signed MoU with Iranian Railways in 2016

 
No more waiting: Iran has begun laying tracks for the 628 km line which will be extended to Afghanistan.

Four years after India and Iran signed an agreement to construct a rail line from Chabahar port to Zahedan, along the border with Afghanistan, the Iranian government has decided to proceed with the construction on its own, citing delays from the Indian side in funding and starting the project.

Last week, Iranian Transport and Urban Development Minister Mohammad Eslami inaugurated the track-laying process for the 628 km Chabahar-Zahedan line, which will be extended to Zaranj across the border in Afghanistan. Officials told The Hindu that the entire project would be completed by March 2022, and that Iranian Railways will proceed without India’s assistance, using approximately $400 million from the Iranian National Development Fund.

The development comes as China finalises a massive 25-year, $400 billion strategic partnership deal with Iran, which could cloud India’s plans.

Trilateral agreement

The railway project, which was being discussed between the Iranian Railways and the state-owned Indian Railways Construction Ltd (IRCON), was meant to be part of India’s commitment to the trilateral agreement between India, Iran and Afghanistan to build an alternate trade route to Afghanistan and Central Asia.

In May 2016, during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Tehran to sign the Chabahar agreement with Iranian President Rouhani and Afghanistan President Ghani, IRCON had signed an MoU with the Iranian Rail Ministry.

(With inputs from

Yuthika Bhargava)


https://epaper.thehindu.com/Home/MShareArticle?OrgId=GPR7J8MR2.1&imageview=0

2020 ജൂലൈ 11, ശനിയാഴ്‌ച

A raid that left a bloody trailOnly 24 hours after his surrender, Vikas Dubey, a criminal with political connections, was shot dead during an alleged exchange of fire with the police near Kanpur on Friday

A raid that left a bloody trailOnly 24 hours after his surrender, Vikas Dubey, a criminal with political connections, was shot dead during an alleged exchange of fire with the police near Kanpur on Friday. Omar Rashid pieces together the violent events of the past week beginning with the raid that led to the death of eight policemen near Dubey's residence
 
Provincial Armed Constabulary jawans patrol the area of the shootout in Bikru village of Kanpur district of Uttar Pradesh. (Below): PAC jawans eat outside the demolished house of Vikas Dubey.Omar Rashid Omar Rashid
Twenty-four hours after his arrest near a temple in Ujjain, Vikas Dubey met an abrupt and dramatic end on Friday at about 6:45 a.m. Dubey, the history-sheeter accused of shooting dead eight policemen in Kanpur’s Bikru village last week, had attempted to escape after the car transporting him back to Kanpur from Madhya Pradesh overturned, the police said. Dubey snatched a policeman’s pistol and shot at those escorting him, they claimed. As he refused to surrender, the police acted in self-defence and shot him dead, they said. Dubey is the sixth and most significant of the accused in the case to be gunned down, but questions remain over the exact sequence of events of the intervening night of July 2 and 3 in Bikru where eight policemen were killed and where Dubey enjoyed notoriety.

A sudden volley of bullets

On that fateful night, police teams of three stations of Kanpur approached Dubey’s house in Bikru, located 40 km from Kanpur, to conduct a raid. Dubey, who already had 60 criminal cases against him, was wanted in a new ‘attempt to murder’ case. According to police accounts, policemen from Chaubeypur, Shivajpur and Bithoor, led by Circle Officer (CO) Devendra Mishra, reached the village around 1 a.m. After parking their vehicles around 200 metres ahead of Dubey’s house, they started walking. They hadn’t been briefed, said Ajay Kashyap, a constable who survived the encounter.

Bikru’s power lines had been snapped, allegedly after a phone call from the Chaubeypur police station. “We had never been to the village. We didn’t know which lane led where,” said Kashyap in a video statement.

Just a few metres in front of Dubey’s house, the cops found an earthmover, unusually parked to block the road. They decided to proceed. They crawled under the machine’s front portion, one at a time. Once they were on the other side, “somebody from our staff pointed a torch at Dubey’s roof and we spotted two people,” Kashyap said.

Led by Station House Officer (SHO) Bithoor Kaushalendra Pratap Singh, Kashyap and constable Ajay Sengar went towards the left side of the house. But seconds later, the entire police unit came under sudden and indiscriminate firing, allegedly even from semi-automatic weapons, from at least three sides. The assailants, whose exact number and weapons remain a mystery, enjoyed vantage points on the roofs of adjoining houses. The police called the incident a “well-planned ambush”.

The policemen, taken by surprise by the sudden volley of bullets, could not see their targets in the dark. “We started taking cover at different places and then fired back. We could not see the targets but they could see us from above. Every time we moved a little, they fired at us,” Kaushalendra said to a news channel from his hospital bed. He and two constables survived bullet injuries. The assailants fired around 20-22 bullets in the first round, injuring most of the cops, he said.

Archana Rajpoot, who lives 40-50 metres ahead of the point where the earthmover was parked, was sleeping on a cot outside her kutcha house that night. She was woken up by the sound of gunshots. She said she did not know what was happening since it was the middle of the night and pitch dark. As Dubey had a reputation for violence and showboating, Archana thought this was yet another episode of the henchmen going berserk or firing to scare someone away. “I could not hear anything except gunshots. So I decided to go back to sleep,” she said. Archana claimed she did not see policemen walk past her, but said she did see them when they were trying to retreat after the ambush.

The tip-off and the shootout

After his arrest, Dayashankar Agnihotri, Dubey’s domestic help of 25 years, told the police that Dubey had received prior information about the raid through a phone call from the local police station. That had given him enough time to set up the ambush.

On Wednesday, the SHO of Chaubeypur, Vinay Tiwari, and beat in-charge K.K Sharma were arrested on charges of tipping off Dubey. The exact nature of the conspiracy is not known.

After receiving the inputs, Dubey summoned his armed associates, numbering 20-30, over phone. He even fired at the police using a gun registered in his domestic help’s name, claimed Agnihotri, who is now in jail for conspiracy, along with his wife.

Locals believe Dubey orchestrated the ambush as he may have thought the police had come to shoot him dead. In the shootout, eight policemen were killed, and six policemen and a civilian injured. SHO Kaushalendra and his two men sought refuge in a trolley and a dilapidated house before escaping through a lane. Constable Sengar was shot twice in his abdomen, but the bleeding officer thought it was his priority to save his colleague’s life. The other policemen took cover near a dilapidated toilet, which still showcases dark blood stains. Five bodies were reportedly found in its proximity.

CO Mishra, who had previously complained to his senior about SHO Vinay Tiwari for protecting Dubey, met a brutal end. After being shot, Mishra reportedly jumped over a brick wall and took cover in a corner of the inner courtyard of a Pandey family residence. But he was spotted by one of the assailants standing on an adjacent roof. The assailant called out to his accomplices. Soon four men jumped over the wall into the courtyard to kill the CO. Mishra was allegedly shot in the head. There was also an attempt to amputate his leg with an axe, said a policeman now stationed in the village. Dried blood stains on the floor mark the spot where Mishra was killed. The locals said the shootout lasted about 30 minutes.

Remnants of a long night

Locals in Bikru recalled the incident only through the loud sounds of gunshots. The episode has brought grief for Sushma Pandey, whose husband Prem Kumar Pandey was gunned down by the police hours after the policemen were killed in the ambush. The police said Pandey was one of the assailants and Dubey’s accomplice. The imperfectly plastered house of the Pandey family is located a few metres from Dubey’s mansion, now demolished.

Her husband died because of “bad karma” on her part, Sushma said. “I did not open the door for them [the policemen] that night. I was scared. Now I have lost my husband. I didn’t even get to see his ashes,” said a bedridden and sobbing Sushma.

At least two injured policemen banged on her door that night, begging to be let in, before they were killed by the assailants. The men were frantically searching for a place to hide outside, she recalled. It was later found that they had tried to hide under a bench and a motorbike parked in the porch. Sushma recounted their desperate pleas with regret. “They cried, ‘Amma humko bachalo. Hamare chote chote bacche hai. Hum aapka kuch nahi karenge (Mother, please save us. We have little kids at home. We won’t harm you)’,” she said. Initially, Sushma hesitated; the firing outside had numbed her. But she gradually mustered courage and tried to crawl towards the door. By then the men had been silenced by a loud burst of firing. An SHO and a constable were later found dead in pools of blood.

Following the bloodbath, Dubey and his men fled the scene. Soon after the incident, the administration exacted small revenge by demolishing Dubey’s house and crushing his vehicles in broad daylight. The official reason was that he could have hidden a huge cache of arms and ammunition in bunkers within the compound. Six illegal country-made pistols, two kilos of explosives, 15 crude bombs, 25 cartridges and bomb-making material were shown as recoveries.

Dubey’s spacious house earlier boasted of CCTV cameras, big white walls and a large courtyard dotted with neem trees. Dubey, his ailing father, Agnihotri, Agnihotri’s wife and their children used to live in the house, which stood out amid the humble, run-down dwellings in the area. On Monday, when this reporter visited the house, Provincial Armed Constabulary personnel were standing on guard at the wreckage. Most locals have fled the village after the incident. Many homes remain locked. Some youths have been picked up for questioning. The power supply in the village has not been restored. The remnants of the terrible night were visible in blood stains on the ground and gunshot holes in the walls.

The Pandey family

Manu Pandey, Sushma Pandey’s daughter-in-law, witnessed some of the firing from the tiny gap of her window, a few yards away. Manu said she had no idea that it was the police who were being attacked. “Unmein se ek aadmi bola,‘encounter’ karne aaya tha (One of those assailants told another that the CO had come to kill Dubey and his men in an ‘encounter’),” said Manu.

In the morning, when they finally opened the door for the police, apart from the bullet marks and blood stains, the Pandey family discovered that a ladder had been put up against their main door, possibly by the assailants to set up positions.

Manu said she was sleeping in her room with her husband Sashikant, who works in a detergent factory, and their two children, aged seven and three, when the firing drew them out. The couple ran out and headed to the adjoining room where Sushma was waiting for her husband Prem Kumar Pandey to return. After retiring from the detergent factory last year, Pandey was supervising the work of the earthmover, often mandated by the Zilla Panchayat member, who is Dubey’s wife, Richa. Pandey was Dubey’s distant maternal uncle.

Sushma said she asked her son Sashikant to flee the scene as she feared he would be arrested without any reason and his clean record would be tarnished. “For 14 years, she did not let his [Dubey] shadow fall on him when he lived in the factory compounds,” Manu said of her husband, as she wept.

Manu and Sushma claimed that Pandey and Sashikant fled the scene out of fear but had nothing to do with the incident. In official records, however, Sashikant is an ‘accused absconding’ and carries a bounty of ₹50,000 on his head. “Please save my husband. What a curse it has been shifting to this house [a year ago],” said Manu, clutching her two kids. She fears the police might shoot dead Sashikant.

Sushma claimed her husband had no role in the violence. But on second thought, she also does not rule it out. “You can ask around, nobody will speak a word against him. Such is the fear against him. He would hang people upside down and thrash them,” said Sushma. “It’s possible that my man was also handed a gun and instructed to shoot at the cops owing to the fear he had of ‘Bhaiyaji,’” she surmised.

In a hushed tone, the family said Dubey intimidated everyone, even those who were related to him. He once threatened to get Sashikant transferred to Jharkhand from the local detergent factory if he did not listen to him, claimed Sushma. Manu said she and her husband had been looking to leave the village and shift to a rented flat in Chaubeypur town because the atmosphere of fear was too much to bear.

‘A criminal mentality’

Vikas Dubey was named in 60 criminal cases in Kanpur, with several linked to murder, attempt to murder, robbery, and charges under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, the police said. After the shootout on July 2-3, the assailants fled with an AK-47, one Insas rifle, a Glock pistol, and two 9mm pistols belonging to the police. The first two are yet to be recovered. So is the CCTV recording of the house.

Dubey’s story highlights the typical nexus between errant policemen, criminals and politicians in Uttar Pradesh’s hinterland. He knew politicians across parties, which earned him both adversaries and guardians.

The shocking murder in 2001 of Bharatiya Janata Party leader Santosh Shukla, who then held the rank of a Minister of State, in a police station in Shivli was among the highlights of his criminal record. According to the Uttar Pradesh Special Task Force, Dubey’s animosity towards Shukla started in the 1990s when Shukla and Harikishan Srivastava became political rivals. Srivastava, Dubey’s mentor, was then with the Bahujan Samaj Party. They competed for the Chaubeypur Assembly seat.

In 1996, after Srivastava, who was later elected Speaker of the Uttar Pradesh Assembly, defeated Shukla, Dubey participated in a victory parade for his mentor. Both sets of supporters clashed and a case was filed against Dubey. This made him hostile towards Shukla and culminated in the BJP leader’s sensational murder. However, Dubey was acquitted in the case after the witnesses, all of them policemen, turned hostile.

Dubey was known to use force and his criminal antecedents to secure votes for candidates, especially in his constituency. But he also allegedly committed crimes to grab land and indulged in extortion. In 2000, he allegedly murdered Siddheshwar Pandey, the manager of a college of which, incidentally, Dubey had been a student. He was convicted in the case but a higher court granted him bail. His name was then linked to the murder of a cable operator, Dinesh Dubey, in 2004.

Lallan Bajpai, Dubey’s long-time political nemesis, said Dubey wanted to grab Pandey’s land. Bajpai, who has been chairperson of the Shivli Nagar Panchayat for 22 years, had known Dubey for years. As a young man, Dubey used to watch movies in the cinema hall run by Bajpai, the only one in town then. Bajpai said Dubey had a “criminal mentality” even when he was a teenager. Dubey faced charges of dacoity, assault and intimidation as far back as 1991-92, according to police records. The two of them were in different camps of the Kanpur political tussle. One day, Dubey allegedly shot at Bajpai’s brother, who was lucky to survive. The animosity eventually led to the murder of Santosh Shukla, whom Bajpai considered his mentor. Bajpai said Dubey had tremendous influence. He had the power to shift 10,000 votes in nearby villages to any party he wanted, he said. “But mind you, that wasn’t because of his popularity, it was because people feared him,” said Bajpai.

In 2000, Dubey, while he was lodged in jail, allegedly orchestrated the murder of one Ram Babu Yadav in Shivli, in rural Kanpur, through his associates, the police alleged. Then, in October 2017, Dubey was arrested by the Special Task Force in Lucknow in connection with a murder case. Police had accused him of allegedly applying pressure on the complainant and witnesses to submit affidavits in his favour. During questioning, a video of which was widely shared on social media recently, Dubey, then carrying a reward of ₹25,000, disclosed his political links. He mentioned the names of two sitting MLAs, a block pramukh, a zilla panchayat head and several pradhans. The MLAs, however, distanced themselves from him. One of them even said Dubey’s strategy was to show his clout by aligning himself with political leaders of ruling parties.

Recently another attempt to murder case was filed against Dubey. The complaint was filed by one Rahul Tiwari who accused Dubey of assaulting him after he refused to surrender his in-laws’ land to him. It was then that the police decided to raid Dubey’s house.

Tiwari has since gone into hiding. Suman, Tiwari’s mother, said her son was married into a family which has three daughters and an adopted son. The son got married into Dubey’s family in Bikru. The son, empowered by Dubey, wanted to grab all of their six bigha land, while Tiwari was in favour of distributing the land equally among the four, she said. Days before the Bikru ambush, Tiwari was allegedly assaulted by men linked to Dubey, but the police did not file his FIR, said Suman. Then, under the pretext of an “inquiry”, a police team took Tiwari to Bikru village where he was allegedly thrashed, claimed Suman. Dubey had threatened to kill Tiwari if he tilled the land, she said.

‘He helped the poor’

Dubey carried the image of a notorious criminal in Bikru, but locals also recounted tales of how “Panditji”, as he was popularly known owing to his caste, helped families. He would give them money to get their daughters married or for medical treatment and even intervened in disputes, they said.

Dubey had been a Pradhan and a Zilla Panchayat member, posts that are now held by his sister-in-law and wife, respectively. Since he enjoyed political power, he was also able to use his clout to get the poor jobs in factories, said locals. There are several plaques in the village bearing the Dubey family name.

Most locals claimed that they had locked themselves up the night of the shootout and had little knowledge about the incident. When asked about Dubey’s criminal image, Paras, a caste Hindu, who was holding a Hindi language newspaper carrying news about Dubey, said: “What can I say about big people? I never interacted with him much. He never harassed me, so I can’t tell you about what the media is saying.”

Questions on death

Dubey, or “Panditji”, is dead, but the Uttar Pradesh police have vowed not to rest till they bring the remaining accused to justice. Twelve of the accused are still on the run.

Meanwhile, Opposition parties have questioned the manner in which he was killed. The notorious criminal has been eliminated, but did the U.P. police deliver justice to the families of the slain policemen and dismantle the nexus behind the crime?

The question lingers.

2020 ജൂൺ 19, വെള്ളിയാഴ്‌ച

China lays claim to entire Galwan Valley

Monday’s clash was reported to have taken place on India’s side of the LAC.

India’s constructions, including a bridge across the river that was completed on Friday and is thought to be one of the triggers for the recent clash, are on India’s side of the LAC, in an area in between the Galwan-Shyok confluence and the line.

While most Chinese maps show almost all of the Galwan river within Chinese territory, the western edge of the river where it meets the Shyok River has not previously been shown as Chinese territory previously in most maps.

By now staking a claim to the entire valley and up to the confluence of the rivers — including on land where India has carried out construction work — Indian officials said China had expanded its claims and was seeking to alter the LAC.

While the LAC has not been demarcated and there are differing perceptions in more than a dozen locations along the LAC, this has not been a point of contention previously in the Galwan area, they said.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry’s statement said: “For many years, Chinese border guards have been patrolling and performing their duties here. Since April this year, the Indian border defence forces have unilaterally continued to build roads, bridges and other facilities in the Galwan Valley region. China has repeatedly made representations and protests on this, but the Indian side has intensified cross-border troubles.”

The statement revealed China sought a commitment from India to “not cross the Galwan estuary to patrol and build facilities”, underlining its claims up to the confluence.

The statement claimed that in the early hours of May 6, Indian border guards “crossed the line into the Chinese territory in the Galwan Valley area by night, constructing construction barriers, blocking the normal patrol of the Chinese border guards, deliberately provoking incidents, and attempting to unilaterally change the status of border control.” It said that “at the strong request of the Chinese side” India had “agreed and evacuated the personnel and facilities beyond the line”.

The statement claimed that at the June 6 Corps Commander-level talks, India “promised not to cross the Galewan Estuary to patrol and build facilities, and the two sides agreed to withdraw the troops in batches through a meeting of local commanders.” It repeated China’s statement from earlier this week that blamed India for the June 15 violence.

On Friday, a Chinese strategic expert cited “historical rights” going back to the Qing Dynasty to claim the entire valley.

“Multiple accounts from the Qing Dynasty [1644-1911] and Western literature have recorded that the Galwan Valley was China's territory. Based on the principle of ‘historic rights,’ China has jurisdiction over the valley area,” Zhang Yongpan, a research fellow of the Institute of Chinese Borderland Studies at CASS, told the Global Times.

He referred to India’s construction activity near the Shyok river as reflecting an attempt “to break into Chinese land”.

“In nearby Shyok River in west Galwan River, India built an airport, constructed bridges, roads and villages. For years, the country has been seeking to break into Chinese land,” he said.

“Chinese maps that I have seen show almost all of the Galwan River as lying within the territory China claims in the area,” M. Taylor Fravel, an expert on the Chinese military at MIT, told The Hindu earlier.

“The one discrepancy would be the western tip of the Galwan River as it meets the Shyok River. Here, the last few kilometres of the Galwan River are often depicted as lying beyond China’s border. How one defines the parameters of the valley itself might be different than the river, however.”

While there was some ambiguity on where the extremities of the valley may be defined, the new statements from China suggest their claim goes up to the confluence of the rivers.

China’s new claims, observers said, may have been triggered by last year’s opening of the vital Darbuk-Shyok-Daulet Beg Oldie (DSDBO) road, that runs parallel to the LAC providing key all-weather access to the post at Daulet Beg Oldie, one of the northernmost points in Ladakh.

China may also be seeking access to areas closer to the confluence, from where it could neutralise the strategically important DSDBO road.

Testing the limits of the capital

Even as COVID-19 cases and deaths are rapidly rising in the capital, the AAP government is grappling with complaints of under-reporting, inadequate facilities and exploitative private hospitals. Nikhil M. Babureports on how it frittered away an opportunity to ramp up healthcare facilities during the lockdown period

On February 29 afternoon, when 45-year-old Rohit Dutta walked into the Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital in New Delhi to take a COVID-19 test, he didn’t think the hospital would ask him to stay the night. The process of getting admitted was “very easy” and the stay “extremely comfortable,” he said. The next day, at around 8 p.m., the doctors said they would move him and three other patients suspected of having COVID-19 to a “better facility,” Dutta said. “They shifted us in an ambulance to the Safdarjung Hospital. We didn’t have to arrange for anything. The next morning, at Safdarjung, three doctors approached me and asked me sit down. I knew then that I had tested positive for COVID-19,” he said.

Dutta, a businessman with a travel history to Italy, was Delhi’s first confirmed COVID-19 case. On March 10, after lunch, he received an unexpected call. It was none other than the Union Health Minister, Dr. Harsh Vardhan, calling to enquire about his health. “He called me on WhatsApp and asked me if I faced any problem. He asked me what I ate. He told me that even the Prime Minister had enquired about my health,” he said. Four days later, Dutta walked out of the hospital relieved and happy, after testing negative twice for the virus.

That was the Delhi of three and a half months ago. Today, the story is starkly different. On June 14, Rohit, 25, clambered onto his scooter. He left his house in Azadpur, in north-east Delhi, in search of a hospital to admit his mother who had tested positive for the virus. “I first went to AIIMS. Then I went to Safdarjung Hospital and then to Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital. None of them had beds despite the Delhi government app, Delhi Corona, showing us beds being available. Finally, I reached GTB (Guru Teg Bahadur) Hospital. There the authorities told me that beds were available,” he said.

But Rohit’s problems did not end there. “I called 102 (the emergency number for an ambulance), but no one answered. I had to pay ₹5,000 for an ambulance to get my mother admitted,” he said, at the parking area of GTB Hospital, where he had spent the previous night. Rohit said his mother, Rajkumari, was miserable in the hospital. Doctors were busy and there was no one to attend to her. “Yesterday, she called me at 12 p.m. and told me that she was not getting water. I bought two bottles of water. I asked many people for help and finally a guard agreed to give her the water. By the time she got the water, it was around 4 p.m.,” Rohit said. Food for her was kept outside the door of her room, but she had trouble walking which made it difficult for her to get it, he said.

The contrast between the two stories paints a picture of the Delhi government’s handling of the COVID-19 crisis. From having an initial grip over the situation, the Aam Aadmi Party government is now fighting several accusations — of delayed decision-making, poor planning, hiding data on the dead, disappearing numbers, and poor testing — even as it grapples with the surging cases. Further, unlike Mumbai, Delhi is yet to cap the charges for treatment of COVID-19 in private hospitals. On June 12, the Supreme Court expressed shock at the videos of the “deplorable conditions of wards” and the “pathetic condition of patients” in Delhi hospitals. The Centre intervened, with Home Minister Amit Shah calling for a meeting with all the stakeholders in Delhi. However, with estimates showing cases rising rapidly over the next two months, the government is worried. Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal described the challenge as being “unprecedented”. The government will do its best to salvage the situation, he said, even as he urged neighbouring States to help create more facilities so that fewer people come to Delhi from these States.

A cluster, and a delayed response

How did things come to such a pass? On April 1, at around 5 a.m., the last bus carrying people from a religious centre in Nizamuddin left the area. A total of 2,346 people had been evacuated from the headquarters of the Tablighi Jamaat, according to the Delhi government. Evacuating them was the government’s first big challenge, and the religious congregation for which they had gathered, one of its first failures.

The religious congregation was held in mid-March despite two orders by the Delhi government restricting the size of gatherings. The attendees of the congregation violated the orders, while the police and the Delhi government failed to enforce the orders. A local police station was hardly 100 metres from the Markaz. In the weeks that followed, about 3,000 people, including those evacuated, were traced to the religious gathering and about 1,100 of them tested positive for COVID-19 in Delhi alone, according to officials. In parallel, the number of healthcare workers and their family members who tested positive too gradually increased.

Though the first case was reported on March 2 and though a huge cluster of cases was reported from Nizamuddin in late March and early April, it was only in June that the government issued a flurry of new orders aimed at fixing basic issues in hospitals. After reports of numerous complaints from people about lack of helplines, lack of help desks in hospitals, and lack of information on availability of beds, on June 2 the Delhi government launched an app to enable people to check the availability of hospital beds. In addition, 1031 was launched as a Central helpline number. On June 4, the government ordered all hospitals to create a 24X7 helpline number for people to register their complaints. On June 6, Kejriwal released a government order that patients suspected of suffering from the disease cannot be denied treatment by any hospital. A June 7 order said that “some patients” are facing difficulties in admission in government hospitals. Hospitals were ordered to set up a 24X7 help desk. Another order on the same day noted that rules were not being followed in “letter and spirit”. A senior nursing officer was to be appointed in each private hospital to monitor the admission of patients.

“Delhi did not do as well as one would expect,” M.C. Mishra, former AIIMS Director, told The Hindu. “These things should have been done in the beginning. Things were not planned properly.” To this a Delhi government spokesperson responded: “Initially, no one expected that the situation would get this big. Also, at different stages our main challenges were different and we kept addressing them. Whenever we noticed issues, we fixed them.”

The sorry plight of patients

Issues have not been fixed, however. On June 16, at the GTB Hospital, there was no help desk, no helpline number displayed, and no LED board displaying the number of beds. Rohit said he could not find any help despite all the government orders. “There is no one to listen to us. The guards are also very rude,” Rohit said. Hospital authorities blamed the Public Works Department for its failure to provide the information on a LED board.

At the Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Narayan (LNJP) Hospital, there is a help desk, and information on the number of beds is displayed, but the hospital has been in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons. There was shock and anger when a video surfaced of a naked body lying under a bed in a ward in the hospital, Delhi’s biggest COVID-19 treatment facility. The Supreme Court took note of the video, but Delhi’s Health Minister, Satyendra Jain, dismissed it as the “mischievous” act of a contract staff.

In the blistering heat, on June 15, Sandeep Kumar, 21, and his father sat on the steps of LNJP Hospital, tired and helpless. “My mother was admitted here on June 9. But they are yet to tell us whether she has tested positive or not. She has breathing issues,” said Kumar. The doctor on duty said people often provide the wrong number or switch off their phones making it very difficult for hospital authorities to reach them.

At the Max Super Speciality Hospital in Patparganj, Divya Sharma, 28, was angry. She had come with her father who was complaining of shortness of breath. She said they had to argue for nearly half an hour with the hospital staff who told them that beds were not available. “They did not allow him inside though he was sweating in an air-conditioned car. His condition was really bad,” Sharma said in the waiting area of the hospital. She went to the hospital because the government app showed beds being available there, she said. In the admission area of the hospital there was no notice displaying the number of vacant beds or the rates for treatment, despite government orders. By 6 p.m., Divya’s father, Sanjay, died at the hospital. Max Hospital refused to comment.

Capping prices

While there are some families like the Sharmas who are being refused admission in private hospitals due to lack of beds, there are other families in Delhi that simply cannot afford private hospitals. Private hospitals in Delhi have been demanding anywhere between ₹2 lakh and ₹8 lakh for COVID-19 testing and treatment even before patients get admitted into hospitals. Responding to reports on the issue, Kejriwal said his government would not allow “black marketing” of beds in private hospitals.

In contrast, in mid-March, the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation announced that private hospitals in Mumbai allocating isolation beds for COVID-19 patients will have to limit their charges per bed to ₹4,000. On May 21, the Maharashtra government said in a notification that 80% of beds in private hospitals would be regulated to ensure that patients are billed according to the government price cap. While the charges for a COVID-19 patient in an isolation ward cannot be more than ₹4,000 a day in the State, the maximum charge for an intensive care unit is capped at ₹7,500 a day, and charges for a ventilator are capped at ₹9,000 a day. Also, items such as personal protective equipment cannot be charged over 10% mark-up on the net procurement cost.

Ten days since Kejriwal made that promise, there are still no details in the public domain of action being taken against Delhi hospitals that are charging such high rates. Nor has the government capped the rates. The Delhi government spokesperson said that they were working, along with the Central government, on capping the prices. “It will happen soon,” she said. On June 19, the Union Home Ministry said that a committee set up by it has recommended capping the price of isolation beds for COVID-19 patients in private hospitals in Delhi in the range of ₹8,000-₹18,000 per day.

Disappearing data

Apart from complaints of exploitative billing, the government is also facing complaints of under-reporting cases and deaths. Delhi has had a serious data problem since the COVID-19 outbreak. First, in the second week of May, The Hindu reported that the total number of COVID-19-related deaths reported by the Delhi government was fewer than the number of deaths being reported by hospitals. The government responded that the hospitals sent data on deaths to a government-appointed death audit committee, and only deaths certified by the committee were counted as part of the official death toll. The government blamed the hospitals for delaying reporting deaths. And thus ensued a blame game between the Delhi government and the city’s hospitals. On May 14, the government stopped releasing the hospital-wise number of COVID-19-related deaths happening in the city.

Second, from April 15, the government stopped providing details of cases “under investigation”. In a “case under investigation”, it is unknown how a patient got infected by the virus, suggesting chances of community transmission. The health bulletin on April 14 had 85 cases that were “under investigation”. After that, the category was simply removed from the bulletin.

Third, data on testing too has been inconsistent. At one point, the government stopped providing details of the number of COVID-19 tests being done and began to provide the data again only after a High Court order on May 4.

Fourth, there has been a drop in daily testing in June. During the first week of June, daily testing fell to 3,700 even though the government had a capacity of 8,600 tests per day. The Delhi government said it was a “momentary drop” and that the number of tests per million of the population in Delhi was higher than the national average.

Fifth, on June 2, the Delhi government issued an order limiting the scope of people who can be tested for COVID-19. Also, eight labs were asked not to collect samples and conduct tests as they allegedly violated Indian Council of Medical Research guidelines.

Finally, the number of containment zones also reduced. On May 18, the Secretary of the Health and Family Welfare Department, Padmini Singla, raised this issue in an order. She said the number of containment zones had gone down despite cases going up. A month since then, the number of containment zones has increased from 73 on May 18 to 247 on June 17.

A controversial decision

Through the months of March, April and May, Kejriwal made multiple statements assuring people that “things are under control” and that “there was no need to panic”. He said on June 2 that “Delhi is four steps ahead of corona”. Sufficient arrangements have been made for a potential increase in cases, he said. But on June 7, he said Delhi government-run hospitals and private hospitals would be reserved only for the residents of Delhi. He cited an expert committee report and suggestions from lakhs of residents who apparently said that Delhi hospitals should be reserved only for the people of Delhi. “The expert committee has said that if we open the hospitals for all, then the 9,000 beds that the Delhi government has kept for COVID-19 patients will be filled within just three days,” Kejriwal said.

The decision came under criticism from many quarters. “It was made overnight. The government shouldn’t have gone forward with it as the High Court had struck down a decision for preferential treatment for Delhiites in the GTB Hospital in 2018,” a Delhi government official told The Hindu.

On June 8, the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi, Anil Baijal, overruled the Kejriwal government’s controversial decision as well as a June 2 order restricting testing. Harking back to a series of Supreme Court judgments, Baijal said that the right to health is an integral part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.

In the next three days, the 9,000 beds in the city did not get filled as Kejriwal said. As on June 17, 4,245 of the 9,647 beds were vacant, according to the Delhi Corona app.

But why did the Delhi government take such a decision in the first place? The capital witnessed its first 1,000-plus daily new cases on May 28. The number of daily new cases has been consistently exceeding that mark since then, except on one day. The committee which recommended restricting access to hospitals was formed on June 2. An earlier committee, headed by S.K. Sarin, formed by the Delhi government, had not made any such recommendation.

“We had made an extensive plan on the need for beds at different stages, based on the recommendations of the Sarin Committee. It included details on when we should start acquiring banquet halls or stadiums. The plan was already in place during the lockdown. And we are ramping up facilities whenever cases reach a particular mark. Our preparations have been ahead of the virus,” the Delhi government spokesperson said.

K. Srinath Reddy, President of the Public Health Foundation of India, does not think so. “The lockdown should have been used to ramp up systems. But that level of organisation and planning has not been done in Delhi,” he said. Mishra said the government panicked. “They thought they won’t be able to cope with the increase in cases. It was an impulsive decision,” he said.

On June 9, the Deputy Chief Minister of Delhi, Manish Sisodia, said after a meeting with the Lieutenant Governor that the latter had not done “any calculation” on the requirement of beds before overturning the government’s decision. Kejriwal said 1.5 lakh beds would be needed by July 31, based on estimates. The AAP government has ordered the Taj Man Singh Hotel to isolate all its rooms and place them at the disposal of the Sri Ganga Ram Hospital. It has began to convert a large tent of the spiritual organisation, Radha Soami Satsang Beas, to a 10,000-bed COVID-19 facility. It has also identified 77 banquet halls which are expected to have 11,229 beds. A panel formed by the government had suggested in June that Pragati Maidan, the Talkatora Stadium, the Thyagaraj Stadium, the Indira Gandhi Stadium, the Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, and the Dhyanchand National Stadium be converted into COVID-19 facilities. “These beds should have been arranged a little earlier. But now work has gathered speed,” the Delhi government official said.

Centre’s intervention

When Baijal overturned the two decisions by the AAP government, the Centre stepped in. Shah reviewed the preparedness of Delhi in a meeting with Baijal and Kejriwal. After the meeting, he said testing would be increased two-fold in the next two days and three-fold after six days. He said testing will begin at every polling station in containment zones after a few days. He promised to provide 500 railway coaches to augment bed capacity. On Wednesday, the Central government capped the price of COVID-19 testing in Delhi at ₹2,400.

Seeing the chaos in Delhi, Dutta said he considers himself lucky for being infected at the beginning of the epidemic and not later on. “What is happening is depressing,” he said. “I would have faced problems if I was infected now. The government did not prepare well.”

2020 ജൂൺ 18, വ്യാഴാഴ്‌ച

Galwan: Postscript to a tragedyApart from insisting on a timely and early clarification of the LAC, India should take a long view of its South Asia policy

 

The night of June 15, 2020 will go down in the annals of Indian history as one steeped in tragedy. Twenty Indian Army personnel, including the Commanding Officer of 16th Bihar Regiment, lost their lives at the hands of Chinese troops in the Galwan Valley of Ladakh. The incident represents a watershed in India’s relations with China and marks the end of a 45-year chapter which saw no armed confrontation involving loss of lives on the Line of Actual Control (LAC). The period of bilateral relations that was inaugurated with former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s visit to China in December 1988 also drew to a close in the darkness of that fateful Monday night.

The incident has deeply shaken the nation. It had been assumed all along that there would be a de-escalation of the confrontation between Indian and Chinese troops in the area after the Corps Commander-level talks between the two sides on June 6. That things went terribly wrong is more than evident. What is the import and significance of what happened in Galwan Valley on June 15? Can it be business as usual with China after this? That would seem unlikely given the manner in which the whole calculus of relations has been disturbed by the incident.

From 1959 to 2020

Nothing on this scale was witnessed even in the run-up to the conflict between the two countries in 1962. In October 1959, there was a face-off between Indian and Chinese troops at Kongka La. Nine Indian soldiers were killed and three soldiers were detained then, including the legendary Karam Singh, the leader of the group who recorded after his release the ill-treatment he and his colleagues had been subjected to at the hands of their captors. It was after Kongka La that the national mood turned against the Chinese in full measure in an atmosphere already complicated by the revolt in Tibet and the granting of asylum to the Dalai Lama in March 1959. There was very little room for a reasoned, negotiated settlement being reached on the boundary question between the two countries after that juncture. The rest is history. The conflict in 1962 inflicted gaping wounds on the national soul and prestige from which India took time to recover.

Is the country at a similar juncture today? 2020 is not 1959. India and China are in a very different place in their history as nations today. They have grown immensely in strength and stature on the world stage and their relations have substance and a diversity of content in a manner absent in the 1950s. To assume that India is on a steep descent from here towards a full-blown conflict with China may therefore be an oversimplification. Both countries must stop that fall despite the terse messaging of statements issued in the two capitals after the incident. The statements are mutually accusatory, with each country disclaiming responsibility for the tragic turn of events. The mood is very sombre.

Assessing choices carefully

Cool-headed thinking is the need of the hour. All this comes at a time when the COVID-19 crisis demands the full attention of the government, the economy needs to recover from the stagnancy of the last few months, the tensions with Pakistan persist, and a dispute over territory with Nepal in the Lipulekh/Kalapani area has been headlined. There is considerable turbulence generated by all this. Even as we mourn the loss of Indian personnel in Galwan Valley, a reincarnated battlefront with China cannot be blindly embraced, however much national pride and prestige are at stake. The implications of such a choice must be carefully assessed. The instant gratification that an eye for an eye may provide, because we have scores to settle, has its attendant complications.

Strong political direction, mature deliberation and coherence are keys to handling the situation. The Army can make tactical adjustments and manoeuvres to deter the Chinese, but a comprehensive China strategy and its determination should devolve on those tasked with national security policy in the highest echelons of the Government of India under the direction of the Prime Minister. The responsibility of effective strategic communication too rests there. A clearer enunciation of the circumstances surrounding Chinese transgressions in Sikkim and Ladakh in the last few months would have been helpful in guiding the scattershot public debate. Were there early warning signs of the seriousness of the situation that could have been defused at the military, diplomatic and political levels so that the disaster could have been averted? We must draw the right conclusions that can help us in the future. The Opposition must not play politics on this issue.

Turning to the future

It is to the future we must turn. It is India that should take the initiative to insist on a timely and early clarification of the LAC. Pockets of difference of alignment as perceived by each side have to be clearly identified and these areas demilitarised by both sides through joint agreement pending a settlement of the boundary. At the same time, India must stand resolute and firm in the defence of territory in all four sectors of the border. Contacts between the two militaries — joint exercises and exchanges of visits of senior Commanders — should be scaled down for the foreseeable future. A border settlement is not envisaged in the short or medium term.

Bilateral relations in other areas will be under considerable strain and soft landings cannot be expected. No leadership-level contact between the top leaders of the two countries can be envisaged in the near term and there is no need for any haste on that front. Diplomatic channels must continue to be open and should not be fettered in any way because their smooth operability is vital in the current situation. Indian businesses in China and Chinese business operations in India can expect the going to be tougher than before. The scenario on trade and investments could encounter similar obstacles. In any case, in areas that impinge on national security, as in the cyber field and in telecommunications, and in technologies that enable spying and surveillance (5G, for instance), stringent controls, exclusions and clampdowns can be expected in the treatment and the entry of Chinese companies in India.

Taking the long view

But beyond all this is the outside world. India’s leverage and balancing power within the Indo-Pacific and the world beyond stems from its strong democratic credentials, the dynamism of its economy, its leading role in multilateral institutions, and the strategic advantage of its maritime geography — an asset possessed by few other nations, and which must be deployed much more effectively to counterbalance the Chinese ingress into this oceanic space that surrounds us. The events in Galwan Valley should be a wake-up call to many of India’s Asian friends and partners enabling a high-resolution envisioning of Chinese aggressiveness. This is also an opportunity for India to align its interests much more strongly and unequivocally with the U.S. as a principal strategic partner and infuse more energy into its relations with Japan, Australia, and the ASEAN. The time has also come for India to reconsider its stand on joining the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. If India is to disengage from economic involvement with China, and build the capacities and capabilities it needs in manufacturing, and in supply chains networks closer home, it cannot be a prisoner of the short term. It is time to boldly take the long view in this area as also on its South Asia policy. Good neighbourhood relations are crucial for national stability and well-being.

Nirupama Rao is a former Foreign Secretary and Ambassador to China


https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10214405882219719&id=1798238530