Row erupts in Kerala about Bharat Mata portrait at Raj Bhavan during official event
The state government claimed that the Bharat Mata portrait at the central hall of the governor's residence was 'one that is used by RSS [Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh]'.
Bharat Mata is a personification of India as a mother goddess. The iconography is widely used by Hindu nationalists, and is frequently criticised for propagating a Hindu-centric image of nationhood.
The incident took place during an event organised by the state agriculture department for World Environment Day at the Raj Bhavan on Thursday, with Governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar as the chief guest, according to The Indian Express.
During a review of the preparations for the event, government officials noticed that a picture of the Bharat Mata displayed at the central hall of the governor's residence was similar to the one used by the RSS.
Subsequently, Communist Party of India leader and state Agriculture Minister P Prasad was notified about the image and event was moved to the darbar hall of the state secretariat, The Indian Express reported. The Communist Party of India is part of the state's ruling Left Democratic Front.
'The picture of Bharat Mata displayed at the venue is one that is used by RSS,' the newspaper quoted Prasad as having told reporters. 'A seat of a constitutional body should not use that. Constitutionally, it is not proper to use that picture at a government function.'
Prasad claimed that Arlekar insisted on using the image. 'But we could not agree with that decision,' the minister said. 'So the government function was shifted out of Raj Bhavan.'
The Communist Party of India leader noted that no image of Bharat Mata had ever been acknowledged as the official or authorised version by the Constitution or any of the governments in power since independence, The Hindu reported.
The minister also claimed that the Bharat Mata image in the Raj Bhavan did not carry an Indian flag, but that of a political organisation, and hence could not be honoured during a government event.
The governor, addressing another function at the Raj Bhavan later in the day, noted that Prasad wanted the image of the Bharat Mata to be removed from the stage.
'I informed them that we cannot remove Bharat Mata,' The Indian Express quoted him as having said. 'Bharat Mata cannot be kept away…Whatever be the pressure from whichever quarters, there will be no compromise whatsoever on Bharat Mata.'
On Saturday, the Communist Party of India hoisted the national flag and planted saplings in protest against the usage of the Bharat Mata image in the Raj Bhavan, PTI reported.
Communist Party of India leader Binoy Viswam also asked whether the Constitution or the policies of the RSS was more important for Arelkar. Hoisting the national flag, Viswam said that there was 'no Bharat Mata other than this'.
Any other attempt to impose another concept of Bharat Mata was 'unconstitutional' and 'anti-national', he added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
4 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Panun Kashmir demands terrorist-state tag for Pakistan
Synopsis Panun Kashmir has criticised the Indian government for not acknowledging the "genocidal objectives" of terrorism and for its reluctance to designate Pakistan as a terrorist state, asserting that this approach endangers future security operations in Jammu and Kashmir. Agencies Representative Image Panun Kashmir, an organisation advocating the cause of displaced Kashmiri Pandits, on Monday accused the central government of shirking from recognising the genocidal objectives of terrorism and avoiding the designation of Pakistan as a terrorist state. They said this would certainly jeopardise future security operations in Jammu and Kashmir. The outfit appealed to the GoI to recognise that this genocidal war is still ongoing and spilling over into the rest of India. "The GoI has once again shirked from recognising the genocidal objectives of jihadi terrorism and avoided recognising Pakistan as a terrorist state. It is extremely unfortunate and will certainly lead to jeopardising future security operations, even those based on the New Normal enunciated by the GoI," Panun Kashmir Chairman Dr. Ajay Chrungoo told reporters here. He said that while communicating with utmost regard and appreciation for the way the defence forces of the nation successfully conducted Operation Sindoor, Panun Kashmir feels it is its utmost responsibility to call upon the government to recognise Pakistan as a terrorist state. "The New Normal enunciated by the GoI after the Pahalgam massacre should have been based on the outright and unambiguous recognition of genocide as the prime objective of the terrorist violence in Jammu and Kashmir," he said that instead of calling it genocide, the GoI described the objective of terrorist violence in Jammu and Kashmir, particularly the Pahalgam massacre, as a disruption of Hindu-Muslim unity - an interpretation that, he claimed, undermines the motivations behind terrorist operations in the region. Chrungoo said the Pahalgam killings, along with the massacres perpetrated at Dangri, Shiv Khori, Baltal, and the selective killings of Hindus in Kashmir, led to the complete religious cleansing of a few thousand Hindus during the BJP's rule. "It does not merely represent gruesome violence with hidden objectives. These acts unambiguously constitute an unabated genocidal campaign. They represent the same genocidal assault that was earlier perpetrated on Hindus in Kashmir, which led to their religious cleansing," he said. He added that the failure to recognise terrorist violence as genocidal appears to be driven by the same intellectual subversion that has long sought to secularise and normalise terrorism in India. "The GoI, both during BJP and Congress rule, has been driven by the same perspective of not recognising the ideological objectives of terrorism and separatism in Jammu and Kashmir," he said."Even after the Pahalgam massacre and Operation Sindoor, the GoI continues to follow a policy of genocide denial. It continues to be driven by a vision that treats Pakistan as both a rogue state and a normal state at the same time," he added. The GoI acknowledges that it is the Pakistani army that creates and perpetuates terrorism, yet time and again states that its fight is against terrorists and not against the Pakistani army or state, he said. "The New Normal should bring new hope. However, as things stand, the New Normal appears to be the old abnormality in new clothes," he said.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
5 minutes ago
- First Post
India needs strategic patience to sail through Trump's tariff storm
On July 30, 2025, US President Donald Trump unveiled a sweeping 25 per cent tariff on Indian exports, effective August 7, alongside threats of penalties for India's continued purchase of Russian oil and military hardware. Justified by Trump as retaliation for India's 'far too high' tariffs and 'strenuous and obnoxious non-monetary trade barriers', this move severely disrupts an expanding trade partnership. More troubling is the proposed 100 per cent secondary tariff on nations dealing in Russian oil—especially damaging for India, which sources around 35 per cent of its crude from Russia. These measures risk entangling trade, energy security, and defence in a complex geopolitical crossfire. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India–US Trade Snapshot India is the US' ninth-largest trading partner, and the US is India's largest export destination. In 2024, bilateral trade (per Indian sources) stood at $136.7 billion—with India exporting $91.2 billion and importing $45.5 billion, yielding a $45.7 billion surplus for India. U.S. data shows bilateral goods trade at $129.2 billion, with exports to India at $41.8 billion and imports from India at $87.4 billion. This trade imbalance remains a sore point for Washington. While Trump has dubbed India the 'tariff king', the actual weighted average tariff on US imports is under 5 per cent, well within WTO limits. However, India does levy higher duties on specific items like whisky, wines, and automobiles—similar to protectionist policies adopted by many other nations, including the US. India's major exports to the US in 2024 included electrical and electronic equipment ($14.4 billion), pharmaceuticals ($12.73 billion), and precious metals and stones ($11.88 billion). Conversely, US exports to India comprised mineral fuels ($12.6 billion), precious stones ($5.31 billion), and machinery ($3.29 billion), along with soybeans ($2.2 billion). Tariff Dynamics Before the Trump Shock Before Trump's announcement, US tariffs on Indian goods averaged 2.5 per cent, while Indian duties ranged from 10 per cent to 80 per cent depending on the sector—with high rates on agricultural products like apples and rice. Non-tariff barriers, especially in agriculture and pharmaceuticals, have long frustrated US businesses. Trump has used tariffs as a pressure tool to counter the trade deficit under the guise of protecting US industries. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD From India's perspective, the US administration has ignored the significant American advantage in India's services and education sectors. Furthermore, India's obligations to safeguard farmers' livelihoods, sensitivities regarding dairy products, ensure energy security, and maintain affordability restrict its capacity to yield to US expectations. Fallout The new 25 per cent tariff raises average duties on Indian goods to 27 per cent, affecting key sectors such as auto parts, electronics, steel, and aluminium. Even iPhones assembled in India may see price hikes. Projections suggest a 10 per cent to 50 per cent drop in Indian exports in these sectors—amounting to annual losses of up to $3 billion. India, with 1.4 billion people and the world's fourth-largest economy, aims to double trade with the US to $500 billion by 2030. However, Trump's tariffs threaten this goal, potentially trimming 0.3–0.5 per cent off India's projected 6.5 per cent GDP growth for 2025 (as per HSBC). For US consumers, these tariffs will likely spark inflation, especially in healthcare affordability. Tariff revenues—estimated to constitute 5 per cent of federal income in 2025—are intended to offset Trump's tax cuts and support domestic manufacturing. Yet economists, including JP Morgan, predict a US GDP slowdown to 1.6 per cent and supply chain disruptions, given India's crucial role in supplying generics, pharmaceuticals, and electronics. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Strategically, these tariffs risk alienating a key Indo-Pacific partner, undermining US efforts to counter China. The punitive measures could push India closer to the Russia-China-India (RIC) alignment. India imported $40 billion of Russian oil in 2024 (forming 35 per cent of India's energy imports). A 100 per cent secondary tariff on this trade would spike India's import bill, increase inflation, strain fuel subsidies, and derail fiscal targets—especially problematic in an election year. In defence, India's 36 per cent dependency on Russian arms (down from 55 per cent in 2019) makes it vulnerable to US sanctions, particularly regarding high-value systems like the S-400. While compliance compromises strategic autonomy, non-compliance risks further penalties. Given the perceived unreliability of US foreign policy, India may be inclined to take calculated risks. A Web of Sticking Points Agriculture is India's red line. The US demands greater access to India's protected agricultural market, particularly in dairy and grains. But with 45 per cent of the population reliant on farming, India faces high political costs in liberalising this sector. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India is unlikely to emulate US allies like Japan or the EU in offering zero-tariff concessions, owing to security dependencies. Indian exports of auto parts, steel, aluminium, and electronics face the steepest tariffs. Less-affected sectors like textiles and gems may still lose market share to Vietnam and Bangladesh. In retaliation, India could target US exports such as soybeans and aircraft—although this could impact its aviation sector if the UK cannot meet shortfalls. Domestic Compulsions India's trade policy is constrained by domestic politics. Any concessions on agriculture risk electoral backlash. Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs), which drive Indian exports, would be severely impacted by higher US tariffs. Energy security remains paramount, and Russian oil provides affordable options not easily replaceable. Strategic autonomy underpins India's foreign policy. Aligning too closely with either Washington or Moscow would compromise this balance. Given Trump's recent policy unpredictability, abandoning a reliable partner like Russia seems unjustified. Balancing Act Trump's tariff blitz leaves India with limited but critical choices. These include: STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Negotiate a Selective Trade Deal: India may pursue a limited deal, lowering tariffs on non-sensitive imports like machinery, liquor, hydrocarbons, motorbikes, and soybeans—while resisting US demands on agriculture and dairy. It must stand firm on energy affordability for its vast poor population. From August 1, 2025, India should absorb the tariffs temporarily without rushing into a disadvantageous deal. It should protect MSMEs, prioritise growth, and wait out the 10-day deadline on secondary tariffs, monitoring US–China negotiations. This appears to be the most prudent approach. Diversify Markets: India should expand exports to Asean, the EU, and Africa. Deepening ties with Brics nations can also cushion the impact. Though these markets lack the scale of the US, diversification reduces dependency and future coercion risks. Aggressive pursuit of FTAs and strategic partnerships is essential. Strategic Reduction in Russian Trade: India can gradually diversify oil imports to the Middle East or the US and broaden arms sourcing to France, Israel, and others. However, higher costs and strong Russia ties complicate this transition. India can redirect exports to Asean, the EU, and Africa, though with smaller profit margins. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Self-Reliance: Strengthening the Atmanirbhar Bharat campaign for defence and tech manufacturing is vital. Past disruptions, like Covid, have shown India's capacity to localise supply chains—a trend that must accelerate. Controlled Retaliation: If unavoidable, India must retaliate proportionately with tariffs on high-profile US goods like aircraft, oil, whisky, and motorcycles. Such a move risks escalation but may be necessary to defend sovereignty and prevent future coercion. Brics Brics nations face similar US tariffs—34 per cent on China, 50 per cent on Brazil. The concept of a coordinated Brics response is attractive but lacks momentum. India-China rivalry and Russia's economic constraints limit cohesion. While alternate payment systems (eg, rupee-ruble trade) are being explored, intra-Brics trade ($700 billion) pales in comparison to their $5 trillion trade with the US. However, if Trump follows through with 100% tariffs on BRICS and 500% on countries trading with Russia, he may inadvertently force BRICS closer. This could catalyze a realignment toward the RIC format. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Realistic Road Ahead India's optimal response blends diplomacy, economic recalibration, and strategic signalling. A selective trade deal protecting sensitive sectors while retaining competitiveness is key. Simultaneously, India must diversify exports, reduce reliance on Russian oil and arms incrementally, and boost domestic manufacturing. Subsidies for impacted exporters and tax relief for MSMEs can cushion the blow. By reinforcing its role as a democratic counterweight to China, India can retain geopolitical leverage while defending long-term interests. Trump's tariff offensive poses serious challenges—but India possesses considerable leverage. Through smart negotiation, diversification, and strategic patience, India can weather the storm and emerge stronger, with a more resilient and self-reliant economic framework. Diplomacy, reform, and national resolve will be India's guiding tools in navigating this turbulent phase. The author is a strategic and security analyst. He can be reached at Facebook and LinkedIn as Shashi Asthana, @asthana_shashi on Twitter, and personal site. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
Hindustan Times
5 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
‘Rahul must stop irresponsible remarks': Rijiju after SC questions Congress leader
Union minister Kiren Rijiju on Monday hit out at Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, saying the latter 'must stop irresponsible remarks'. This comes after the Supreme Court, earlier on Monday, questioned the Congress leader over claims that China had occupied Indian land after the clash between the countries' armies in the Yangsi region of Arunachal Pradesh in 2022. Rijiju said that Rahul had 'repeatedly claimed' that China had occupied Indian territory, despite the armed forces, government, and defence ministry stating otherwise.(ANI Grab ) 'How does he know the Chinese occupied 2000 square kilometres of land?' the top court asked, while adding that a 'true Indian' would not say this. "When there is a conflict across borders... can you say all this?" a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih questioned. Rijiju said that Rahul had 'repeatedly claimed' that China had occupied Indian territory, despite the armed forces, the Government of India, and the Ministry of Defence stating otherwise. 'This dispute dates back to before 1962, and there are occasional confrontations during patrolling, something clearly visible in several videos showing face-offs between the Indian and Chinese armies—largely because the boundary remains undemarcated,' PTI news agency quoted Rijiju as saying. The union minister added that by 'asserting' that China had occupied 2000 kilometres of Indian land, Rahul 'continues to make baseless statements'. He said that the government had urged the Wayanad MP to not speak against the nation 'without factual backing'. Rijiju added that 'there must be a pause in such rhetoric' following the SC's question to the Congress leader. 'We consider ourselves responsible citizens, and Rahul Gandhi is expected to be one as well,' Rijiju said, adding that matters concerning national security must not be discussed in a way that 'demoralises the armed forces'. 'I hope that, going forward, Rahul Gandhi reflects on his words, and the Congress Party also reassesses its approach. After the Supreme Court's remarks, this course correction is not just expected, it is necessary,' Rijiju said, according to PTI.
