World

Has Canada Bought Into the Reputation Cooked Up for Amit Shah by the Indian Media?

The intelligence establishment in Ottawa can be excused for locating in the Indian home minister’s political DNA an eagerness to move beyond conventional “dos and don’ts”, an appetite for risk and recklessness.

Four days after he was officially “outed” by a Canadian minister as the prime mover in this whole unpleasant business of alleged Indian involvement in the killing of a Canadian citizen on the Canadian soil, the Indian government has rather belatedly spoken up in defence of Union home minister Amit Shah.

The Ministry of External Affairs has expectedly termed the Canadian charge as “absurd and baseless.” Our official view is that the Justin Trudeau regime is indulging in India-bashing because of its domestic political agenda. Perhaps there is substance to the Indian understanding of Canadian domestic politics. Yet, it needs to be asked why a responsible Canadian ministerial official would allow himself to “finger” Shah, that too before a parliamentary committee. If Indian officials are correctly reading Trudeau’s political and electoral calculus, then his petty domestic imperatives have already been served by the grand diplomatic hoo-ha between New Delhi and Ottawa. Naming the third most powerful political figure [ as per the latest India Today list] still does not add up. Why this extreme, precipitous step?

Could it be that the Canadian intelligence establishment has been taken in by the reputation cooked up for Amit Shah by the Indian media? Even before he moved to Delhi in 2014, a friendly Gujarati press had hailed him as the mastermind behind Chief Minister Narendra Modi’s signature political moves, within and outside the BJP. His “take-no-prisoner” approach against political rivals and allies got easily shoe-horned into the “law and order” sector. The whole Sohrabuddin/Kausar Bi caper revealed Amit Shah as an activist, hands-on home minister. Along with chief minister Modi, home minister Amit Shah was serenaded for ridding Gujarat of all those difficult “underworld figures” who had supposedly prospered over the years because of “appeasement” politics. In the post-9/11 “global war on terrorism”, there was subtle appreciation for all those police and political officials who were prepared to employ unorthodox methods against the presumed “jihadis.”

All these “facts” probably figured in the profile of Amit Shah that the Canadians had compiled, as a matter of routine, of an up and coming Indian politician. The profile had to be necessarily updated and nuanced when he moved to Delhi in 2014 to work as Modi’s empowered consigliere. A fawning media ramped up his reputation as a new Chanakaya in the BJP as the ruling party rewrote the rules of political engagement with domestic rivals. “Naya Bharat” was not to be constrained by the old, conventional political morality of the Vajpayee era.

The Canadians must have surely revised Amit Shah’s profile when Prime Minister Modi allotted him the corner office in North Block in 2019. A servile media showered him with encomiums when he “did away” with Article 370. Amit Shah’s reputation as a man who did not care for any norms or conventions or traditions was now cast in stone. Journalists vied with each other to manufacture his image as a man who not only had the complete confidence of his boss but who believes that “power” must be used to consolidate and entrench oneself. Strategy and tactics came naturally to him; he was always in his zone. The media was in thrall of Shah; even our judges and generals and bureaucrats fell for this exaggerated image of a consummate power player. The Canadians, and most probably their big brothers in Washington too, could not be impervious to this concocted portrait.

Perhaps Canadian diplomats stationed in New Delhi also heard from serving and retired Indian police officers praising Amit Shah as the boss who was unafraid of the consequences, however unpleasant, if a course of action was deemed to be in the “national interest.” Senior police officers came away impressed with his determined eagerness to move beyond conventional “dos and don’ts” of the lawful exercise of authority. He was definitely not a man who would allow himself to be dissuaded from going after an “enemy” by some ‘Western’ notions of accountability and statesmanship. Here was a man of certainties and convictions, a man who knew what he believed and what he was doing. Policemen, bureaucrats, foreign service-wallahs, and generals found him a refreshing contrast to all his predecessors who allowed themselves to be hobbled by bureaucratic rules and by considerations of political fair-play. This admiration must have wafted into the ears of Delhi-based Canadian diplomats.

The Canadian intelligence establishment can be excused for locating in Amit Shah’s political DNA an appetite for risk and recklessness. Does this mean he would be so reckless as to get involved in “encounters” on Canadian soil? Notwithstanding Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s campaign-time hyperbole that “ye naya Bharat dushman ko ghar me ghoos kar marta hai”[ the new India goes after its enemies in their homes], Indian constitutional arrangements stand in the way, as does our collective aversion to any kind of “rogue” exercise of power at home or abroad. All spy agencies across the world know the limits of New Delhi’s coercive power outside of India.

So far, the Canadians have not produced a smoking gun to back their allegations against Amit Shah, which have inadvertently enhanced his reputation as a man not to be easily trifled with. Until and unless they do so, the mystery of why the intelligence and political bosses in Ottawa pointed a finger at him will remain.

Whatever the truth of the matter, this very public diplomatic spat should serve as a reminder to everyone that Deng Xiaoping’s axiom, “Hide your strength, bide your time,” applies to New Delhi too. As an aspiring power, India will need to appreciate that over-reach is not without its consequences.

‘Deliberate Attack on Temple’: Modi Condemns Violence at Consular Camp in Canada

‘Equally appalling are the cowardly attempts to intimidate our diplomats’, Modi said. Justin Trudeau also condemned the incident, calling it ‘unacceptable’.

New Delhi: A day after a violent incident occurred in the grounds surrounding a Hindu temple in Canada’s Brampton, Prime Minister Narendra Modi said on Monday (October 4) that he “strongly condemn[ed] the deliberate attack on a Hindu temple”.

“Equally appalling are the cowardly attempts to intimidate our diplomats. Such acts of violence will never weaken India’s resolve. We expect the Canadian government to ensure justice and uphold the rule of law,” Modi added in a statement on X.

The Indian High Commission in Ottawa claimed in a statement that the violence was perpetrated by “anti-India elements” at the Hindu Sabha Mandir in Brampton near Toronto and said it occurred during a consular camp to help local life certificate beneficiaries.

Although the statement does not identify Khalistanis by name, a CBC report notes that videos circulating on social media appear to show demonstrators holding banners in support of Khalistan.

The videos also show “fist fights and people striking each other with poles,” the CBC report says.

Modi’s statement condemning the violence is his first to directly address a Canada-related issue ever since relations between India and Canada turned frosty last year.

The downturn in ties came after Ottawa alleged an Indian government role behind the murder of pro-Khalistan separatist Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Canadian Sikh, in Canada. Recently, Canada has said that India – including Union home minister Amit Shah – is behind several incidents of violence in Canada. India has denied this.

Modi last made an X post about Canada in July, saying he “met” his Canadian counterpart Justin Trudeau on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Italy. He had previously acknowledged a congratulatory message from Trudeau after the Lok Sabha election in June.

In his X post addressing Sunday’s violence in Brampton, Trudeau said it was “unacceptable”.

“The acts of violence at the Hindu Sabha Mandir in Brampton today are unacceptable. Every Canadian has the right to practice their faith freely and safely. Thank you to the Peel Regional Police for swiftly responding to protect the community and investigate this incident,” he posted on X.

The MEA has meanwhile condemned what it called were “acts of violence perpetrated by extremists and separatists at the Hindu Sabha Temple in Brampton, Ontario yesterday.”

“We call on the Government of Canada to ensure that all places of worship are protected from such attacks. We also expect that those indulging in violence will be prosecuted. We remain deeply concerned about the safety and security of Indian nationals in Canada. The outreach of our Consular officers to provide services to Indians and Canadian citizens alike will not be deterred by intimidation, harassment and violence,” it said.

It was earlier reported that police in Brampton were probing the violence.

Peel Regional Police chief Nishan Duraiappah posted on X saying that while cops “respect the right to protest in a peaceful and safe manner,” they will “not tolerate violence and criminal acts.”

“Those that do participate in this activity will be pursued, arrested and charged,” Duraiappah said.

In its statement, the Indian high commission also said that Canadian authorities had been asked to provide strong security for its consular camp.

“As in previous years, the High Commission of India in Ottawa and Consulates General of India in Vancouver and Toronto have organized/plan consular camps during this period, for the benefit and ease of local life certificate beneficiaries (Canadian and Indian). On account of the prevailing security situation in Canada, the Canadian authorities had been requested well in advance to provide strong security measures for these events, which constitute routine consular work.”

The statement said that it is “deeply disappointing to see such disruptions being allowed for routine consular work being organized by our Consulates with the fullest cooperation of local co-organizers.”

“We also remain very concerned for the safety of applicants, including Indian nationals, on whose demand such events are organized in the first place,” the Indian high commission said, adding that there were attempts to disrupt similar camps held in Vancouver and Surrey on November 2-3.

Several other Canadian politicians and public representatives have also condemned the violence, including Brampton mayor Patrick Brown, premier of Ontario Doug Ford, Conservative party leader Pierre Poilievre and New Democratic Party leader Jagmeet Singh.

The Indian high commission further noted in a statement that “in light of these incidents, and with the continued threats posed to the Indian diplomats and officials, local venue organizers as well as local attendees, organization of further scheduled consular camps will be contingent on security arrangements made for them by local authorities.”

Note: This report was updated to reflect the MEA’s and Modi’s responses.

WTO Faces Scrutiny in Director-General Appointment Amid Fears of Trump’s Return

This week could be pivotal in deciding who will be the next director-general of the WTO.

Geneva: Rigging elections and manipulating selection processes is not merely a prerogative of the authoritarian rulers. The virus has seemingly spread to the so-called member-driven and rules-based multilateral organisations like the World Trade Organization (WTO).

This week could be pivotal in deciding who will be the next director-general of the WTO. It could be the incumbent, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, a dual citizen of Nigeria and the United States, or another person should ex-President Donald Trump capture the White House and signal to the current administration that their views on who should be the next director-general should be taken into account.

Paragraph 7 of the WTO procedures for the appointment of directors-general adopted by the General Council in 2002 makes it clear the process should commence 9 months before the expiry of the incumbent’s term of office. Since Okonjo-Iweala’s term ends on August 31, 2025, the process should legally commence on December 1.

In ignoring the explicit language of paragraph 7 of the relevant WTO procedures, the chair of the General Council, ambassador Petter Olberg of Norway, bypassed the General Council and initiated the selection process on October 8 giving countries up until November 8 to nominate candidates on the basis of the detection of a “convergence”, instead of consensus among the WTO members as mandated by WTO rules and practice. The consensus principle is at the core of decision-making of Article IX of the Marrakesh Agreement that established the WTO in 1995, following eight years of Uruguay Round of trade negotiations.

Normally, envoys of the Nordic countries are respected for adhering to international rules of law. However, the current Norwegian, unlike his illustrious predecessors, appears to have blatantly disregarded the rules to ensure that the incumbent director-general can clear the selection process clear the decks without a contest.

When asked whether the United States gave the green signal to the allegedly inconsistent practice, a spokesperson of the office of the United States told this writer that “this action was taken based on the chair’s assumption of convergence, rather than consensus.”

Later, the WTO members had expected that the US would speak its mind to stop the allegedly illegitimate process. Instead, at the crucial WTO’s General Council meeting, the decision-making body during the biennial ministerial conferences, the US remained silent and gave an impression that Washington is not pressing ahead with its stand as conveyed.

Why circumvent the WTO rules and procedures?

It is obvious that the WTO director-general and the General Council chair want to circumvent the rules because of the fear that President Trump may block the reappointment of director-general Ngozi, as they had blocked her original appointment.

It was the Biden administration which lifted the block and allowed her appointment. It is ironic that the director-general wants to circumvent the very process which enabled her to be appointed. Had the Biden administration not been given the option, she would not have become the director-general.
Also read: WTO’s E-commerce Moratorium: Will India Betray the Interests of the Global South Again?

The General Council chair and the director-general have denied that the decision to bring forward the selection process is because of the possible return of Trump to the White House. They both allege that it was started at the request of the African Group. What is interesting that there was no formal decision by the African Group to make the request.

It was made by the Ambassador of Chad who was obviously coerced into making the request. It is noteworthy that the Africa Group recently rejected attempts by the director-general and the chairman of the Special Session of the Committee on Agriculture to appoint facilitators on the basis of a “possible convergence”. The Group insisted that the process should only be launched only when there is consensus among the membership. It may be asked, what has changed?

The whole process is illegimate and should be discarded. The General Council chair exceeded his authority and the process should be relaunched on December 1. It is being speculated that the intention of the General Council chair is to convene a special General Council meeting and request for the formal reappointment of the director-general should no one step forward to compete with her by November 8.

A formal decision of the WTO’s General Council would be required but the director-general and the General Council chair are hoping that the US would not block her reappointment at the specially convened meeting of the General Council. Ambassador Olberg is understood to have told some members that while the US expressed its concerns about the illegitimate process, it did not request him to stop it. They are therefore hoping that the US will feel constrained to veto the reappointment of the director-general should no candidate step forward.

Obviously, the calculations would change should Trump win the election on November 5 and request the outgoing Biden administration to let his administration decide on who should become the next director-general.

Trump administration’s trade priorities

Meanwhile, the Trump administration’s likely trade policy czar ambassador Robert Lighthizer, who always plays the victim card of getting a raw deal from its trading partners and the multilateral trading system, particularly the WTO, has already signaled what is in the offing for Beijing, Brussels, and New Delhi.

The backdrop of Trump’s calls for jacking up tariffs on all countries, including India, and clamping reciprocal tariff regime to ensure countries import US goods at rates similar to what they export to the US market, portends chaos.

“There are essentially three ways to bring about fairness and balance, and so help (US) businesses and workers,” writes Lighthizer. “First, the US could impose a system of import/export certificates (known as export quotas which the Reagan administration had imposed on Japan in the 1980s). Second, it could legislate a capital access fee on inbound investment, meaning that buying up our assets would be more expansive. Or, finally, the US could use tariffs to offset the unfair industrial policies of the predators.”

On trade policy, there is always continuity between the two parties in the US with varying levels of emphasis on some of the key determinants. Despite repeated pronouncements of respecting international rule of law, the Biden-Harris administration opted for more than a trillion dollars of subsidies programs on advanced chips/semiconductor sector to maintain its hegemonic position, and create new supply-side chains in critical raw materials and green goods.

Perhaps, the main difference between the two sides – Republicans and Democrats – is the degree of unilateral cowboy ruthlessness that harks back to early 20th century when tariffs were used as a policy tool to ensure Uncle Sam perpetuates its hegemony across the world.

Ravi Kanth Devarakonda is a financial journalist based in Switzerland.

Israel’s Ban on UNRWA Puts Millions of Lives at Risk

Aid for refugees, particularly Palestinian refugees, has long been politicised, and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees, or UNRWA, has been targeted throughout its 75-year history.

The Israeli parliament’s vote on October 28, 2024, to ban the United Nations agency that provides relief for Palestinian refugees is likely to affect millions of people – it also fits a pattern.

This was evident earlier in the current Gaza conflict, when at least a dozen countries, including the U.S., suspended funding to the UNRWA, citing allegations made by Israel that 12 UNRWA employees participated in the attack by Hamas on Oct. 7, 2023. In August, the U.N. fired nine UNRWA employees for alleged involvement in the attack. An independent U.N. panel established a set of 50 recommendations to ensure UNRWA employees adhere to the principle of neutrality.

The vote by the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, to ban the UNRWA goes a step further. It will, when it comes into effect, prevent the UNRWA from operating in Israel and will severely affect its ability to serve refugees in any of the occupied territories that Israel controls, including Gaza. This could have devastating consequences for livelihoods, health, the distribution of food aid and schooling for Palestinians. It would also damage the polio vaccination campaign that the UNRWA and its partner organisations have been carrying out in Gaza since September. Finally, the bill bans communication between Israeli officials and the UNRWA, which would end efforts by the agency to coordinate the movements of aid workers to prevent unintentional targeting by the Israel Defense Forces.

Refugee aid, and humanitarian aid more generally, is theoretically meant to be neutral and impartial. But as experts in migration and international relations, we know funding is often used as a foreign policy tool, whereby allies are rewarded and enemies punished. In this context, we believe Israel’s banning of the UNRWA fits a wider pattern of the politicisation of aid to refugees, particularly Palestinian refugees.

What is the UNRWA?

The UNRWA, short for United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, was established two years after about 750,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled from their homes during the months leading up to the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 and the subsequent Arab-Israeli war.

Prior to the UNRWA’s creation, international and local organizations, many of them religious, provided services to displaced Palestinians. But after surveying the extreme poverty and dire situation pervasive across refugee camps, the U.N. General Assembly, including all Arab states and Israel, voted to create the UNRWA in 1949.

Since that time, the UNRWA has been the primary aid organization providing food, medical care, schooling and, in some cases, housing for the 6 million Palestinians living across its five fields: Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, as well as the areas that make up the occupied Palestinian territories: the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

The mass displacement of Palestinians – known as the Nakba, or “catastrophe” – occurred prior to the 1951 Refugee Convention, which defined refugees as anyone with a well-founded fear of persecution owing to “events occurring in Europe before 1 January 1951.” Despite a 1967 protocol extending the definition worldwide, Palestinians are still excluded from the primary international system protecting refugees.

While the UNRWA is responsible for providing services to Palestinian refugees, the United Nations also created the U.N. Conciliation Commission for Palestine in 1948 to seek a long-term political solution and “to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation.”

As a result, UNRWA does not have a mandate to push for the traditional durable solutions available in other refugee situations. As it happened, the conciliation commission was active only for a few years and has since been sidelined in favor of the U.S.-brokered peace processes.

Is the UNRWA political?

The UNRWA has been subject to political headwinds since its inception and especially during periods of heightened tension between Palestinians and Israelis.

While it is a U.N. organization and thus ostensibly apolitical, it has frequently been criticized by Palestinians, Israelis as well as donor countries, including the United States, for acting politically.

The UNRWA performs statelike functions across its five fields, including education, health and infrastructure, but it is restricted in its mandate from performing political or security activities.

Initial Palestinian objections to the UNRWA stemmed from the organization’s early focus on economic integration of refugees into host states.

Although the UNRWA officially adhered to the U.N. General Assembly’s Resolution 194 that called for the return of Palestine refugees to their homes, U.N., U.K. and U.S. officials searched for means by which to resettle and integrate Palestinians into host states, viewing this as the favorable political solution to the Palestinian refugee situation and the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In this sense, Palestinians perceived the UNRWA to be both highly political and actively working against their interests.

In later decades, the UNRWA switched its primary focus from jobs to education at the urging of Palestinian refugees. But the UNRWA’s education materials were viewed by Israel as further feeding Palestinian militancy, and the Israeli government insisted on checking and approving all materials in Gaza and the West Bank, which it has occupied since 1967.

While Israel has long been suspicious of the UNRWA’s role in refugee camps and in providing education, the organization’s operation, which is internationally funded, also saves Israel millions of dollars each year in services it would be obliged to deliver as the occupying power.

Since the 1960s, the U.S. – the UNRWA’s primary donor – and other Western countries have repeatedly expressed their desire to use aid to prevent radicalization among refugees.

In response to the increased presence of armed opposition groups, the U.S. attached a provision to its UNRWA aid in 1970, requiring that the “UNRWA take all possible measures to assure that no part of the United States contribution shall be used to furnish assistance to any refugee who is receiving military training as a member of the so-called Palestine Liberation Army (PLA) or any other guerrilla-type organization.”

The UNRWA adheres to this requirement, even publishing an annual list of its employees so that host governments can vet them, but it also employs 30,000 individuals, the vast majority of whom are Palestinian.

Questions over links of the UNRWA to any militancy has led to the rise of Israeli and international watch groups that document the social media activity of the organization’s large Palestinian staff.

In 2018, the Trump administration paused its US$60 million contribution to the UNRWA. Trump claimed the pause would create political pressure for Palestinians to negotiate. President Joe Biden restarted U.S. contributions to the UNRWA in 2021.

While other major donors restored funding to the UNRWA after the conclusion of the investigation in April, the U.S. has yet to do so.

‘An unmitigated disaster’

Israel’s ban of the UNRWA will leave already starving Palestinians without a lifeline. U.N. Secretary General António Guterres said banning the UNRWA “would be a catastrophe in what is already an unmitigated disaster.” The foreign ministers of Canada, Australia, France, Germany, Japan, South Korea and the U.K. issued a joint statement arguing that the ban would have “devastating consequences on an already critical and rapidly deteriorating humanitarian situation, particularly in northern Gaza.”

Reports have emerged of Israeli plans for private security contractors to take over aid distribution in Gaza through dystopian “gated communities,” which would in effect be internment camps. This would be a troubling move. In contrast to the UNRWA, private contractors have little experience delivering aid and are not dedicated to the humanitarian principles of neutrality, impartiality or independence.

However, the Knesset’s explicit ban could, inadvertently, force the United States to suspend weapons transfers to Israel. U.S. law requires that it stop weapons transfers to any country that obstructs the delivery of U.S. humanitarian aid. And the U.S. pause on funding for the UNRWA was only meant to be temporary.

The UNRWA is the main conduit for assistance into Gaza, and the Knesset’s ban makes explicit that the Israeli government is preventing aid delivery, making it harder for Washington to ignore. Before the bill passed, U.S. State Department Spokesperson Matt Miller warned that “passage of the legislation could have implications under U.S. law and U.S. policy.”

At the same time, two U.S. government agencies previously alerted the Biden administration that Israel was obstructing aid into Gaza, yet weapons transfers have continued unabated.

Sections of this story were first used in an earlier article published by The Conversation U.S. on February 1, 2024.

Nicholas R. Micinski, Assistant Professor of Political Science and International Affairs, University of Maine and Kelsey Norman, Fellow for the Middle East, Baker Institute for Public Policy, Rice University.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

MEA: Entities US Accused of Evading Russia Sanctions Don’t Break Indian Law; Working to Sensitise Firms

Washington had earlier this week accused 19 Indian firms and two Indian nationals of ‘enabling Russia’s prosecution of its illegal war’.

New Delhi: After the US government sanctioned 21 Indian entities for allegedly supplying Russia with technologies it needs to support its invasion of Ukraine, India said the entities did not violate domestic laws but that it was working to “sensitise Indian companies on applicable export control provisions”.

The external affairs ministry was also working with relevant Indian government departments and agencies to “inform them [the entities] on new measures being implemented that could impact Indian companies in certain circumstances,” it said.

“We are also in touch with the US authorities to clarify issues,” ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal added on Saturday (November 2).

Jaiswal did not reiterate India’s long-standing position of opposing unilateral sanctions by countries, i.e. those not imposed by the UN.

On Wednesday, the US state and treasury departments sanctioned 19 Indian companies and two Indian nationals among a total of close to 400 entities in countries including China, Malaysia, Thailand, Turkey and the UAE whom they charged with “enabling Russia’s prosecution of its illegal war” against Ukraine.

The action targets those entities that allegedly evaded sanctions against Moscow and provided Russia with “items critical to Russia’s military-industrial base” as well as other dual-use goods, which are those that may be used for civilian or military purposes.

Indian firms named include Ascend Aviation, accused of supplying Russian companies with US-origin aircraft parts; Futrevo, accused of providing electronic components to a Russian drone manufacturer; and Shreya Life Sciences, accused of sending US-trademarked servers designed for AI and machine learning applications to Russia.

Reportedly based across India, they also allegedly worked with proscribed Russian entities to procure export-controlled items and supplied aviation parts, electronic integrated circuits, machines for data processing, roller bearings and other items to Russia.

US deputy treasury secretary Wally Adeyemo said on Wednesday that Washington “and [its] allies will continue to take decisive action across the globe to stop the flow of critical tools and technologies that Russia needs to wage its illegal and immoral war against Ukraine.”

When asked on Saturday about the Indian companies being sanctioned, Jaiswal said India had “a robust legal and regulatory framework on strategic trade and non-proliferation controls” and added that New Delhi was part of three key of the four multilateral export control regimes in the world.

He continued: “Our understanding is that the sanctioned transactions and companies are not in violation of Indian laws. Nevertheless, in keeping with India’s established non-proliferation credentials, we are working with all the relevant Indian departments and agencies to sensitise Indian companies on applicable export control provisions, as also inform them on new measures being implemented that could impact Indian companies in certain circumstances.

“Regular strategic trade/export control outreach events for Indian industries and stakeholders are being carried out by agencies of the government of India.”

India has never explicitly condemned Russia for its 2022 invasion of Ukraine and has consistently abstained from UN resolutions criticising Moscow.

However, it has also called for a peaceful resolution through dialogue and the protection of civilians in conflict.

Speaking to Reuters, a US state department official said that Wednesday’s action was intended to send a message to India that Washington would take action against Indian entities if ‘progress is not made through communication’.

“With India, we have been very direct and blunt with them about the concerns we have about what we see as sort of emerging trends in that country that we want to stop before they get too far down the road,” the unnamed official said.

The sanctions were imposed under a 2021 executive order that allow the US government to impose asset freezes and visa restrictions against targeted entities.

India Calls References to Amit Shah’s ‘Involvement’ in Plot to Attack Khalistanis ‘Absurd, Baseless’

India also formally protested after some consular officials in Canada were informed that they were under audio and video surveillance.

New Delhi: India has lodged strong protest against Canada and warned of serious consequences for bilateral ties after Canadian deputy foreign affairs minister David Morrison said earlier this week that he had confirmed to a US newspaper that Indian home minister Amit Shah was “involved” in a plot to kill Canadian nationals.

The external affairs ministry summoned Canada’s acting deputy high commissioner Geoffrey Dean on Friday (November 1) and handed him a diplomatic note protesting Morrison’s statements as “absurd” and “baseless”.

“We had summoned the representative of the Canadian high commission yesterday. A diplomatic note was handed over in reference to the proceedings of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security in Ottawa on October 29, 2024. It was conveyed in the note that the government of India protests in the strongest terms to the absurd and baseless references made to the Union home minister of India before the committee by deputy minister David Morrison,” external affairs ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said at a press briefing on Saturday.

“In fact, the revelation that high Canadian officials deliberately leak unfounded insinuations to the international media as part of a conscious strategy to discredit India and influence other nations only confirms the view [the] government of India has long held about [the] current Canadian government’s political agenda and behavioural pattern. Such irresponsible actions will have serious consequences for bilateral ties.”

Morrison on Tuesday made the disclosure at a hearing by the Canadian parliamentary committee on public safety and national security. It came amid a widening diplomatic row between the two countries and a year after Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau alleged that agents of the Indian government were involved in the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a pro-Khalistan Canadian national proscribed as a terrorist by India.

The Washington Post on October 14 had cited unnamed Canadian officials as saying they had told the Indian government that “conversations and texts among Indian diplomats” ordered out of the country that day “include references” to Shah and a senior official in the Research and Analysis Wing “who have authorised … intelligence-gathering missions and attacks on Sikh separatists” in Canada.

Jaiswal said that India also formally protested after some consular officials in Canada were informed by the Canadian government that they were under audio and video surveillance.

“Some of our consular officials were recently informed by the Canadian government that they have been and continue to be under audio and video surveillance. Their communications have also been intercepted. We have formally protested to the Canadian government as we deem these actions to be a flagrant violation of relevant diplomatic and consular conventions,” he said.

“By citing technicalities, the Canadian government cannot justify the fact that it is indulging in harassment and intimidation. Our diplomatic and consular personnel are already functioning in an environment of extremism and violence. This action of the Canadian government aggravates the situation and is incompatible with established diplomatic norms and practices.”

In response to a Canadian cyber security report from earlier this week, the external affairs ministry said that it “appears to be another example of a Canadian strategy to attack India”.

“As I mentioned earlier, their senior officials have openly confessed that they are seeking to manipulate global opinion against India. As on other occasions, imputations are made without any evidence,” Jaiswal said.

Canada’s cybersecurity report said: “We assess that Indian state-sponsored cyber threat actors likely conduct cyber threat activity against government of Canada networks for the purpose of espionage. We judge that official bilateral relations between Canada and India will very likely drive Indian state-sponsored cyber threat activity against Canada.”

Jaiswal said that the atmosphere in Canada has “reached high levels of intolerance and extremism” after reports of the cancellation of Diwali celebrations at the Parliament House in Ottawa.

“We have seen some reports in this regard. It is unfortunate that the prevailing atmosphere in Canada has reached high levels of intolerance and extremism,” he said.

In recent weeks, the diplomatic row between India and Canada widened after the two countries expelled six diplomats each, including their top envoys.

India on October 14 announced that Canada had informed it that six of its diplomats, including high commissioner Sanjay Kumar Verma, were “persons of interests” in a criminal investigation.

The Indian external affairs ministry summoned the Canadian charge d’affaires to announce that New Delhi was withdrawing the six diplomats and declaring six Canadian diplomats personae non gratae.

At that same time, Canada also stated that expulsion notices had been given to the six Indian diplomats in Ottawa.

On the same day, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police held a press briefing to say that its investigations went beyond the Nijjar killing and involved evidence of Indian diplomats allegedly using members of jailed gangster Lawrence Bishnoi’s gang in criminally intimidating Canadian nationals of Indian origin.

Why Is a War Correspondent’s Profession a Calling?

In ‘I Brought the War with Me’, British journalist Lindsey Hilsum has the courage to introduce the human interest despite the brutality, and by and large, with welcome non-romanticism.

Of the 50 short on-the ground narratives about various conflict zones, British journalist and war correspondent Lindsey Hilsum has structured her autobiographical text in ten segments. Within those segments, the events are neither chronological nor confined to one country.

‘I Brought the War with Me: Stories and Poems from the Front Line’, Lindsey Hilsum, Chatto & Windus, UK, 2024.

The narratives refer to warzones in the Middle East, Africa and Europe, with less than a handful in Asia and one in North America, and in terms of specific countries, the maximum references are to Syria, followed by Ukraine, Palestine/Israel, Rwanda and Russia. The absence of Asia, by and large, and Latin America is explained by British priorities and possibly the journalist’s available budgets.

Why is a war correspondent’s profession a calling? Because, in Hilsum’s words, ‘the act of documenting someone’s story makes it count for something, or at least for something more than if it had never been recorded at all.’ She finds reporting from warzones ‘rewarding and exciting,’ the feeling of ‘living through history’ in which ‘nightmares, anger, tears and bouts of despondency are all normal…it is hard to believe that humans are inherently good.’

Sometimes she was an eyewitness to history; at others, among the first on the scene. In 1994, Hilsum served with UNICEF in Rwanda, the only foreign reporter when the Hutu genocide of the minority Tutsis began and led to 800,000 killed, one of the most brutal mass crimes of the 20^th century. She reports that ‘I was alone in a city I scarcely knew with no petrol in my car. Barricades manned by red-eyed drunken men armed with broken beer bottles, machetes and nail-studded clubs had sprung up all over town.’ And on the Palestine West Bank, ‘we were the first outsiders in nearly two weeks who hadn’t come to kill them.’

Hilsum has the courage to introduce the human interest despite the brutality, and by and large, with welcome non-romanticism. She states that some ‘details were tantalizing in their mundanity…There was nothing that could be called victory. There was certainly no glory,’ pointing out the ‘futility and cruelty of war which never achieves the results promised by those who start it.’ In using the words of interviewees verbatim, Hilsum notes that the most courageous people in war have been civilians, and ‘war brings out the best and worst in people.’ In countless instances of inhumanity, she saw that in Uganda ‘children became the most feared fighters because they knew no restraint,’ and one with ‘a louring volatility I have never seen in an adult soldier.’

Lindsey Hilsum. Photo: Chatham House, CC BY 2.0.

Hilsum has no respect for American overseas interventions; the Afghans did not believe bin Laden had orchestrated the 9/11 attack from Afghanistan, and regarded the Americans as just another foreign invasion. The USA had equally little impact with its ‘reckless and aggressive behaviour’ in Iraq when its invasion had brought anarchy in its wake – ‘an ignorant, ahistorical intervention by outsiders.’ The Iraqis that had welcomed the US intervention ‘were now trembling with fury and outrage…US troops were regarded as liberators for less than 24 hours.’ So, is ‘totalitarian oppression’ better than the bedlam that follows it more often than not? This remains an imponderable question.

Hilsum considers terrorism in Europe: ‘If you thought about it too much it was unnerving so on the whole, we didn’t…Jihadism only has currency because their generation is looking for identity and meaning.’ Like W.H. Auden, she ‘knew human folly like the back of [her] hand.’ Therefore, she writes that ‘the online world increasingly demands binary attitudes; the only authentic response [varies] between happy warrior and bitter pacifist,’ whereas ‘experience tells me that that war never turns out as planned, and taints everyone it touches.’

Hilsum predicts that the ongoing conflict in the Sahel presages wider wars and greater African numbers who will try to escape to Europe and the US, and that refugee flows caused by climate change are only starting. She observes that the top five refugee-hosting countries include only one developed nation – Germany. Western societies are riven by polarising politics, AI disassociates the decision-makers from the killed while she regrets that ‘journalists focus on what is critical now.’ Deploring the destruction of ancient monuments, she states ‘the moment of history in which they [the combatants] were living was more important to them than preserving emblems of the country’s past.’

With unsentimental but often evocative prose, Hilsum notes that ‘Nothing bonds you to your colleagues as intensely as being under fire.’ Her own experiences were ‘too painful to recall but too searing to forget,’ for example, ‘In Mexico it’s more dangerous to be a journalist than a drug trafficker.’ And there are also rare flashes of humour – as in Ukraine when ‘statements of questionable veracity [about the author’s alleged connections with the British Queen] would speed up our passing through almost any roadblock.’

The poems are sometimes more eloquent than the text. After all, from time immemorial poetry has dealt with the tropes of passion and battle. Assessing a poem is a deeply subjective exercise, but the context for the poems is apposite, the poets sometimes familiar, others unexpected like Enheduanna, the world’s (2300 BC) earliest poet with her hymns to Sumerian goddesses Inana and Nanna; and touching when they concern the futility of settlement of disputes through force.

A student or practitioner of international relations would be on the lookout for any suggestion of bias, and to the author’s credit there are few, save a predisposition to oppose actions by Russia and Syria on account of ‘dictatorships’, irrespective of the legitimacy of their positions, and when ‘similarities between enemies can be almost unbearable.’ Russia according to the author has ‘belligerent imperial ambition’ which reflects the UK’s government and media’s prejudices.

It has to be questioned whether the non-chronological, non-geographical system of the book best serves the author’s interest. It seems so designed to appeal to the emotions rather than a reasoned train of sequence. It is for each reader to judge the validity of this format.

Krishnan Srinivasan is a former foreign secretary.

Botswana: President Masisi Concedes Defeat Ending BDP’s 6 Decades in Power

Partial results showed the ruling party trailing in fourth place. The opposition UDC party is expected to win

Botswana’s President Mokgweetsi Masisi conceded defeat in the general election Friday, marking an end to his party’s 58 year rule.

The final results are yet to be announced, but the main opposition Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC) was in the lead, with the ruling Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) in the fourth place according to partial results.

Several local media reports said the BDP had lost by a landslide, citing results from 36 out of 61 constituencies. A party needs to win 31 constituencies to get a majority in Botswana. The UDC had 25 seats.

“I concede the election. I am proud of our democratic processes. Although I wanted a second term, I will respectfully step aside and participate in a smooth transition process,” Masisi told reporters early in the morning.

Masisi looks forward to ‘cheering on’ successor

Opposition leader Duma Boko is poised to become the next president of Botswana. Masisi said he had called Boko to concede. Boko, 54, is a lawyer and has previously contested the elections in 2014 and 2019.

“I look forward to attending the coming inauguration and cheering on my successor. He will enjoy my support,” Masisi added.

Botswana gained independence from Britain in 1966. Since then, the BDP has dominated national politics for nearly 60 years. The southern African nation is one of the continent’s most stable democracies. It is the second largest producer of diamonds in the world. However, as global demand for diamonds has slumped, the economy has suffered. The unemployment rate has risen to more than 27%.

Masisi has received a lot of criticism for not doing enough to diversify the economy.

This article was originally published on DW.

‘List RSS, Affiliates as Hate Groups’: South Asian Communities in Canada Write To Trudeau

The open letter urges the Canadian government to extend protection to South Asians and other minority communities.

New Delhi: Members of 25 South Asian communities in Canada have written an open letter to the country’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, urging the government to list the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and its affiliates in Canada as hate groups/far right extremist entities.

The development comes amid an unprecedented escalation of tensions between India and Canada over Ottawa’s allegations that Indian government agents were involved in killing pro-Khalistan leader Hardeep Singh Nijjar in Canada in 2023.

“The recent RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) announcement has revealed the “involvement of agents of the Government of India in serious criminal activity in Canada” and that the RCMP and other law enforcement agencies in Canada have investigated and charged a “significant number of individuals for their direct involvement in homicides, extortions and other criminal acts of violence.” The assassination of a Canadian Sikh leader, Hardeep Singh Nijjar last year, and its alleged hand by India’s Hindu nationalist government appears to be the tip of the iceberg,” says the statement from the members of the South Asian communities.

“The Guardian reports that the “allegations of an India campaign of transnational violence and harassment have emerged not only in Canada but in the US, UK and Pakistan, where prominent Sikh activists say they have received threats to their lives,” the statement adds.

The statement cited a 2023 report published by the National Council of Canadian Muslims that has linked anti-Sikh violence in Canada to the RSS and the Sangh Parivar.

“The presence of Sangh Parivar and RSS-related groups sadly but predictably overlaps with various incidents of Hindu supremacist rhetoric and actions in Canada,” states the 2023 report.

‘Minority populations made second class citizens’

The statement adds that the BJP is the political arm of RSS – which is a paramilitary organisation which promotes “Hindutva” or Hindu nationalism, inspired by European Fascism.

“Founders of RSS explicitly espoused Fascist ideology In the ten years of BJP rule in India we have seen blatant examples of this, as the government takes India toward their goal of making the country a Hindu ethno-nationalist state in which the 200 million Muslim population and other minority populations such as Sikh, Dalit, Adivasi (indigenous peoples), and Christians are made second class citizens,” adds the statement.

The signatories to the statement are – Academics for Palestine – Concordia, Association des Femmes Musulmanes de Québec, Canadian Council of Indian Muslims (CCIM) Canadian Council of Muslim Women, Montreal Canadian Forum for Human Rights and Democracy in India, Canadians Against Oppression and Persecution (CAOP), Canadians for Indian Democracy (CID), Canadians for Peace and Justice in Kashmir (CPJK), Centre sur l’asie du sud (CERAS), Critical Diasporic South Asian Feminisms, External Affairs – Students’ Society of McGill University, Femmes de diverses origines/Women of Diverse Origins, Hindus for Human Rights, International Council of Indian Muslims (ICIM), Just Peace Advocates/Mouvement Pour Une Paix Juste, Justice For All Canada, Palestinian and Jewish Unity (PAJU), Quebec Public Interest Research Group – Concordia (QPIRG), Rang Collective: Arts for Solidarity, Solidarity Across Borders, South Asian Dalit Adivasi Network-Canada (SADAN), South Asian Diaspora Action Collective (SADAC), South Asian Women’s Community Centre (SAWCC) Tadamon! and Teesri Duniya Theatre.

‘Investigate influence of RSS and its affiliates’

“Under this Hindu nationalist government, atrocities against minorities in India have been carried out with impunity and often with complicity. The evidence in recent reports confirm a network of these extremist groups are targeting Sikhs and other diasporic Indian minority communities and activists in Canada and the US. The extensive network of Hindu nationalists and their affiliates in Canada and worldwide is well documented, and now we know this network in Canada is involved in a disturbing pattern of coercion, organized crime and deadly violence,” adds the statement.

The statement urges the Canadian government to extend protection to South Asians and other minority communities, investigate the human rights violations and influence of the RSS and its affiliates and list the RSS and its affiliates in Canada as hate groups/far right extremist groups.

“HSS-Canada, VHP-Canada, Coalition of Hindus of North America (CoHNA)-Canada
and Canadian Organization for Hindu Heritage Education (COHHE), SEWA International.
These groups often deflect criticism by invoking “hinduphobia”, which has been profusely
debunked,” says the statement.

Spain: Rescuers Search For Survivors, Bodies Following Deadliest Floods Since 1973

Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, who has called three days of national mourning, headed to the region on Thursday.

Some 1,000 Spanish troops, alongside police and firefighters, have begun searching through debris in the Valencia region after massive floods killed at least 95 people and left many others missing in Spain’s southeast.

Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, who has called three days of national mourning, headed to the region on Thursday (October 30).

On Thursday, he urged residents of the regions hit hardest by the floods in a generation to stay home.

“Please, stay at home … follow the calls of the emergency services … right now the most important thing is to save as many lives as possible,” Sanchez told residents of the provinces of Valencia and Castellon.

The disaster was the deadliest of its kind in the country since 1973, with up to a year’s rain falling in the region in a matter of hours.

Scientists have warned that such extreme weather events are becoming more intense, longer and more frequent because of human-induced climate change.

Power outages, no drinking water

On Thursday morning, tens of thousands of homes still lacked electricity and drinking water, while hundreds of cars and trucks swept along by the water masses littered the streets.

Authorities said Paiporta, in the Valencia suburbs, suffered the most deaths, with about 40 people falling victim to the floods.

Six of those who died there were in a home for the elderly, Spanish broadcaster RTVE said.

Officials in the Valencia region, where at least 92 were killed, said survivors were being sheltered in temporary accommodation such as fire stations. They said, however, that the death toll in the region will rise as more bodies are found.

Two women died in the Castilla-La Mancha region southeast of Madrid also died, while a British national was killed in Andalusia.

Condolences from PM, king

Sanchez expressed his condolences in a televised address on Wednesday, saying “All of Spain weeps with all of you … We won’t abandon you.”

He said the disaster could not be considered over and that “we will deploy all the necessary resources for as long as necessary so that we can recover from this tragedy.”

King Felipe VI said he was “devastated” by the disaster and offered “heartfelt condolences” to families of the victims.

Valencia regional government chief Carlos Mazon has rejected criticism that the population was warned too late about the coming floods, saying alerts were issued as early as Sunday.

The regional government had been criticised for not sending out flood warnings to people’s mobile phones until 8:00 pm on Tuesday, when flooding in some areas had already begun.

This article was originally published on DW.