That Guy
PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2013
- Messages
- 14,553
- Reaction score
- 52
- Country
- Location
G20 Kashmir Meeting: Modi's PR Ploy Backfires!
- Thread starter RiazHaq
- Start date
VkdIndian
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2021
- Messages
- 3,163
- Reaction score
- -6
- Country
- Location
Got the gist.
You trying to prove that, it was the most important event related to G20 while Indians trying to prove otherwise.
I guess I too have said my piece. No point thrashing a dead snake now.
That Guy
PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2013
- Messages
- 14,553
- Reaction score
- 52
- Country
- Location
Not really, nice try putting words in my mouth.
But regardless, it's up to the readers to decide.
Kuru
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2017
- Messages
- 2,880
- Reaction score
- -18
- Country
- Location
Lol we didn’t invite 200 countries’ representatives in the first place. In case you didn’t notice, it was a G20 meet.
ProudThamizhan
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2023
- Messages
- 1,385
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
When it comes to Kashmir only group of consequence is G1. India.
Arguments that claim abrogation of Article 370 has made the situation on the ground, lives of people in Jammu and Kashmir better mislead on facts as well as approach, writes Radha Kumar, a former Kashmir interlocutor appointed by the Government of India.
indianexpress.com
Articles by Ram Madhav (‘J&K, like other states’, IE August 5) and Akhilesh Mishra, along with Jammu and Kashmir lieutenant-governor Manoj Sinha’s interview (IE, August 5), were published on the fourth anniversary of the reading down of Article 370 (August 5). All three mislead on fact as well as approach.
Madhav claims that Jammu and Kashmir is more secure, economically better-off, and socially more stable than it was before the former state lost its special status and was divided and demoted into two Union Territories. As a result of these historic actions, he says, “normalcy” is the new normal. His examples are: The opening of a cineplex (sic), a booming tourist season and a sharp drop in stone-pelting. Sinha claims that infrastructure is being developed at a rapid pace, investment is flowing in, and “ordinary people” are now free to express their opinions. Mishra echoes these views but also provides a fascinating account of how the RSS prepared the ground for the Modi administration’s actions in August 2019.
The facts, unfortunately, indicate that all three are wrong on the ground situation. What is normal about taking over 5,000 people into detention to prevent outcry against the actions of August 5 and 9, 2019? Is it normal to put journalists and human rights defenders behind bars for years on end because they publish information or opinion that the government seeks to suppress? Is it normal for Pandits and migrant workers to be targeted by militants, or for crimes against women and children to be rising or for unemployment to be as high as 23.1 per cent (three times the national average)? Is it normal for militancy to resurface in the Pir Panjal region from where it had virtually disappeared over the past 15 years? Is it normal for political leaders to be routinely denied permission to protest peacefully or their offices to be sealed, as happened with the PDP and NC on Friday, while the three articles were in press? Is it normal for land to be alienated, cross-border trade to cease, local hotels to be put out of business by the refusal to extend their leases and mining rights to go to non-local industry? Is it normal for 71 CRPF troops to be killed in the four years between 2019-2022, twice as many as in the previous four years when 35 died.
Radha Kumar writes: After abrogation of Article 370, there is no normalcy in Kashmir
Arguments that claim abrogation of Article 370 has made the situation on the ground, lives of people in Jammu and Kashmir better mislead on facts as well as approach
indianexpress.com
Articles by Ram Madhav (‘J&K, like other states’, IE August 5) and Akhilesh Mishra, along with Jammu and Kashmir lieutenant-governor Manoj Sinha’s interview (IE, August 5), were published on the fourth anniversary of the reading down of Article 370 (August 5). All three mislead on fact as well as approach.
Madhav claims that Jammu and Kashmir is more secure, economically better-off, and socially more stable than it was before the former state lost its special status and was divided and demoted into two Union Territories. As a result of these historic actions, he says, “normalcy” is the new normal. His examples are: The opening of a cineplex (sic), a booming tourist season and a sharp drop in stone-pelting. Sinha claims that infrastructure is being developed at a rapid pace, investment is flowing in, and “ordinary people” are now free to express their opinions. Mishra echoes these views but also provides a fascinating account of how the RSS prepared the ground for the Modi administration’s actions in August 2019.
The facts, unfortunately, indicate that all three are wrong on the ground situation. What is normal about taking over 5,000 people into detention to prevent outcry against the actions of August 5 and 9, 2019? Is it normal to put journalists and human rights defenders behind bars for years on end because they publish information or opinion that the government seeks to suppress? Is it normal for Pandits and migrant workers to be targeted by militants, or for crimes against women and children to be rising or for unemployment to be as high as 23.1 per cent (three times the national average)? Is it normal for militancy to resurface in the Pir Panjal region from where it had virtually disappeared over the past 15 years? Is it normal for political leaders to be routinely denied permission to protest peacefully or their offices to be sealed, as happened with the PDP and NC on Friday, while the three articles were in press? Is it normal for land to be alienated, cross-border trade to cease, local hotels to be put out of business by the refusal to extend their leases and mining rights to go to non-local industry? Is it normal for 71 CRPF troops to be killed in the four years between 2019-2022, twice as many as in the previous four years when 35 died.
VkdIndian
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2021
- Messages
- 3,163
- Reaction score
- -6
- Country
- Location
Time to revive this thread and ask those questions that were raised on this thread, wrongly and untimely. Srinagar event wasn’t the main one, which was attempted to be shown, for purposes well known.
G20 meet in Kashmir was just one of the events and that too a low level one. The arguments thrown were completely contrary to that and some people claimed the boycott to be of the highest level from Turkey as well as China.
The G20 summit is about to take place in Sep.
Will Erdogan and Xi boycott it?
News is that they wouldn’t. Let’s see.
G20 Summit: Biden, Xi, Erdogan among 25+ world leaders to be present at Delhi high table - World News
This marks India`s inaugural hosting of the summit since the grouping initiated summit-level meetings in response to the 2008 financial crisis
G20 Summit: Biden, Xi, Erdogan among 25+ world leaders to be present at Delhi high table
Last edited:
Xi Jinping’s absence challenges G20 status as global leadership forum
China’s president will send his deputy to next week’s summit in New Delhi
www.ft.com
For one western official involved in preparations for next week’s G20 summit in India, the news that China’s president Xi Jinping would skip the event could only mean one thing: “They have been working to scupper our joint work all year,” the official said. “Not attending is the obvious step.”
Xi’s decision to send Premier Li Qiang to the summit instead, which western officials say was conveyed to them by Chinese counterparts, has yet to be confirmed by Beijing.
But the absence of China’s president will be a blow to India’s rotating presidency of the multilateral gathering and the status of the New Delhi summit. It also shakes the stature of the G20 as the pre-eminent global leadership forum, amid deep fissures between its members.
The decision follows months of failed efforts by the G20’s multiple ministerial forums to find joint conclusions on topics running from healthcare to climate change, because of disagreements over the war in Ukraine and burden-sharing between rich and developing nations.
Some Indian observers are convinced that China wants to spoil India’s showcase event at a time of bilateral friction over their disputed border.
“China has been the principal opposition to consensus on almost all issues,” said Indrani Bagchi, chief executive of the Ananta Aspen Centre, an Indian think-tank.
It will be the first time that Xi or any president of China has skipped a G20 summit, a nadir for a body that was founded to find consensus among the world’s most powerful nations, despite their social or economic contrasts.
Premier Li is China’s second most senior leader and Xi’s right-hand man. But Josh Lipsky, senior director of the GeoEconomics Center of the Washington-based Atlantic Council, said the president’s absence put in question the G20’s “long-term sustainable viability and success”.
“When the G20 speaks, are they speaking without China’s affirmation, to debt restructuring negotiations, for example?” Lipsky said. “That is an existential threat to the future of the G20.”
At its first two summits in 2008 and 2009, held to forge a co-ordinated response to the global financial crisis, the G20 was hailed as the emerging primary international decision-making body, reflecting the rising importance and economic clout of developing nations led by China.
Gordon Brown, who hosted the 2009 summit as UK prime minister, said it represented “a coming together of the world”.
But Russia’s break from the west, with the annexation of Crimea in 2014 and full-scale war against Ukraine in February last year, fractured G20 unity and the resulting global crisis, alongside rising tension between the US and China in recent years, has exacerbated faultlines between its developed and developing members.
The G20 managed to agree an unexpected joint statement at the 2022 summit in Bali. But this year’s discussions under India’s presidency have been marked by a seemingly unbridgeable rift between democracies and Russia and China over the war in Ukraine.
At meetings of G20 foreign ministers, finance chiefs and other officials, India has failed to secure a single final statement agreed by all members. Russia and China have repeatedly opted out of language promoted by western countries condemning the war.
Asked about Xi’s absence, China’s foreign ministry on Friday said only that it would announce any travel plans at the “proper time”. Beijing this month rejected suggestions that it had obstructed G20 consensus on cutting climate emissions as “totally run counter to facts”.
China’s president will send his deputy to next week’s summit in New Delhi
Xi Jinping’s absence challenges G20 status as global leadership forum
China’s president will send his deputy to next week’s summit in New Delhi
For one western official involved in preparations for next week’s G20 summit in India, the news that China’s president Xi Jinping would skip the event could only mean one thing: “They have been working to scupper our joint work all year,” the official said. “Not attending is the obvious step.”
Xi’s decision to send Premier Li Qiang to the summit instead, which western officials say was conveyed to them by Chinese counterparts, has yet to be confirmed by Beijing.
But the absence of China’s president will be a blow to India’s rotating presidency of the multilateral gathering and the status of the New Delhi summit. It also shakes the stature of the G20 as the pre-eminent global leadership forum, amid deep fissures between its members.
The decision follows months of failed efforts by the G20’s multiple ministerial forums to find joint conclusions on topics running from healthcare to climate change, because of disagreements over the war in Ukraine and burden-sharing between rich and developing nations.
Some Indian observers are convinced that China wants to spoil India’s showcase event at a time of bilateral friction over their disputed border.
“China has been the principal opposition to consensus on almost all issues,” said Indrani Bagchi, chief executive of the Ananta Aspen Centre, an Indian think-tank.
It will be the first time that Xi or any president of China has skipped a G20 summit, a nadir for a body that was founded to find consensus among the world’s most powerful nations, despite their social or economic contrasts.
Premier Li is China’s second most senior leader and Xi’s right-hand man. But Josh Lipsky, senior director of the GeoEconomics Center of the Washington-based Atlantic Council, said the president’s absence put in question the G20’s “long-term sustainable viability and success”.
“When the G20 speaks, are they speaking without China’s affirmation, to debt restructuring negotiations, for example?” Lipsky said. “That is an existential threat to the future of the G20.”
At its first two summits in 2008 and 2009, held to forge a co-ordinated response to the global financial crisis, the G20 was hailed as the emerging primary international decision-making body, reflecting the rising importance and economic clout of developing nations led by China.
Gordon Brown, who hosted the 2009 summit as UK prime minister, said it represented “a coming together of the world”.
But Russia’s break from the west, with the annexation of Crimea in 2014 and full-scale war against Ukraine in February last year, fractured G20 unity and the resulting global crisis, alongside rising tension between the US and China in recent years, has exacerbated faultlines between its developed and developing members.
The G20 managed to agree an unexpected joint statement at the 2022 summit in Bali. But this year’s discussions under India’s presidency have been marked by a seemingly unbridgeable rift between democracies and Russia and China over the war in Ukraine.
At meetings of G20 foreign ministers, finance chiefs and other officials, India has failed to secure a single final statement agreed by all members. Russia and China have repeatedly opted out of language promoted by western countries condemning the war.
Asked about Xi’s absence, China’s foreign ministry on Friday said only that it would announce any travel plans at the “proper time”. Beijing this month rejected suggestions that it had obstructed G20 consensus on cutting climate emissions as “totally run counter to facts”.
Similar threads
- Article
