Congress MP Shashi Tharoor said the Modi govt is restricting electoral debate to national security while daily terror of hunger, poverty & disease remains.
National security advisor Ajit Doval said India hasn't forgotten and will not forget the Pulwama attack, in which Jaish-e-Mohammed killed 40 CRPF jawans.
Folly of Modi’s foreign policy is he launches trade war with Trump’s America, a stalwart ally, but treats the Chinese, who walked into Doklam, with deference.
Voters in Bihar don’t want dynastic politics, minority politics, or caste politics—all dead ducks flogged by the Congress Party in its regressive, divisionary, divisive game.
Without a Congress revival, there can be no challenge to the BJP pan-nationally. Modi’s party is growing, and almost entirely at the cost of the Congress.
Yes the foreign policy narrative has changed. But what is the impact beyond the optics?
Has terrorism abated? The subsequent events post the Balakot do not reflect any change in the policy of the terrorist organisations operating on the Indian side of Kashmir.
Balakot has hidden the fundamental weaknesses on the Indian side to
a. exposed by the Pulwama Attack.
b.. the lack of vision by India in addressing the genuine concerns of the people of the valley. The custodial death of school teacher in Avantipura is evidence of this, as was the swarms of people attending the funeral of Burhan Wani. Without addressing the concerns of the people, India cannot stop more and more of Indians from the valley joining the terrorist groups.
c. Making the narrative of the issues in 5 districts determine smudge the scar over the entire state of J&K.
Pakistan has been able to keep their side of Kashmir free of controversies in the International press – rightly or wrongly; that is besides the point. The focus is on the Indian side of Kashmir – hence makes India defensive.
India had gone nuclear and faced sanctions from US. It impacted our nuclear energy program. Now the world opinion is behind us – is it due to India’s foreign policy initiatives???
No, it is due to the fact that there is a better appreciation of the terrorism issue with several incidents on the soil of US, France, UK etc.
It is worthwhile recalling that US was merry making money by selling arms to both sides of the divide – Axis and Allies during WWII, until the Pearl Harbour incident.
What if JeM had not claimed responsibility for the Pulwama outrage ? Forensic examination would have revealed the remains of an Indian citizen in the suicide vehicle. There would have been speculation on the source of the RDX, who trained a young Kashmiri to fashion it into an explosive device. Nothing concrete that, in the eyes of the world, would have justified a military strike on a neighbouring country, which would have condemned the attack. So that still leaves us with a fraught situation in the Valley, a deeply alienated population, young people becoming fidayeen, vulnerability despite such an immense security grid.
God forbid, if a Kandahar happens again, the gossamer spun in this column will be put to test.
Yes the foreign policy narrative has changed. But what is the impact beyond the optics?
Has terrorism abated? The subsequent events post the Balakot do not reflect any change in the policy of the terrorist organisations operating on the Indian side of Kashmir.
Balakot has hidden the fundamental weaknesses on the Indian side to
a. exposed by the Pulwama Attack.
b.. the lack of vision by India in addressing the genuine concerns of the people of the valley. The custodial death of school teacher in Avantipura is evidence of this, as was the swarms of people attending the funeral of Burhan Wani. Without addressing the concerns of the people, India cannot stop more and more of Indians from the valley joining the terrorist groups.
c. Making the narrative of the issues in 5 districts determine smudge the scar over the entire state of J&K.
Pakistan has been able to keep their side of Kashmir free of controversies in the International press – rightly or wrongly; that is besides the point. The focus is on the Indian side of Kashmir – hence makes India defensive.
India had gone nuclear and faced sanctions from US. It impacted our nuclear energy program. Now the world opinion is behind us – is it due to India’s foreign policy initiatives???
No, it is due to the fact that there is a better appreciation of the terrorism issue with several incidents on the soil of US, France, UK etc.
It is worthwhile recalling that US was merry making money by selling arms to both sides of the divide – Axis and Allies during WWII, until the Pearl Harbour incident.
What if JeM had not claimed responsibility for the Pulwama outrage ? Forensic examination would have revealed the remains of an Indian citizen in the suicide vehicle. There would have been speculation on the source of the RDX, who trained a young Kashmiri to fashion it into an explosive device. Nothing concrete that, in the eyes of the world, would have justified a military strike on a neighbouring country, which would have condemned the attack. So that still leaves us with a fraught situation in the Valley, a deeply alienated population, young people becoming fidayeen, vulnerability despite such an immense security grid.
God forbid, if a Kandahar happens again, the gossamer spun in this column will be put to test.