Monday, 2 September 2024

HAWA MAHAL

 HAWA MAHAL also known as the "Palace of Winds",is a stunning palace located in Jaipur,the capital city of the Indian state of Rajasthan . Built in 1799 by Maharaja Sawai Pratap Singh, this architectural marvel was designed by Lal Chand Ustad . It is an iconic symbol of Rajput architecture and reflects the city's rich history and culture .

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN 

HAWA MAHAL is renowned for its unique five story facade , which resembles a honeycomb . The palace features 953 small windows , or "jharokhas", which are intricately decorated with latticework . These windows were designed to allow the royal ladies to observe street festivals and daily life without being seen , adhering to the strict "purdah" system of the time . The windows also provide excellent  ventillation , allowing cool breezes to pass through and making the palace a comfortable retreat during the hot summer months , hence its name "Palace of winds".

CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE 

The HAWA MAHAL is more than just an architectural wonder ;it is a significant cultural symbol of Jaipur and Rajasthan . Its design elements are heavily influenced by Hindu Rajput architecture ,with some Mughal influences . The use of pink and red sandstone aligns with the color theme of Jaipur , which is famously known as the "pink City ". The palace's facade is particularly striking during sunrise and sunset when it glows with a soft pink hue . 

HISTORICAL IMPORTANCE

Historically, Hawa Mahal was part of the city palace complex and served as an extension of the zenana (women's chambers ). It was built primarily for the royal ladies to provide them with a vantage point to view the bustling market streets and processions below , without compromising thier privacy . This reflects the socio -cultural practices of the period and highlights the blend of aesthetics with functionality in Rajput architeccture.





Thursday, 13 August 2015

After N-deal Iranian Foreign Minister to Visit India

NEW DELHI: After the nuclear deal was done between Iran and six world powers, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif has embarked on a regional tour that will take him to India as well as Pakistan among other countries.
Zarif is set to visit India on August 14, Friday. He is expected to meet Prime Minister Narendra Modi, External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj, as well as union Transport Minister Nitin Gadkari.
Both sides are expected to discuss increasing Indian imports of Iranian oil, and boosting trade.
India is among Asia's major importers of energy and relies on Iran to meet a portion of its energy demand. Iran was the second largest supplier of India's crude before the tightening of US-led sanctions against Tehran about two years ago.
Zarif and Indian officials are to discuss the latest developments in the region, Iran's recent nuclear agreement with world powers and the subsequent lifting of sanctions.
Zarif is to visit Pakistan on August 13. He will call of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Foreign Affairs advisor Sartaj Aziz, according to news reports.
Zarif has visited a number of countries in West Asia following the July 14 nuclear agreement between Iran and the P5+1 -- US, Britain, France, China, Russia and Germany --countries.

India and the US poised to strengthen their relationship

When Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi invited US President Barack Obama to attend his country’s Republic Day ceremonies this year, it signalled an important change in relations between the world’s two biggest democracies.
Ever since the 1990s, three US administrations have tried to improve bilateral relations, with mixed results. While annual trade between the countries has soared during this period, from $US20 billion ($27bn) to more than $US100bn, annual US-China trade is worth six times more, and the political relationship has had ups and downs.
The two countries have a long history of confusing each other. By definition, any alliance with a superpower is unequal; so efforts to establish close ties with the US have long run up against India’s tradition of strategic autonomy. But Americans do not view democratic India as a threat. On the contrary, India’s success is an important US interest, and several factors promise a brighter future for the bilateral relationship.
The most important factor is the acceleration in India’s economic growth, which the International Monetary Fund projects will exceed 7.5 per cent through to 2020. For decades, India suffered from what some called the “Hindu rate of economic growth”: a little more than 1 per cent per year. It might more properly have been called a 1930s British socialist rate of growth. After independence in 1947, India adopted an inward-looking planning system that focused on heavy industry.
Market-oriented reforms in the early 1990s changed that pattern, and annual growth accelerated to 7 per cent under the Congress party, before slumping to 5 per cent. Since last year’s general election brought Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party to power, the government has reversed the slowdown.
And prospects for continued growth are strong. India has an emerging middle class of several hundred million, and English is an official language spoken by some 50 million to 100 million. Building on that base, Indian information industries are able to play a major global role.
Moreover, with a population of 1.2 billion people, India is four times larger than the US, and likely to surpass China by 2025. Its sheer scale will be increasingly important not only to the global economy, but also to balancing China’s influence in Asia and managing global issues such as climate change, public health and cyber security.
India also has significant military power, with an estimated 90-100 nuclear weapons, intermediate-range missiles, 1.3 million military personnel, and annual military expenditure of nearly $US50bn (3 per cent of the world total). And, in terms of soft power, India has an established democracy, an influential diaspora, and a vibrant popular culture with transnational influence. Bollywood produces more films every year than any other country, out-competing Hollywood in parts of Asia and the Middle East.
But one should not underestimate India’s problems. Population alone is not a source of power unless those human resources are developed, and India has lagged well behind China in terms of literacy and economic growth. Despite its progress, about a third of India’s population lives in conditions of acute poverty, making the country home to a third of the world’s poor. India’s $US2 trillion GDP is only a fifth of China’s $US10 trillion, and a ninth of America’s $US17.5 trillion (measured at market exchange rates).
Likewise, India’s annual per capita income of $US1760 is just one-fifth that of China. Even more striking, while 95 per cent  of the Chinese population is literate, the proportion for India is only 74 per cent — and only 65 per cent for women. A symptom of this problem is India’s poor performance in international comparisons of universities, with none ranked among the world’s top 100. India’s hi-tech exports are only 5 per cent of its total exports compared to 30 per cent for China.
India is unlikely to develop the power to become a global challenger to the US in the first half of this century. Indeed, even in terms of soft power, a recent study by the Portland Consultancy in London placed India outside the top 30 countries. China ranked 30th, and the US came in third, behind Britain and Germany.
Nonetheless, India has considerable assets that already affect the balance of power in Asia. While India and China signed agreements in 1993 and 1996 that promised a peaceful settlement of the border dispute that led them to war in l962, the issue has heated up again, following Chinese actions in recent years.
India and China are fellow members of the BRICS (along with Brazil, Russia, and South Africa). But co-operation within that caucus is limited. While Indian officials are often discreet in public about relations with China, and wisely want bilateral trade and investment to grow, their security concerns remain acute.
As part of the group of Asian countries that will tend to balance China, India has already begun to strengthen its diplomatic relations with Japan.
It would be a mistake to cast the prospects for an improved US-India relationship solely in terms of China’s rising power. Indian economic success is an American interest on its own. So is the open approach taken by India and Brazil on issues such as governance of the internet, at a time when Russia and China are seeking more authoritarian control.
No one should expect an Indian-American alliance any time soon, given historical Indian public opinion. But one can predict a relationship in the coming years that will be both sui generis and stronger.
Joseph S. Nye Jr is a professor at Harvard and author of Is the American Century Over? Since 2002, he has co-chaired a US-India Strategic Dialogue under the auspices of the Aspen Institute.

Bolivia ready for new go at relations with US: President

La Paz: Bolivia is set to try to rebuild ties with the United States and exchange ambassadors again, President Evo Morales said Tuesday, citing Washington`s warmer Iran and Cuba stances.
"We are here today to get back on course to good relations with the United States," Morales told a briefing at the presidential palace, ahead of US Secretary of State John Kerry`s historic visit to Havana Friday.
The leftist leader, a key ally of Communist-led Cuba and socialist Venezuela, said the top US diplomat here, business attache Peter Brennan, had been informed about Bolivia`s wish to work with him on restoring normal ambassadorial-level ties.
"I cannot say when this may happen, but hopefully, we will be able to achieve it," Brennan added.
The United States and Bolivia have not had ambassadors in their respective capitals since 2008.
Morales threw out the last US ambassador in 2008 accusing him of allegedly plotting with local conservative opposition seeking to oust him. The United States reciprocated.
Since then, the diplomatic outlook has improved, Morales said.
In December, US President Barack Obama and Cuban President Raul Castro made a surprise announcement to seek normal diplomatic relations after more than 50-year break in relations. Kerry is due in Havana for a ceremony to raise the US flag at its reopened embassy, a first since January 1961.
"Before the United States used to tell us not to have relations with Cuba and Iran. Now, the United States has good relations with Cuba and with Iran, a surprise (deal)," said Morales.
"So we can`t be sitting on the sidelines in an international context," he said.

The great democracies’ new harmony

It would be a mistake to cast the prospects for an improved US-India relationship solely in terms of China’s rising power
By Joseph Nye, Special to Gulf News

When Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi invited US President Barack Obama to attend his country’s Republic Day ceremonies earlier this year, it signalled an important change in relations between the world’s two biggest democracies. Ever since the 1990s, three American administrations have tried to improve bilateral relations, with mixed results. While annual trade between the countries has soared during this period, from $20 billion (Dh73.4 billion) to more than $100 billion, annual US-China trade is worth six times more, and the political relationship has had ups and downs.
The two countries have a long history of confusing each other. By definition, any alliance with a superpower is unequal; so efforts to establish close ties with the US have long run up against India’s tradition of strategic autonomy. But Americans do not view democratic India as a threat. On the contrary, India’s success is an important US interest, and several factors promise a brighter future for the bilateral relationship.
The most important factor is the acceleration in India’s economic growth, which the International Monetary Fund projects will exceed 7.5 per cent through 2020. For decades, India suffered from what some called the “Hindu rate of economic growth”: a little more than 1 per cent per year. It might more properly have been called a 1930s British socialist rate of growth. After independence in 1947, India adopted an inward-looking planning system that focused on heavy industry.
Market-oriented reforms in the early 1990s changed that pattern, and annual growth accelerated to 7 per cent under the Congress party, before slumping to 5 per cent. Since the 2014 general election brought Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party to power, the government has reversed the slowdown. And prospects for continued growth are strong. India has an emerging middle class of several hundred million, and English is an official language spoken by some 50 to 100 million. Building on that base, Indian information industries are able to play a major global role.
Moreover, with a population of 1.2 billion people, India is four times larger than the US, and likely to surpass China by 2025. Its sheer scale will be increasingly important not only to the global economy, but also to balancing China’s influence in Asia and managing global issues such as climate change, public health, and cyber security.
Lagging behind
India also has significant military power, with an estimated 90-100 nuclear weapons, intermediate-range missiles, 1.3 million military personnel, and annual military expenditure of nearly $50 billion (3 per cent of the world total). And, in terms of soft power, India has an established democracy, an influential diaspora, and a vibrant popular culture with transnational influence. Bollywood produces more films every year than any other country, out-competing Hollywood in parts of Asia and the Middle East.
But one should not underestimate India’s problems. Population alone is not a source of power unless those human resources are developed, and India has lagged well behind China in terms of literacy and economic growth. Despite its progress, around a third of India’s population lives in conditions of acute poverty, making the country home to a third of the world’s poor. India’s $2 trillion GDP is only a fifth of China’s $10 trillion, and a ninth of America’s $17.5 trillion (measured at market exchange rates).
Likewise, India’s annual per capita income of $1,760 is just one-fifth that of China. Even more striking, while 95 per cent of the Chinese population is literate, the proportion for India is only 74 per cent — and only 65 per cent for women. A symptom of this problem is India’s poor performance in international comparisons of universities, with none ranked among the world’s top 100. India’s high-tech exports are only 5 per cent of its total exports compared to 30 per cent for China.
“No one should expect an Indian-American alliance any time soon, given historical Indian public opinion.”
-Joseph Nye
Tweet this
India is unlikely to develop the power to become a global challenger to the US in the first half of this century. Indeed, even in terms of soft power, a recent study by the Portland Consultancy in London placed India outside the top 30 countries. China ranked 30th, and the US came in third, behind the UK and Germany.
Nonetheless, India has considerable assets that already affect the balance of power in Asia. While India and China signed agreements in 1993 and 1996 that promised a peaceful settlement of the border dispute that led them to war in 1962, the issue has heated up again, following Chinese actions in recent years.
India and China are fellow members of the Brics (along with Brazil, Russia, and South Africa). But cooperation within that caucus is limited. While Indian officials are often discreet in public about relations with China, and wisely want bilateral trade and investment to grow, their security concerns remain acute. As part of the group of Asian countries that will tend to balance China, India has already begun to strengthen its diplomatic relations with Japan.
It would be a mistake to cast the prospects for an improved US-India relationship solely in terms of China’s rising power. Indian economic success is an American interest on its own. So is the open approach taken by India and Brazil on issues such as governance of the internet, at a time when Russia and China are seeking more authoritarian control.
No one should expect an Indian-American alliance any time soon, given historical Indian public opinion. But one can predict a relationship in the coming years that will be both sui generis and stronger.
— Project Syndicate, 2015
Joseph S. Nye, Jr. is a professor at Harvard and author of Is the American Century Over? Since 2002, he has co-chaired a US-India Strategic Dialogue under the auspices of the Aspen Institute.

Tuesday, 4 August 2015

Asean-India summit to adopt new joint action plan

KUALA LUMPUR: The 13th Asean-India Summit scheduled to be held here in November is expected to adopt a new five-year joint Plan of Action (POA), which is currently being discussed, says India's External Affairs secretary (East) Anil Wadhwa (pix).
He said that the current five-year plan to implement Asean-India partnership for peace, progress and shared prosperity (2010-2015), would expire at the end of this year.
"Currently, both sides are formulating a new action plan for the next five years (2016-2020)," he told Bernama in an interview here ahead of the 48th Asean Foreign Ministers' Meeting, Post-Ministerial Conferences and Related Meetings, scheduled for this week.
Anil said that during the meeting, the leaders would be reviewing the entire gamut of relationship between Asean and India and also share ideas on further enhancing bilateral relations in various areas.
According to the secretary, the leaders would also exchange views on various regional and international issues, with special focus to be given on the three pillars of the Asean Community (AC) during the 13th Asean-India Summit, which Malaysia will host as Asean's chair.
The three pillars of the AC, set to be established by year-end, are Asean Political Community, Asean Economic Community and Asean Socio-Cultural Community.
"We look forward to establish a stronger foundation to further deepen our strategic partnership. This time around, we are looking at joint production with Asean countries," Anil said.
Bernama had earlier quoted External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj as saying that India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi would attend the Summit as Asean member countries had always been a key element in Indian foreign policy.
She said that Modi's presence would be crucial in engaging further with the country's partners in the region.
The last official visit by an Indian prime minister to Malaysia was in October 2010 when Dr Manmohan Singh came to Kuala Lumpur. – Bernama

The Mysterious Death of an Indian Muckraker

The Mysterious Death of an Indian Muckraker
UTTAR PRADESH, India — The afternoon’s heat was thick and voices of the crowd low as two young men stood on a straw bed outside the ancestral home of the late freelance journalist Jagendra Singh. Over 100 people had gathered on June 15 for a sit-in here in Khutar, a village in the northern Indian state of Uttar Pradesh. The young men reached for a banner strung against a tree to post Singh’s photograph in its center. It stated the reason for the sit-in, with bright red Hindi script emblazoned across the top: “Justice for martyred journalist Jagendra Singh.”
A week earlier, on June 8, the 45-year-old Singh had died in a hospital in Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh’s capital. He was transferred there after his body was doused in kerosene and lit on fire on June 1, in his home in Shahjahanpur, a district of central Uttar Pradesh, which locals say is known for its carpet industry, samosas, and crime — especially murders. A preliminary forensic report by state investigators suggests the death was an attempted suicide. But on his deathbed, Singh charged a police officer, acting on behalf of Ram Murti Singh Verma, a welfare minister in Uttar Pradesh, with attempting to murder him. The burning occurred after Singh had accused Verma of a host of criminal activities and corruption on Singh’s Facebook page, which he used as a news portal.
Singh didn’t always post the source of his information on Facebook. But on his deathbed, before succumbing to the burns that charred 60 percent of his body, he declared before a magistrate and Amitabh Thakur, a longtime police officer and social activist, that he had obtained damning information through the Indian equivalent of the Freedom of Information Act. Amitabh recorded his declaration on two videos that are now posted on YouTube.
“The fight against corruption and corrupt practices is the root cause of this,” said Amitabh at his home in Lucknow, a few days after Singh died. “Mr. Jagendra Singh was something out of sync with the mindset. If you expose the system’s corruption or malfunctioning, it is generally considered something that is,” he paused, cocking his head as he searched for the right words, “not usual.”
The conflicting stories at the heart of the case underscore the worries, suspicions, and frustrations that have reverberated since Singh’s death shook India. His death, along with a spate of recent attacks against members of the press across the country, has raised a larger outcry over the challenges journalists endure working outside of India’s major cities. They often operate with limited institutional support and risk their lives to report stories that both editors and organized crime would rather they ignore. Even local residents often prefer that journalists ignore some of the most dangerous stories. And that’s because these stories, once published, inevitably lead to trouble — especially in a place like Uttar Pradesh.
India’s most populous state of more than 200 million people, is notorious for its culture of lawlessness and “goonda raj” — a government run and influenced by goons. The sinister nexus of power, fear, business, politics, poverty, and policing creates widespread corruption. In this type of murky environment, an issue like the death of a journalist can sometimes become conflated with a distrust of journalists themselves. And that’s what happened with Singh.
* * *
Singh became a reporter around 2000, after three failed business ventures — a general store, a snack counter, and a paan shop, where he would sell cigarettes and the betel leaf that men in this region like to chew. He was determined to turn his passion for writing into a career and serve as a voice for poor people like himself, his 22-year-old son Rajan explained in a secluded corner of the family’s home.
He started by stringing for the Hindi paper Amar Ujala (“Undying Light”), offering news as needed and managing the paper’s distribution. Balancing multiple tasks is not unusual in India’s vernacular journalism (that is, reporting in one of India’s many languages, mostly outside of major cities) where the wages are low, even for Indian standards, and it’s expected that reporters do side jobs to earn a living. But payments were too paltry, and he left the job after a few years. Still, his work earned him a reputation as a fearless crime reporter. Sometime around 2010, Sardar Sharma, the bureau chief of the Hindi daily Swatantra Bharat (“Free India”), recruited Singh to join his paper in Shahjahanpur, a town of roughly 350,000 people near Khutar and the center of the district with the same name.
In the roughly two years he worked there, he often reported damning information on powerful local personalities, his two sons said. That was, and still is, an unconventional practice in a region where politicians regularly buy advertising in papers and local leaders wield enormous power. His reporting style and stubbornness angered Sharma, who said Singh reported false information at least once. “He was the kind of personality who used to say anything and everything in front of police officials, government officials, and his fellow journalists,” Sharma said in an interview. 
“He 
“He was like a car without brakes.”
But what Singh saw, his sons say, was the newspaper’s infuriating subservience to the state’s corruption. “His seniors used to pressure him to conceal certain information, so he left the job,” Rajan said.
Singh then turned to freelancing. In 2011, he set up a Facebook account, which he called “Shahjahanpur Samachar” (“Shahjahanpur News”), to post and distribute stories. He thought he could make productive use of Facebook, his family and fellow reporters said, and considered himself a “social media journalist.”
That moniker is unusual for Shahjahanpur, where most people view Facebook as an aimless distraction. But it wasn’t odd for the reporters who found Singh’s posts helpful and sourced stories from his account, and the more than 10,000 followers he amassed across three different Facebook pages. He typically tagged dozens of people in his posts, and many were influential youth leaders with wide networks, according to A., a Shahjahanpur reporter who asked to be identified only by his first initial because of the sensitivity of Singh’s death.
For several months before he died, Singh’s posts had targeted the welfare minister Verma — so aggressively that many people in Shahjahanpur wondered whether Singh had a personal vendetta against him. Singh not only charged the minister with land grabbing and illegal mining, but also the gang rape of a healthcare worker, known as Shalini, a widow with whom Singh was reportedly having a relationship.
On May 22, Singh published a chilling Facebook post. In it, he wrote of the revenge he alleged he had received for exposing Verma’s alleged corruption: He was physically assaulted, had his leg broken, and henchmen of the minister slapped him with criminal charges. He knew the danger his choices had invited. “Ram Murti Singh Verma may get me killed. Right now, politicians, goons, and the police are all after me. Writing the truth is taking a toll on my life,” he wrote in the post.
The confrontation between Singh and the police came in the middle of a scorching afternoon just days later on June 1. Shalini was the only witness. In her original account, she asserted that a police officer had ignited Singh and also tried to pour kerosene on her before she escaped. But in a subsequent statement, she changed her story, claiming Singh was attempting to self-immolate to evade arrest for the other charges levied on him.
Verma has shunned media since the incident. (Phone calls made to Verma’s office were refused after I identified myself as a journalist.) Some political analysts in Lucknow say the state’s ruling party, the Samajwadi Party, is keeping him in the government in part to avoid alienating members of hisKurmi caste; caste affiliation resonates loudly in Indian politics and especially in Uttar Pradesh.
Meanwhile, Singh’s integrity is still being questioned. At a dingy office shared by several reporters in Shahjahanpur the week after he died, on June 16, the reporters spoke of his sometimes unethical income streams, including accepting money from locals to not report potentially incriminating information and the peculiar, but common, practice of ghostwriting news for men who identified themselves as journalists.
Another rumored income source of Singh’s was far riskier, given Uttar Pradesh’s notoriously dirty politics. Allegedly, Verma’s political rival, former state legislator Devendra Pal Singh, had paid him to write negative stories about Verma. These reporters believed that Singh and Devendra Pal Singh worked together on an election media campaign for Devendra in 2012. The two were also both members of the Thakur caste — an unquestionable reason for solidarity for many people. But gossip that Verma recently paid off Shahjahanpur reporters to paint Singh as a mentally tortured political pawn is also making the rounds among journalists in Lucknow.
In an interview, Devendra Pal Singh admitted to giving incriminating information on Verma to media and law-and-order officials, but he denied any association with Singh and also denied rumors that he offered the journalist money. Singh “used to respect me a lot,” he acknowledged. But “who am I to supply information just to him?”
* * *
Some of the harassment and pressure Singh faced has transferred onto his family. On July 3, his younger son, 21-year-old Rahul, appealed to the Indian Supreme Court to conduct an independent probe into his father’s death to compensate for what the family felt was Lucknow’s deliberate negligence. But just before the court’s hearing on July 27, Rahul sent a letter to the lawyers saying he wanted to withdraw the matter. He and his brother nowreportedly agree with the forensic report — that Singh was attempting self-immolation.
“It appears from [Rahul’s] Facebook posts that he was being threatened for some time to withdraw the case,” said Colin Gonsalves, a senior advocate for the Supreme Court of India and founding director of the Human Rights Law Network, a public interest litigation group in India. “He was undoubtedly scared.”
Given that few people outside of Shahjahanpur knew of Singh or paid any attention to his reports before he died — and that rumors of payoffs and coverups have festered in the weeks since — it’s nearly impossible to confirm what actually happened to Singh.
Sadly, that’s not rare for cases involving the deaths of journalists in India. “There’s always a muddled story,” said Sumit Galhotra, a research associate at the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), which tracks journalist deaths around the world. Personal rivalries and suspicions of being on the payroll of someone influential are not uncommon. Inadequate pay rates among journalists, and the door it may open to corrupt practices like blackmail, exploitation, and dishonest reporting, is a huge factor, he said. At least 35 journalists in India have been killed for their reporting since 1992, according to the committee. India ranked 13th on CPJ’s 2014 annual global impunity index, which spotlights countries where journalists are murdered and their killers go free. India’s watchdog media organization, the Press Council of India, says 79 journalists have been killed in the past 25 years, with few convictions.
Statistics aside, the retaliations for reporting on topics involving politicians, religious figures, and organized crime merely hint at the danger on the ground. Days after Singh died in June, a group of men beat and draggedHaider Khan, another journalist in Uttar Pradesh, behind a motorcycle for about 300 feet for reporting on allegedly suspect land deals. On July 4, Akshay Singh, a journalist with the private Hindi news channel Aaj Tak, died mysteriously while investigating a billion-dollar corruption scam in the nearby state of Madhya Pradesh.
And in Shahjahanpur, journalist Narendra Yadav reported on the alleged sexual assault of a girl by Asaram Bapu, a self-proclaimed spiritual guru whose birth name is Asumal Thaumal Harpalani and whose rape charges aremaking headlines again for the witnesses dying. (A spokesperson for Harpalani, who is currently in prison, couldn’t be reached for comment.) Yadav showed a picture of himself taken after attackers — whom he believes were associated with Bapu — slit his throat in September 2014. Yadav had reported on the case and supplied information on it to other reporters, a routine practice. The henchmen tried to lure him away from reporting with bribes, Yadav said. The attack came after he refused them.
Yadav tried reporting his own assault to the police. “The police told me that I was not the only journalist writing about Asaram Bapu, so why would it be only me [who was attacked]?” he said. He pointed to the photo. “The police are completely biased. They work under political pressure and consider journalists their enemies.”
Some state officials seem unmoved by the assaults on the press. In an interview, Navneet Sehgal, Uttar Pradesh’s principal secretary of information, chuckled in response to questions about the issue. “Jagendra’s case is only in isolation,” he said. “The reality is that it’s alright. Everybody is safe. What is the problem?” Sehgal added that Lucknow has “efficient” committees in every district for reporters to air their grievances. However, N.K. Trikha, former president of India’s National Union of Journalists, told me in an email, “These committees are almost nonexistent at present due to the unsympathetic and negligent attitude of the state authorities.”
Given the attention on these recent killings and scandals, a help line for journalists in Uttar Pradesh is in the works. India’s Ministry of Home Affairs has also begun to collect data on attacks on journalists, activists, and whistleblowers. Others have noted, however, that these threats and deaths often rise to the national attention for just a short while before receding back into oblivion. 
Th
They are part of broader systemic issues that prevail in the absence of the rule of law, even asverifying who is an honest journalist remains a challenge.
* * *
Suspicions that Singh burned himself were spreading in Shahjahanpur even before Shalini, the only witness to the incident, retracted her original testimony. Her decision was enough evidence for some to suspect that blackmail is at play. Locals opined that perhaps “goons told her” what to say and that she’s now trying to protect herself — as some believe is the case with Singh’s family now as well.
The police officers at the scene of the burning have been suspended. But no arrests have been made. “Unless someone is proven guilty, you can’t take action,” said Sehgal, the principal secretary of information. “The inquiry is being done independently, and it will be brought before the court. If anyone is found guilty, action will be taken.”
In the end, it makes no difference who is responsible for his death, said Prem Shankar, a television news reporter in Shahjahanpur. Singh did things — or was perceived to have done things — that were unconventional and angered someone with power. That’s the fundamental reason he died, he added.
“Either he burned himself to draw attention to his plight, or someone else murdered him,” said Shankar. “The reasons remain the same.”

A New Era in India's Foreign Policy

 
Photo: Reuters
Photo: Reuters
During the election campaign of 2014, Narendra Modi rarely, if ever, invoked foreign policy issues. Yet, since assuming office, the Prime Minister has pursued a vigorous foreign policy agenda with visits to a host of major countries as well as to several states in India’s immediate neighbourhood.
Does the vigour that Modi has brought to India’s foreign policy reflect a fundamental shift or are these changes merely cosmetic? The question is far from trivial. At a time when China is pursuing an increasingly assertive foreign policy, when the future of the American re-balancing strategy is unclear and with much of the Middle East aflame, India’s foreign policy choices will have considerable bearing on the country’s overall fortunes. In considerable measure, Modi appears cognizant of the significance of foreign policy. Indeed, barely a year after his assumption of office some broad features of an innovative approach to foreign policy making is now discernible. That said, he still has to articulate a framework for dealing with contending priorities in certain parts of the world.
At one level, his various foreign trips can be dismissed as mere fanfare without any substantial or tangible accomplishments to date. Yet, such an assessment may be premature. His various trips to a number of key states in East Asia suggest that he grasps the significance of attracting foreign investment and building a set of key strategic partnerships, especially at a time when India’s relations with China remains fraught with uncertainty.
He has also sought to improve ties with India’s smaller neighbours. The most significant of these, of course, has been his successful conclusion of a border accord with Bangladesh. This was far from a trivial achievement. A host of previous regimes had tried to tackle the issue, but in the end had failed to bring the matter to a successful resolution.
The critical exception in terms of dealing with India’s immediate neighbours, of course, has been its relations with its nettlesome neighbour, Pakistan. Despite initial efforts to woo Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, Modi’s efforts have not yielded useful results. Against this backdrop, it appears that he and his key foreign policy advisers have devised a strategy for the neighbourhood.
Pared to the bone, it seems to have three components. First, it seeks to improve ties with all of India’s neighbours. Second, it makes clear to Pakistan that provocations will be met with a firm response at times and places of India’s choosing. Despite a seemingly tepid response to the latest Pakistan-based terrorist attack in Punjab, it would be a mistake to believe that the government will not fashion a befitting reply in due course. Third, if and when the Sharif regime demonstrates a willingness to improve trade and commercial relations with India, his regime will reciprocate. This approach to dealing with Pakistan marks a significant departure from the United Progressive Alliance regime’s willingness to engage Pakistan despite the lack of any reciprocity.
Modi has also brought a sense of urgency and pragmatism to the foreign policy arena. This was on display during his visit to France when he made a decision to purchase 36 Rafale aircraft. This move may well contribute to the breaking of the near-impasse in the negotiations to acquire the medium multi-role combat aircraft.
His practicality has also been on display in his dealings with the US. Given the contretemps with the denial of a visa to visit the US during his tenure as chief minister of Gujarat, he could well have borne a grudge against the country. Yet, his decision to both visit the US soon after assuming office and then to invite President Barack Obama as the chief guest at the Republic Day parade has demonstrated that he is well prepared to set aside past slights and grievances.
The question that remains, however, is whether or not he can now follow up on these symbolic gestures with some tangible efforts to address outstanding issues in India-US relations, ranging from enhanced defence cooperation to the eventual consummation of the civilian nuclear agreement and differences on the issue of intellectual property rights.
Apart from these concrete issues, Modi’s foreign policy has also been bereft of the long-standing ideational (and mostly hollow) rhetoric that had long characterized India’s foreign policy. Not once has he invoked the concept of non-alignment, he has made no hoary statements about the urgent need for global nuclear disarmament and he has also eschewed as reference to the jejune idea of “strategic autonomy”. His silence on these matters again bespeaks of a more imaginative foreign policy attuned to meeting India’s national interests.
The one area, however, where his government has yet to demonstrate much resourcefulness involves India’s ties to the Middle East. Admittedly, he has made clear his interest in sustaining and indeed boosting ties with Israel. However, beyond maintaining this important bilateral relationship, his government has kept a deafening silence on how India might respond to the political upheavals that are now roiling much of the region. Nor, for that matter, has it signalled how it intends to take advantage of the current thaw in US-Iran relations.
There is little question that his government will have to turn its attention to this vital region of the world. India’s energy needs, its vast Muslim population and the presence of a substantial expatriate community in the Gulf all highlight the importance thereof.
If Modi truly intends to make foreign policy one of his legacy issues, he will need to sustain the various initiatives that he has undertaken. He will also need to resist the temptation to fall back on the shibboleths of yesteryear as he charts a new course. And, finally, he will have to turn his gaze to the Middle East because of the sheer significance of the region to India’s national interests. A failure to move on all three fronts could well jeopardize the renewed enterprise that he has brought to this arena.
Sumit Ganguly holds the Rabindranath Tagore Chair in Indian Cultures and Civilizations and directs the Center on American and Global Security at Indiana University, Bloomington.
Comments are welcome at theirview@livemint.com

Featured Post 2