Chindia Alert: You’ll be Living in their World Very Soon
aims to alert you to the threats and opportunities that China and India present. China and India require serious attention; case of ‘hidden dragon and crouching tiger’.
Without this attention, governments, businesses and, indeed, individuals may find themselves at a great disadvantage sooner rather than later.
The POSTs (front webpages) are mainly 'cuttings' from reliable sources, updated continuously.
The PAGEs (see Tabs, above) attempt to make the information more meaningful by putting some structure to the information we have researched and assembled since 2006.
Chinese groups calling for more ‘fighting spirit’ are getting the upper hand on those who favour calm and cooperation, government adviser says
From Hong Kong to Covid-19, trade to the South China Sea, Beijing and Washington are clashing on a growing number of fronts and in an increasingly aggressive way
Efforts to promote dialogue and cooperation between the US and China are failing, observers say. Photo: AFP
Moderates who favour dialogue and cooperation as a way to resolve China’s disputes with the United States are losing ground to hardline groups bent on taking the fight to Washington, according to political insiders and observers.
“There are two camps in China,” said a former state official who now serves as a government adviser and asked not to be named.
“One is stressing the combat spirit, the other is trying to relieve tensions. And the former has the upper hand.”
Relations between China and the US are under intense pressure. After Beijing moved to introduce a national security law for Hong Kong, US President Donald Trump said on Friday that Washington would begin eliminating the special policy exemptions it grants the city, as it no longer considers it autonomous from mainland China.
Beijing’s decision to enact a national security law for Hong Kong was met with anger from the US and other Western countries. Photo: Sam Tsang
The two nations have also clashed over trade, Xinjiang, Taiwan and the South China Sea, with the US passing several acts denouncing Beijing and sanctioning Chinese officials.
China has also experienced turbulence in its relations with other countries, including Australia and members of the European Union, mostly related to the Covid-19 pandemic
and Beijing’s efforts to position itself as a leader in the fight against the disease with its policy of “mask diplomacy”.
After Canberra appealed for an independent investigation to be carried out to determine the origins of the coronavirus, Beijing responded by imposing tariffs on imports of Australian barley, showing it is prepared to do more than just trade insults and accusations with its adversaries.
Pang Zhongying, a professor of international relations at Ocean University of China in Qingdao, said there was a worrying trend in China’s relations with other nations.
“We need political and diplomatic means to resolve the challenges we are facing, but … diplomatic methods have become undiplomatic,” he said.
“There are some who believe that problems can be solved through tough gestures, but this will never work. Without diplomacy, problems become confrontations.”
said during his annual press conference on the sidelines of the National People’s Congress last weekend that China and the United States must work together to prevent a new Cold War.
His words were echoed by Chinese Premier Li Keqiang, who said during a press conference after the closure of the legislative session on Thursday that the many challenges facing the China-US relations could only be resolved through cooperation.
However, the government adviser said there was often quite a chasm between what China’s leaders said and what happened in reality.
“Even though we say we do not want a Cold War, what is happening at the working level seems to be different.” he said. “The implementation of policies is not properly coordinated and often chaotic.”
Tensions between China and the US have been in a poor state since the start of a trade war almost two years ago. After multiple rounds of negotiations, the sides in January signed a phase one deal, but the positivity that created was short-lived.
In February, Beijing expelled three reporters from The Wall Street Journal over an article it deemed racist, while Washington has ramped up its military activity in the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait, and threatened to revoke the visas of Chinese students studying science and technology in the US over concerns they might be engaged in espionage.
Beijing has also used its state media and army of “Wolf Warrior” diplomats to promote its narrative, though many Chinese scholars and foreign policy advisers have said the latter’s nationalistic fervour has done more harm than good and appealed to Beijing to adopt a more conciliatory tone.
However, Hu Xijin, editor-in-chief of Chinese tabloid Global Times, said China had no option but to stare down the US, which regarded the world’s most populous nation as its main rival.
“Being contained by the US is too high a price for China to pay,” he said. “I think the best thing people can do is forget the old days of China-US ties”.
Jin Canrong, a professor of international relations at Renmin University in Beijing, wrote in a recent newspaper article that Beijing’s actions – notably enacting a national security law for Hong Kong – showed it was uncompromising and ready to stand its ground against the US.
Wu Xinbo, dean of international studies at Fudan University in Shanghai, agreed, saying relations between the two countries were likely to worsen in the run-up to the US presidential election in November and that Beijing should be prepared for a fight.
But Adam Ni, director of China Policy Centre, a think tank in Canberra, said the issue was not that the moderate camp had been sidelined, but rather Beijing’s perception of the US had changed.
“Beijing has woken up to the idea that America’s tough policy on China will continue and it is expecting an escalation of the tensions,” he said.
“The centre of gravity in terms of Beijing’s perception of the US has shifted, in the same way the US perception of China has shifted towards a more negative image”.
Beijing was simply responding in kind to the hardline, assertive manner of the US, he said.
Li held a press conference to mark the end of the parliamentary session. This is the South China Morning Post’s live coverage.
Reporting by Wendy Wu, Gary Cheung, Frank Tang, Mai Jun, Sarah Zheng, Kinling Lo, Linda Lew, Coco Feng, Liu Zhen, Laura Zhou, Echo Xie, Keegan Elmer, Catherine Wong, Zhuang Pinghui, Tony Cheung
6:05PM
The End
Li’s key points
The main points from Li’s press conference:
The central government will stick to the principle of “one country, two systems”, and “Hong Kong people governing Hong Kong” with a high degree of autonomy. The NPC’s resolution for a
. But he said at the press conference that “peaceful reunification” was still Beijing’s policy and the mainland was open to further exchanges with Taiwan.
Even though the central government did not set a GDP growth target, China will implement
On the difficult and unpredictable external factors faced by China, Li said the pandemic had hit the world severely, greatly reducing exchanges between countries.
If conditions persisted, there would be more dangers to the global economy, which could undermine efforts to contain the coronavirus.
Combating the virus required an open economy to ensure the supply of goods for public health, he said.
He said China would to continue to open up and maintain the stability of the supply chain.
5:46PM
Rise in pensions
Li said that given the tough economic times, Beijing would expand coverage of subsistence allowances and unemployment benefits as well as increase pensions for the elderly.
“There can be no loopholes – if there are any gaps, then this will make people feel there is no hope for the future,” he said. “As the saying goes, the people are the foundation of a state and when the foundation is solid, the state enjoys tranquility.”
5:41PM
Ending poverty
Li said that even with the fallout from the coronavirus pandemic, the country was still determined to reach its goal of eliminating poverty by 2020.
He said there were some 5 million people living below the poverty line before the outbreak, and more may have fallen below it since then, making eliminating poverty a “daunting task”.
5:36PM
Questions
So far Li has taken nine questions, of which four were from foreign media, one was from Hong Kong and one from Taiwan.
Li said the central government must work hard to help business flourish, aiming at having 10,000 new enterprises registered each day.
The government must get rid of all unnecessary restrictions on the market, foster fair competition and create tangible wealth, he said.
He said there had been a surge in new kinds of businesses, such as online platforms, during the pandemic, and some of these businesses had seen their revenue grow by two-thirds.
5:20PM
China-US tensions
On escalations in China-US tensions and speculation about a new Cold War, Li acknowledged new challenges between the two countries, but said there was room for bilateral cooperation, including on the economy and technology.
Their relationship could be either mutually beneficial or mutually harmful, he said.
was not good for either country or the world, Li said.
Referring to a phase one trade deal reached in January, Li said the two countries should continue to follow through on the consensus reached by the leaders of both countries.
He said trade and economic cooperation should be based on market forces. There were differences in each other’s systems, and conflicts were inevitable, but the key was how to handle the problems.
We need to mutually respect each other’s core interests and search for areas for cooperation, Li said.
The US had in recent days issued a strategic policy that appeared to signal that Washington had abandoned its engagement policy towards Beijing.
He also spoke of new investment by a hi-tech US company in the central Chinese city of Wuhan, an example he said reflected the importance of business ties and cooperation between the countries.
Li had earlier sent a congratulatory letter to the company, the US conglomerate Honeywell.
5:11PM
Hong Kong and the national security law
Asked whether the NPC’s resolution for a national security law for Hong Kong
meant that Beijing had abandoned the “one country, two systems” model for Hong Kong, Li said the law was to secure the long-term stability of “one country, two systems”.
He said that “one country, two systems” and a high degree of autonomy were long an important part of Beijing’s basic state policy, and had been implemented from the start.
He said the national security law resolution was designed “for the steady implementation of one country, two systems and Hong Kong’s long-term stability and prosperity”.
5:04PM
Growth for jobs
Li said growth would be needed to support job creation, one issue of greatest public concern.
About one-third of recent comments left on the State Council’s website were on employment.
China was committed to helping businesses survive and retain jobs, he said.
University students are expected to graduate and enter the workforce in record numbers this year.
4:59PM
‘No change’ on Taiwan
Li said that Beijing’s cross-strait policy would not change, and that the mainland Chinese government was open to further exchanges with Taiwan to move forward on “peaceful reunification” with the self-ruled island.
He rejected all “Taiwanese independence forces” and external interference in Taiwan.
He said Beijing remained committed to the 1992 consensus – the political understanding that there is only “one China” but that each side has its own understanding of what this means.
Last week, Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen officially started her second term, after a landslide election win in January that many saw as an endorsement of her harder stand against Beijing.
Li said Beijing would continue to pay high attention to the island, adding that no Taiwanese died from the coronavirus in mainland China.
4:50PM
Jobs – not infrastructure
Li said the government’s measures to counter the coronavirus would focus on
About 70 per cent of the funds would support people’s income and boost consumption.
Smaller firms would also be targeted for support.
“The central government will live on a tight budget,” Li said.
4:44PM
‘No cover-up allowed’
Li said China had successfully controlled the coronavirus within its borders and Beijing had acted in a transparent and timely manner throughout the pandemic.
“No cover-up will ever be allowed,” he said.
Li said there were two main challenges in the pandemic: controlling the virus outbreak and reopening the economy. International cooperation was important for both.
“We may have to live with Covid-19 for some time to come,” he said.
4:36PM
Coronavirus inquiry
In response to a question about the origins of the coronavirus and calls for an
Li said that getting a clear, scientific understanding of the source of the virus could contribute to global public health.
He also referred to the World Health Assembly’s endorsement of an independent review into the World Health Organisation’s handling of the pandemic and its animal origins.
Li said the virus had no borders and much was still not known about it, adding that the international community needed to work together to keep the virus in check and create a vaccine.
Beijing and Washington have sparred over the origin of the virus, and earlier the Chinese foreign ministry condemned the US and Australia for their calls of an independent investigation into Beijing’s response to the pandemic.
The US has accused Beijing of cover-ups and a lack of transparency, while a Chinese foreign ministry spokesman suggested earlier that the US could be the origin of the virus.
Li said Beijing was open to international cooperation on research and development for a vaccine. Washington has accused China of seeking to steal its vaccine research, a charge that Beijing has strongly rejected.
Economic stability
The cabinet is determined to stabilise the economy, according to Li.
“If there are big changes, we still have policy room, including on the fiscal, financial and social security fronts,” he said.
“We are confident that under the strong leadership of [President] Xi Jinping and with joint efforts across the nation, we will be able to prevail in the difficulties and achieve the goal of building a moderately prosperous society.”
Chinese businesses still face grim economic reality despite Covid-19 restrictions being lifted
Coronavirus and the economy
Li said the Chinese economy was deeply integrated into the global economy, so China would not be immune from the impact of the coronavirus.
Economic development remained key to solving China’s problems today, Li said.
Li starts his annual press conference by saying that the restrictions imposed for Covid-19 will not affect his communication with the media.
Earlier, Li Zhanshu, chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, presided over a near-unanimous vote to pass a resolution on a national security law for Hong Kong that would ban separatism, subversion, foreign interference, and terrorism in the city.
The votes were 2,878 in favour, one against, six abstentions, and one who did not press the button to vote.
Critics say the move to enact a national security law will end the “one country, two systems” model in Hong Kong. The United States said on Thursday that Hong Kong was no longer autonomous from China, a decision that could end the city’s special trading status with the US.
This year all journalists are restricted to the press centre, the first time that the media have not been in the same room as the premier at his annual press conference.
Journalists waiting for the presser can watch a live broadcast of the NPC’s closing ceremony at the press centre’s lounge. But vote count is not shown at the broadcast. Photos: Jun Mai
All journalists attending the conference were tested for the coronavirus at 6am today and had to wait for the results at the Diaoyutai Hotel.
Countries must respect each others’ systems and be wary of US political forces who want to ‘hijack relations’, Wang tells press conference at ‘two sessions’
Beijing is not looking for confrontation and wants to work with Washington to fight coronavirus, minister says
Foreign Minister Wang Yi said China did not want to replace or change the US. Photo: Xinhua
China and the US should try to avoid a new cold war and find new ways to cooperate despite their differences, China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi said on Sunday.
“We need to be alert to efforts by some political forces in America to hijack China-US relations and who try to push the two countries towards a so-called ‘new cold war’.
“This is a dangerous attempt to turn back the course of history,” Wang told a press conference on the sidelines of the annual parliamentary meetings known as the ‘two sessions’.
Ties between the two countries have further worsened due to escalating tensions over the handling of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Voices calling for decoupling have been on the rise in the US, with some arguing that the two countries are edging towards a new cold war akin to that against the Soviet Union.
Wang called for the two countries to respect each other’s political systems and to find a way to get along despite their differences.
The two nations should step up cooperation on global pandemic control, and coordinate on macro policies to deal with the economic impact.
“China has no intention of changing the United States, much less replacing it. The US should give up the wishful thinking that it can change China.”
“For the benefit of the two peoples, as well as the future and well-being of humankind, China and the US should and must find a way to coexist peacefully despite the differences in system and cultures of the two societies.”
Wang said China will not seek confrontation with the United States, but China is determined to protect its sovereignty, territorial integrity and development.
BEIJING, May 2 (Xinhua) — A Chinese health official on Saturday urged people to wear masks correctly and avoid travel during peak hours over coronavirus concerns in the May Day holiday.
Travelers are encouraged to reserve visiting slots in advance, and pay attention to their temperatures, said Mi Feng, a spokesperson for the National Health Commission, at a press conference in Beijing.
Some tourist attractions have seen large crowds of tourists not wearing masks Friday, the first day of the five-day May Day holiday, Mi said.
China recorded more than 23 million domestic tourist trips Friday, with the domestic tourism revenue reaching over 9.7 billion yuan (about 1.38 billion U.S. dollars), according to the Ministry of Culture and Tourism.
Image copyright GETTY IMAGESImage caption The Chinese city of Wuhan recently lifted its strict quarantine measures
The Chinese city of Wuhan, where the coronavirus originated last year, has raised its official Covid-19 death toll by 50%, adding 1,290 fatalities.
Wuhan officials attributed the new figure to updated reporting and deaths outside hospitals. China has insisted there was no cover-up.
It has been accused of downplaying the severity of its virus outbreak.
Wuhan’s 11 million residents spent months in strict lockdown conditions, which have only recently been eased.
The latest official figures bring the death toll in the city in China’s central Hubei province to 3,869, increasing the national total to more than 4,600.
China has confirmed nearly 84,000 coronavirus infections, the seventh-highest globally, according to Johns Hopkins University data.
What’s China’s explanation for the rise in deaths?
In a statement released on Friday, officials in Wuhan said the revised figures were the result of new data received from multiple sources, including records kept by funeral homes and prisons.
Deaths linked to the virus outside hospitals, such as people who died at home, had not previously been recorded.
Media caption Learn how Wuhan dealt with the lockdown
The “statistical verification” followed efforts by authorities to “ensure that information on the city’s Covid-19 epidemic is open, transparent and the data [is] accurate”, the statement said.
It added that health systems were initially overwhelmed and cases were “mistakenly reported” – in some instances counted more than once and in others missed entirely.
A shortage of testing capacity in the early stages meant that many infected patients were not accounted for, it said.
A spokesman for China’s National Health Commission, Mi Feng, said the new death count came from a “comprehensive review” of epidemic data.
In its daily news conference, the foreign ministry said accusations of a cover-up, which have been made most stridently on the world stage by US President Donald Trump, were unsubstantiated. “We’ll never allow any concealment,” a spokesman said.
Why are there concerns over China’s figures?
Friday’s revised figures come amid growing international concern that deaths in China have been under-reported. Questions have also been raised about Beijing’s handling of the epidemic, particularly in its early stages.
In December 2019, Chinese authorities launched an investigation into a mysterious viral pneumonia after cases began circulating in Wuhan.
China reported the cases to the World Health Organization (WHO), the UN’s global health agency, on 31 December.
But WHO experts were only allowed to visit China and investigate the outbreak on 10 February, by which time the country had more than 40,000 cases.
The mayor of Wuhan has previously admitted there was a lack of action between the start of January – when about 100 cases had been confirmed – and 23 January, when city-wide restrictions were enacted.
Around that time, a doctor who tried to warn his colleagues about an outbreak of a Sars-like virus was silenced by the authorities. Dr Li Wenliang later died from Covid-19.
Wuhan’s death toll increase of almost exactly 50% has left some analysts wondering if this is all a bit too neat.
For months questions have been asked about the veracity of China’s official coronavirus statistics.
The inference has been that some Chinese officials may have deliberately under-reported deaths and infections to give the impression that cities and towns were successfully managing the emergency.
If that was the case, Chinese officials were not to know just how bad this crisis would get in other countries, making its own figures now seem implausibly small.
The authorities in Wuhan, where the first cluster of this disease was reported, said there had been no deliberate misrepresentation of data, rather that a stabilisation in the emergency had allowed them time to revisit the reported cases and to add any previously missed.
That the new death toll was released at the same time as a press conference announcing a total collapse in China’s economic growth figures has led some to wonder whether this was a deliberate attempt to bury one or other of these stories.
Then again, it could also be a complete coincidence.
China has been pushing back against US suggestions that the coronavirus came from a laboratory studying infectious diseases in Wuhan, the BBC’s Barbara Plett Usher in Washington DC reports.
US President Donald Trump and some of his officials have been flirting with the outlier theory in the midst of a propaganda war with China over the origin and handling of the pandemic, our correspondent says.
Mr Trump this week halted funding for the World Health Organization (WHO), accusing it of making deadly mistakes and overly trusting China.
“Do you really believe those numbers in this vast country called China, and that they have a certain number of cases and a certain number of deaths; does anybody really believe that?” Mr Trump said at the White House on Wednesday.
On Thursday, UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said: “We’ll have to ask the hard questions about how [coronavirus] came about and how it couldn’t have been stopped earlier.”
But China has also been praised for its handling of the crisis and the unprecedented restrictions that it instituted to slow the spread of the virus.
SUIFENHE, China (Reuters) – China’s northeastern border with Russia has become a frontline in the fight against a resurgence of the coronavirus epidemic as new daily cases rose to the highest in nearly six weeks – with more than 90% involving people coming from abroad.
Having largely stamped out domestic transmission of the disease, China has been slowly easing curbs on movement as it tries to get its economy back on track, but there are fears that a rise in imported cases could spark a second wave of COVID-19.
A total of 108 new coronavirus cases were reported in mainland China on Sunday, up from 99 a day earlier, marking the highest daily tally since March 5.
Imported cases accounted for a record 98. Half involved Chinese nationals returning from Russia’s Far Eastern Federal District, home to the city of Vladivostok, who re-entered China through border crossings in Heilongjiang province.
RELATED COVERAGE
Number of people crossing China borders cut 90% as part of virus efforts: official
“Our little town here, we thought it was the safest place,” said a resident of the border city of Suifenhe, who only gave his surname as Zhu.
“Some Chinese citizens – they want to come back, but it’s not very sensible, what are you doing coming here for?”
The border is closed, except to Chinese nationals, and the land route through the city had become one of few options available for people trying to return home after Russia stopped flights to China except for those evacuating people.
Streets in Suifenhe were virtually empty on Sunday evening due to restrictions of movement and gatherings announced last week, when authorities took preventative measures similar to those imposed in Wuhan, the central Chinese city where the pandemic ripping round the world first emerged late last year.
The total number of confirmed cases in mainland China now stands at 82,160 as of Sunday, and at the peak of the first wave of the epidemic on Feb 12 there were over 15,000 new cases.
Though the number of daily infections across China has dropped sharply from that peak, China has seen the daily toll creep higher after hitting a trough on March 12 because of the rise in imported cases.
Chinese cities near the Russian frontier are tightening border controls and imposing stricter quarantines in response.
Suifenhe and Harbin, the capital of Heilongjiang, are now mandating 28 days of quarantine as well as nucleic acid and antibody tests for all arrivals from abroad.
In Shanghai, authorities found that 60 people who arrived on Aeroflot flight SU208 from Moscow on April 10 have the coronavirus, Zheng Jin, a spokeswoman for the Shanghai Municipal Health Commission, told a press conference on Monday.
Residents in Suifenhe said a lot of people had left the city fearing contagion, but others put their trust in authorities’ containment measures.
“I don’t need to worry,” Zhao Wei, another Suifenhe resident, told Reuters. “If there’s a local transmission, I would, but there’s not a single one. They’re all from the border, but they’ve all been sent to quarantine.”
Image copyright GETTY IMAGESImage caption Mr Modi said he will not forgive Pragya Thakur
India is in full election mode: voting began on 11 April, and the final ballot will be cast on 19 May with results out on 23 May. Every day, the BBC will be bringing you all the latest updates on the twists and turns of the world’s largest democracy.
What happened?
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has attended first ever press conference at the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) head office in Delhi – days before Indians take part in the final stage of voting.
But journalists were left disappointed as he did not take any questions, and instead largely talked about his government’s achievements.
“I have come to thank the country for blessing me. I have seen a lot of ups and downs but the country stayed with me,” he said.
Mr Modi also spoke of his pride in India’s democratic process and said he needs to show the world “how diverse our democracy is”.
Mr Modi was seated next to party president Amit Shah. He said he would not take questions because the press conference was Mr Shah’s.
Earlier, the prime minister said he would “never be able to forgive” those who have “insulted” Mahatma Gandhi.
Mr Modi’s statement comes after controversial Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) politician Pragya Thakur called Nathuram Godse – the man who assassinated Mahatma Gandhi – a “patriot”.
Ms Thakur apologised after several leaders, including those from the BJP, criticised her.
“Such statements should be condemned. There is no place in society for such comments. She [Ms Thakur] may have apologised, but I will never be able to forgive her,” he said in an interview to News24 TV channel.
Why does this matter?
This is the first time Mr Modi has attended a press conference as prime minister while in India. Most of his press conferences have been on state visits to other countries and often involved little more than reading out an official statement.
He has given some one-on-one interviews to Indian media, though critics say that these have largely been tightly controlled and given to journalists seen as sympathetic to him. However in recent weeks he has given a flurry of interviews to several leading publications and television channels, including those that have been critical of him.
But if people were expecting a complete about-turn in his media policy this time, they would have been disappointed.
This caused some frustration among journalists on Twitter.
Also on Friday, a BJP candidate apologised for calling Gandhi’s killer a patriot
Image copyright GETTY IMAGES
What is happening?
Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) politician Pragya Thakur has apologised after calling Nathuram Godse – the man who assassinated Mahatma Gandhi – a “patriot”.
Several political parties had criticised her comment and her own party demanded that she should publicly apologise.
“It was my personal opinion. My intention was not to hurt anyone’s sentiments. If I’ve hurt anyone, I do apologise. What Gandhi Ji has done for the country cannot be forgotten. My statement has been twisted by the media,” Ms Thakur said on Thursday evening.
She made the comment after actor-turned politician Kamal Haasan said Godse was India’s first Hindu “extremist” earlier this week.
Why does this matter?
The BJP as well as opposition parties immediately reacted to her comment, which also caused a storm on social media.
BJP spokesperson GVL Narasimha Rao said that the party does not agree with her statement, and asked her to publicly apologise.
The main opposition Congress party demanded an apology from Prime Minister Narendra Modi and said that the BJP should take “punitive action” against Ms Thakur.
Congress spokesperson Randeep Surjewala said that “insulting martyrs is in the BJP DNA” and that the “soul of the nation” has been hurt by her remarks.
Congress party leader Priyanka Gandhi also lashed out at the BJP.
Political analysts also say that her comments have put the BJP in a tough spot, since Mr Modi and BJP president Amit Shah defended their decision to field her as a candidate despite terror charges against her.
Her candidature caused outrage as she is an accused of involvement in a blast that killed seven people and injured 100 others. Ms Thakur denies all charges against her.
However, Ms Thakur’s comments do reflect the views of some right-wing Hindus who support the BJP and have long seen Gandhi as too moderate.
Godse, who shot Gandhi in the chest three times at point-blank range on 30 January 1948, was also an activist with nationalist right-wing groups, including those closely associated with the BJP.
Hindu hardliners in India accuse Gandhi of having betrayed Hindus by being too pro-Muslim, and even for the division of India and the bloodshed that marked Partition, which saw India and Pakistan created after independence from Britain in 1947.
On Thursday, a ruling party candidate called Gandhi’s killer a patriot
What happened?
Controversial Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) politician Pragya Thakur made headlines again. This time it was for calling Nathuram Godse – the man who assassinated Mahatma Gandhi – a “patriot”.
Her comment was made in response to a statement by southern actor-turned politician Kamal Haasan who had said India’s first “extremist” was a Hindu”, referring to Godse.
His statement, made on Monday, was heavily criticised by the BJP, which accused him of indulging in “divisive politics” and filed a complaint against him with the Election Commission of India.
Why does this matter?
The BJP responded by criticising Ms Thakur and asking her to publicly apologise.
“BJP does not agree with this statement, we condemn it. Party will ask her for clarification, she should apologise publicly for this statement,” party spokesperson GVL Narasimha Rao told reporters.
Image copyright GETTY IMAGES
Ms Thakur has seen her fair share of controversy. Her candidature caused outrage as she is an accused of involvement in a blast that killed seven people and injured 100 others. On 18 April, she said that police officer Hemant Karkare had died in the November 2008 Mumbai terror attacks because she had “cursed” him. She was then banned from campaigning for 72 hours as a result.
A team led by Mr Karkare had arrested her for questioning in connection with the Malegaon blast.
During her campaign, she also said she was “proud” of her part in the demolition of the 16th Century Babri mosque. In 1992, right-wing Hindu mobs razed the mosque to the ground, claiming it was built on the site of a temple destroyed by Muslim rulers. The site, which is in the city of Ayodhya, has been a religious flashpoint for Hindus and Muslims for decades.
Campaigning ended in West Bengal a day before deadline
What happened?
The Election Commission (EC) told political parties to end their campaigning in West Bengal state, a day before the deadline in the wake of poll-related violence.
The campaign will end on Thursday at 10pm local time, and voting will be held on Sunday.
The decision comes after clashes broke out between the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) workers and protesters believed to be from the ruling Trinamool Congress (TMC) in Kolkata (formerly Calcutta) on Tuesday.
It happened during a roadshow of BJP chief Amit Shah. Several people were injured and vehicles were set on fire. A statue of renowned Bengali reformer Iswarchandra Vidyasagar was also vandalised in the clashes.
Both parties have accused each other of starting the violence.
Why does this matter?
Image copyright GETTY IMAGESImage caption Violence took place during BJP chief Amit Shah’s rally in Kolkata on Tuesday
The BJP welcomed the decision, saying it validated their argument that the state had “descended into anarchy” under the leadership of chief minister Mamata Banerjee.
Ms Banerjee said that the move was “undemocratic” and “it had insulted the people of Bengal”.
“Tomorrow, [Prime Minister Narendra] Modi has two meetings in Bengal. When he finishes, the campaigning also ends… Instead of punishing Amit Shah, the Election Commission has given a gift to the BJP,” she said.
Image copyright AFPImage caption Several people were injured and vehicles were set on fire during the violence
Both parties are locked into a fierce election battle to win most out West Bengal’s 42 seats. Ms Banerjee has ambitions of becoming the prime minister in case a nationwide coalition of regional parties wins enough seats.
The state has also become crucial for the BJP as it’s trying to expand its reach in the eastern state. It won only two seats in the 2014 election.
The BJP performed well in northern states like Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan in 2014, but this time it’s expected to suffer loses against a coalition of regional parties and the main opposition Congress.
So the party is trying to make up for the losses in West Bengal.
On Wednesday, the TMC and the BJP accused each other of poll violence
Image copyright GETTY IMAGES
What happened?
The war of words between West Bengal state chief minister Mamata Banerjee and the governing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) intensified ahead of voting on Sunday.
The latest verbal duel comes after violence was reported during BJP chief Amit Shah’s roadshow in Kolkata (formerly Calcutta) on Tuesday.
Clashes broke out between BJP supporters and protesters who were holding “Amit Shah go back” posters.
Some people suffered minor injuries and a few vehicles were set on fire.
The BJP said the protest was “orchestrated” and called it an “attempt to strangulate democracy”.
Why does this matter?
The eastern state has become politically crucial for the BJP as it has intensified campaigning in the past few days.
And that has sparked a feverish electoral battle between the BJP and Ms Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress (TMC).
“What does Amit Shah think of himself? Is he above everything? Is he god that no one can protest against him?” Ms Banerjee said.
In reply, Mr Shah accused the TMC of not following democratic norms during elections.
“Have faith in the people of Bengal that they’d face the TMC goons,” he said.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi is scheduled to hold more rallies in the coming days, so one can expect more verbal fireworks from the two leaders.
On Tuesday, the saga of the morphed Mamata meme continued
What happened?
India’s top court stepped in to release an activist belonging to India’s governing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) who was sent to prison for sharing a doctored image of West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee.
Priyanka Sharma was sentenced to two weeks in prison on 10 May after she shared a picture of Bollywood star Priyanka Chopra and her husband Nick Jonas at the Met Gala – but with Ms Banerjee’s head superimposed on to Chopra’s body.
Earlier the court had said Ms Sharma could be released only if she apologised to Ms Banerjee, but later waived this condition.
Why does this matter?
The battle for West Bengal in this general election has been absolutely bruising.
The BJP, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself, has been campaigning hard for votes in the state. This has brought them toe-to-toe with the state’s feisty chief minister. The fact that voting for West Bengal’s 42 seats has been split across all nine phases of voting has meant that the battle has been long and drawn-out.
And with just one phase to go before voting finally ends, the gloves are well and truly off. The two parties have traded insults on the campaign stage, their workers have attacked each other, and the violence on the ground has intensified. And now the battle has spread to cyberspace as well.
The country’s finance minister Arun Jaitley jumped at news of Ms Sharma’s release to call Ms Banerjee a dictator.
Analysts say that this political row is so bitter because the BJP has clearly identified West Bengal as one of the states where they may be able to make gains this election. This becomes more important for the party in the context of their fight in the politically crucial state of Uttar Pradesh, which sends the most number of MPs (80) to parliament.
They are up against a powerful coalition of regional parties there, and many expect them to lose seats as a result.
And PM Modi said Rahul Gandhi should be ashamed of 1984 riots
What happened?
Prime Minister Narendra Modi said that main opposition Congress party chief Rahul Gandhi should be “ashamed of himself” over his colleague’s remark on the 1984 anti-Sikh riots.
Mr Modi was replying to a controversial statement made by Sam Pitroda, who is a strategist of the Congress party.
In his reply to a question about the Congress’ role in the riots, Mr Pitroda had said “so what?”.
“I don’t think so, this is also another lie, and what about 1984? You speak about what you [Mr Modi] have done in five years. It [the riots] happened in 1984, so what?” he said.
Mr Gandhi said he was “ashamed” of Mr Pitroda’s statement, and asked him to apologise.
Mr Pitroda later said his statement was “twisted” and he did not mean to hurt sentiments.
But Mr Modi said the Congress chief “must apologise”.
“I was watching that naamdar [the dynast] told his guru that he should be ashamed of what he said. I want to ask naamdar, you pretended to scold your mentor for what? Because he exposed what was always in the Congress’s heart, and in the discussions of the naamdar family? Because he made public a family secret? Naamdar, it is you who should be ashamed,” Mr Modi said.
Why does this matter?
The controversy matters because it comes days ahead of voting for the 13 seats in the northern state of Punjab.
The BJP, which has formed a coalition with regional Shiromani Akali Dal, is locked in a bitter electoral battle with the ruling Congress in the state.
Sikhs are a majority in the state and the 1984 riots is still an emotional issue for many of them.
More than 3,000 Sikhs were killed in 1984 after the assassination of former prime minister Indira Gandhi by her Sikh bodyguards.
They were angry at her decision to send the army into the Golden Temple – Sikhism’s holiest shrine – to flush out militants earlier in the year.
The killing of Mrs Gandhi, who belonged to the Congress, saw mobs attack and murder members of the Sikh community across the country.
And both parties appear to be trying to come across as pro-Sikh ahead of the vote on 19 May.
On Sunday, Delhi voted but not enthusiastically
Image copyright GETTY IMAGESImage caption Delhi’s voter turnout was lower than in 2014
What happened?
Sunday saw India’s capital Delhi vote along with several other states in the polls – the penultimate phase of the country’s mammoth general election.
Voters turned out to vote, but in fewer numbers than they did in 2014. The election commission said that around 60% of the capital’s registered voters had actually cast ballots, which was about a five percent drop from 2014.
Delhi Chief Electoral Officer Ranbir Singh expressed disappointment, saying that the turnout did not match expectations.
Why does this matter?
The election commission is right to be disappointed – it had run a series of campaigns in the city, encouraging more people to vote.
But it was not as though polling in Delhi was an entirely smooth process. Some voters complained that their names were missing from electoral lists even though they had all the necessary documents. There were also reports that around 1,200 Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) had malfunctioned across the city, delaying the polling process.
The fact that Delhi became a three-cornered contest after the main opposition Congress and the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), which controls the Delhi state assembly, failed to stitch up an alliance may also have put voters off. Many analysts believe that this failure will only split voters who were against prime minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and effectively hand them victory.
So they may have decided to just stay home, and not bother queuing up in the blistering heat – it touched 40C on Sunday.
Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionAn Indian man watches the news broadcasting images of the released Indian pilot
As tensions between India and Pakistan escalated following a deadly suicide attack last month, there was another battle being played out on the airwaves. Television stations in both countries were accused of sensationalism and partiality. But how far did they take it? The BBC’s Rajini Vaidyanathan in Delhi and Secunder Kermani in Islamabad take a look.
It was drama that was almost made for television.
The relationship between India and Pakistan – tense at the best of times – came to a head on 26 February when India announced it had launched airstrikes on militant camps in Pakistan’s Balakot region as “retaliation” for a suicide attack that had killed 40 troops in Indian-administered Kashmir almost two weeks earlier.
A day later, on 27 February, Pakistan shot down an Indian jet fighter and captured its pilot.
Abhinandan Varthaman was freed as a “peace gesture”, and Pakistan PM Imran Khan warned that neither country could afford a miscalculation, with a nuclear arsenal on each side.
Suddenly people were hooked, India’s TV journalists included.
Image copyrightAFPImage captionIndian PM Narendra Modi is accused of exploiting India-Pakistan hostilities for political gain
So were they more patriots than journalists?
Rajini Vaidyanathan: Indian television networks showed no restraint when it came to their breathless coverage of the story. Rolling news was at fever pitch.
The coverage often fell into jingoism and nationalism, with headlines such as “Pakistan teaches India a lesson”, “Dastardly Pakistan”, and “Stay Calm and Back India” prominently displayed on screens.
Some reporters and commentators called for India to use missiles and strike back. One reporter in south India hosted an entire segment dressed in combat fatigues, holding a toy gun.
And while I was reporting on the return of the Indian pilot at the international border between the two countries in the northern city of Amritsar, I saw a woman getting an Indian flag painted on her cheek. “I’m a journalist too,” she said, as she smiled at me in slight embarrassment.
Print journalist Salil Tripathi wrote a scathing critique of the way reporters in both India and Pakistan covered the events, arguing they had lost all sense of impartiality and perspective. “Not one of the fulminating television-news anchors exhibited the criticality demanded of their profession,” she said.
Media captionIndia and Pakistan’s ‘war-mongering’ media
Secunder Kermani: Shortly after shooting down at least one Indian plane last week, the Pakistani military held a press conference.
As it ended, the journalists there began chanting “Pakistan Zindabad” (Long Live Pakistan). It wasn’t the only example of “journalistic patriotism” during the recent crisis.
Two anchors from private channel 92 News donned military uniforms as they presented the news – though other Pakistani journalists criticised their decision.
But on the whole, while Indian TV presenters angrily demanded military action, journalists in Pakistan were more restrained, with many mocking what they called the “war mongering and hysteria” across the border.
In response to Indian media reports about farmers refusing to export tomatoes to Pakistan anymore for instance, one popular presenter tweeted about a “Tomatical strike” – a reference to Indian claims they carried out a “surgical strike” in 2016 during another period of conflict between the countries.
Media analyst Adnan Rehmat noted that while the Pakistani media did play a “peace monger as opposed to a warmonger” role, in doing so, it was following the lead of Pakistani officials who warned against the risks of escalation, which “served as a cue for the media.”
What were they reporting?
Rajini Vaidyanathan: As TV networks furiously broadcast bulletins from makeshift “war rooms” complete with virtual reality missiles, questions were raised not just about the reporters but what they were reporting.
Indian channels were quick to swallow the government version of events, rather than question or challenge it, said Shailaja Bajpai, media editor at The Print. “The media has stopped asking any kind of legitimate questions, by and large,” she said. “There’s no pretence of objectiveness.”
In recent years in fact, a handful of commentators have complained about the lack of critical questioning in the Indian media.
Image copyrightAFPImage captionIndians celebrated news of the strikes
“For some in the Indian press corps the very thought of challenging the ‘official version’ of events is the equivalent of being anti-national”, said Ms Bajpai. “We know there have been intelligence lapses but nobody is questioning that.”
Senior defence and science reporter Pallava Bagla agreed. “The first casualty in a war is always factual information. Sometimes nationalistic fervour can make facts fade away,” he said.
This critique isn’t unique to India, or even this period in time. During the 2003 Iraq war, western journalists embedded with their country’s militaries were also, on many occasions, simply reporting the official narrative.
Secunder Kermani: In Pakistan, both media and public reacted with scepticism to Indian claims about the damage caused by the airstrikes in Balakot, which India claimed killed a large number of Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) militants in a training camp.
Hamid Mir, one of the most influential TV anchors in the country travelled to the area and proclaimed, “We haven’t seen any such (militant) infrastructure… we haven’t seen any bodies, any funerals.”
“Actually,” he paused, “We have found one body… this crow.” The camera panned down to a dead crow, while Mr Mir asked viewers if the crow “looks like a terrorist or not?”
There seems to be no evidence to substantiate Indian claims that a militant training camp was hit, but other journalists working for international outlets, including the BBC, found evidence of a madrassa, linked to JeM, near the site.
Image copyrightPLANET LABS INC./HANDOUT VIA REUTERSImage captionThe satellite image shows a close-up of a madrassa near Balakot in Pakistan’s Khyber Paktunkhwa
A photo of a signpost giving directions to the madrassa even surfaced on social media. It described the madrassa as being “under the supervision of Masood Azhar”. Mr Azhar is the founder of JeM.
The signpost’s existence was confirmed by a BBC reporter and Al Jazeera, though by the time Reuters visited it had apparently been removed. Despite this, the madrassa and its links received little to no coverage in the Pakistani press.
Media analyst Adnan Rehmat told the BBC that “there was no emphasis on investigating independently or thoroughly enough” the status of the madrassa.
In Pakistan, reporting on alleged links between the intelligence services and militant groups is often seen as a “red line”. Journalists fear for their physical safety, whilst editors know their newspapers or TV channels could face severe pressure if they publish anything that could be construed as “anti-state”.
Who did it better: Khan or Modi?
Rajini Vaidyanathan: With a general election due in a few months, PM Narendra Modi continued with his campaign schedule, mentioning the crisis in some of his stump speeches. But he never directly addressed the ongoing tensions through an address to the nation or a press conference.
This was not a surprise. Mr Modi rarely holds news conference or gives interviews to the media. When news of the suicide attack broke, Mr Modi was criticised for continuing with a photo shoot.
Image copyrightAFPImage captionImran Khan was praised for his measured approach
The leader of the main opposition Congress party, Rahul Gandhi, dubbed him a “Prime Time Minister” claiming the PM had carried on filming for three hours. PM Modi has also been accused of managing his military response as a way to court votes.
At a campaign rally in his home state of Gujarat he seemed unflustered by his critics, quipping “they’re busy with strikes on Modi, and Modi is launching strikes on terror.”
Secunder Kermani: Imran Khan won praise even from many of his critics in Pakistan, for his measured approach to the conflict. In two appearances on state TV, and one in parliament, he appeared firm, but also called for dialogue with India.
His stance helped set the comparatively more measured tone for Pakistani media coverage.
Officials in Islamabad, buoyed by Mr Khan’s decision to release the captured Indian pilot, have portrayed themselves as the more responsible side, which made overtures for peace.
On Twitter, a hashtag calling for Mr Khan to be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize was trending for a while. But his lack of specific references to JeM, mean internationally there is likely to be scepticism, at least initially, about his claims that Pakistan will no longer tolerate militant groups targeting India.
CHINDIA ALERT: You'll be living in their world, very soon 
India and Pakistan: How the war was fought in TV studios
As tensions between India and Pakistan escalated following a deadly suicide attack last month, there was another battle being played out on the airwaves. Television stations in both countries were accused of sensationalism and partiality. But how far did they take it? The BBC’s Rajini Vaidyanathan in Delhi and Secunder Kermani in Islamabad take a look.
It was drama that was almost made for television.
The relationship between India and Pakistan – tense at the best of times – came to a head on 26 February when India announced it had launched airstrikes on militant camps in Pakistan’s Balakot region as “retaliation” for a suicide attack that had killed 40 troops in Indian-administered Kashmir almost two weeks earlier.
A day later, on 27 February, Pakistan shot down an Indian jet fighter and captured its pilot.
Abhinandan Varthaman was freed as a “peace gesture”, and Pakistan PM Imran Khan warned that neither country could afford a miscalculation, with a nuclear arsenal on each side.
Suddenly people were hooked, India’s TV journalists included.
So were they more patriots than journalists?
Rajini Vaidyanathan: Indian television networks showed no restraint when it came to their breathless coverage of the story. Rolling news was at fever pitch.
The coverage often fell into jingoism and nationalism, with headlines such as “Pakistan teaches India a lesson”, “Dastardly Pakistan”, and “Stay Calm and Back India” prominently displayed on screens.
Some reporters and commentators called for India to use missiles and strike back. One reporter in south India hosted an entire segment dressed in combat fatigues, holding a toy gun.
And while I was reporting on the return of the Indian pilot at the international border between the two countries in the northern city of Amritsar, I saw a woman getting an Indian flag painted on her cheek. “I’m a journalist too,” she said, as she smiled at me in slight embarrassment.
Print journalist Salil Tripathi wrote a scathing critique of the way reporters in both India and Pakistan covered the events, arguing they had lost all sense of impartiality and perspective. “Not one of the fulminating television-news anchors exhibited the criticality demanded of their profession,” she said.
Secunder Kermani: Shortly after shooting down at least one Indian plane last week, the Pakistani military held a press conference.
As it ended, the journalists there began chanting “Pakistan Zindabad” (Long Live Pakistan). It wasn’t the only example of “journalistic patriotism” during the recent crisis.
Two anchors from private channel 92 News donned military uniforms as they presented the news – though other Pakistani journalists criticised their decision.
But on the whole, while Indian TV presenters angrily demanded military action, journalists in Pakistan were more restrained, with many mocking what they called the “war mongering and hysteria” across the border.
In response to Indian media reports about farmers refusing to export tomatoes to Pakistan anymore for instance, one popular presenter tweeted about a “Tomatical strike” – a reference to Indian claims they carried out a “surgical strike” in 2016 during another period of conflict between the countries.
Media analyst Adnan Rehmat noted that while the Pakistani media did play a “peace monger as opposed to a warmonger” role, in doing so, it was following the lead of Pakistani officials who warned against the risks of escalation, which “served as a cue for the media.”
What were they reporting?
Rajini Vaidyanathan: As TV networks furiously broadcast bulletins from makeshift “war rooms” complete with virtual reality missiles, questions were raised not just about the reporters but what they were reporting.
Indian channels were quick to swallow the government version of events, rather than question or challenge it, said Shailaja Bajpai, media editor at The Print. “The media has stopped asking any kind of legitimate questions, by and large,” she said. “There’s no pretence of objectiveness.”
In recent years in fact, a handful of commentators have complained about the lack of critical questioning in the Indian media.
“For some in the Indian press corps the very thought of challenging the ‘official version’ of events is the equivalent of being anti-national”, said Ms Bajpai. “We know there have been intelligence lapses but nobody is questioning that.”
Senior defence and science reporter Pallava Bagla agreed. “The first casualty in a war is always factual information. Sometimes nationalistic fervour can make facts fade away,” he said.
This critique isn’t unique to India, or even this period in time. During the 2003 Iraq war, western journalists embedded with their country’s militaries were also, on many occasions, simply reporting the official narrative.
Secunder Kermani: In Pakistan, both media and public reacted with scepticism to Indian claims about the damage caused by the airstrikes in Balakot, which India claimed killed a large number of Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) militants in a training camp.
Hamid Mir, one of the most influential TV anchors in the country travelled to the area and proclaimed, “We haven’t seen any such (militant) infrastructure… we haven’t seen any bodies, any funerals.”
“Actually,” he paused, “We have found one body… this crow.” The camera panned down to a dead crow, while Mr Mir asked viewers if the crow “looks like a terrorist or not?”
There seems to be no evidence to substantiate Indian claims that a militant training camp was hit, but other journalists working for international outlets, including the BBC, found evidence of a madrassa, linked to JeM, near the site.
A photo of a signpost giving directions to the madrassa even surfaced on social media. It described the madrassa as being “under the supervision of Masood Azhar”. Mr Azhar is the founder of JeM.
The signpost’s existence was confirmed by a BBC reporter and Al Jazeera, though by the time Reuters visited it had apparently been removed. Despite this, the madrassa and its links received little to no coverage in the Pakistani press.
Media analyst Adnan Rehmat told the BBC that “there was no emphasis on investigating independently or thoroughly enough” the status of the madrassa.
In Pakistan, reporting on alleged links between the intelligence services and militant groups is often seen as a “red line”. Journalists fear for their physical safety, whilst editors know their newspapers or TV channels could face severe pressure if they publish anything that could be construed as “anti-state”.
Who did it better: Khan or Modi?
Rajini Vaidyanathan: With a general election due in a few months, PM Narendra Modi continued with his campaign schedule, mentioning the crisis in some of his stump speeches. But he never directly addressed the ongoing tensions through an address to the nation or a press conference.
This was not a surprise. Mr Modi rarely holds news conference or gives interviews to the media. When news of the suicide attack broke, Mr Modi was criticised for continuing with a photo shoot.
The leader of the main opposition Congress party, Rahul Gandhi, dubbed him a “Prime Time Minister” claiming the PM had carried on filming for three hours. PM Modi has also been accused of managing his military response as a way to court votes.
At a campaign rally in his home state of Gujarat he seemed unflustered by his critics, quipping “they’re busy with strikes on Modi, and Modi is launching strikes on terror.”
Secunder Kermani: Imran Khan won praise even from many of his critics in Pakistan, for his measured approach to the conflict. In two appearances on state TV, and one in parliament, he appeared firm, but also called for dialogue with India.
His stance helped set the comparatively more measured tone for Pakistani media coverage.
Officials in Islamabad, buoyed by Mr Khan’s decision to release the captured Indian pilot, have portrayed themselves as the more responsible side, which made overtures for peace.
On Twitter, a hashtag calling for Mr Khan to be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize was trending for a while. But his lack of specific references to JeM, mean internationally there is likely to be scepticism, at least initially, about his claims that Pakistan will no longer tolerate militant groups targeting India.
Source: The BBC
Posted in Adnan Rehmat, airstrikes, airwaves, Al Jazeera, Balakot, BBC, BBC reporter, campaign schedule, casualty, combat fatigues, commentators, congress party, critical questioning, Dastardly Pakistan, Delhi, escalation, factual information, fought, general election, Hamid Mir, hashtag, Imran Khan, India alert, Indian jet fighter, international border, Islamabad, Islamist militant groups, Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM), JeM, jingoism and nationalism, Journalist, Kashmir, madrassa, Masood Azhar, Media analyst, media editor, militant camps, militants, missiles, nationalistic fervour, Nobel Peace Prize, Pakistan, Pakistani, Pakistani military, Pallava Bagla, pilot, PM Narendra Modi, press, press conference, Prime Time Minister, rahul gandhi, Rajini Vaidyanathan, red line, retaliation, Reuters, Salil Tripathi, Secunder Kermani, Senior defence and science reporter, sensationalism and partiality, Shailaja Bajpai, signpost's, suicide attack, Surgical strike, The Print, Tomatical strike, toy gun, training camp, TV anchors, TV journalists, TV studios, Twitter, Uncategorized, war, war mongering and hysteria, warmonger, Wg Cdr Abhinandan Varthaman | Leave a Comment »