Category: India

  • India has offered to provide Vietnam with US$300 million to strengthen its maritime security amid rising tensions in the Asia-Pacific region and increasing wariness in both countries about China’s growing military might and assertiveness.

    India’s pledge was made during a visit to India this week by Vietnamese Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh, during which he and his host, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, virtually inaugurated a military software hub in the city of Nha Trang in central Vietnam.

    The Army Software Park is being developed with India’s assistance and is expected to produce software solutions as well as provide information technology services.

    Modi said at a welcome ceremony for Chinh at Hyderabad House on Thursday that Vietnam was an important partner in India’s Act East Policy and Indo-Pacific vision. 

    The Act East Policy is a diplomatic initiative to promote economic, strategic and cultural relations with the vast Asia-Pacific region at different levels. 

    Both countries would “continue cooperation for a free, open, rules-based and prosperous Indo-Pacific,” Modi said.

    This visit from July 30 to Aug. 1 was Chinh’s first trip to India as head of government.


    RELATED STORIES

    Vietnam’s PM visits India to reaffirm strategic partnership

    Vietnam mulls law that may open market to foreign arms firms

    Vietnam hosts its first international defense expo


    The leaders said in a joint communique at the end of the visit that Vietnam and India “agreed to strengthen further their defense cooperation based on common priorities and interests, and to contribute to the stability in the Indo-Pacific region.”

    A package of preferential loans worth US$300 million would be offered for two projects to improve Vietnam’s maritime security, they said.

    They  did not specify details but Indian media said the money would  be spent on procuring two types of patrol boats for the Vietnamese navy.

    In June 2023, India donated to Vietnam a missile corvette, the INS Kirpan, and also sold it 12 high-speed guard boats.

    Rule-based South China Sea

    Maritime security is seen as one of the most important elements of Vietnam-India bilateral relations and they have held regular maritime security dialogues since 2019.

    The joint communique emphasized the importance of “maintaining peace, stability, security and freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea.”

    Both countries are committed to finding peaceful solutions to maritime disputes in accordance with international law, in particular the 1982 U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, or UNCLOS, they said.

    They stressed that UNCLOS is the legal framework for all maritime activities in the region and the basis for all claims over jurisdiction.

    Vietnam, together with other ASEAN countries, and China are negotiating  a code of conduct for parties in the South China Sea. 

    India and the United States are not involved in those talks but the two leaders called in their communique for a rule-based and effective code of conduct that “does not affect rights and jurisdictions of other countries, including those not taking part in the negotiation process.”

    China has warned against what it sees as the “intervention” of outside countries in South China Sea disputes.

    Edited by Taejun Kang.


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Vietnamese Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh has arrived in India on an official visit with security and defense cooperation high on the agenda.

    This is Chinh’s first visit as head of the government and also the first visit by a Vietnamese prime minister to India in 10years. 

    Chinh is the second foreign leader, after Bangladesh prime minister Sheik Hasina, to visit Delhi since Narendra Modi began his third term as India’s prime minister.

    Security and defense are two core “pillars” in Vietnam-India relations, said the office of Vietnam’s prime minister.

    Delhi is one of Hanoi’s seven comprehensive strategic partners – the top tier of bilateral relations – on par with China, Russia and the United States.

    Prime Minister Modi once said that Vietnam is an important pillar of India’s Act East Policy. 


    RELATED STORIES

    Vietnam mulls law that may open market to foreign arms firms

    Vietnam hosts its first international defense expo

    Russian arms sales to Southeast Asia have tanked, report finds


    The two countries signed a Joint Vision Statement on a defense partnership, as well as a memorandum of understanding on mutual logistics support in June 2022 during a visit to Vietnam by India’s defense minister Rajnath Singh. 

    “Vietnam-India defense cooperation went back a long time,” said Yusuf Unjhawala, an Indian defense analyst.

    India donated a domestically built missile corvette, INS Kirpan, to Vietnam in June 2023 and “also sold a number of smaller vessels to Hanoi,” Unjhawala told RFA, referring to high-speed guard boats built in both India and in Vietnam under an Indian credit scheme.

    Indian warship.jpg
    The Indian Navy’s anti-submarine warfare corvette INS Kiltan visiting Cam Ranh port in Vietnam on May 12, 2024. (Vietnam Defense Ministry) 

    India’s naval vessels have been allowed to make port calls in Vietnam.

    “Hopefully this can be elevated to another level with a mutual logistics agreement” to grant the Indian navy better access to Vietnam’s strategic port of Cam Ranh, he said. 

    Maritime cooperation

    Both Vietnam and India are wary of China’s growing military might and assertiveness. 

    Maritime security is seen as one of the most important parts of Vietnam-India bilateral relations and they have held regular maritime security dialogues since 2019.Vietnam is embroiled in an intense territorial dispute with China in the South China Sea and is keen to upgrade its navy and boost its capabilities.

    Vietnam is also looking to diversify its defense industry to end dependence on Soviet and Russian weaponry and India  could provide a promising alternative, the Bangalore-based  analyst Unjhawala said.

    BrahMos Aerospace – a joint venture between India and Russia – is in talks to export its supersonic cruise missiles to Southeast Asian countries including Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam.

    The company has begun delivering shore-based anti-ship missile systems to the Philippines under a US$375-million contract and Vietnam has indicated its interest in acquiring similar missiles, according to the defense intelligence company Janes.

    Giang Rajnath Singh.jpg
    Vietnam’s defense minister Phan Van Giang and his Indian counterpart Rajnath Singh during Giang’s visit to Delhi, June 19, 2023. (Vietnam Defense Ministry)

    RFA’s sources said Vietnam is also exploring possibilities to purchase India’s indigenous medium-range mobile surface-to-air missile (SAM) Akash systems. 

    India has also provided a multi-million-dollar grant to develop an Army Software Park in Vietnam.

    While it is unclear whether any arms contract would be signed during the Vietnamese prime minister’s visit to India, it is almost certain that discussions are underway on strengthening security cooperation, analysts said.

    Edited by Mike Firn.


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • india budget climate change
    5 Mins Read

    India has released its annual Budget this week, with a climate finance taxonomy and spending on resilient crop varieties among the key takeaways for climate change and agriculture.

    This week, Indian finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman presented the country’s annual Budget for a record seventh consecutive year. It was also the first Budget announced by India’s NDA coalition government, which was re-elected for a third straight term in June, led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

    Contrary to expectations, the BJP didn’t win an absolute majority on its own, let alone reach its predicted number of seats that would have given the right-wing party a supermajority in the party. After landslide victories in the previous two elections, that the BJP had to rely on coalition partners to form a government signalled a shift in the national sentiment.

    India voted against religious persecution, segregation and nationalism, rejecting the polarised environment cultivated by the ruling party in the last decade. But another huge factor was largely in the background: climate change.

    The six-week-long elections were held amid heatwaves in several parts of India, leading to record-high temperatures and dozens of deaths. Climate change was missing from candidates’ messaging, despite one of the biggest backlashes against the BJP’s tenure coming from farmers, a group even more adversely affected by the climate crisis.

    The finance ministry this week suggested that India’s annual per capita emissions are a third of the global average – but these have also risen by 93% since 2001. Its climate target (or nationally determined contribution) has been deemed “highly insufficient” by the Climate Action Tracker, with current policies and action rated as “insufficient” too.

    India is now the most populous country, and also the world’s third-largest polluter – it can’t afford to ignore climate change.

    India ups climate investment, to create a climate taxonomy

    india budget 2024
    Courtesy: PTI

    In the Union Budget for the 2024-25 fiscal year, Sitharaman has allotted ₹3,265.53 crores ($390M) to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), a 6% improvement on the ₹3,079.4 crores ($367.9M) set aside last year.

    As part of its efforts to meet its climate goals, India will also develop a climate taxonomy to classify economic activities in line with green commitments and broader environmental goals. “We will develop a taxonomy for climate finance for enhancing the availability of capital for climate adaptation and mitigation. This will support [the] achievement of the country’s climate commitments and green transition,” said Sitharaman.

    According to the UN Environment Programme, taxonomies provide clear science-based definitions, help avoid greenwashing, and help identify eligible assets, activities or projects that are low-carbon, align with climate-friendly economic development, or are environmentally sustainable.

    But while the move has been hailed by some, others have raised concerns about possible greenwashing. “India’s climate finance taxonomy could prove helpful and would be a move towards the ‘Paris alignment’ of finance in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement,” said Sehr Raheja, programme officer at think tank Centre for Science and Environment.

    “Whether the tagging of activities improves finance for climate or brings in risks of greenwashing remains to be seen after it is released,” he added.

    Aarti Khosla, director of consulting firm Climate Trends, said: “The budget lacks timelines for announcements on taxonomy, carbon pricing mechanisms and detailed strategies for mobilising climate finance for adaptation and mitigation efforts in vulnerable communities.”

    Additionally, the Budget allocated ₹220 crores ($26M) for the National Mission for a Green India, a 37.5% hike from last year. The initiative aims to preserve forest cover and protect citizens from the impacts of the climate crisis.

    Major wins for agriculture and smart proteins

    india farmers climate change
    Courtesy: Vipin Kumar/Hindustan Times/Shutterstock

    One of the nine priorities of India’s latest Budget was productivity and resilience in agriculture, a sector that received ₹1.52 crores ($18.15B) for the next fiscal year.

    Sitharaman announced that the Indian government will undertake a comprehensive review of research to develop climate-resilient seeds, and release 109 new high-yielding and climate-resilient varieties of 32 field and horticultural crops for farmers in 2024-25.

    Meanwhile, in the next two years, 10 million farmers would be initiated into natural farming – which emphasises modern ecology, recycling, and on-farm resource optimisation – supported by certification and branding. This will be implemented through scientific institutions and rural councils, alongside the establishment of 10,000 need-based bio-input resource centres.

    The finance minister further outlined plans to shift large-scale vegetable production closer to major consumption centres. “We will promote farmer producer organisations, coops and startups for vegetable supply chains, including for collection, storage, and marketing,” she said.

    The government will also boost the production and marketing of crops like mustard, groundnut, sesame, soybean and sunflower to achieve self-sufficiency in oilseeds and pulses, which are vital sources of plant proteins in the country.

    In another move to help small and medium-sized startups sell products internationally., India will establish e-commerce export hubs via a public-private partnership. A marker of such success is Kanpur-based OatMlk, which last year began exporting its plant-based milk to the UAE and Singapore, and has now landed in speciality stores in the UK.

    The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India is currently working on a regulatory framework for novel foods like cultivated meat. In a move that would potentially interest the smart protein sector, SItharaman announced that the government will set up 100 accredited food safety labs nationwide.

    “We commend the government’s continued dedication to advancing agriculture and food processing, as reflected in the latest budget,” said Sneha Singh, acting managing director of alternative protein think tank the Good Food Institute (GFI) India. She labelled the introduction of climate-resilient crops as “a significant stride towards sustainable agriculture”, and said self-sufficiency in pulses and oilseeds would “create more pathways for value-added products such as plant proteins”.

    “These initiatives will not only enhance food security but also bolster agricultural sidestreams and help localise and accelerate the alternative protein sector,” explained Singh. “Continued support for entrepreneurship, particularly through schemes benefiting MSMEs and startups, is a promising move that will drive growth and innovation in smart proteins, especially cultivated and fermentation-derived proteins.”

    The post What India’s 2024 Budget Means for Climate Change and the Future of Food and Agriculture appeared first on Green Queen.

    This post was originally published on Green Queen.

  • The citizens of India have a problem. In what the media like to call ‘the world’s biggest democracy’, there is a serious, proven conflict of interest among officials in the areas of science, agriculture and agricultural research that results in privileging the needs of powerful private interests ahead of farmers and ordinary people.

    This has been a longstanding concern. In 2013, for instance, prominent campaigner and environmentalist Aruna Rodrigues said:

    The Ministry of Agriculture has handed Monsanto and the industry access to our agri-research public institutions, placing them in a position to seriously influence agri-policy in India. You cannot have a conflict of interest larger or more alarming than this one.

    In 2020, Kavitha Kuruganti (Alliance for Sustainable and Holistic Agriculture) stated that the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee had acted more like a servant for Monsanto — there is an ongoing revolving door between crop developers (even patent holders) and regulators, with developers-cum-lobbyists sitting on regulatory bodies.

    However, the capture of public policymaking space by the private sector is set to accelerate due to a recent spate of memorandums of understanding between state institutions and influential private corporations involved in agriculture and agricultural services, including Bayer and Amazon.

    Corporate capture

    As part of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) and Amazon (June 2023), farmers will produce for Amazon Fresh stores in India as part of a ‘farm to fork’ supply chain. It will see “critical inputs” in agriculture and “season-based crop plans” in collaboration with Amazon based on “technologies, capacity building and transfer of new knowledge.”

    This corporate jargon ties in with the much-publicised notion of ‘data-driven agriculture’ centred on cloud-based data information services (which Amazon also offers). In this model, data is to be accessed and controlled by corporates and the farmer will be told how much production is expected, how much rain is anticipated, what type of soil quality there is, what must be produced and what type of genetically engineered seeds and inputs they must purchase and from whom.

    This has been described as the recolonisation of Indian agriculture, which will eventually involve a handful of data owners (Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet etc.), input suppliers (Bayer, Corteva, Syngenta, Cargill etc.) and retail concerns (Amazon and Walmart-Flipkart — both firms already control 60% of India’s e-commerce market) at the commanding heights of the agrifood economy, determining the nature of agriculture and peddling industrial food. Farmers who remain in this AI-driven system (a stated aim is farmerless farms) will be reduced to exploitable labour at the mercy of global conglomerates.

    This is part of a broader strategy to shift hundreds of millions out of agriculture, ensure India’s food dependence on global finance and foreign corporations and eradicate any semblance of food democracy (or national sovereignty). [1]

    In addition to the MoU with Amazon, an MoU was signed between the ICAR and Bayer in September 2023. Bayer (it bought Monsanto in 2018), which profits from various environmentally harmful and disease-causing chemicals like glyphosate, signed the MoU to help “develop resource-efficient, climate-resilient solutions for crops, varieties, crop protection, weed and mechanization”, according to the ICAR website.

    The ICAR is responsible for co-ordinating agricultural education and research in India, and Bayer seems likely to exploit the ICAR’s vast infrastructure and networks to pursue its own commercial plans, including boosting sales of toxic proprietary products.

    But that’s not all. According to the non-profit GRAIN in its article ‘The corporate agenda behind carbon farming’, Bayer is gaining increasing control over farmers in various countries, dictating exactly how they farm and what inputs they use through its ‘Carbon Program’.

    GRAIN says:

    You can see in the evolution of Bayer’s programmes that, for corporations, carbon farming is all about increasing their control within the food system. It’s certainly not about sequestering carbon.

    Given the seriousness of what is laid out by GRAIN in its article, India’s citizens and farmers should take heed, especially as the ICAR website states that a focus of the MoU with Bayer will be on developing carbon credit markets.

    In a letter (14 July 2024) to Rabindra Padaria, principal scientist at the Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), and Himanshu Pathak, director-general of the ICAR, Aruna Rodrigues says: [2]

    Inking in ICAR’s formal partnership with Bayer (Monsanto) quite simply confirms straightforwardly that the ICAR protects its interest, which is the same as those of Bayer-Monsanto, large chemical/herbicide corporates… the ICAR has ditched its mandate to Indian farmers and farming, which is to promote farmer interests as a priority in an unbiased and objective assessment of what is right and good for Indian farming and food…

    A separate ‘citizen letter’ (20 July 2024) has also been sent to Pathak on the various MoUs that the Indian government has signed with influential private corporations. [3]  Hundreds of scientists, farmer leaders, farmers and ordinary citizens have signed the letter.

    It states:

    Bayer is a company notorious for its anti-people, anti-nature business products and operations in itself and, furthermore, after its takeover of Monsanto. Its deadly poisons have violated basic human rights of peoples across the world, and it is a company that has always prioritised profits over people and planet.

    It goes on to say that it is not clear what the ICAR will learn from Bayer that the well-paid public sector scientists of the institution cannot develop themselves. The letter says entities that have been responsible for causing an economic and environmental crisis in Indian agriculture are being partnered by ICAR for so-called solutions when these entities are only interested in their profits and not sustainability (or any other nomenclature they use).

    The letter poses some key questions such as: Where was the democratic debate on carbon credit markets? How is the ICAR ensuring that the farmers get the best rather than biased advice that boosts the further rollout of proprietary products? Is there a system in place for the ICAR to develop research and education agendas from the farmers it is supposed to serve as opposed to being led by the whims and business ideas of corporations?

    These are fundamental questions given that agriculture is a state subject as per India’s constitution. It is all the more concerning given that the authors of the citizen letter note that copies of the MoUs are not being shared proactively in the public domain by the ICAR.

    The letter asks that the ICAR suspends the signed MoUs, shares all details in the public domain and desists from signing any more such MoUs without necessary public debate.

    However, on 19 July, there were reports that the ICAR had signed another MoU, this time with Syngenta for promoting climate resilient agriculture and training programmes. In response, the authors of the letter state that the ICAR has (again) partnered with a corporation that has a track record of anti-nature and anti-people activities, selling toxic products like paraquat, class action suits against its corn seeds and anti-competitive behaviour.

    Mutagenic HT rice

    It is becoming clear who the ICAR actually serves. Let us return to Aruna Rodrigues and her letter to Rabindra Padaria (IARI) and Himanshu Pathak (ICAR) for additional insight.

    Rodrigues’ letter focuses on the commercial cultivation of basmati rice varieties tolerant to imazethapyr-based, non-selective herbicides. These chemicals can be liberally sprayed on herbicide tolerant (HT) crops because the crops have been manipulated to withstand the toxic impacts of spraying.

    The HT varieties of rice have undergone some form of mutagenesis rather than genetic engineering. Mutagenesis has traditionally involved subjecting plant cells to chemical or physical agents (e.g. radiation) that cause mutations to the DNA in the hope that a resulting mutation may produce a desirable effect in the plant. This kind of mutation breeding has been used for decades but only affects a minority of the plants on the market. Industry watchdog GMWatch says this risky technology (mutagenesis breeding) in the past managed to escape regulation.

    So, this HT crop by the mutagenesis route is not defined as ‘genetic engineering’ (the method usually used to create HT crops) and therefore falls outside the purview of current GM regulations.

    Although the Supreme Court-appointed Technical Expert Committee (TEC) bars HT crops (a) for being a HT crop and (b) on account of contamination of crops in a centre of genetic diversity, it has been a long-standing aim of biotech companies like Bayer (Monsanto) to get HT crops cultivated in India.

    Rodrigues asks:

    Is it a deliberate decision of the ICAR to use the mutagenesis route to produce HT rice varieties (tolerant to imazethapyr) with the explicit objective to bypass the formal regulation of GE crops/GMOs?

    Rodrigues accuses the ICAR of effectively ditching its mandate to Indian farmers, many of whom regard organic farming as their competitive advantage. This step is also a potential threat to India’s export markets, which are based on organic standards, along with the necessary co-surety that India’s foods and farms are not contaminated by herbicides, a consequence of using HT crops.

    By adding a trait for herbicide tolerance, the ICAR is informed:

    ICAR’s action directly impacts this vital issue of contaminating our germ plasm in rice and contravenes a Supreme Court Order of “No Contamination”. Furthermore, our export markets for basmati are in excess of US $5 billion in 2023-24. Your action will also directly impact India’s exports and thereby, impact farmer export potential, incomes and income opportunities that premium prices provide.

    Moreover, Rodrigues asserts that the entire mutagenesis process for HT rice must be elaborated, especially when the mutant variety is for the purpose of human consumption. The ICAR is duty-bound to provide, for example, whether a physical or a chemical mutagen was used, the range of doses used and the toxicity for the said material, the herbicide(s) used to test the HT of the basmati rice being used, the concentrations of the herbicides used and the genetic mechanism by which HT rice through mutagenesis has a resistant gene to imazethapyr.

    While the issue of intellectual property rights for the HT rice varieties using mutagenesis is unclear, the ICAR and IARI have executed a technology transfer agreement of the HT trait for commercial cultivation.

    A failed technology

    In her letter, Rodrigues states that, based on empirical evidence of 35 years of HT crops in the US and Argentina, HT crops are a failed technology: it spawns super weeds, increased herbicide use and no added performance yield. Moreover, for India, HT crops are a perverse use of technology, whether genetic engineering or through mutagenesis, that risks small and marginal farmers’ crops and herbs and plants used in many Ayurvedic medicines because of herbicide drift.  It will also uniquely impact the employment of women in weeding.

    She goes on to state that in the US overall herbicide use has increased more than tenfold since the introduction of HT Crops (1992-2012 figure). In addition, HT crops are designed for monocultures and completely unsuited to Indian small-holder, multi-crop farming: anything not HT will be destroyed, the resistant crop stands, but everything else dies, including non-target organisms.

    The herbicides used with HT crops are also a major human health issue. There is a strong link between glyphosate and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. In relation to this, there are more than 100,000 lawsuits winding their way through US Courts. Glyphosate (used in Bayer’s Roundup herbicide) is also an endocrine disruptor and is linked to birth defects. Rodrigues notes that Monsanto and the US Environmental Protection Agency had both known for over 40 years that glyphosate and its formulations cause cancer.

    Other herbicides used by Bayer include glufosinate (used in its Liberty herbicide), which is acknowledged as more toxic than glyphosate and, like it, is a systemic, broad spectrum, non-selective herbicide. It is a neurotoxin that can cause nerve damage and birth defects and is damaging to most plants that come into contact with it.

    Glufinosate is banned in Europe and not permitted in India. It has been implicated in brain developmental abnormalities in animal studies and is very persistent in the environment, so it will certainly contaminate water supplies in addition to food where it will be absorbed.

    Imazethapyr (contained in Bayer’s Adue herbicide) is also a systemic broad-spectrum herbicide and is banned in some countries and not approved for use in the EU.

    Prof. Jack Heinemann (University of Canterbury in New Zealand) adds that the likes of imazethapyr must be tested for their ability to cause bacterial antibiotic resistance. An important concern given that India’s population has some of the highest levels of antibiotic resistance in the world. Any spread of HT crops would put people at severe risk of resistance and disease.

    Despite these environmental and health concerns, the herbicide market in India is projected to grow by around 54% in the next five years, from USD 361.85 million in 2024 to USD 558.17 million by 2029.

    In her letter, Rodrigues concludes:

    In view of the above evidence of serious irreversible harm to health, food and agriculture across several dimensions and contravention of the PP (Precautionary Principle), it is a required scientific response for the ICAR to immediately withdraw HT rice varieties and desist from introducing any HT crop through mutagenesis.

    Notes

    1. For further insight into this, see Food, Dependency and Dispossession: Resisting the New World Order by C Todhunter on Globalresearch.ca or Academia.edu.

    2. ICAR Introduces HT Rice Varieties by the Mutagenesis Process Tolerant to Imazethapyr, letter to the Indian Council for Agricultural Research and the Indian Agricultural Research Institute, A Rodrigues, 14 July 2024.

    3. Citizens’ letter (incl. farmer leaders and agri scientists) to ICAR against multiple recent MoUs with agri-corporations – ASHA Kisan Swaraj, 20 July 2024.

    The post Amazon Gets Fresh, Bayer Loves Basmati: Toxic Influences in Indian Agriculture first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • India Today NE, the India Today group vertical that covers the northeast, reported on Sunday, July 21, that Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina had been airlifted from Dhaka to an undisclosed location amid the nationwide crisis over an anti-quota stir that had already claimed over 100 lives.

    The report authored by journalist Mehtab Uddin Ahmed was tweeted by the X handle of India Today NE at 2.48 pm with a caption that read, “#Bangladesh: Amidst the chaos, reports confirmed that Prime Minister #SheikhHasina was airlifted from here residence in Dhaka. Her current whereabouts remain unknown.”

    Both the report, and the tweet were, however, soon deleted. An archived version of the story can be read here.

    Readers should note that this is an updated version of the report and the update was saved close to three hours after the original story was tweeted.

    Several users on social media shared the India Today NE report and subsequently deleted their posts as the report got retracted. Some of the posts are still live. (Facebook, X)

    False Report by India Today

    As the report of Sheikh Hasina being airlifted or leaving the country amid the ongoing crisis caused ripples, Alt News noticed that the language in the updated version of the report was self-contradictory in nature. It said, “reports confirmed that Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina was allegedly airlifted from her residence in Dhaka.” To have ‘confirmed reports’ on something and then to say that it had ‘allegedly’ happened was inexplicable.

    We also noticed that no other media outlet had reported the Bangladesh PM being airlifted. Had it been true, it would certainly have been a major headline across publications. It also appeared strange that the point about Hasina being airlifted was buried in the fourth paragraph of the story under several less important points. The 6-minute video that was embedded in the story did not mention anything about it either.

    Next, we tried to look for details about Sheikh Hasina’s schedule on Sunday and found that she had chaired a meeting with the Army top brass on July 21. This was reported by the international media with photos. For example, in its live blog on developments in the country, VoA Bangla published a photo of the said meeting and reported, “প্রধানমন্ত্রী শেখ হাসিনা রবিবার (২১ জুলাই ২০২৪) প্রধানমন্ত্রীর নিরাপত্তা উপদেষ্টা, তিন বাহিনীর প্রধান, মন্ত্রিপরিষদ সচিব ও সশস্ত্রবাহিনী বিভাগের প্রিন্সিপাল স্টাফ অফিসারের সঙ্গে বৈঠক করেছেন। প্রধানমন্ত্রীর কার্যালয় সূত্রে জানা গেছে, তিনি দেশের সামগ্রিক নিরাপত্তা পরিস্থিতির ব্যাপারে তাদের নির্দেশনা দেন।”

    [Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina on Sunday (21 July 2024) held a meeting with the prime minister’s security adviser, the chiefs of the three forces, the cabinet secretary and the principal staff officer of the armed forces. According to sources in the Prime Minister’s office, she gave them instructions regarding the overall security situation of the country.”]

    The US-based media outlet’s Bengali arm posted this on its Facebook page as well. The Facebook post contained two photos and it was clearly mentioned that these were from a meeting Sheikh Hasina chaired on Sunday in Dhaka.

    Indian digital media outlet The Wall, too, reported that Hasina chaired a meeting at her official residence in Dhaka on Sunday.

    On July 21, Alt News reached out to its sources in the Bangladesh deputy high commission in Kolkata, which refuted the report. “India Today itself withdrew the story. And there are reports by the international media which confirm Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s presence in Dhaka. That is enough to show that the report was false,” the source told Alt News on condition of anonymity.

    On July 22, The Bangladesh high commission in India officially refuted the report. In a letter to India Today, the high commission said, “…the misinformation on the status of the Government of Bangladesh went viral within a short span of time and triggered huge confusion and anxiety among people at home and abroad. On behalf of the High Commission of Bangladesh, I express my sheer disappointment at the aforesaid erroneous article and post.”

    “This kind of misinformation and reporting based on rumour at the time of such critical moment of any country may misguide the people and even add fuel to the crisis and turn the situation into more chaotic. Moreover, such kind of reporting, without gauging the sensitivity, does not only affect the people and the society in large negatively, but also questions the credibility of any news outlet. We request all the news outlets, including the India Today NE, to remain vigil and ensure objective and balanced reporting taking account of the sensitivity of the issue,” it added.

    India Today NE published a story on its website on July 22 ‘apologizing’ for the ‘unintentional error’ and attributed it to a “confidential source that could not be immediately verified.”

    The post India Today NE falsely reports Sheikh Hasina airlifted from Dhaka, withdraws story later appeared first on Alt News.


    This content originally appeared on Alt News and was authored by Indradeep Bhattacharyya.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • India Today NE, the India Today group vertical that covers the northeast, reported on Sunday, July 21, that Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina had been airlifted from Dhaka to an undisclosed location amid the nationwide crisis over an anti-quota stir that had already claimed over 100 lives.

    The report authored by journalist Mehtab Uddin Ahmed was tweeted by the X handle of India Today NE at 2.48 pm with a caption that read, “#Bangladesh: Amidst the chaos, reports confirmed that Prime Minister #SheikhHasina was airlifted from here residence in Dhaka. Her current whereabouts remain unknown.”

    Both the report, and the tweet were, however, soon deleted. An archived version of the story can be read here.

    Readers should note that this is an updated version of the report and the update was saved close to three hours after the original story was tweeted.

    Several users on social media shared the India Today NE report and subsequently deleted their posts as the report got retracted. Some of the posts are still live. (Facebook, X)

    False Report by India Today

    As the report of Sheikh Hasina being airlifted or leaving the country amid the ongoing crisis caused ripples, Alt News noticed that the language in the updated version of the report was self-contradictory in nature. It said, “reports confirmed that Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina was allegedly airlifted from her residence in Dhaka.” To have ‘confirmed reports’ on something and then to say that it had ‘allegedly’ happened was inexplicable.

    We also noticed that no other media outlet had reported the Bangladesh PM being airlifted. Had it been true, it would certainly have been a major headline across publications. It also appeared strange that the point about Hasina being airlifted was buried in the fourth paragraph of the story under several less important points. The 6-minute video that was embedded in the story did not mention anything about it either.

    Next, we tried to look for details about Sheikh Hasina’s schedule on Sunday and found that she had chaired a meeting with the Army top brass on July 21. This was reported by the international media with photos. For example, in its live blog on developments in the country, VoA Bangla published a photo of the said meeting and reported, “প্রধানমন্ত্রী শেখ হাসিনা রবিবার (২১ জুলাই ২০২৪) প্রধানমন্ত্রীর নিরাপত্তা উপদেষ্টা, তিন বাহিনীর প্রধান, মন্ত্রিপরিষদ সচিব ও সশস্ত্রবাহিনী বিভাগের প্রিন্সিপাল স্টাফ অফিসারের সঙ্গে বৈঠক করেছেন। প্রধানমন্ত্রীর কার্যালয় সূত্রে জানা গেছে, তিনি দেশের সামগ্রিক নিরাপত্তা পরিস্থিতির ব্যাপারে তাদের নির্দেশনা দেন।”

    [Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina on Sunday (21 July 2024) held a meeting with the prime minister’s security adviser, the chiefs of the three forces, the cabinet secretary and the principal staff officer of the armed forces. According to sources in the Prime Minister’s office, she gave them instructions regarding the overall security situation of the country.”]

    The US-based media outlet’s Bengali arm posted this on its Facebook page as well. The Facebook post contained two photos and it was clearly mentioned that these were from a meeting Sheikh Hasina chaired on Sunday in Dhaka.

    Indian digital media outlet The Wall, too, reported that Hasina chaired a meeting at her official residence in Dhaka on Sunday.

    On July 21, Alt News reached out to its sources in the Bangladesh deputy high commission in Kolkata, which refuted the report. “India Today itself withdrew the story. And there are reports by the international media which confirm Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s presence in Dhaka. That is enough to show that the report was false,” the source told Alt News on condition of anonymity.

    On July 22, The Bangladesh high commission in India officially refuted the report. In a letter to India Today, the high commission said, “…the misinformation on the status of the Government of Bangladesh went viral within a short span of time and triggered huge confusion and anxiety among people at home and abroad. On behalf of the High Commission of Bangladesh, I express my sheer disappointment at the aforesaid erroneous article and post.”

    “This kind of misinformation and reporting based on rumour at the time of such critical moment of any country may misguide the people and even add fuel to the crisis and turn the situation into more chaotic. Moreover, such kind of reporting, without gauging the sensitivity, does not only affect the people and the society in large negatively, but also questions the credibility of any news outlet. We request all the news outlets, including the India Today NE, to remain vigil and ensure objective and balanced reporting taking account of the sensitivity of the issue,” it added.

    India Today NE published a story on its website on July 22 ‘apologizing’ for the ‘unintentional error’ and attributed it to a “confidential source that could not be immediately verified.”

    The post India Today NE falsely reports Sheikh Hasina airlifted from Dhaka, withdraws story later appeared first on Alt News.


    This content originally appeared on Alt News and was authored by Indradeep Bhattacharyya.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • The story uses only screenshots and not the actual viral video in view of the graphic nature of the clip. 

    A video is viral on WhatsApp in particular with the claim that a house painter, hailing from the town of Rampur in Uttar Pradesh, has been shot dead by an unknown assailant in Kerala.

    This graphic video shows a man, who appears to be painting a wall while standing on a wooden support, shot from a close distance, at least seventeen times in a space of 13 seconds.

    Click to view slideshow.

    Alt News received multiple requests on its WhatsApp helpline to verify the video. Some messages said the incident was from Uttarakhand, some said Noida.

    Click to view slideshow.

    On WhatsApp, the video is accompanied by a recorded voice message (attached below) which says the following:

    “This is an incident from Kerala. See if anyone can recognize this painter. Check if he belongs to someone’s family, or is a relative to someone. See what has happened to him. He is from Rampur zilla, identify him if you know him.”

    Fact Check

    We ran a reverse image search on one of the key frames from the clip and came across an X post from June 29.

    The Portuguese caption, when translated to English, reads: “CRAZY! Criminal records video murdering a man known as “Olhão” in the Novo Aleixo neighborhood, in Manaus.”

    Taking a cue from this, we ran a relevant keyword search on Google, and came across this news report, which states that the victim from the viral video, identified as Lucas Pereira, was murdered by unknown gunmen while working on a construction site at a house in the Novo Aleixo neighbourhood in the city of Manaus in Brazil.

    We also found a video uploaded by Portal do Holanda, which, according to its YouTube bio, is ‘…the most read news website in Amazonas and the North region of Brazil.’ It reports on the same incident, and features footage of the crime scene.

    Another news report states that Pereira had an open arrest warrant issued against him by the court, after being tried for drug trafficking in April 2024. Based on videos circulating on social media, the report also speculated on the victim’s connection to members of criminal factions in Manaus involved in feuds for control of drug trafficking.

    To sum up, the viral video of a painter/construction worker shot dead is from Manaus, Brazil. The victim, Lucas Pereira, faced a slew of drug-related charges, and the investigation into his murder was on. The video has no connection to India.

    Prantik Ali is an intern at Alt News.

    The post Painter shot multiple times: Viral video is from Brazil, no connection with India appeared first on Alt News.


    This content originally appeared on Alt News and was authored by Prantik Ali.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • The Punjab and Haryana High Court has stayed an order requiring journalist Rahul Pandita to pay INR7.5 million (US$89,800) in defamation compensation to senior paramilitary officer Harpreet Singh Sidhu, according to news reports. This stay will remain in effect until the next hearing, scheduled for October 21.

    On March 5, an appellate court ordered Pandita, an independent journalist and author, to pay the original ask of INR5 million (US$59,900) plus 6% interest, totaling INR7.5 million, from the date of the suit’s filing. This compensation was for Sidhu’s alleged “loss of reputation and goodwill, mental agony, and hardship due to unfounded derogatory remarks.”  

    On May 28, the high court stayed the appellate court’s decision after it was revealed that Pandita was not even aware of the trial proceedings against him and had no opportunity to defend himself, according to CPJ’s review of the court ruling.

    The order stemmed from a December 13, 2014, report by Pandita, who worked with The Hindu newspaper as an opinion and special stories editor at the time, that has since been withdrawn but was reviewed by CPJ. While it is not clear why the publication withdrew the story, The Hindu initially defended Pandita’s report in a response to Sidhu’s legal notice to the publication as fair comment, according to the Mumbai Press Club.

    The report accused Sidhu of negligence in his duties as Inspector general of Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) operations in Chhattisgarh. The original defamation suit filed by Sidhu was dismissed by a lower court in Mohali on September 16, 2017, but Sidhu challenged this judgment, leading to the appellate court’s recent decision.

    The report claimed that Sidhu did not perform his duties properly during a Maoist attack on December 1, 2013, which resulted in the deaths of 14 people. Pandita alleged that Sidhu took nearly four hours to reach the location despite being only 400 meters (440 yards) away. Sidhu contested these allegations, which were summarized in a statement published by The Hindu, asserting that he was the first to reach the troops and provided proper leadership.

    In his defense, Pandita’s lawyers argued that the report was not personal, did not invade Sidhu’s privacy, and was written with due care and caution, according to a news report reviewed by CPJ. They emphasized that the articles were published as part of Pandita’s journalistic duties and were based on eyewitness accounts and responses from CRPF officials.

    “The articles were published in relation to the conduct of a public servant, in exercise of public duties, and thus the respondent being a public servant cannot question foul play,” Pandita’s legal team argued. Pandita also maintains that he reached out to Sidhu’s superiors for their right to reply, and that their responses were included in the story.

    Pandita declined to respond to CPJ’s request for comment, and Sidhu has not yet replied to CPJ’s text message.


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • umami bioworks india
    5 Mins Read

    Singapore’s Umami Bioworks has partnered with two Indian entities as it aims to advance R&D and reach commercial-scale production for its cultivated seafood.

    Months after its merger with Shiok Meats, Umami Bioworks is looking to advance the scale-up efforts for its cultivated seafood through two collaborations with organisations in India.

    The Singapore-based startup has teamed up with the IKP Knowledge Park’s newly established Centre for Smart Protein and Sustainable Material Innovation in Bengaluru, India, which will be aimed at accelerating research and scalability for its cultivated seafood.

    Additionally, it is set to collaborate with the Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology in Chennai to set up an R&D facility at the university’s campus.

    “India has a wealth of experienced talent in biomanufacturing and steel production. We saw this combination as among the best-in-class globally, and given the relative proximity to Singapore, it was an obvious choice,” Mihir Pershad, founder and CEO of Umami Bioworks, told Green Queen.

    IKP partnership to validate and transfer Umami Bioworks’ tech

    lab grown fish
    Courtesy: Umami Bioworks

    As part of the incubation collaboration with the IKP’s alternative protein centre, Umami Bioworks’ India-based team will lead the engineering and validation of its plug-and-play manufacturing hardware, supporting the tech transfer from the demonstration line to customer sites.

    “IKP provides a hub for our team to work on this scale-up R&D, including meeting and lab space, and a facilitator to help us connect with the supply chain partners that will enable us to deliver a complete production solution,” explained Pershad.

    “The partnership is initially scoped for a year, with opportunities to extend and expand over time. Our end goal is to successfully deliver a production-ready manufacturing system, led by our team in India, that is ready for deployment to customer sites around the world,” he added.

    “We are excited about the novel technology platform that they bring to our community of entrepreneurs and founders in their pursuit of growth in the smart protein sector,” IKP Knowledge Park chairman and CEO Deepanwita Chattopadhyay said of Umami Bioworks. “This collaboration will not only accelerate Umami’s growth in India, but will also propel the smart protein ecosystem that we are building in the country.”

    The Centre for Smart Protein and Sustainable Material Innovation was established in May, born out of an MoU between IKP Knowledge Park and alternative protein think tank the Good Food Institute (GFI) India. The facility aims to support startups with incubation and product development via access to state-of-the-art equipment, and expert mentorship on the technical, IP, regulatory, marketing and business strategy domains.

    “This landmark partnership between Umami Bioworks and IKP’s newly launched centre is a prime example of how India’s booming biotech industry and growing smart protein ecosystem are attracting global players,” said Aiyanna Belliappa, senior innovation and entrepreneurship specialist at GFI India.

    “We are confident that this collaboration will pave the way for further innovation and investment in India, ultimately contributing to a safe, secure, and just future for food.”

    South India leads the country’s cultivated seafood scene

    cultivated seafood india
    Courtesy: Umami Bioworks

    The partnership comes the same week researchers at the Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology developed prototypes of cultivated seafood using milkfish, grouper, red snapper and tilapia cells. The university is also partnering Umami Bioworks, with Sheela Rani, the institute’s director, telling The New Indian Express that the startup will help “set up a full-fledged facility at the campus to develop more cultures and push for commercial-scale production”.

    “We are establishing a collaboration with Sathyabama University to expand our pipeline of marine species cell lines in partnership with their newly established National Facility for Coastal and Marine Research,” Pershad told Green Queen.

    “We will be doing collaborative research to establish cell lines from new fish, crustaceans, and other species. This work will include seeking [a] deeper understanding of the fundamental biology of these species to enable first-ever cell lines to be established for some species,” he added.

    Sathyabama University has earned authentication from the National Bureau of Fish Genetic Resources, meaning its cultivated meat has no recombinant DNA. It will now pursue statutory approvals from the National Biodiversity Authority, the environment ministry, and the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI).

    The latter, in fact, has been working to establish a regulatory framework for cultivated meat and seafood companies to file dossiers for approval. In a regulatory conclave held in New Delhi in April, the FSSAI confirmed its willingness to work with the government’s Department of Biotechnology and Biotechnology Industry Research Assistance Council to set up a framework.

    “The FSSAI can institute a working group on cultivated meat. This working group will be able to recommend strategic priorities for cultivated meat (and inputs such as culture media and cell lines) for the FSSAI to consider for regulatory interventions and a strategy for a dynamic regulatory framework,” wrote Astha Gaur, regulatory policy specialist at GFI India. “Ultimately, instituting a scientific panel on novel smart proteins would ensure progressive rule-making and risk management.”

    Umami Bioworks’ partnerships symbolise the fast-growing cultivated meat sector in South India. In January, the ICAR-Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute (based in Kochi, Kerela) inked a deal with biotech startup Neat Meatt to develop cultivated fish.

    Having raised $2.4M to date, Umami Bioworks has previously outlined its plans of submitting regulatory dossiers in several countries this year. Its merger with Shiok Meats will see it bring cultivated unagi (eel) and white fish (grouper) to the market via hybrid applications.

    “We are now in active review with the Singapore Food Agency, including regular engagements to review data and address any questions that arise during their review,” revealed Pershad. “We are also making rapid progress in two other geographies and anticipate being able to share an update in the near future.”

    The post Umami Bioworks Looks to India to Scale Up Cultivated Seafood appeared first on Green Queen.

    This post was originally published on Green Queen.

  • On July 6, 2024, defense contractor Larsen and Toubro (L&T) and the Indian Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) unveiled “Zorawar,” a jointly-developed indigenous light tank. This public debut reflects the culmination of an accelerated two-year effort to define and build a main battle type tank optimized for combat operations in the northern mountain frontier […]

    The post India Debuts “Mountain” Tank appeared first on Asian Military Review.

    This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.

  • Indo-Russian Rifles Private Limited, registered and located in India, has produced and transferred 35,000 Kalashnikov AK-203 assault rifles to the Indian Ministry of Defence. The founders of the enterprise from the Russian side are ROSOBORONEXPORT JSC and the Kalashnikov Group (both are subsidiaries of the Rostec State Corporation). The Kalashnikov AK-203 assault rifle is a […]

    The post Rostec: Indo-Russian joint venture delivers 35,000 AK-203s to Indian Army appeared first on Asian Military Review.

    This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.

  • Today, the United States is leading the world’s largest multinational maritime war exercise from occupied Honolulu, Hawai’i. 25,000 personnel from 29 nations, including NATO allies and other strategic partners, are participating in the Rim of the Pacificor RIMPAC, under the command of the US Pacific Fleet, a major component of the US Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM).

    With RIMPAC now underway, the lands and waters surrounding the Hawaiian Islands are being intensively bombed and shelled as participating forces practice amphibious landings and urban combat training, and the Kānaka Maoli (Native Hawaiians) find their sovereignty once again violated after more than 130 years of colonization by the US.

    RIMPAC aims to fortify the colonization and militarization of the Pacific, ensuring the security of the West’s imperialist agenda against the rise of China and other threats to the US-led capitalist system.

    In the interest of advancing a political education around the history and purpose of INDOPACOM as part of U.S. militarism, the Solidarity Network for the Black Alliance for Peace has published this comprehensive Fact Sheet on INDOPACOM.

    WHAT IS INDOPACOM?

    U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, or INDOPACOM, is one of the U.S. Department of Defense’s eleven unified combatant commands that together span the globe. INDOPACOM’s area of responsibility (AOR) covers half of the earth’s surface, stretching from California to India’s western border, and from Antarctica to the North Pole. INDOPACOM claims 38 nations within its AOR, which together comprise over half of the world’s population. Its AOR includes the two most populous countries in the world, China and India, while also encompassing small island nations, such as Diego Garcia, Guam, Palau, and Samoa, all of which are under some form of U.S. colonial occupation. INDOPACOM comprises multiple components and sub-unified commands. They include U.S. Forces Korea, U.S. Forces Japan, U.S. Special Operations Command Pacific, U.S. Pacific Fleet, U.S. Marine Forces Pacific, U.S. Pacific Air Forces, and U.S. Army Pacific.

    According to INDOPACOM, this large and diverse area is optimal terrain to implement its “combat credible deterrence strategy.” This includes an estimated 366 bases and installations across 16 nations–more than any other command structure due to large concentrations in Guam, Hawai’i, Japan, Korea, and Okinawa. Many of the military installations strategically surround China and major trade routes.

    Headquartered at Camp H.M. Smith of occupied Honolulu, Hawai’i, INDOPACOM claims to enhance stability and ensure “a free and open Indo-Pacific” through military and economic partnerships with countries in the region. Nonetheless, it also claims to advance “U.S. national security objectives while protecting national interests.” INDOPACOM states its mission is to build a combat-ready force “capable of denying its adversaries sustained air and sea dominance.”

    THE HISTORY OF INDOPACOM

    INDOPACOM is the U.S. military’s oldest and largest combatant command. It is the result of a merger between three commands–Far East Command, Pacific Command and Alaskan Command–which were established after World War II in 1947. The first commander of the Far East Command, General Douglas MacArthur, was tasked with “carrying out occupation duties of Korea, Japan, the Ryukyu Islands, the Bonin Islands, the Philippines and the Mariana Islands.” From the end of WWII to 1958, the U.S. military conducted 67 nuclear tests throughout the Marshall Islands under “Operation Crossroads.” It conducted another 36 nuclear detonations at Christmas Island and Johnston Atoll in 1962 under “Operation Dominic,” which permanently destroyed the natural biomes.

    Against the backdrop of the Korean War, the key predecessor to INDOPACOM, Pacific Command, was primarily oriented toward combat operations in Korea and later, the Philippines. The ongoing Korean War has resulted in millions of casualties as well as the demarcation of North and South Korea since 1953. By 1957, Pacific Command saw a major expansion and strategic reorientation of its AOR, absorbing the Far East Command and most of the Alaskan Command. Camp H.M. Smith of occupied Honolulu, Hawai’i was selected as the new headquarters because the U.S. Fleet Marine Force, Pacific, the largest maritime invasion force in the world, was already located there.

    Throughout the U.S. war on Vietnam, Pacific Command controlled all U.S. military forces, including South Vietnamese assets, and operations within the country. Leading both the U.S. Pacific Air Forces and Pacific Fleet, Pacific Command’s brutal campaigns resulted in some of the most egregious atrocities, such as the My Lai massacre in 1968. Pacific Command’s operations also included some of the heaviest aerial bombardments, like “Operation Rolling Thunder.” In its numerous campaigns, which also included “Operation Bolo,” “Linebacker I and II”, “Ranch Hand,” and “Arc Lightdropping,” Pacific Command dropped over 5 million tons of bombs and at least 11 million gallons of the highly corrosive herbicide known as “Agent Orange” on Southeast Asia. Pacific Command was also responsible for covert bombing operations targeting Cambodia and Laos during the war, dropping over 2.5 million tons of bombs through “Operation Menu.”

    Pacific Command saw subsequent alterations to its AOR after U.S. forces fled Vietnam in 1973. Responsibility for Afghanistan and Pakistan was delegated to US Central Command after its inauguration in 1983, while Pacific Command assumed new responsibility for China and North Korea that same year. U.S. Secretaries of Defense Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfield respectively oversaw territorial expansions to Pacific Command’s AOR in 1989 and 2002, into INDOPACOM’s current formation.

    INDOPACOM NOW

    The United States continues to view the Asia-Pacific region as pivotal to the pursuit of its material interests, emphasizing that the region is home to some of the largest and fastest-growing economies and militaries. The Obama administration’s 2011 “Pivot to Asia” marked a stronger push by Pacific Command for confrontation not only with China but any nation or movement that poses a threat to U.S. hegemony in the region.

    In 2018, Pacific Command was rebranded to Indo-Pacific Command, or INDOPACOM, as it is known today. This move was meant to recognize the strategic importance of India, following heightened aggression toward China during the Obama and Trump presidencies. INDOPACOM regularly conducts joint naval training exercises in the South China Sea with countries like Japan and Australia in clear violation of international law and even secretly stationed U.S. special-operations and support forces in Taiwan since 2021.

    Massive military exercises like the largest international maritime warfare training, the “Rim of the Pacific Exercise (RIMPAC),” and others like “Cape North” and Joint Pacific Multinational Readiness Center trainings occur frequently in occupied Hawai’i and Guam, without the consent of the Indigenous populations. In 2023, INDOPACOM carried out new iterations of its“Talisman Sabre” exercise in Australia and its “Super Garuda Shield” exercise in Indonesia. These exercises involved tens of thousands of military personnel from 13 and 19 nations, respectively, including the Pacific island nations of Papua New Guinea, Fiji, and Tonga for the first time.

    INDOPACOM’s major military partners in the Asia-Pacific region include Japan and South Korea. The U.S. military holds significant leverage over each nation’s armed forces via agreements undergirding the U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) and U.S. Forces Japan (USFJ), essentially commanding additional joint military structures with their own distinct mission, vision, and objectives in support of INDOPACOM. USFK continues to prevent reunification in Korea as part of its mission to “defend the Republic of Korea,” while USFJ remains committed to the colonial occupation of Okinawa as part of its mission of “provid[ing] a ready and lethal capability…in support of the U.S.-Japan Alliance.”

    BAP AGAINST INDOPACOM

    INDOPACOM works to extend U.S. military influence throughout the Asia-Pacific region and to promote the militarism and violence required to fulfill the material interests of the U.S. ruling class. By portraying China as a global bogeyman, INDOPACOM serves to obfuscate the indigeneity and legitimacy of liberation movements like those occurring on the occupied islands of Guam, Hawai’i, Okinawa, and Samoa, as well as nearly every other nation across the region from Indonesia and Malaysia to the Philippines. INDOPACOM’s aggressive role in the region serves to create the very instability it uses to justify its own existence and mask the responsibility of U.S. officials provoking new wars.

    The Black Alliance for Peace stands against the influence and power of INDOPACOM, and the ever-increasing militarization of the region. Informed by the Black Radical Peace Tradition, we understand that peace is not the absence of conflict, but the achievement, by popular struggle and self-defense, of a world liberated from nuclear armament and proliferation, unjust war, and global white supremacy. As referenced in our Principles of Unity, BAP takes a resolute anti-colonial, anti-imperialist position that links the international role of the U.S. empire–one based on war, aggression and exploitation–to the domestic war against poor and working-class African/Black people in the United States.

    The post What is the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM)? first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Five Australian universities will work with counterparts in India on research projects spanning AI, e-waste and stopping superbugs after securing almost $4 million from the countries’ long running research fund. Recipients of round 15 of the Australia-India Strategic Research Fund were announced on Wednesday by Science minister Ed Husic. “From tougher strains of bacteria to…

    The post $4m in research grants deepen India innovation ties appeared first on InnovationAus.com.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.com.

  • Asia Pacific Report

    An exhibition from Tara Arts International has been brought to The University of the South Pacific as part of the Pacific International Media Conference next week.

    In the first exhibition of its kind, Connecting Diaspora: Pacific Prana provides an alternative narrative to the dominant story of the Indian diaspora to the Pacific.

    The epic altar “Pacific Prana” has been assembled in the gallery of USP’s Oceania Centre for Arts, Culture and Pacific Studies by installation artist Tiffany Singh in collaboration with journalistic film artist Mandrika Rupa and dancer and film artist Mandi Rupa Reid.

    PACIFIC MEDIA CONFERENCE 4-6 JULY 2024
    PACIFIC MEDIA CONFERENCE 4-6 JULY 2024

    A colourful exhibit of Indian classical dance costumes are on display in a deconstructed arrangement, to illustrate the evolution of Bharatanatyam for connecting the diaspora.

    Presented as a gift to the global diaspora, this is a collaborative, artistic, immersive, installation experience, of altar, flora, ritual, mineral, scent and sound.

    It combines documentary film journalism providing political and social commentary, also expressed through ancient dance mudra performance.

    The 120-year history of the people of the diaspora is explored, beginning in India and crossing the waters to the South Pacific by way of Fiji, then on to Aotearoa New Zealand and other islands of the Pacific.

    This is also the history of the ancestors of the three artists of Tara International who immigrated from India to the Pacific, and identifies their links to Fiji.

    expressed through ancient dance mudra performance.

    The 120-year history of the people of the diaspora is explored, beginning in India and crossing the waters to the South Pacific by way of Fiji, then on to Aotearoa New Zealand and other islands of the Pacific.

    Tiffany Singh (from left), Mandrika Rupa and Mandi Rupa-Reid
    Tiffany Singh (from left), Mandrika Rupa and Mandi Rupa-Reid . . . offering their collective voice and novel perspective of the diasporic journey of their ancestors through the epic installation and films. Image: Tara Arts International

    Support partners are Asia Pacific Media Network and The University of the South Pacific.

    The exhibition poster
    The exhibition poster . . . opening at USP’s Arts Centre on July 2. Image: Tara Arts International

    A journal article on documentary making in the Indian diaspora by Mandrika Rupa is also being published in the 30th anniversary edition of Pacific Journalism Review to be launched at the Pacific Media Conference dinner on July 4.

    Exhibition space for Tara Arts International has been provided at the Oceania Centre for Arts, Culture and Pacific Studies at USP.

    The exhibition opening is next Tuesday, and will open to the public the next day and remain open until Wednesday, August 28.

    The gallery will be open from 10am to 4pm and is free.

    Published in collaboration with the USP Oceania Centre for Arts, Culture and Pacific Studies.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • India must not force about 200 jailed Myanmar refugees to return home, an advocacy group told Radio Free Asia on Thursday, citing dangers that they would face if pushed back into the jurisdiction of the Myanmar military.

    Junta attacks against ethnic minority insurgents and pro-democracy militias that emerged in the wake of Myanmar’s 2021 coup have forced hundreds of thousands of people from their homes in Chin state and the neighboring Sagaing region, with thousands seeking refuge across the porous Indian border

    Among those who have slipped into India are supporters of those fighting to end military rule and they could be in grave danger if forced back into the arms of the junta, activists say.

    In immediate peril are more than 200 Myanmar people who have been arrested in Indian states bordering Myanmar’s western Sagaing region, said Salai Dokhar, founder of the group India for Myanmar. Most have been detained under immigration laws.

    India has already forced dozens of them back and fears are growing that the rest will soon be expelled, he said.

    “Indian authorities have arrested refugees fleeing from war-torn areas to India, especially in Assam and Manipur states. According to our list, more than 230 people, but 76 of those were sent back to Myanmar,” he added. 

    “Now, they are also working to send all the remaining nationals back. Some of them are absolutely in danger, so we are calling [on the Indian government] to release all of them and if possible, grant them asylum in India.”

    India for Myanmar is one of four activist groups that have called on India to let the Myanmar nationals stay. 

    Decades of strife in Myanmar have forced villagers to flee from their homes for safety in neighboring countries, Bangladesh and Thailand in particular.

    Myanmar’s 2021 coup has triggered a new round of war that has swept areas of Myanmar that were previously peaceful, including Sagaing and Chin state, which border India.

    About 100 Myanmar people in prison in the Indian state of Manipur went on a four-day hunger strike to campaign against their repatriation, said a resident of the state with knowledge of the situation in the prison.

    On Monday, guards cracked down on the protesting inmates injuring four of them, said the resident, who declined to be identified for security reasons.

    “They want everyone to be released in Moreh town and not sent back to the Myanmar side,” the resident said, referring to an Indian town on the border.

    Political activists and those involved in non-violent action in opposition to the Myanmar junta are among those in the prison, he said.

    The Indian government has yet to release any information about the condition of the prisoners. 

    The Indian embassy in Myanmar has not responded to RFA’s inquiries as of this writing.

    The four Myanmar activist groups – including Blood Money Campaign, Defense Myanmar Democracy and the Sitt Nyein Pan Foundation – released a statement on Wednesday calling for India to grant the refugees asylum.

    While those in prison were in immediate danger of deportation, the groups said they were worried about more than 5,000 Myanmar refugees sheltering in Manipur, who they believed could also be forced home.

    Translated by RFA Burmese. Edited by Kiana Duncan and Taejun Kang. 


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Burmese.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • June 20, 2024—The Committee to Protect Journalists urges Indian authorities to immediately renew French reporter Sébastien Farcis’ journalism permit and cease using legal technicalities to prevent journalists from carrying out their duties.

    Farcis, a New Delhi-based South Asia correspondent for multiple French and Belgian news organizations, including Radio France Internationale, Radio France, and Libération, left India on June 17, after 13 years of reporting, following the government’s refusal to renew a journalism permit to work in the country, according to the journalist, who told CPJ in a text message and a statement he shared on X, formerly Twitter.

    The government did not provide a reason for refusing the permit on March 7. Farcis, who is married to an Indian citizen, holds a permanent residency status, known locally as the Overseas Citizenof India (OCI) visa. Since March 2021, Indian regulations have mandated that OCI visa holders must obtain permits to work as journalists in India.

    “The departure of Sébastien Farcis highlights the increasing challenges faced by foreign journalists in India. The arbitrary refusal to renew his journalism permit, without explanation, undermines press freedom and disrupts journalists’ lives,” said Kunal Majumder, CPJ’s India representative. “Indian authorities must approve Farcis’ permit and ensure that all journalists can work without fear of unjust reprisal, upholding India’s democratic values.”

    In his statement, which he shared with CPJ, Farcis said the permit denial has effectively prevented him from practicing his profession and cut off his income. Multiple requests to the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), which issues the journalism permits, have gone unanswered, and attempts to appeal the decision have so far been unsuccessful, he said.

    Farcis said in the statement that he has always adhered to regulations, obtaining the necessary visas and accreditations. He said he has never reported from restricted or protected areas without proper permits, and the MHA has previously granted him permission to report from border areas.

    “This decision has had a great impact on my family. I am deeply attached to India, which has become my second homeland. But with no more work nor income, my family has been pushed out of India without explanation and uprooted overnight for no apparent reason,” Farcis said in the statement.

    Farcis is the second French journalist in four months to leave India under similar circumstances, following Vanessa Dougnac’s departure in February. CPJ is aware that at least five OCI-holder foreign correspondents have been banned from working as journalists in India over the past two years.

    CPJ’s email to Home Secretary Ajay Kumar Bhalla, who oversees the MHA, requesting comment did not receive a response.

    Editor’s note: This report has been corrected to show Farcis’ journalism permit was not renewed, rather than revoked. 


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Arlene Getz/CPJ Editorial Director.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Acclaimed author Arundhati Roy could soon face trial under India’s contested “anti-terror” laws in a case that has drawn outrage from free speech advocates in India and beyond. An official from Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s far right ruling Bharatiya Janata Party gave the go-ahead on Friday for Roy’s prosecution over comments she made about Kashmir in 2010. This comes as Modi was sworn in last…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Seg3 royandmodi

    Acclaimed author Arundhati Roy could soon face trial under India’s contested “anti-terror” laws in a case that has drawn outrage from free speech advocates in India and beyond. An official from Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s far-right ruling Bharatiya Janata Party gave the go-ahead on Friday for Roy’s prosecution over comments she made about Kashmir in 2010. This comes as Modi was sworn in last week to his third term as prime minister after the BJP won the most seats in Indian’s Parliament, but lost its outright majority. “This case is so convoluted, it’s hard to say where it begins and where it ends — and that’s the point. The process is the punishment,” says Indian author and journalist Siddhartha Deb, who teaches at The New School in New York. Deb says Modi is trying to show that “everything is normal” despite the shocking electoral setback, with the case against Roy being used to placate his “rabid attack dogs of Hindu nationalism.”


    This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Modi’s narrow re-election this month was greeted in the U.S. media with petulant satisfaction that Indian voters had “woken up”, as an oped piece in the New York Times put it.

    The Washington Post’s editorial board rebuked Modi with the headline: “In India, the voters have spoken. They do not want autocracy.”

    The Post editors went on to say that Modi “will lack a free hand for further repression of civil society, imprisonment of the opposition, infiltration and takeover of democratic institutions, and persecution of Muslims.”

    That is quite a withering rap sheet for a political leader who not so long ago was given the VIP treatment in Washington.

    Other U.S. media outlets also sounded smug that India’s legislative elections had returned a diminished majority for Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The “shock setback” for India’s strongman would mean that his Hindu nationalist politics would be restrained and he would have to govern during his third term with more moderation and compromise.

    The American media’s contempt for the 73-year-old Indian leader is a dramatic turnaround from how he was lionized by the same media only a year ago.

    Back in June 2023, Modi was feted by U.S. President Joe Biden with a privileged state dinner in the White House. The Indian premier was invited to address the Congress and the media were rhapsodic in their praise for his leadership.

    Back then, the Washington Post’s editors recommended “toasting” Modi’s India, which Biden duly did at the White House reception. Raising a glass, Biden said: “We believe in the dignity of every citizen, and it is in America’s DNA, and I believe in India’s DNA that the whole world – the whole world has a stake in our success, both of us, and maintaining our democracies.” With trademark stumbling words, Biden added: “[This] makes us appealing partners and enables us to expand democratic institutions across, around the world.”

    Modi may well wonder what happened over the past year. The Indian leader has gone from receiving the red carpet treatment to having the rug pulled from under his feet.

    The difference is explained by the changing geopolitical calculation for Washington, which is not to its liking.

    It is not that the Indian government under Modi has suddenly become a bad strongman who has taken to trashing democratic institutions and repressing minorities. Arguably, those tendencies have been associated with Modi since he first came to power in 2014.

    The United States had long been critical of Modi’s Hindu nationalism. For more than a decade, Modi was persona non-grata in Washington. At one stage, he was even banned from entering the country owing to allegations that he was fanning sectarian violence against Muslims and Christians in India.

    Washington’s view of Modi, however, began to warm up under the Trump administration because India was seen as a useful partner for the U.S. to counter China’s growing influence in the Asia-Pacific, a region which Washington renamed as the Indo-Pacific in part to inveigle India into its fold. To that end, the U.S. revived the Quad security alliance in 2017 with India, Japan and Australia.

    The Biden administration continued the courting of India and Modi who was re-elected in 2019 for his second term.

    Biden’s fawning over India culminated in the White House extravaganza for Modi last June when the U.S. media championed the “new heights” of U.S.-India relations. There were at the time residual complaints about India’s deteriorating democratic conditions under Modi, but such concerns were brushed aside by the sweep of media eulogizing, epitomized by Biden’s grandiloquent toasting of the U.S. and India as supposedly world-conquering democratic partners.

    It was discernible, though, that all the American charm and indulgence was setting India up for an ulterior purpose.

    In between the lines of effusive praise and celebration, the expected pay-off from India was that it would be a “bulwark” for U.S. interests against China and Russia.

    As a piece in CNN at the time of Modi’s visit last year in Washington asked: “Will India deliver after lavish U.S. attention?”

    The article noted with some prescience: “India and the U.S. may have different ambitions and visions for their ever-tightening relationship, and the possibility that Biden could end up being disappointed in the returns for his attention on Modi.”

    The Indian leader certainly did receive some major sweeteners while in the U.S. Several significant military manufacturing deals were signed such as General Electric sharing top-secret technology for fighter jet engines.

    Still, despite the zealous courting of New Delhi, over the following months, the Modi government appeared not to change its foreign policy dramatically to suit Washington’s bidding.

    India has had long-held strained relations with China over border disputes and regional rivalry. Nevertheless, Modi has been careful not to antagonize Beijing. Notably, India did not participate in recent security drills in the Asia-Pacific along with the U.S. and other partners.

    New Delhi has also maintained its strong support for the BRICS group that includes Russia, China, Brazil and other Global South nations advocating for a multipolar world not in hock to Western dominance.

    This traditional policy of non-alignment by India is not what Washington wants. It seems that Modi did not heed the memo given during his splendid Washington visit. He rebuffed the American expectation of steering India towards U.S. geopolitical objectives of toeing a tougher line against China and Russia.

    What seems to have intensified Washington’s exasperation with Modi is the worsening proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. After two and half years of conflict, President Vladimir Putin’s forces have gained a decisive upper hand over the NATO-backed Kiev regime. Hence, Biden and other NATO leaders have begun to desperately ramp up provocations against Moscow with recent permission for Ukraine to use Western long-range weapons to hit Russian territory.

    When Modi visited Washington last June, the West was (unrealistically) confident that the Ukrainian counteroffensive underway at the time would prove to be a damaging blow to Russian forces. Western predictions of overcoming Russian lines have waned from the cruel reality that Russian weapons and superior troops numbers have decimated the Ukrainian side.

    During Modi’s state trip last year, Washington’s focus was on getting India to act as a bulwark against China, not so much Russia. Modi has not delivered on either count, but the situation in Ukraine has cratered, from the NATO point of view.

    Commenting on U.S. priorities last June, Richard Rossow of the Washington-based think-tank the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said: “If the invasion went worse for Ukraine, or was destabilizing the region, the Biden administration might have chosen to reduce the intensity of engagement with India. But the United States has found that nominal support to Ukraine, with allies and partners, has been sufficient to blunt the Russian offensive…” (How wrong was that assessment!)

    Rossow continued his wrongheaded assessment: “Russia’s ineffective military campaign [in Ukraine] has also underscored the fact that China presents the only real state-led threat to global security, and the United States and India are steadily deepening their partnership bilaterally and through forums like the Quad to improve the likelihood of peace and tranquility in the region. So long as this strategic relationship continues to grow, it is unlikely that a U.S. administration will press India to take a hard line on Russia.”

    Washington and its NATO allies have got their expectations about Russia losing the conflict in Ukraine all badly wrong. Russia is winning decisively as the Ukrainian regime stumbles towards collapse.

    This is a double whammy for the Biden administration. China and Russia are stronger than ever, and India has given little in return for all the concessions it received from Washington.

    From the American viewpoint, India’s Modi has not delivered in the way he was expected to by Washington despite the latter’s fawning and concessions. New Delhi has remained committed to the BRICS multipolar group, it has not antagonized China and it has not succumbed to U.S. pressure to condemn Russia. Far from condemning Moscow, India has increased its imports of Russian oil and gas.

    Now with the U.S. and NATO’s reckless bet on Ukraine defeating Russia looking like a beaten docket, Washington’s disappointment with India is taking on an acrimonious tone.

    In one year, Modi’s India has gone from a geopolitical darling to a target of U.S. recrimination over alleged human rights violations and democratic backsliding. It is not so much that political conditions in India have degraded any further. It is Washington’s geopolitical calculations that have been upended. Hence the chagrined and increasingly abrasive attitude towards New Delhi from its erstwhile American partner.

    • First published in Strategic Culture Foundation

    The post Why Modi’s India is Suddenly getting Washington’s Cold Shoulder first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Official from ruling BJP party allows action against Booker winner under controversial anti-terrorism law

    Indian authorities have granted permission for the prosecution of the Booker prize-winning Indian novelist Arundhati Roy over comments she made about Kashmir at an event in 2010.

    The top official in the Delhi administration, VK Saxena, gave the go-ahead for legal action against Roy, whose novel The God of Small Things won the Booker prize in 1997, under anti-terrorism legislation, alongside a former university professor, Sheikh Showkat Hussain.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Like most Indians, Ritwik “Ritu” Chakravarty was raised with a strict notion of traditional gender roles. But for Ritu, who identifies as a trans woman, such rigidity never made sense. “My name, Ritu, means ‘weather’ or ‘season,’” she says today. “And my gender was fluid, changing like the weather.” This openness has allowed Ritu to …

    Source

    This post was originally published on American Jewish World Service – AJWS.

  • Aisha Khalid and Imran Qureshi (Pakistan), Two Wings to Fly, Not One, 2017.

    Half of the world’s population will have the opportunity to vote by the end of this year as 64 countries and the European Union are scheduled to open their ballot boxes. No previous year has been so flush with elections. Among these countries is India, where a remarkable 969 million voting papers had to be printed ahead of the elections that culminated on 1 June. In the end, 642 million people (roughly two-thirds of those eligible) voted, half of them women. This is the highest-ever participation by women voters in a single election in the world.

    Meanwhile, the European Union’s 27 member states held elections for the European Parliament, which meant that 373 million eligible voters had the opportunity to cast their ballot for the 720 members who make up the legislative body. Add in the eligible voters for elections in the United States (161 million), Indonesia (204 million), Pakistan (129 million), Bangladesh (120 million), Mexico (98 million), and South Africa (42 million) and you can see why 2024 feels like the Year of Elections.

    Alfredo Ramos Martínez (Mexico), Vendedora de Alcatraces (‘Calla Lily Vendor’), 1929.

    Over the past few weeks, three particularly consequential elections took place in India, Mexico, and South Africa. India and South Africa are key players in the BRICS bloc, which is charting a path towards a world order that is not dominated by the US. The nature of the governing coalitions that come to power in these countries will have an impact on the grouping and will certainly shape this year’s BRICS Summit to be held in Kazan (Russia) in late October. While Mexico is not a member of BRICS and did not apply for membership during the expansion last year, the country has sought to relieve itself of the pressures from the United States (most Mexicans are familiar with the statement ‘Poor Mexico: so far from God, so close to the United States’, made by Porfirio Diaz, the country’s president from 1884 to 1911). The Mexican government’s recent aversion to US interference in Latin America and to the overall neoliberal framework of trade and development has brought the country deeper into dialogue with alternative projects such as BRICS.

    While the results in India and South Africa showed that the electorates are deeply divided, Mexican voters stayed with the centre-left National Regeneration Movement (MORENA), electing Claudia Sheinbaum as the first woman president in the country’s history on 2 June. Sheinbaum will take over from Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO), who leaves the presidency with a remarkable 80% approval rating. As the mayor of Mexico City from 2018 to 2023 and a close ally of AMLO, Sheinbaum followed the general principles laid out in the Fourth Transformation (4T) project set out by AMLO in 2018. This 4T project of ‘Mexican Humanism’ follows three important periods in Mexico’s history: independence (1810–1821), reform (1858–1861), and revolution (1910–1917). While AMLO spoke often of this 4T as an advance in Mexico’s history, it is in fact a return to the promises of the Mexican Revolution with its call to nationalise resources (including lithium), increase wages, expand government jobs programmes, and revitalise social welfare. One of the reasons why Sheinbaum triumphed over the other candidates was her pledge to continue the 4T agenda, which is rooted less in populism (as the bourgeois press likes to say) and more so in a genuine welfarist humanism.

    George Pemba (South Africa), Township Games, 1973.

    In May of this year, thirty years after the end of apartheid, South Africa held its seventh general election of the post-apartheid era, producing results that stand in stark contrast to those in Mexico. The ruling tripartite alliance – consisting of the African National Congress (ANC), South African Communist Party, and Congress of South African Trade Unions – suffered an enormous attrition of its vote share, securing just 40.18% of the vote (42 seats short of a majority), compared to 59.50% and a comfortable majority in the National Assembly in 2019. What is stunning about the election is not just the decline in the alliance’s vote share but the rapid decline in voter turnout. Since 1999, less and less voters have bothered to vote, and this time only 58% of those eligible came to the polls (down from 86% in 1994). What this means is that the tripartite alliance won the votes of only 15.5% of eligible voters, while its rivals claimed even smaller percentages. It is not just that the South African population – like people elsewhere – is fed up with this or that political party, but that they are increasingly disillusioned by their electoral process and by the role of politicians in society.

    A sober appraisal of South Africa’s election results shows that the two political forces that broke from the ANC – Jacob Zuma’s uMkhonto we Sizwe (MK) and Julius Malema’s Economic Freedom Fighters – won a combined 64.28% of the vote, exceeding the vote share that the ruling alliance secured in 1994. The overall agenda promised by these three forces remains intact (ending poverty, expropriating land, nationalising banks and mines, and expanding social welfare), although the strategies they would like to follow are wildly different, a divide furthered by their personal rivalries. In the end, a broad coalition government will be formed in South Africa, but whether it will be able to define even a social democratic politics – such as in Mexico – is unclear. The overall decline in the population’s belief in the system represents a lack of faith in any political project. Promises, if unmet, can go stale.

    Kalyan Joshi (India), Migration in the Time of COVID, 2020.

    In the lead-up to the election in India, held over six weeks from 19 April to 1 June, incumbent Prime Minister Narendra Modi of the far-right Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) said that his party alone would win a thumping 370 seats in the 543-seat parliament. In the end, the BJP could only muster 240 seats – down by 63 compared with the 2019 elections – and his National Democratic Alliance won a total of 293 (above the 272-threshold needed to form a government). Modi will return for a third term as prime minister, but with a much-weakened mandate. He was only able to hold on to his own seat by 150,000 votes, a significant decrease from the 450,000-vote margin in 2019, while fifteen incumbent members of his cabinet lost their seats. No amount of hate speech against Muslims or use of government agencies to silence opposition parties and the media was able to increase the far-right’s hold on power.

    An April poll found that unemployment and inflation were the most important issues for two-thirds of those surveyed, who say that jobs for city dwellers are getting harder to find. Forty percent of India’s 1.4 billion people are under the age of 25, and a study by the Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy showed that India’s youth between the ages of 15 and 24 are ‘faced with a double whammy of low and falling labour participation rates and shockingly high unemployment rates’. Unemployment among young people is 45.4%, six times higher than the overall unemployment rate of 7.5%.

    India’s working-class and peasant youth remain at home, the sensibility of their entire families shaped by their dilemmas. Despair at everyday life has now eaten into the myth that Modi is infallible. Modi will return as prime minister, but the actualities of his tenure will be defined partly by the grievances of tens of millions of impoverished Indians articulated through a buoyant opposition force that will find leaders amongst the mass movements. Among them will be farmers and peasants, such as Amra Ram, a leader of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and All India Kisan Sabha (‘All India Farmers’ Union’) who won decisively in Sikar, an epicentre of the farmers’ movement. He will be joined in parliament by Sachidanandam, a leader of the All India Kisan Sabha and Communist Party of India (Marxist) from Dindigul (Tamil Nadu), and by Raja Ram Kushwaha, a leader of the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation from Karakat (Bihar) and the convenor of the All-India Kisan Sangharsh (‘All India Farmers’ Struggle’) Coordination Committee, a peasant alliance that includes 250 organisations. The farmers are now represented in parliament.

    Nitheesh Narayanan of Tricontinental Research Services writes that even though the Left did not send a large contingent to parliament, it has played an important role in this election. Amra Ram, he continues, ‘enters the parliament as a representative of the peasant power that struck the first blow to the BJP’s unquestioned infallibility in North India. His presence becomes a guarantee of India’s democracy from the streets’.

    Heri Dono (Indonesia), Resistance to The Power of Persecution, 2021.

    The idea of ‘democracy’ does not start and finish at the ballot box. Elections – such as in India and the United States – have become grotesquely expensive. This year’s election in India cost $16 billion, most of it spent by the BJP and its allies. Money, power, and the corrosiveness of political dialogue have corrupted the democratic spirit.

    The search for the democratic spirit is at least as old as democracy itself. In 1949, the communist poet Langston Hughes expressed this yearning in his short poem ‘Democracy’, which spoke then to the denial of the right to vote and speaks now to the need for a much deeper consideration of what democracy must mean in our times – something that cannot be bought by money or intimidated by power.

    Democracy will not come
    Today, this year,
    Nor ever
    Through compromise and fear.
    I have as much right
    As the other fellow has
    To stand
    On my two feet
    And own the land.

    I tire so of hearing people say,
    Let things take their course.
    Tomorrow is another day.
    I do not need my freedom when I’m dead.
    I cannot live on tomorrow’s bread.

    Freedom
    Is a strong seed
    Planted
    In a great need.
    Listen, America—
    I live here, too.
    I want freedom
    Just as you.

    The post Democracy Will Not Come through Compromise and Fear first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • india elections climate change
    6 Mins Read

    India’s dramatic election results have confirmed a third term for Narendra Modi, but with a much-weakened mandate – is climate change to blame (or thank) for that?

    India stands third in the world for the number of billionaires and the amount of greenhouse gas emissions, and that perhaps sums up the paradoxical nature of the nation’s latest election.

    As Narendra Modi was sworn in for a third term as prime minister, he did so much later and in much different circumstances than his party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), expected. Before the election – where 642 million Indians, or 8% of the world’s population, voted – the narrative was one of a third-consecutive landslide victory for the right-wing party.

    With a mandate built on Hindu nationalism, the slogan ‘Ab ki baar, 400 paar’ (This time, past 400) – a redux of the 2015 campaign slogan ‘Ab ki baar, Modi sarkar’ (This time, a Modi government) – was all over the BJP’s communications, referring to a parliamentary supermajority that would allow the party to amend the constitution.

    Things, however, didn’t pan out the way Modi wanted. The BJP didn’t even obtain the simple majority of 272, let alone 400, instead having to rely on alliances to form a coalition government with the National Democratic Alliance (NDA). It was a victory that felt like defeat, and vice-versa for the now-strong opposition INDIA coalition, led by Congress member and political dynast Rahul Gandhi.

    The shock result of the world’s largest election was a rejection of the BJP’s religious persecution, and was ascribed – by Gandhi no less – to India’s poorest. In the last decade, the country has become the fifth-largest economy in the world, but the wealth gap has never been more stark.

    The disparity can also be found when you look at who feels the worst effects of climate change. While Modi may have built an us-versus-them mentality using the historical emissions of the “hypocritical West”, the climate crisis was notably absent from his entire electoral campaign, despite India being amongst the 40 nations most vulnerable to global warming.

    Climate change drove farmers away from the BJP

    india elections heat
    Courtesy: Reuters

    The sheer size of India’s elections makes for complex logistics – this year, the entire exercise ran six weeks. And while the length of the election isn’t anything new, it was a much larger focus because of the extreme heatwaves sweeping through the nation.

    In the northern states of Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Odisha, at least 33 people – including election officials on duty – died of suspected heatstroke in a single day in May. This followed reports that parts of New Delhi almost breached the 53°C barrier, the highest-ever temperature recorded in India, prompting the High Court to warn that the capital could soon turn into “a barren desert”.

    But despite the Election Commission setting up a task force to monitor weather conditions (only after voting was underway) and sending a heat precaution list to poll workers, party campaigners were told not to do anything differently in the face of the heat.

    This encapsulates the attitude towards the climate crisis by India’s lawmakers. While people suffer fatally from extreme weather, the BJP promised more temples and a better economy. But at what – and whose – cost? Unemployment and cost of living have been pinpointed as two key reasons that voters turned sour on the incumbent government.

    In his second term, Modi faced one of the most powerful backlashes of his political career. While India and the world went in and out of lockdowns, hundreds of thousands of farmers poured into New Delhi to protest against his moves to open up more private investment in agriculture. The farmers believed this would make them vulnerable to low prices.

    Agriculture is the biggest source of income in India, with 70% of rural households dependent on farming, and 82% being small or marginal farmers. But as climate change worsens, so does its impact on the sector. Extreme heat and droughts are decimating crops, while groundwater is already in short supply. Farmers are facing crippling debt – since Modi first took office in 2014, estimates suggest 100,000 farmers have taken their lives.

    These are all climate issues. Ignoring them has swayed many former BJP voters, who are rightfully dismayed by the lack of jobs outside agriculture for India’s youth, many of whom grow up in farming families riddled with debt for their entire lives.

    farmers protest india
    Courtesy: Pradeep Gaurs/Shutterstock

    India’s inadequate climate goals need a revamp

    Modi’s first speech after it became apparent that his coalition would gain the majority represented some marked shifts from his previous rhetoric. ‘Jai Shree Ram’ became ‘Jai Jagannath’ (after Ayodhya voted out the BJP despite the building of a divisive temple on the site of a destroyed mosque), the Modi government was now the NDA government, and climate change was suddenly an issue.

    The prime minister took note of the election workers who toiled away in the sweltering heat for weeks, and, while there was no mention of the failure of reaching the 400-seat target, read between the lines and you could sense relief, and worry.

    India’s emissions are off the charts, thanks in part to its agricultural practices, and in even larger part to its fossil fuel industry. Coal, specifically, is the biggest source of electricity across the country, and its use actually grew this year. And, despite being the third-largest solar power generator in the world, the overall share of clean energy has subsequently decreased, making up just around 22% of the total.

    At COP26, Modi set out a pledge to reach net zero by 2070, but more than half of India’s electricity will still be sourced from coal by the end of the decade. And its climate target (or nationally determined contribution) has been deemed “highly insufficient” by the Climate Action Tracker, with current policies and action rated as “insufficient” as well.

    india climate change
    Courtesy: Carbon Action Tracker

    This makes it all the more infuriating that climate change was just not on the ballot in India this year. It mirrors the larger political landscape: only 0.3% of the questions asked in the parliament are about climate change, and just one of the country’s 700-plus parties is focused on the environment.

    But per capita emissions have risen by 93% since 2001, and heat-related deaths increased by 55% from 2000-2004 to 2017-2021. Climate change needs to be on the parliamentary agenda – especially since neither the BJP nor the INDIA coalition made any clear campaign commitments for the climate crisis, with just a handful of eco targets intertwined with promises to grow infrastructure.

    For climate activists, the concern starts at the top, with Modi. This is a man who has infamously compared the changing climate to people’s heightened sensitivity to cold when they age. He has also proclaimed that the “climate has not changed”, but people and their habits have spoiled and destroyed the environment (identifying the very reason that the climate has, in fact, changed).

    As a country, India proved that democracy is still important and alive, and secularism is part of its social fabric. In a climate election year, its voting surprised everybody – but now, its farmers, islanders, and climate-vulnerable citizens are hoping that the government springs a surprise too. It’s imperative that it does.

    The post Was the World’s Largest Election Decided By the Climate Crisis? appeared first on Green Queen.

    This post was originally published on Green Queen.

  • Lock them up.  The whole bally lot.  The pollsters, the pundits, the parasitic hacks clinging to the life raft of politics in the hope of earning their crust.  Yet again, the election results from a country have confounded the chatterers and psephologists.  India’s Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, was meant to romp home and steal the show in the latest elections.  The Bharatiya Janata Party was meant to cut through the Lok Sabha for a third time, comprehensively, conclusively.  Of 543 parliamentary seats, 400 were to be scooped up effortlessly.

    From a superficial perspective, it was easy to see why this view was reached.  Modi the moderniser is a selling point, a sales pitch for progress.  The builder and architect as leader.  The man of temples and faith to keep company with the sweet counting of Mammon’s pennies.  Despite cherishing an almost medieval mindset, one that rejects Darwinian theories of evolution and promotes the belief that Indians discovered DNA before Watson and Crick, not to mention flying and virtually everything else worth mentioning, Modi insists on the sparkle of development.  Propaganda concepts abound such as Viksit Bharat (Developed India).  The country, he dreams, will slough off the skin of its “developing” status by 2047, becoming a US$30 trillion economy.

    The BJP manifesto had pledges aplenty: the improvement of the country’s infrastructure, the creation of courts programmed to be expeditious in their functions, the creation of “high-value” jobs, the realisation of India as a global hub for manufacturing.

    The electors had something else in mind.  At the halfway point of counting 640 million votes, it became clear that the BJP and its allies had won 290 seats.  The BJP electoral larder had been raided.  The Modi sales pitch had not bent as many Indian ears as hoped.  The opposition parties, including the long-weakened Congress Party, once the lion of Indian politics, and the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance, had found their bite.  States such as Tamil Nadu, Punjab and Maharashtra, had put the Hindutva devotees off their stroke.

    Despite Modi’s inauguration of a garish temple to Ram at Ayodhya, occupying the site of a mosque destroyed by mob violence (the cliché goes that criminals return to the scene of their crime), the Socialist party and Congress alliance gained 42 of the 80 seats on offer in Uttar Pradesh.  A rather leaden analysis offered in that dullest of publications, The Conversation, suggested that Hindu nationalist policies, while being “a powerful tool in mobilising the BJP’s first two terms” would have to be recalibrated.  The theme of religious nationalism and its inevitable offspring, temple politics, had not been as weighty in the elections as initially thought.

    For such politics watchers as Ashwini Kumar, the election yielded one fundamental message: “the era of coalition politics is back”.  The BJP would have to “put the contentious ideological issues in cold storage, like the uniform civil code or simultaneous elections for state assembly and the Parliament.”

    While still being the largest party in the Lok Sabha, the BJP put stock in its alliance with the National Democratic Alliance.  The NDA, said Modi, “is going to form the government for the third time, we are grateful to the people”.  The outcome was “a victory for the world’s largest democracy.”

    Modi, sounding every bit a US president dewy about the marble virtues of the republic, romanced the election process of his country.  “Every Indian is proud of the election system and its credibility.  Its efficiency has not [sic] match anywhere else in the world. I want to tell the influencers that this is a matter of pride.  It enhances India’s reputation, and people who have a reach, they should present it before the world with pride.”

    For a man inclined to dilute and strain laws in a breezy, thuggish way, this was quite something.  Modi spoke of the Indian constitution as being “our guiding light”, despite showing a less than enlightened attitude to non-Hindus in the Indian state.  He venerated the task of battling corruption, omitting the fact that the vast majority of targets have tended to be from the opposition.  The “defence sector”, he vowed, would become “self-reliant”.

    In an interview with the PTI news agency, the relentlessly eloquent Congress Party grandee Shashi Tharoor had this assessment.  The electorate had given a “comeuppance” to the BJP’s “overweening arrogance” and its “my way or the highway attitude”.  It would “be a challenge for Mr Modi and Amit Shah who have not been used to consulting very much in running their government and I think this is going to test their ability to change their way of functioning and be more accommodative and more conciliatory within the government and also I hope with the Opposition.”

    Whatever Modi’s sweet words for the Indian republic, there was no getting away from the fact Hindutva’s juggernaut has lost its shine. We anticipate, to that end, something amounting to what Tharoor predicts to be a “majboor sarkaar (helpless government)” on fundamental matters.  Far better helpless in government than ably vicious in bigotry.

    The post Modi’s Comeuppance: The Waning of Hindutva first appeared on Dissident Voice.


    This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Binoy Kampmark.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • A seven-second clip of Karnataka deputy chief minister D K Shivakumar was circulating on social media before the results of the 2024 general elections were out. In the video, the Congress leader says, ”I don’t believe. We will…I.N.D.I.A (alliance) will form the government.” Social media users have shared the video claiming that Shivakumar accepted defeat in the Lok Sabha elections.

    Right-wing influencer Mr Sinha (@MrSinha_), who has been found peddling misinformation several times in the past, shared the clip on X (formerly Twitter) with the caption, ‘ “I don’t believe I.N.D.I.A will form the govt” – DK Shivkumar’. His tweet received over 517,200 views, 13,000 likes and 2,900 retweets.

    Right-wing propaganda outlet The Jaipur Dialogues (@JaipurDialogues) also posted the viral clip with the caption, “And they accept Defeat DK Shivkumar says INDI is not forming the Government”. The tweet has received over 93,400 views, 4,900 likes and 896 retweets.

    A verified user on X, @thatmarineguy21, shared the clip with a similar caption and added, “Looks like Congress Lion has accepted his defeat.” The tweet garnered over 3351 views, 180 likes and 72 retweets.

    BJP IT cell functionary Abhishek Tiwari (@lkoabhishek) uploaded the viral clip and wrote, ‘ “I don’t believe I.N.D.I.A will form the govt” – DK Shivkumar He accepted why not others ??’.

    Fact Check

    A relevant keyword search on X led us to a 14-second-long video uploaded by ANI on June 3, 2024. At the beginning of the extended video, a journalist can be heard asking Shivakumar about his predictions on Congress winning, to which Shivakumar responds with, “All seven seats will win.” The reporter further asked him a question on exit polls to which he replied, “I don’t believe. We will… I.N.D.I.A (alliance) will form the government.” According to a Hindustan Times report, most of the exit poll surveys have predicted that the NDA would secure more than 20 out of 28 seats in Karnataka.

    Times Now also uploaded an extended YouTube video-shorts, titled “Watch: Karnataka DY CM DK Shivakumar’s First Reaction To Exit Poll Results 2024 #shorts”. The video depicts the Congress leader refuting the exit poll numbers. The 7-second viral video has been clipped from the 0:07 mark of the extended clip.

    On June 3, Mirror Now uploaded a video report where Shivakumar dismissed the exit polls and questioned the accuracy of the predictions.

    To sum up, social media users have shared a 7-second clipped video of Congress leader DK Shivakumar and falsely claimed that the Karnataka deputy CM had accepted defeat even before the election results are out. Our fact-check revealed that the original video depicted Shivakumar refuting the exit poll numbers and stating that the INDIA alliance would form the government at the Centre.

    Abira Das is an intern at Alt News.

    The post D K Shivakumar said INDIA bloc would form govt; viral video clipped, falsely shared appeared first on Alt News.


    This content originally appeared on Alt News and was authored by Abira Das.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • What will it take to defeat fascism in India — ruled by one of the world’s largest, oldest and well-funded fascist projects, Hindutva nationalism, now equipped with one of the world’s biggest digital identity surveillance databases? Though the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has now been reduced in India’s recently concluded elections from its previous 303-seat majority to a 240-seat minority…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • For the Chinese, the trauma of the Century of Humiliation continues as a blunt reminder of their past defeat and neo-colonial servitude, as well as a reminder of the West’s self-righteous hypocrisy and arrogance.

    In 1500, India and China were the world’s most advanced civilizations. Then came the Europeans. They eventually looted and wreaked havoc on both, just as they were to on the Americas and Africa. For India and China, Britain was the chief culprit, relying on state-sponsored drug-running backed by industrialized military power. The British Empire was the world’s largest producer and exporter of opium—the main product of global trade after the gradual decline of the slave trade from Africa. Their “civilization” brought the Century of Humiliation to China, which only ended with the popular revolution led by Mao Zedong. This historic trauma and the struggle to overcome it and re-establish their country is etched in the minds of the Chinese today.

    Before the British brought their “culture,” 25% of the world trade originated in India. By the time they left it was less than 1%. British India’s opium dealing was for the large part of the 19th Century the second-most important source of revenue for colonial India. Their “opium industry was one of the largest enterprises on the subcontinent, producing a few thousand tons of the drug every year – a similar output to Afghanistan’s notorious opium industry [during the US occupation], which supplies the global market for heroin.” Opium accounted for about 17-20% of British India revenues.

    In the early 1700s, China produced 35% of the world GDP. Until 1800 half the books in the world were printed in Chinese. The country considered itself self-sufficient, not seeking any products from other countries. Foreign countries bought Chinese tea, silk, and porcelain, having to pay in gold and silver. Consequently, the balance of trade was unfavorable to the British for almost two centuries, like the situation the US and Europe face with China today.

    This trade slowly depleted Western reserves. Eventually, 30,865 tons of silver flowed into China, mostly from Britain. Britain turned to state sponsored drug smuggling as a solution, and by 1826 the smuggling from India had reversed the flow of silver. Thus began one of the longest and continuous international crimes of modern times, second to the African slave trade, under the supervision of the British crown.

    (The just formed United States was already smuggling opium into China by 1784. The US first multi-millionaire John Jacob Astor grew rich dealing opium to China, as did FDR’s grandfather, Warren Delano, Jr.)

    The British East India Company was key to this opium smuggling. Soon after Britain conquered Bengal in 1757, George III granted the East India Company a monopoly on producing and exporting Indian opium. Eventually its Opium Agency employed some 2500 clerks working in 100 offices around India.

    Britain taxed away 50% of the value of Indian peasants’ food crops to push them out of agriculture into growing opium. This soon led to the Bengal famine of 1770, when ten million, a third of the Bengali population, starved to death. Britain took no action to aid them, as they did almost a century later with their orchestrated famine in Ireland. Another famine hit India in 1783, and again Britain did nothing as 11 million starved. Between 1760-1943, “As per British sources, more than 85 million Indians died in these famines which were in reality genocides done by the British Raj.”

    At its peak in the mid-19th century, the British state-sponsored export of opium accounted for roughly 15% of total colonial revenue in India and 31% of India’s exports. The massive revenues from this drug money solidified India as a substantial financial base for England’s later world conquests.

    In 1729, the Chinese emperor declared the import of opium illegal. At the time it amounted to 200 chests a year, each 135 pounds, a total of 14 tons. The emperor in 1799 reissued the prohibition in harsher terms, given imports had leaped to 4,500 chests (320 tons). Yet by 1830 it rose to 1100 tons, and by 1838, just before the British provoked the First Opium War (1839-1842), it climbed to 40,000 chests (2800 tons).

    A chest of opium cost only £2 to produce in India but it sold for £10 [over $1,000 in today’s prices] in China, nearly an £8 profit per chest.

    About 40,000 chests supplied 2.1 million addicts in a Chinese population of 350 million. China was losing over 4000 tons of silver annually. Addicts were mostly men, twenty to fifty-five years old, which should have been their most productive years. Smoking opium gradually spread to different groups of people: government officials, merchants, intelligentsia, women, servants, soldiers, and monks.

    Just before the First Opium War the Chinese “drug czar,” Lin Zexu, wrote to Queen Victoria, “Where is your conscience? I have heard that the smoking of opium is very strictly forbidden by your country; this is because the harm caused by opium is clearly understood. Since it is not permitted to do harm to your own country, then even less should you let it be passed on to the harm of other countries.” In standard imperialist arrogance, Britain ignored the letter and challenged the very legality of China’s sovereign decision to prohibit opium imports.

    Britain provoked this First Opium War in retaliation for China seizing and destroying 1300 tons of opium held by British drug dealers off Canton (now Guangzhou). This had a value equal to one-sixth of the British empire’s military budget. British Foreign Secretary Palmerston demanded an apology, compensation for the opium, a treaty to prevent Chinese action against British drug-running, and opening additional ports to “foreign trade,” their euphemism for drug dealing.

    The British India Gazette reported on the sack of one Chinese city during the war:

    A more complete pillage could not be conceived than took place. Every house was broken open, every drawer and box ransacked, the streets strewn with fragments of furniture, pictures, tables, chairs, grain of all sorts — the whole set off by the dead or the living bodies of those who had been unable to leave the city from the wounds received from our merciless guns… The plunder ceased only when there was nothing to take or destroy.

    Once Britain defeated China, the Treaty of Nanking gave Hong Kong to the British, which quickly became the center of opium drug-dealing, soon providing the colony most of its revenue. The treaty also allowed the British to export unlimited amounts of opium.

    In 1844, France and the US forced China to sign similar unequal and unjust treaties, with the same unrestricted trading rights.

    In the wake of the First Opium War, a devastating famine hit southern China, causing mass starvation among millions of poor Chinese peasants. Soon the Taiping Rebellion against Chinese imperial rule broke out, claiming 20 million Chinese lives between 1850 and 1864. As with many later civil wars, as in Syria a decade ago, the European states financed the rebels to undermine the national government.

    Karl Marx detailed how Britain provoked the Second Opium War (1856-1860). France joined in the looting. The Times of London, propagandists for their state-sponsored drug mafia, declared, “England, with France . . . shall teach such a lesson to these perfidious hordes that the name of Europe will hereafter be a passport of fear, if it cannot be of love, throughout their land.”

    In October 1860 the British and French military attacked Beijing. Despite French protests, British commander Lord Elgin destroyed Yuanming Yuan, the emperor’s summer palace, in a show of contempt for the Chinese.

    The Summer Palace was the quintessential treasure house of China. No such collection of wealth and beauty had ever existed anywhere on earth. Nor would it ever again.…in some 200 fabulously decorated buildings, thirty of them imperial residences, lay riches beyond all dreams of avarice. Jewels, jade, ceremonial robes, the court treasures, bales of silk, and countless priceless artifacts represented the years of accumulated tribute placed before the Chinese emperors. There were splendid galleries of paintings and irreplaceable libraries…For three days British and French troops rampaged through the palace’s marble corridors and glittering apartments, smashing with clubs and rifle butts what they were unable to carry away.

    When the robbery and destruction was finished, they burned Yuanming Yuan to the ground. An estimated 1.5 million Chinese relics were taken away, many still filling museums and the homes of the wealthy in the West today.

    Britain and France forced China to legalize the import of opium, which reached 5000 tons by 1858, an amount surpassing global opium production in 1995. China had to agree that no Westerner could be tried in Chinese courts for crimes committed in the country, and, ironically, to legalize Christian missionary work.

    The 1881 pamphlet, Opium: England’s Coercive Policy and Its Disastrous Results in China and India, stated:

    As a specimen of how both wars were carried on, we quote the following from an English writer on the bombardment of Canton: ‘Field pieces loaded with grape were planted at the end of long, narrow streets crowded with innocent men, women and children, to mow them down like grass till the gutters flowed with their blood.’ In one scene of carnage, the Times correspondent recorded that half an army of 10,000 men were in ten minutes destroyed by the sword, or forced into the broad river. The Morning Herald asserted that ‘a more horrible or revolting crime than this bombardment of Canton has never been committed in the worst ages of barbaric darkness.’

    By the mid-1860s, Britain was in control of seven eighths of the vastly expanded opium trade into China. Opium imports from India skyrocketed to 150,000 chests (10,700 tons) in 1880. British opium earnings amounted to $2 billion a year in today’s money and accounted for nearly 15% of the British Exchequer’s tax revenue. The London Times (October 22, 1880) outrageously claimed that “the Chinese government admitted opium as a legal article of import, not under constraint, but of their own free will.” Lord Curzon, later Under Secretary for India, “denied that England had ever forced opium upon China; no historian of any repute, and no diplomatist who knew anything of the matter, would support the proposition that England coerced China in this respect.”

    China began domestic production to curtail losing more silver to imported opium. After 1858, large tracts of land were given over to opium production, and provinces turned from growing food and other necessities to opium. Eventually the Chinese were producing 35,000 tons, about 85% of the world’s supply, with 15 million addicts consuming 43,000 tons annually.

    China, now greatly weakened by the British narco state, surrendered territory to Russia equal to the combined size of France, Germany, and Spain. In 1885 France seized Chinese Southeast Asia. In 1895, Japan seized Taiwan and Chinese-controlled Korea.

    The Eight-Nation Alliance (Japan, Russia, Britain, France, the United States, Germany, Italy, and Austria-Hungary) invaded again in 1900 to crush the nationalist Boxer Rebellion. An indemnity of 20,000 tons of silver was extracted, and China reduced to a neo-colony.

    By 1906, besides British India, opium dealing also provided 16% of taxes for French Indochina, 16% for the Netherlands Indies, 20% for Siam, and 53% for British Malaya.

    That year, the British, still exporting 3500 tons to China, finally agreed to end the dirty business within ten years. The British crown had the distinction of being the biggest opium smuggler in history – a central factor in their wrecking Chinese and Indian civilizations.

    World opium production by 1995 was down to 4,200 metric tons (4,630 tons), mostly from Burma and Afghanistan. The Taliban banned it in 2000, and production fell from 3400 to only 204 tons. The 2001 US invasion of Afghanistan reversed this, and by 2008, US occupied Afghanistan was producing 90% of the world’s opium, reaching 10,000 tons in 2017. After the US was driven out in 2021, the Taliban quickly stopped opium production. The United States Institute of Peace, possibly revealing US support for narco-trafficking, pronounced, “the Taliban’s successful opium ban is bad for Afghans and the world” and “will have negative economic and humanitarian consequences.”

    The blight of opium on China was not resolved until the revolutionary victory in 1949 – though it continued in British Hong Kong. Mao proclaimed “China has stood up,” ending its Century of Humiliation during which at least 100 million Chinese were killed in wars and famines, with up to 35 million during the Japanese invasion from 1931-1945.

    By 1949, China had been reduced to one of the world’s poorest countries. Just 75 years ago four out of five Chinese could not read or write. But since 1981, China has lifted 853 million of its people out of poverty, has become an upper middle income country according to the World Bank, and regained its stature in the world. The West now views China as a renewed threat, again seeking to economically disable it and chop it into pieces. However, this time, the Chinese people are much better prepared to combat imperialist designs to impose a new era of humiliation on them.

    The post Britain’s Century Long Opium Trafficking and China’s Century of Humiliation (1839-1949) first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • From April 19 through June 1, 969 million voters in India will have voted in seven phases to elect the next national government, with results to be announced on June 4. This is the largest election ever in human history. The Indian electorate is larger than the entire population of the European Union, and larger than the combined electorates of seven other countries with elections in 2024…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • An exit poll graphic credited to India Today has gone viral across social media platforms, which shows the BJP in the lead in Amritsar. According to the viral graphic, the BJP is getting 33% of the vote share in the Lok Sabha seat.

    Users have amplified it pointing out that BJP candidate Taranjit Singh Sandhu was winning in Amritsar against AAP’s Kuldeep Singh Dhaliwal, Congress’s Gurjeet Singh Aujla, and SAD’s Anil Joshi.

    X user Michael Rahul tweeted this graphic on May 27. His post has been viewed more than 25,000 times, at the time of the writing of this article. (Archive)

    Several other users on Facebook also posted the exit poll graphic with the same claim.

    Click to view slideshow.

    Fact Check

    To begin with, it must be noted that exit polls were banned till June 1, the last day of poling. This was announced by the election commission at the beginning of the polling process.

    Moreover, the Amritsar LS constituency went to the polls on June 1. Hence, exit poll data could not be available on May 27. These suggest that the viral graphic is not genuine.

    We also noted that Rahul Kanwal, the news director of Aajtak & India Today, tweeted about the viral exit poll graphic, confirming that it was fake.

    Hence, it is clear that Amritsar exit poll data attributed to India Today which became viral on May 27 is false.

    The post Viral India Today exit poll graphic showing BJP leading in Amritsar is fake appeared first on Alt News.


    This content originally appeared on Alt News and was authored by Prantik Ali.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.