1. Top consumer court orders more tests on Maggi noodles.
2. World gets first dengue vaccine, and Mexico has already approved its use.
3. Former journalist, Hindu Mahasabha win bids for Dawood Ibrahim’s Mumbai assets.
4. Volkswagen says carbon emission violation affects far fewer cars than earlier stated. The Big Story: Talk is cheap?
In August of last year, after only two months in power Narendra Modi put some of his muscular campaign rhetoric on Pakistan into action. He cancelled the composite dialogue process with Pakistan on what most observers saw as a technical point: a meeting between Kashmiri separatist leaders and Islamabad’s envoy to New Delhi – a regular event since the All Parties Hurriyat Conference was formed in March 1993.
The composite dialogue was a vital 10-year-old secret dialogue process that was meant to resolve the Kashmir conflict.
A year later, with the euphoria of campaigning gone and the realities of governing hitting home, the Bharatiya Janata Party government has marked an ungainly turnaround from its bellicose position on talks with Pakistan. On a trip to Pakistan, foreign minister Sushma Swaraj announced a return of talks. “We have decided to restart the Comprehensive Bilateral Dialogue. The dialogue that was earlier known as Composite Dialogue and later on known as Resumed Dialogue will now be known as the Comprehensive Bilateral Dialogue,” said Swaraj in a press conference.
Kashmir will also be back in the agenda and the joint statement mentions it explicitly as a dispute to be resolved. The Nawaz Sharif government had been sharply criticised for omitting Kashmir in the earlier Ufa joint statement of July 2015.
While the Indian government’s justification for this turnaround seems to be assurances from Pakistan to act on terror, right now, the Nawaz Sharif government has made no real progress on the matter. The Pakistan position on the Mumbai terror trials and the prosecution of masterminds Hafiz Saeed and Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi is the same it was when the BJP government rejected talks in August 2014.
This U-turn was preceded by an impromptu meeting between Narendra Modi and Nawaz Sharif on November 30 and NSA talks on December 6. Sushma Swaraj was also involved in the high visibility campaign to bring an Indian citizen “Geeta” back to India from Pakistan.
While the talks are back, India is still mulling over resuming cricketing ties with Pakistan, another item on Swaraj’s agenda. The government has, however, not confirmed Modi’s visit to Pakistan next year for the SAARC summit.
The Big Scroll
Modi’s cancellation of talks with Pakistan in August 2014 was a terrible idea. But Modi’s learnt now and Swaraj’s trip is preparing the ground for his visit to Pakistan next year. And this flip-flop is yet another example of how India-Pakistan relations are a bit like those between two squabbling siblings.
Although the Modi government is trying to fix things now, it’s a fact that the government has had a very poor track record of managing relations with its neighbours.
Politicking and policying
1. National Herald case: Congress members of Parliament are divided over Sonia’s strategy, With Trinamool a new ally, the BJP plans anti-Congress agitation.
2. Mumbai’s Siddhivinayak temple mulls investing 40kg gold in monetisation scheme.
3. Climate talks: Developed countries not fulfilling their obligations, says India.
4. Only 10 smart cities may get funds from Centre this year.
Punditry
1. In the Indian Express, historian Ramchandra Guha points out the that the Sangh Parivar’s promotion of Ambedkar is hypocritical.
2. Indian art has always been apolitical. But is it time for that to change asks Deepanjana Pal in theHindu.
3. Japan is model for developed countries trying to climb out of recession says Rahul Jacob in theBusiness Standard.
Don’t Miss
Tony Joseph on why the intolerance debate is far from over.
The right-wing rebuttal brushes off the charge of rising intolerance by branding it as a “political statement, not an intellectual or academic one.” It then goes on to lay seven specific charges of “abusive practices” against the liberal academicians themselves. It is these charges that give us the opportunity to sharply delineate what the differences are really about.
The most striking factor about the right-wing rebuttal is their choice of the very first charge. It is about the caste system, and its role in Indian society. This tells us something important. When the two opposite sides are ranged against each other and the intellectual battle is about to begin, caste is the issue over which the right-wing sounds its bugle.
[“source-scroll”]