Category Archives: Government Oppression

Some American leaders are using sharper, more belligerent language about China.

From Sen. Ted Cruz:

"China is the single greatest geopolitical threat facing the United States over the next century," the senator tweeted in 2020.

To Mike Pompeo:

Now, I've spoken about this at some length, the People's Republic of China represent an absolute existential threat to our country, the former secretary of state said.

We often hear from Washington that the United States is locked in another great powers conflict with China. But is the "great powers" Cold War era analogy the right one for modern China?

Today, On Point: The fear and folly of invoking Cold War rhetoric when grappling with U.S.-China tensions.

Melvyn Leffler, professor of history emeritus at the University of Virginia. Author of several books on the Cold War, including "For the Soul of Mankind" and "A Preponderance of Power." Co-editor of the three volume "Cambridge History of the Cold War."

Jack Beatty, On Point news analyst. (@JackBeattyNPR)

Yangyang Cheng, postdoctoral fellow at Yale Law School's Paul Tsai China Center. Frequent columnist on Chinese politics and U.S.-China relations. (@yangyang_cheng)

On echoes between Cold War era language and U.S.-China relations in 2021

Yangyang Cheng: China is used as a subject. But China is a country. It cannot think and do. So who in China is bent on dominating Asia or other parts of the world? There may be certain people in different levels of Chinese government, or punditry in society, who may have these views. But are these the dominant views? Are these the only views? Can these views be changed? And can power relations be changed? I feel that this kind of rhetoric really reflects a profound lack of intellectual curiosity. As well as a lack of moral imagination. That these fears and insecurities are all projected onto a faceless other. And the world is being collapsed into this kind of false binary. And so oneself can pretend to be both morally superior, as well as innocent.

But isnt that one of the hallmarks of how world powers talk about other nations in moments of tension?

Yangyang Cheng:Absolutely. And I would like to also point out that similar rhetorics are also used by the Chinese government. In terms of talking about U.S. or Western imperialism bent on subverting the Chinese system, bent on keeping China backwards. And these are the language that are directed at a domestic audience in order to legitimize the Chinese government's way of governing, in order to enhance its own control within China, and potentially also overseas.

China doesn't necessarily have to forcibly project its power. The fear is that the biggest difference today is that China actually has its economic tentacles, by our own invitation, in the United States already.

If you look at the economic power of China, the United States can be almost seen as a vassal state to China. And that's the existential threat that not just Ted Cruz, but occasionally Joe Biden and people on both sides of the aisle, talk about. What do you make of that?

Yangyang Cheng: It is interesting, right, because, for example, earlier in the clips, you've shown certain senators on the floor saying, 'commie China' and this and that. But of course, the Chinese ruling party is nominally communist, China is now an integral part of the global capitalist system. And the Chinese government itself is a major player in the global capitalist system.

"And if we think about this integration, a lot of the overseas influence, and political pressures the Chinese government exerts through its economic leverage really is not so much as China is weakening the democratic system, but behaviors from certain Chinese entities are exposing the pre-existing weaknesses in a lot of societies. Where there are companies that prioritize access to the Chinese market, instead of standing up for principles of freedom and human rights.

"And how these global supply chains, including the forced labor issue among the Uyghur people in the northwestern region of Xinjiang. And so it's really systems of oppression, including state oppression, are all connected. And simply projecting them as all in one single country contained by a border, it's a profound misunderstanding.

On lessons from the Cold War, and how we might apply those lessons regarding America and China today

Melvyn Leffler:Even President Reagan came to realize that the Soviet Union and the United States had mutual interests. Mutual interests in curbing the strategic arms race, in negotiating arms limitation agreements. And most of all, in seeking to abolish nuclear weapons. Once again, Republican officials from Ford to Reagan, from Nixon, Ford and Reagan, while waging the Cold War, also understood that they needed to seek out mutual interests. And that's what we need to do today.

Yangyang Cheng: "The Cold War really was a hot war in many parts of the world. And it's like the people who exist on the edges of empires, on the margins of nationhood, who are bearing the ... cost of it. And we are seeing these being played out again. And so I think one really important thing is to listen to the voices in the margins who are bearing the brunt of the cost in terms of xenophobic rhetoric, in terms of state oppression, in terms of climate change. And to be able to see the edge not as an end, but as a new beginning. And to imagine a world where humanity as a species can come together and imagine the future where no one is in exile.

Highlights have been condensed and edited for clarity.

The Atlantic: "China Isnt the Soviet Union. Confusing the Two Is Dangerous." "Anyone looking for evidence of a growing economic and ideological conflict between China and the United States will have no trouble finding somethingthe trade war now roiling both countries economies, the standoff between police and pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong, Beijings swift retaliation against the NBA over a single Houston Rockets executives tweet in support of those same protesters."

The Guardian: "The west sees China as a threat, not as a real place, with real people" "I was at dinner with a friend, and she asked about my work. 'Name one thing you wish Americans knew about China,' she said."

Go here to see the original:

A rekindled Cold War? A reality check on the narrative around U.S.-China tensions - WBUR

The Department of the Interior recently ordered that the derogatory term squaw be removed from lakes, mountains, trails and other features on federal land and the largest share of the cleanup will be taking place in the West.

In California, the sexual slur for Native American women appears on 87 places, according to the U.S. Board on Geographic Names, which has a search tool to look up place names in every state. Idaho is a distant second with 69 places identified by the now-banned term followed by Arizona with 68 places.

When variants of the name are included in a search (such as historical or local references that are not formally recognized) the frequency of the term squaw as a place name can almost triple in some states.

Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, a Native American from New Mexico, issued the order on Nov. 19, along with another directive establishing a process to review and replace other offensive names identifying the nations geographic features.

The orders, which continue an ongoing movement that goes back decades of eliminating derogatory names from landmarks, is expected to streamline and speed up what has usually been a lengthy, painstaking process to change the offensive name of a geographic site.

Racist terms have no place in our vernacular or on our federal lands. Our nations lands and waters should be places to celebrate the outdoors and our shared cultural heritage not to perpetuate the legacies of oppression, Haaland, the first Indigenous woman to head the department, said in a press release. Todays actions will accelerate an important process to reconcile derogatory place names and mark a significant step in honoring the ancestors who have stewarded our lands since time immemorial.

Heres why the term squaw became a lightning rod for removing offensive names from places and how past efforts to clean up the language of landmarks have fared.

Many landmarks are named after historical events in a location, early settlers of an area or can reflect the whims of land surveyors who created early maps of the American frontier, researchers and historians said.

The movement to remove the term squaw from geographical places in the country goes back nearly 30 years, when Minnesota became the first state to require counties to rename 19 lakes, streams and points that have the word squaw in them.

An Associated Press story at the time reported that opponents of the new law facetiously complied. In Minnesotas Lake County, near the Canadian border, they tried to change the names of Squaw Creek and Squaw Bay to Politically Correct Creek and Politically Correct Bay.

Despite the law, a lake and a town both still carry the name Squaw Lake in Minnesota, according the U.S. Board on Geographic Names database.

While there is some debate over when the term squaw evolved from an Algonquian word for female to a sexual slur used by European fur traders and white settlers, Native Americans generally associate the word with todays derogatory definition and have led efforts over the years to eliminate it from place names around the country.

Following in the footsteps of Minnesota, Maine, Montana and Oregon, Utah passed a law earlier this year that sets up the states own process to remove offensive place names. The bill singled out the term squaw.

It was used to describe women who were offered as prostitutes during mountain man rendezvous and later just to describe women who worked in prostitution outside of military forts, Shaina Snyder, a Din Navajo and Southern Ute told the Deseret News. The word, she said, has no relation to the languages, cultures or dialects of Utah tribes but came with westward expansion.

And the word is associated with 53 places in the Beehive State, most notably a jagged peak overlooking Provo and the BYU campus.

Researchers at the U.S. Board on Geographic Names said Utah Countys Squaw Peak is first identified on United States Geological Survey maps of the area in 1948, but may have been used locally for years before.

The most common story about its origins is that it was named for the spot where a Timpanogos Ute tribe member fell to her death while being pursued by white settlers, BYU history professor Jay Buckley told The Associated Press, noting the tale may be more anecdotal than fact.

Efforts to rename the prominent landmark have ebbed and flowed over the past two decades.

And navigating a time-consuming, confusing government process to petition for the change has proven as much an obstacle as public opposition.

In Utah County, the opposition appears to be mostly motivated by nostalgia, although Dustin Jansen, now-director of the Utahs Division of Indian Affairs, recalls opinions got so mean-spirited that a local news website stopped posting comments on a news story about efforts to change the peaks name.

He added that the campaign for change would also get conflated with eliminating Native American-related school mascots, which it is not. Jansen and others said tribal leaders are not in agreement on school mascots, but they are unanimous in eliminating the term squaw from local landmarks.

The latest sustained campaign for a name change was around 2017, when then-Provo Mayor John Curtis, now a congressman, heard feedback that the term perpetuated and mocked domestic violence against Native American women and encouraged those seeking the change to gauge if theres public support to warrant pursuing a formal request.

But the effort stalled when city officials and supporters learned the peak is on federal land. And when proponents began researching the federal name-changing process they called Jansens office for help.

We had community members contacting us, saying, This is really confusing, Jansen said. Instead of a form or application to fill out, the government asks for vague paperwork explaining why the name should be changed.

That started a yearslong search for a solution that resulted in a bill sponsored by state Sen. Jani Iwamoto, D-Holladay. Signed into law earlier this year, the legislation enlists the Utah Division of Indian Affairs to help groups submit a name change request for geographic areas that use American Indian-related terms.

The new law, which singles out places that use the word squaw, can apply to other offensive terms. But most importantly, Iwamoto and Jansen said, it provides a clear process that encourages community input to petitioning government for a name change.

Iwamoto said former GOP Congressman Rob Bishop testified in favor of her bill, stressing that establishing a public process that supports a change would compel federal authorities to honor the request.

While painstaking, changing the name of a geographical feature in Utah has succeeded in the past.

In 2006, a proposal to change Chinamans Arch to Chinese Arch near Brigham City sailed through the process without opposition. But a 2017, the renaming of Negro Bill Canyon to Grandstaff Canyon in Grand County ran up against some unexpected opposition.

The Grand County Historical Preservation Commission and the NAACP Tri-State Conference opposed the name change to preserve the history of racial attitudes of the past and noted the word Negro is still used in official group names such as the National Council of Negro Women. The Utah Martin Luther King Jr. Human Rights Commission believed removing the offensive term would give the misperception Utah has progressed to a place where such flagrant insensitivity is no longer tolerated or acceptable in our community, according to the Moab Times.

The state Committee on Geographic Names recommended Negro Bill Canyon not be changed, but the U.S. Board on Geographic Names disagreed and four years ago this month ordered it be changed, acknowledging local sentiment in Moab.

People dont realize the anger it created. I was treated horribly and to me that shows the name symbolized more than just a name that there was some racism behind it, Mary McGann, a Grand County Council member who fought for the change, told the Deseret News at the time. We change the name of things all the time, but this created some vile reaction. In many ways, it made me think it was more important than not to change it.

While the U.S. Board on Geographic Names gave a nod to local sentiment in 2017, the orders issued last month are clearly top-down directives to scrub offensive terms from the nations geographical features and give priority to local requests to eliminate the term squaw.

But the departments announcement noted such a move has precedent. It cited former Interior Secretary Stewart Udall, of Arizona, identified the N-word as derogatory, and directed in 1962 that the (Board on Geographic Names) develop a policy to eliminate its use. In 1974, the board declared a pejorative term for Japanese as derogatory and eliminated its use.

Arie Leeflang, secretary of the Utah Committee on Geographic Names, said in an email that the panel is awaiting any guidance on if the Interior Department directives change its process.

He described the state committees role in name changes as passive.

We do not proactively seek to change geographic names and are only involved when an official geographic name proposal is received by the (U.S. Board on Geographic Names) and the BGN asks for our review.

Jansen said supporters of renaming Squaw Peak in Utah County are still gathering information, including input from the Ute Indian Tribe for alternative names, to submit for a name change request.

I was contacted by someone (after the Interior Department order was announced) who asked, Are the feds going to do it now? What say does the local community have in what the name should be? Jansen said. Thats a question we are going to have to find out.

Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated that then-Provo Mayor John Curtis endorsed changing the name of Squaw Peak. Curtis encouraged those seeking the change to gauge if there was enough public support to warrant pursuing a formal request.

Continued here:

The Interior Department wants the word squaw removed from federal lands - Deseret News

Twitter has shut down thousands of state-linked accounts in China that seek to counter evidence of human rights abuses in Xinjiang, as part of what experts called an embarrassingly produced propaganda operation.

The operations used photos and images, shell and potentially automated accounts, and fake Uyghur profiles, to disseminate state propaganda and fake testimonials about their happy lives in the region, seeking to dispel evidence of a years-long campaign of oppression, with mass internments, re-education programs, and allegations of forced labour and sterilisation.

The networks were found to share themes and content, but often used repurposed accounts dedicated to pornography or Korean soap operas with little engagement except when they were amplified by Chinese diplomats and officials. Twitter is banned inside China but officials frequently operate accounts overseas.

According to analysts at thinktank the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), the content from the 2,160 accounts that Twitter closed down was often embarrassingly produced but provided a level of implausible deniability which muddied the waters around the issue.

The accounts linked to Chinese operations were in two sets, the largest being a network of 2,048 accounts amplifying the Chinese Communist partys narratives related to Xinjiang, and the second set of 112 accounts connected to Changyu Culture, a private company that ASPI said appeared to be contracted by the Xinjiang regional authority to create videos of Uyghurs supporting the government.

More than 30,000 tweets from each network were identified, frequently responding to other tweets labelling evidence of abuses as lies under the hashtag #StopXinjiangRumours or sharing videos they claimed were the truth of Xinjiang, or targeting foreign politicians while claiming to be a Uyghur person.

When the data were analysed by ASPI, it found much of it linked to pornography, Korean soap opera fans, and spam accounts and content. Thats most likely because theyve taken over these existing accounts and repurposed them, said ASPI senior analyst Fergus Ryan.

They take them over and pump out this content thats generally quite reactive Its so ham-handed, and really not done very well. One of the really weird things about one data set was that for some unknown reason they include hundreds of tweets with this handle for an account @fuck_next.

The tweets also repeatedly mis-tagged the account of former US secretary of state Mike Pompeo, and many videos linked to the now-suspended Changyu Culture YouTube channel, which is known to be a marketing outfit backed by the Xinjiang provincial authorities.

The result was a torrent of highly implausible propaganda, obvious to most eyes but still a cause for concern, said ASPI.

ASPI found 97% of the identified accounts had fewer than five followers, and 73% of accounts had zero. While 98% of tweets had no likes or retweets, the remainder were often boosted by Chinese diplomats and officials, spreading the content and giving it legitimacy.

The target is not actually people who are sceptical of the Chinese government, but is giving content to people who trust Chinese state media and are sceptical of western mainstream media, said ASPI researcher Albert Zhang. Its propaganda appealing to the base.

ASPIs report said the propaganda campaign reflected the likely direction of future information operations by the Chinese Communist party (CCP). However, Zhang and Ryan also said it also showed there might be a lack of understanding by Chinese propaganda and media purveyors about what is believable or legitimate as was showcased last month with attempts to rebut concerns about tennis star Peng Shuai.

Ryan said a portmanteau term originally ascribed to Chinas surveillance system Chabudwellian also applied here, combining Orwellian with the Chinese term cha bu duo, which means almost but is often used to describe something done with poor or minimal effort.

Outside of China, foreigners think their surveillance system is highly sophisticated but in reality a lot of the time this infrastructure is gerry-rigged and not super effective, said Ryan. That can apply to the information campaigns as well.

Read more from the original source:

Xinjiang: Twitter closes thousands of China state-linked accounts spreading propaganda - The Guardian

Maharashtra Congress leaders on Wednesday took exception to West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjees remarks on the UPA and Rahul Gandhi, and stated that the Congress was the only viable alternative to take on the BJP. They also said that statements deriding the Congress were akin to playing into the hands of the BJP.

The country is well aware of the fight the Congress has put up against the oppression of the BJP and the central government. No individual party can fight against the BJP if that party continues to think about its own political gain and personal ambition. The Congress is the only viable option for the country and the democracy, said Balasaheb Thorat, Revenue Minister and Congress legislative party leader.

The Congress is part of the Maha Vikas Aghadi government along with the Shiv Sena and NCP in Maharashtra.

The Congress under the leadership of Congress president Soniaji Gandhi and Rahulji Gandhi is constantly fighting against the dictatorial attitude of the BJP. Rahulji fought against the Modi government by standing firmly behind farmers on the issue of land acquisition law and three farm laws, said Nana Patole, state Congress president.

He said the country is more important than personal ambitions and the fight against the BJP needs to be fought unitedly, keeping egos aside. A political party restricted to one state cannot be an alternative to the BJP. The Congress is the only viable political alternative for the BJP, Patole added.

Senior Congress leader and PWD Minister Ashok Chavan said the Congress party its leadership need no certification for their commitment towards democracy and Constitution as well as the tireless struggle against the present central governments policies.

For the last seven years, the central government has been using the divide and rule policy on the Opposition parties. In such a scenario, it becomes the responsibility of all non-BJP parties to not indulge in politics that supports this policy of the Centre, Chavan added.

Go here to see the original:

Maharashtra Cong leaders object to Mamata remarks: Cong only viable political alternative in the country - The Indian Express

The Prime Minister pitched a new Social Media (Anti-Trolling) Bill 2021 as a way to keep people safe online. The bill that has been proposed will do little to achieve that. It isnt about safety at all. It is about defamation law.

In some dramatic respects, it undermines the ability of people who have their reputation harmed to get a positive outcome through defamation law.

Facebook chief Mark Zuckerberg, rebranding as Meta.Credit:AP

For one thing, it would undo the High Courts judgment in the case of Dylan Voller, which found that media companies were the publishers of defamatory material posted to their social media pages by members of the public and so potentially liable for damages. A by-product of the Voller case was that media companies now needed to take a more active role in moderating comments, or turning them off, to avoid defamation liability. It made social media safer for the people being trolled. This new law would undo that.

It would also undo the ability to sue an online platform, such as Facebook, to prevent it profiteering from a business model that harms reputation. Under current law, platforms can be sued but have defences if they are unaware of the content. Those defences would be replaced with effective immunity under the proposed law.

Why is the government gifting American multinationals rights that arent enjoyed by other Australians? If you publish someone elses defamation, you wont have immunity.

Loading

The introduction of a complaints resolution process for social media is a good thing, and a long time coming. (Academic Kim Gould argued for small-claims dispute resolution for defamation in 2018.) Increasingly, as a UTS report showed in 2017, defamation litigation is between normal people rather than public figures or media companies. A complaints-resolution process would encourage regular punters who dont want to spend money on lawyers to solve fights themselves. That part of the legislation could be salvaged while other parts should be thrown in the bin.

It could be fairly argued that compelling individuals to reveal their identities online, as proposed this legislation, would lead to censorship and oppression of minority voices. It may have a chilling effect on reports of corporate and government misconduct, and allegations of a #MeToo nature, if the people raising the alarm are forced to identify themselves. Perhaps that was the point.

A weird part of the legislation is the ability to obtain unmasking orders from the Federal Court to identify the real humans behind complaints. We can already seek to unmask trolls by various court orders, in some cases subpoenas and, in others, a special kind of injunction called a Norwich Pharmacal order. The weirdness of the proposal is also reflected in its undermining of a law-reform process led by the states that had been running for years. I attended a roundtable meeting led by the NSW government on this very issue just months ago. The experts have seemingly been ignored, except for those lobbying for Facebook et al and Newscorp.

Read more from the original source:

The government is trolling us with its anti-troll bill - The Sydney Morning Herald

India, the nation long being under colonial oppression started its journey of foreign policy with the ideology of Pt. Jawaharlal Nehrus Non-Alignment; abstaining from taking sides of the bipolar power blocs and securing its newly gained national sovereignty and independence. But soon after, it realised the crux of surviving in the internationally interlinked world that the countries were fast approaching towards. Therefore, in 1971, India joined hands with the Soviet Union in a Treaty of Friendship, but with the disintegration of Soviet Union in 1991 and the United States emerging as the sole superpower, India felt back into the state of isolation and helplessness.

As the famous saying goes on to say dont put all your eggs in one basket, India soon learnt from its mistakes to not put all its might and trust into one entity as concepts such as trust and no strings attached are non-existent elements of global politics and international relations.

Today, the 21st century is largely seen as an Asian century, the century where Asias burgeoning economy and demographic dividend will make it rise to everyones notice and be the talk of the center stage. This is what is envisioned by experts and to no surprise it is what is slowly molding to be the fact; a fact that is greatly favoring the Peoples Republic of China.

Despite the pandemics birth from Wuhan and the global economic stagnation in 2020, China managed to log 2.3 percent growth for 2020, becoming the only major economy that grew during a year when the virus exacted a devastating global toll (Gerry Shih, 2021). This shows the success rate of the country into turning its far-sighted China Dream a reality. It is of no surprise that the rise of China is rampant, aggressive in some instances, strategic and far-sighted into changing the existing world order; posing a threat to the rest of the major power houses today.

India, being the largest rival neighbour to China has a lot at stake, for which it has shifted its foreign policy from hedging for to strategically hedging against the collective threat imposed by China. Contemporary geopolitical and strategic circumstances present a multifaceted challenge to Indias foreign policy, with regards to its neighbourhood, border and the Indian Ocean region, for which incorporating a pragmatic realpolitik approach is the need of the hour.

What balancing China means is to strengthen Indias capacity and linkages in order for it to be well-equipped to counter Chinese aggression. India has been working towards this aspect in the following ways-

-India has embarked on its own Diamond Necklace policy to counter Chinas String of Pearls through which it is building ports in strategic points such as Singapore, Indonesia, Oman, Seychelles and Iran and strategically cooperated with Mongolia, Japan, Vietnam and the Central Asian regions.

-India-Russia and Indo-Pak relations although sour, have been tried to reconcile in the recent past as maintaining a somewhat cordial relationship with Chinas ally should be one of Indias priority as both the nations are militarily heavy. India has built its defence cooperation with Russia and Putin recently told that there is no contradiction in the relationship with India, giving it a stronger tie. Russia has also managed to show great support to India during its fight for Pandemic. Maintaining this cordial relationship is of great benefit to both and is a way towards balancing relations.

-In addition to all this, what is more important today to withstand international threat is the coming together of like-minded states that are willing to support each other and target China with a common motive. India has therefore, signed bilateral and multilateral agreements on different fronts to achieve its hedging goals, which will be further looked upon ahead in the paper

-Along with external ties, India needs to be well-equipped domestically as well by building up its defence capabilities. It is here that Indias atmanirbhar (self-reliant) initiative plays importance.

However, on the flip-side, India cannot manage independently without China. The two being giant players in Asia with the two largest populated countries in the world and more so, being geographically in close proximity and economically dependent on each other, it is inevitable for them to have zero contacts. Therefore, whilst battling Chinas String of pearls and border disputes, India must also be wary of having a middle ground with China wherein it can conduct its peaceful coexistence and continue its trade relations.

Overall, it can be said that New Delhis policy of strategic hedging works on a mode of attempting to find a modus vivendi with Beijing, while also slowly moving towards building security and political links with other regional and international powers as an insurgence against China. The Modi government has adopted a mixed strategy towards asymmetric rival China by maintaining a relationship of cooperation at the regional level (the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank), competition at the regional level (Indo-Pacific), rejection of Chinas unilateral initiatives (Belt and Road Initiative), and deterrence along the Himalayas and in the Indian Ocean (Manjeet S. Pardesi, 2021).

When the survival of a state is threatened by a hegemonic state or a coalition of stronger states, they seek to join forces with other states and establish an alliance to preserve its own independence by keeping in check the power of the other state. This is the Balance of threat theory (Stephen M, 1985), wherein the threat levels can be affected by geographical proximity, offensive power, and aggressive intentionsand when all this is together met with one nation alone, the severity of forming coalition and strategically hedging speaks for itself.

The United States

If the rise of China poses a direct threat on someone, it is United States hegemony. US being the super power in the globalized multipolar world, while India being the largest democracy, an emerging economy and a key important player in Asia proves both the states to be in a mutually benefitting coalition.

The two biggest democracies have joined hands on various fronts such as pursuing the joint interest in freedom of navigation in the highly contentious South China Sea where China has shown a great deal of interest as well. The US recently has shown a shift in their focus to the Asia-Pacific region through its new policy of Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and its decision to station 2500 marines in Australia. This has been regarded by China, who staked claim over South China Sea, as a hedging strategy if not outright containment by the USA. In 2020, Indo-US ties have elevated to a comprehensive global strategic partnership. This has been a great achievement in Indias vision for development. Moreover, both the nations have successfully concluded three 2+2 dialogues, wherein USA reiterates to support India in defending its territorial sovereignty against the greater threat, referring to China. In addition to these, the highlights also follow the four foundational agreements between the two nations, which are Communications Compatibility and Security Agreement (COMCASA), General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA), Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement for Geo-Spatial Cooperation (BECA) and Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA). The two nations have also released a Joint Statement on shared Indo-USA goals in the Asia-Pacific region. The developments so far have been quite beneficial on both sides and are a great strategic hedging handling on Indias part. And to top this policy of strategic hedging is the establishment of QUAD (Quadrilateral Strategic Dialogue) between the four members- United States, Japan, Australia and India with their common vision of securing global order, liberal trading and freedom of navigation between the countries. The informal dialogue between these four nations has seen to be a driving force is curtailing a rising China.

Japan

Indias foreign policy is built on its three foundational pillars, which are security, economic development and status and Japan plays quite a significant role in all three aspects. This bilateral relation is of great benefit to India. Japan and Indias upward trajectory gives it a status of being Special Strategic and Global Partnership, transforming the relation into a cornerstone of Indias Act East Policy. The relationship between Asias largest democracies is deemed to be Asias fastest growing relationship as well. Japan was the first country with which India held its 2+2 ministerial level dialogue which along with military and defence talks, also shared concerns of Chinas rise in the region. As Japan acquires world class navy and high-tech capabilities; if the two countries continue to add concrete securities, a high hope is instilled in this strategic relationship of becoming a game-changer in Asia. The two countries have already deepened ties in the field of maritime defence and infrastructure such as the construction of Indias first high speed railway corridor between Mumbai and Ahmadabad.

Australia

The two nations have had a cordial relationship even before independence and continue to share common interests in trade, sustainable development, and student-to-student ties. It has been building its strategic partnership and recognizes Indias critical role in the Indian Ocean and therefore, the two nations are committed to working together to enhance maritime cooperation, along with engaging in a naval exercise called AUSIDEX since 2015. Trilateral engagements with crucial nations like Indonesia and Japan, deeper engagement with regional groups like the Indian Ocean Rim Association and East Asia Summit and the very efficient quadrilateral dialogue with Japan and US have all contributed in strengthening the ties between India and Australia. A cordial relation with Australia will help India in the long run as by 2027, India is expected to have worlds largest population and henceforth require the up-skilling of 400 million people. Australia is well-equipped to assist with this huge need for knowledge-sharing, education and skill development. The two countries also have enormous potential to build on their people-to-people links and thus their soft power influence (Parakkal, 2018). India is the third largest source of immigrants to Australia and the second largest source for skilled professionals. The pandemic is seen to have exacerbated Sino-Australian relations and this further strengthens Australias relations with India is managing China.

European Union

The recent past has seen a reboot in the relations between India and EU which have both embarked on the journey of resuming the long stalled talks on a free trade deal with an aim to strengthen their economic cooperation in the face of an increasing Chinese assertion.

In 2013, trade talks suspended between the two nations but today it rises together to hedge strategically amidst the pandemic. The nations aim to double the trade by 2030 which shows the optimism it withholds for the future endeavours.

In a speech, Indian Foreign Minister Jaishankar highlighted how the pandemic has shown the necessity of diversifying supply chains, especially for the EU. He says Europe is looking at strategic autonomy, looking at a multipolar world, which is actually hedging its risk (Jaishankar, 2021). This was told in the backdrop of repercussions faced by EU and more so, for the majority of the world for being overly dependent on China for trade. Glorifying on this aspect, India has an edge to build connections in the European world and sustain Chinese growth.

In addition to the trade boon, EU countries also signed the Indo-Pacific Strategy that aims to impose greater European influence in areas of Chinese superiority. Keeping this in hand, the two nations remain steadfast on building infrastructure across Europe, Asia and Africa in the name of connectivity partnership. It doesnt brand it to be an anti-Beijing plotting, but a mere alternative to the Belt and Road Initiative of china, a way of disallowing Chinese investments.

Conclusion

Today it can be said that the world has come up together, galvanised in order to counter China in the changing world order. This pushback against China has been manifesting itself in multiple ways and in particular, by the regional players who have been successful in persuading more coordinated actions along the way so as to create a more stable balance of power in these highly tumultuous world that we live in.

The complex rivalry between India and China has led to hedging strategically by a mixed approach of cooperation, deterrence and balancing, which is seen to be working efficiently for India till now. After all, Indias ultimate aim is to build its own capabilities without overtly provoking China and silently transform itself to be a competition. To achieve this, India is building its relation with Chinas neighbours such as South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, along with maintaining a cordial relationship with Russia and mending relations with Pakistan and ultimately gaining support from the western nations in strategic cooperation with a common aim.

It is evident today how Chinas belligerent agenda on regional states has caused it a greater pushback with the unity of the rest of the world against it. The BRI is confronted with numerous fault lines, the Indo-Pacific is well-established, QUAD resurrected and various regional players are beginning to engage with each other much more cohesively.

The only concern that remains today is the growing influence China has over Indias neighbours through its debt-trap diplomacy and its aggressive wolf-warrior diplomacy, for which India needs to make sure to make the neighbouring countries believe in the hidden agenda and bring unity with India in countering the spread and rise of China. Indias vaccine-maitri initiative was a good way of handling the neighbourhood, but more needs to be done in this aspect.

The way forward is to accept each others legitimacy in certain aspects and hedge accordingly in others. Military escalation such as in 2020 Ladakh is to be prevented in order for both to maintain its relations. To paraphrase Deng Xiaoping (1988), unless China and India are able to co-exist peacefully, there will be no Asian century.

Related

Read more:

Chinas rise in power and Indias rise in fear: Strategic hedging amidst growing threat - Modern Diplomacy

Editorial: Will we revert to some semblance of the old normal in 2022? Should we want to?

The pandemic has brought us no end of idioms, old and new, from social distancing to covidiot. Few, though, have served us as well as the before timesa bit of wistful shorthand for life before masks and border closures and denialist mobs who regard hospitals as symbols of state oppression.

The expression is a mainstay of apocalyptic sci-fi, whose origins are pleasingly on point. Its been traced to a 1966 episode of the original Star Trek, in which the crew of the Enterprise encounters a planet full of children whose parents have been obliterated by a deadly pathogen; to them, the before time is a period when adults inhabited their world. Today, we use it for comic effect, as in: Remember the before times? When we could sit inside a restaurant and eat brunch?

But even a phrase used in jest can reveal something about our hopes and fears, and if were still resorting to words of longing in 2022, it is surely a sign of our shared anxiety about what lies ahead. Will we revert to some semblance of the old normal? Should we want to?

READ:Macleans meets the moment: Our new magazine look, explained

In the movies, the survivors of global catastrophe emerge blinking in the daylight to build a new society, leaving behind the problems of the old one. But look around Canada in 2022 and its pretty clear thats not in the cards; the great challenges facing it before the pandemic havent gone away. Reconciliation with Indigenous peoples remains an unfulfilled aspiration. Our biggest trading partner, the U.S., seems indifferent to its commitments under the new NAFTA. Our second-biggest, China, is also our greatest international antagonist.

Most importantly, the country remains riven over the challenge of addressing climate change, committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 45 per cent below 2005 levels within a decade, even as construction continues on pipelines to carry oil and gas to tidewater.

None of these issues lies beyond our capacity for creative solutions. And Canada appears uniquely poised to thrive in a post-pandemic world: its resources, educated population and stable government point to a future as a rich country whose prosperity arises from economic liberty, plurality and rule of law.

But as the pandemic recedes, new faults and barriers come into view. The polarization of our politics has accelerated, dividing our electorate by region, values and identity, to the point that one major party appears hopelessly fractured, and another governs with just 32.6 per cent of the popular vote, the least for a winner in Canadian history.

READ:How the pandemic hasrewired our brains

Not coincidentally, political extremism has migrated from the swamps of the web to the mainstream, breathing life into a party that disparages immigrants and denies science. Technology has abetted these forces, transmitting the lies that are the extremists currency, while undermining the principle of privacy on which freedom rests.

All of this has occurred amid a growing awareness of atrocity that lies at the centre of our founding myths as a country. If truth and reconciliation are part of a continuum, were only beginning to come to grips with the first piece, truth, symbolized by unmarked graves of Indigenous children who died while attending residential schools.

Yet truth, painful as it can be, is an answer unto itself. This might be the greatest takeaway of the last two years: when our scientists publicly shared their findings; when our public health agencies published data showing the extent of danger; when our politicians left the varnish off their words and acted on evidence, the vast majority of us took our cues, masking up, staying home, getting vaccinated. In doing so, we avoided the worst COVID-19 could bring.

Here lies the solution to the conspiracy theories infecting our politics; to the devastation inflicted on First Nations; to the fantasy that we can fight climate change while building a fossil fuel economy. Lets renew our shared commitment to what we know to be true, to what can be proven.

The sooner we get going, the better. We can start with the following hard and necessary truth: the before times are not coming back.

This editorial appears in print in the January 2022 issue of Macleans magazine. Subscribe to the monthly print magazine here.

See the original post here:

What our longing for the 'before times' reveals about our hopes and fears for 2022 - Maclean's

The Centre through a written reply in the Rajya Sabha Thursday said the Paika rebellion cannot be called the first War of Independence. Union Culture Minister G Kishan Reddy stated this in a written reply to a question by BJD MP Prashanta Nanda. Since 2017, Odisha has demanded that the rebellion of Odisha be declared as the first war of Independence. At present, the Indian Mutiny or Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 is called the first war of Independence against British Rule.

The Paika Bidroha (Paika Rebellion) of 1817 took place nearly 40 years before the first sepoy mutiny. The Paikas were peasant militas of the Gajapati rulers of Odisha who offered military services to the king.

The British established themselves in Odisha when the East India company dethroned the King of Khurda, Raja Mukunda Deva in 1803. The following year, in 1804, the king planned a rebellion against the British and roped in the Paikas for the same. But the plan was discovered by the British who confiscated his entire territory.

The Paikas lost their estates when the new colonial establishments and land revenue settlements of the British came into force. The continuous interference in the economy and revenue systems led to exploitation and oppression of the peasants and farmers eventually triggering a rebellion against the British. A large number of Paikas were mobilised under the leadership of Bakshi Jagabandhu Bidyadhar, who then confronted the British on April 2, 1817. A 400-strong party of Kandhas crossed over into Khurda from Ghumsur and declared rebellion. The uprising spread like a wildfire across the state resulting in several confrontations and encounters between the British and the Paika forces.

Government buildings in Banapur were set on fire, policemen killed and the British treasury looted. Over the next few months, the revolt continued but was eventually overpowered by the British army. Bidyadhar was imprisoned in 1825 and died while still in jail four years later.

For the first time in 2017, the Odisha state cabinet under the leadership of CM Naveen Patnaik had passed a proposal to formally urge the centre to declare the Paika rebellion as the first war of Independence. In his letter to the then Home Minister Rajnath Singh, Patnaik had said, I request the Government of India to consider this proposal positively so that the people of India appreciate, in correct perspective, the events that led to the Indian freedom struggle and our historic independence from foreign rule.

In the state cabinets proposal, the rebellion was described as a mass agitation and the first struggle for freedom in the country against the foreign rule in which the people of Odisha had actively participated. In 2019, CM Patnaik had reiterated the demand at the foundation stone laying ceremony for the Paika rebellion memorial at Barunei by President Ram Nath Kovind.

The Centre had considered the proposal and examined the matter in consultation with the Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR) under the Ministry of Human Resource Development, now renamed Ministry of Education. And as per recommendations from ICHR, the Paika Rebellion cannot be called the first War of Independence, Union Culture Minister had informed the Rajya Sabha.

However, considering that the rebellion which started in 1817 continued till 1825 and is one of the beginnings of popular uprisings against the British in India, the minister declared that it would now be included in the curriculum of Class VIII history textbook of NCERT.

Newsletter | Click to get the days best explainers in your inbox

Read more from the original source:

Explained: Why Centre has refused to accept Paika revolution as first war of independence - The Indian Express

Inclusive tune

Sir After 52 years of being on air, Sesame Street has finally welcomed its first Asian American muppet, a seven-year-old Korean-American named Ji-Young. The decision to introduce her was apparently taken in light of the rising hatred against Asians in the aftermath of Covid-19. Recently, there has been a spike in the representation of Asians in the American media. But this may be a publicity stunt rather than an actual change in the industry. While it is too early to determine the truth of this allegation, an atypical representation Ji-Young is an avid guitarist and skateboarder will go a long way in instilling a sense of belonging among those who rarely see themselves on mainstream television shows.

Mohana Chakraborty,Calcutta

Hasty retreat

Sir The Centre repealed all three contentious farm laws on the first day of the winter session of Parliament, ignoring the Oppositions demand for a discussion (Modi in a hurry to bury, Nov 30). This is reminiscent of the way in which the three farm laws were passed to begin with. The Narendra Modi-led government has, time and again, exhibited its aversion to discussing issues of national importance in Parliament.

The withdrawal of the farm laws is a major victory for the farmers. But hundreds of farmers, including those at Lakhimpur Kheri, had to lose their lives before the government came to its senses. It is evident that the Bharatiya Janata Party government withdrew the laws with the upcoming assembly elections in mind. However, people have already lost their faith in the government. This will reflect in the results of the polls.

Bhagwan Thadani,Mumbai

Sir It is evident from the hasty revocation of the farm laws without any discussion or debate in Parliament that the Central government has scant respect for democratic practices. This was in stark contrast to the assurance given by the prime minister earlier in the day that the government is ready for meaningful debates in Parliament.

It is being speculated that the BJP backtracked on the laws because of the upcoming assembly elections. The Uttar Pradesh polls are considered crucial and could determine the fate of BJP in the 2024 general elections. The BJP seems to be doing what it can to regain its diminishing support.

Bhaskar Sanyal,Hooghly

Sir The repeal of three farm bills should have been debated in Parliament. It is unfortunate that the government did not deem it necessary to follow democratic processes.

D.V.G. Sankararao,Nellimarla, Andhra Pradesh

Sir The BJP governments decision to forego debate while repealing the three farm bills must be condemned. The veteran Congress leader, Adhir Chowdhury, is right to ask why the government shied away from a discussion even when it knows that the Opposition will not object to the repeal.

Arun Gupta,Calcutta

Solitary struggle

Sir Anupama Chandran, a young mother from Kerala, has waged an unprecedented battle to locate her child, who was stealthily given away for adoption by her parents without her consent (Mother courage, Nov 29). After months of struggle, Chandran and her partner, Ajith Kumar, were able to regain custody of their son. Chandran must be lauded for her unwavering courage and determination.

There is no doubt that Chandrans parents decision was tantamount to abduction. Chandran has alleged that the Kerala State Council for Child Welfare and the Child Welfare Committee were complicit in the act. This must be investigated, and, if true, strict action must be taken against those in charge.

It is appalling that the notion of family honour Chandran was unmarried when she gave birth to her son was the driving force behind this decision. It seems that even in Kerala, a bastion of the Left and the state with the highest literacy rate, there are limits to a womans autonomy.

G. David Milton,Maruthancode, Tamil Nadu

Sir We often presume that those who are politically progressive are sensitive to the historical atrocities faced by women and other marginalized communities. But the plight of Anupama Chandran, a former leader of the Students Federation of India, the student wing of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), proves that it is simply not true. So far, facts suggest that the CPI(M) leadership including the chief minister and politburo members were aware of the situation and did not intervene because Chandrans father was a party member. Having a Left government in power means little if women continue to be oppressed.

Nandini Srivastav,Lucknow

Break free

Sir On the 55th anniversary of its Independence, Barbados became the worlds newestrepublicbyofficially removing Queen Elizabeth II as its head of state. Sandra Mason became the first president of Barbados, marking a new era for the island nation.

The United Kingdom has a long and dark history of colonialism and racial oppression. It was, thus, good to hear Prince Charles acknowledge the atrocities inflicted by slavery on the occasion. It is time for the remaining 15 nations to sever their constitutional links with the UK as well.

Jang Bahadur Singh,Jamshedpur

Sir The citizens of Barbados must be congratulated for breaking their ties with the UK. Although the Queen was only a nominal head, the office was still a reminder of the brutal history of colonialism in the island nation. Barbados must now script its history independent of its former colonizer.

Archana Ghosh,Calcutta

Excerpt from:

Letters to the Editor: On Sesame Street, an Asian American muppet - Telegraph India

Mike ColombMike Colomb, rancher, entrepreneur, and organizer of Private Membership Associations (PMAs), says that your business can be set free from the jurisdiction of the overreaching government through a private structure that is not subject to the state, its rules and its taxation system. Colomb mentioned the Healing Hub, which is a new private structure for hospitals and emergency care centers without interference from the government. Mr. Colomb will be speaking on these topics at the Red Pill Expo to be held in Lafayette, Louisiana on November 6-7. The list of speakers, and tickets to attend this event or to live-stream it can be found at: https://redpillexpo.org/

Link for video: https://rumble.com/embed/vlu1os/?pub=m6fb1

Check out our Classified ads at the bottom of this page.

Other

A 2014 law known as Prop. 47 helped create the crime surge in California by downgrading thefts under $950 to misdemeanors. This, combined with follow-up laws that removed jail as a punishment for non-felonies, created a crime wave that law enforcement cannot handle.

Kakistocracy

Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm is an avid supporter of so-called criminal justice reform, which includes releasing criminals from prison. Only one-third of all referrals from the police in this county are ever charged!

Other

More than 40 people were injured, including 12 children. The victims include Virginia Sorenson, 79 Leanna Owens, 71 Tamara Durand, 52 James Coolidge, 52, and Wilhelm Hospel, 82. An 11-year old girl remains in hospital fighting for her life with a broken pelvis and lost kidney.

Freedom

Austria announced that Covid vaccines will be compulsory by February 2022, citing a 66% vaccination rate. A full lockdown was imposed nationwide, confining to their homes. A large rally, organized by the right-wing Freedom Party, drew 40,000 protesters this past weekend in Vienna alone.

Freedom

The left tried to destroy Americans right to self defense by bringing charges against Rittenhouse. Politicians and the media have falsely characterized Rittenhouse, both before and after the trial, as a white supremacist, a murderer, and a man who crossed the state line to shoot black people.

Health

Mike Granata wrote, I wished I would have never gotten vaccinated. If you are not vaccinated, dont do it unless you are ready to suffer and die. He revealed that that the medical profession is hiding the true number of deaths from Covid vaccines and that nurses begged him to reveal the truth about the dangerous vaccines to the public.

For classified advertising rates and terms, click here.The appearance of ads on this site does not signify endorsement by the publisher. We do not attempt to verify the accuracy of statements made therein or vouch for the integrity of advertisers. However, we will investigate complaints from readers and remove any message we find to be misleading or that promotes anything fraudulent, illegal, or unethical.

See the original post here:

In a Time of Government Oppression, Private Membership ...