US condemns French inquiry into social media platform X
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
36 minutes ago
- Time of India
Explained: Presidential Fitness Test, why Obama scrapped it and Trump brought it back to schools
(AP Photo/John McDonnell) In the storied annals of American school life, few memories are as unifying or divisive as the Presidential Fitness Test. For decades, it was the gym class rite of passage: Mile runs timed to the second, push-ups counted with unwavering scrutiny, sit-and-reach stretches measuring flexibility like a litmus test of youth. But by 2012, the very programme that once symbolised national strength had quietly disappeared from schools across the country. Now, more than a decade later, President Donald Trump has revived it, and with it, a cultural debate over health, discipline, and the meaning of fitness in America. The rise and fall of a national ritual Introduced under President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1956, the Presidential Fitness Test was born out of Cold War anxieties. A government-sponsored study had revealed that American children were falling behind their European peers in basic physical competency, a revelation so startling that Sports Illustrated called it 'The Report That Shocked the President.' Eisenhower responded by launching the President's Council on Youth Fitness, positioning physical readiness as a matter of national pride and preparedness. Later, under President John F. Kennedy, the programme took on moral and even patriotic dimensions. In his now-famous Sports Illustrated essay, 'The Soft American,' Kennedy warned that the nation's declining physical standards were a threat to its very fabric. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 20 Unforgettable Cars from the Past Undo Successive presidents followed suit, and the test became a nationwide benchmark, awarding badges, patches, and certificates to students who performed in the top percentiles. By the early 2000s, however, the test had become increasingly controversial. Though it was designed to inspire excellence, many educators and child health experts began to see it as a flawed, outdated measure, one that privileged athleticism over wellness and often shamed students who struggled to meet its rigid standards. Why Obama phased it out In 2012, the Obama administration made a decisive break with the past. The Presidential Fitness Test was formally retired and replaced by the Presidential Youth Fitness Program, a reimagined, data-driven model focused on personal growth rather than competition. The shift reflected a broader evolution in public health thinking. Rather than spotlighting top performers, the new programme emphasised 'personal bests' and long-term well-being. Using the FitnessGram assessment, it evaluated students on metrics like aerobic capacity, body composition, and muscular endurance — but in a way designed to reduce peer comparison and performance pressure. 'The new program has moved away from recognizing athletic performance to providing a barometer on student's health,' the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) noted at the time. It was a deliberate move toward inclusivity, particularly for students with disabilities, varying body types, or low baseline fitness. In Obama's vision, the goal was not to cultivate elite athletes, but to instill lifelong habits of physical activity. Health experts widely supported the change, citing research that early exposure to high-pressure physical tests could contribute to anxiety, body image issues, and disengagement from exercise altogether. At a time when mental health and inclusivity were gaining currency in education policy, the Obama administration's decision appeared both timely and humane. Trump's revival : A new battle for the body But in 2025, President Trump has brought the Presidential Fitness Test back, with all its original rigour, symbolism, and competitive edge. The decision, delivered via executive order, is part of the Trump administration's broader campaign to address what it calls 'crisis levels' of obesity, inactivity, and poor nutrition among American youth. The move follows a blistering report released in May by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., which warned that rates of childhood chronic diseases, from diabetes to depression, are accelerating at an alarming pace due to sedentary lifestyles. 'This was a wonderful tradition, and we're bringing it back,' Trump said at the signing ceremony. His new order revives the test's iconic components, the mile run, push-ups, sit-ups, and flexibility tests, and reinstates the Presidential Physical Fitness Award for top performers. In addition, the President's Council on Sports, Fitness, and Nutrition, now chaired by professional golfer Bryson DeChambeau, has been tasked with designing new award criteria and school programmes to incentivize excellence in physical education. For Trump, the decision is not just about health, it's about national character. By reviving a programme steeped in Cold War ethos and competitive spirit, the administration aims to instill discipline, resilience, and what Vice President J.D. Vance called a 'culture of strength.' A divided response The move has drawn mixed reactions. Supporters see it as a long-overdue wake-up call. They argue that a standardized national test can restore accountability in physical education, motivate students, and promote a shared benchmark of health excellence. Secretary Kennedy, who called the award 'a huge item of pride' in his own youth, believes the revived programme can reawaken a culture of active living. But critics warn that the return to percentile rankings and fixed physical benchmarks could alienate students who don't, or physically can't, meet the standards. Mental health advocates caution that such public assessments can heighten performance anxiety and fuel body image issues in increasingly vulnerable age groups. Educators, too, are concerned about implementation logistics and the risk of fostering a punitive environment in the name of fitness. A question of ideology At its core, the debate over the Presidential Fitness Test is about more than push-ups. It's about what America expects from its children, and what it believes schools should teach them. The Obama-era programme privileged equity, customization, and well-being. The Trump revival favors discipline, measurable excellence, and the revival of a competitive, athletic ethos. In many ways, this tug-of-war reflects a deeper philosophical divide, one between public health as empowerment and public health as personal responsibility. And as with so many debates in modern America, the gymnasium has become yet another battlefield in a wider cultural war. Whether this revival will succeed in changing health outcomes, or simply reignite old debates remains to be seen. But one thing is certain: the Presidential Fitness Test is no longer just a measure of physical ability. It's a symbol of who we were, who we are, and who we hope to be. Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Economic Times
39 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Why Trump's tariff move isn't likely to shake India's oil ties with Russia
Synopsis Donald Trump's threat to hike tariffs on Indian exports over its Russian oil imports isn't likely to move the needle in New Delhi. India, driven by domestic needs and economics, isn't ditching cheaper Russian crude anytime soon. Behind the posturing lies a bigger story, about energy security, shifting alliances, and a clash between political theatre and market reality. This piece unpacks how India is responding to Trump's latest pressure play, and why it's not backing down. Donald Trump has made a lot of noise about India's oil trade with Russia, calling it profiteering and threatening to 'substantially raise' tariffs on Indian goods. But New Delhi isn't reported by TOI, a senior Indian government official put it plainly, 'We will go solely by the interest of our consumers and opt for the best option price-wise. If Russian crude works out cheaper than what we can get from other sources, why should we penalise our consumers?'The Centre has so far not made any move to wean off Indian oil refiners from Russian crude, which comes at a steep discount compared to purchases from west Asia or US. It has not just helped keep domestic pump prices lower, but also benefited European countries, which have been major buyers of diesel and jet fuel from India, sources told economic logic is straightforward. Russian oil has been cheaper than what's available from West Asia or the US. India's refiners are not just cutting costs—they're helping stabilise fuel prices at home. And here's the kicker: Europe benefits too, as Indian refiners export refined fuels like diesel and jet fuel, some of which reach European frustration is spilling over into tariff threats. His core accusation? 'India is not only buying massive amounts of Russian Oil, they are then, for much of the Oil purchased, selling it on the Open Market for big profits. They don't care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian War Machine.'He followed that with, 'Because of this, I will be substantially raising the Tariff paid by India to the USA.'No actual figures were given. But just last week, he'd already slapped a 25% tariff on Indian goods and floated a possible jump to 100% unless India stops buying Russian new deadline is August 7. If Russia doesn't agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine, he's hinted at secondary sanctions on countries that continue trading energy with Moscow. That includes India, China, and these threats are running into hard economic and political the West sanctioned Moscow in 2022, Russia started offering deep discounts on its oil. That's when India stepped in. It now buys around 1.7 million barrels a day of Russian crude, according to Bloomberg isn't just stockpiling it. In the first half of this year, it exported 1.4 million barrels a day of refined fuels. About 40% of that was diesel or gasoil, and 30% was petrol and blending components. Refiners blend multiple sources of crude before producing fuels, so it's not always clear which exports came from Russian barrels. But the volume speaks for the trade hasn't slowed down. Over the weekend, at least four tankers delivered millions of barrels of Russian crude to Indian Ministry of External Affairs had a sharp response.'The targeting of India is unjustified and unreasonable,' it said. 'Like any major economy, India will take all necessary measures to safeguard its national interests and economic security.'It also pointed out that the US and EU themselves continue to trade with Russia, even when there's no national position has been consistent. The decision to buy Russian oil was triggered when traditional suppliers diverted their barrels to Europe. It was the US, in fact, that nudged India to continue those purchases—albeit within the G7's price cap. Energy Minister Hardeep Singh Puri told CNBC in July that the Russian crude trade helped global prices stay in check, saying India was advised by Washington to keep buying—'but within the price cap.' National Security Adviser Ajit Doval is heading to Moscow this week. The visit is expected to offer clarity on how India plans to navigate what officials call a 'geo-economic trilemma': cheap energy, political pressure, and long-term security has not made any move to scale back Russian imports. If anything, officials are eyeing additional discounts in light of Trump's business circles in Delhi are calling out the former US president's rhetoric.A statement from trade research body GTRI summed it up, 'India's oil trade with Russia has taken place with full transparency and broad understanding with the US… Trump's decision to raise tariffs on India citing oil trade is not only unjustified—it ignores market realities, misrepresents trade data, and undermines a key strategic partnership in the Indo-Pacific.'This isn't just about oil. Trump has also slammed India's involvement in BRICS and the bloc's discussions around alternatives to the US dollar. He's claimed India has the 'most strenuous and obnoxious non-monetary trade barriers' and is using tariffs as leverage to open up Indian markets to US agriculture and dairy—an area where India has refused to official noted that despite discussions, India would not allow imports of genetically modified American corn and soybean. Nor would it revise its stand on farm and dairy tariffs, which Trump has repeatedly forced to diversify, India could boost imports from Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and the US. In fact, last week saw India's largest refiner suddenly snap up several million barrels from the US and UAE—moves widely interpreted as precautionary, not strategic had, during trade talks, shown interest in ramping up imports of American gas, fertiliser, and defence equipment to improve the trade balance. But there are limits. Modi has refused to open up sensitive sectors like dairy, even as the US pushes and Modi were once seen as political allies. That relationship has cooled. The current standoff is the latest in a string of Trump-led escalations over oil, trade barriers, and foreign policy. From threatening to block access to US markets over India-Pakistan tensions, to taking credit for peace deals India denies happened, Trump's combative posture has worn thin in latest push threatening penalties on anyone still paying for Russian oil reflects growing frustration with Putin's unwillingness to compromise. Trump's nuclear submarine move last week, reportedly in response to Dmitry Medvedev's rhetoric, only adds to the India, for now, isn't shifting course. As one Indian official summed it up, 'We are guided by what's best for Indian consumers, not what's best for Washington politics.'And that might be the line that defines this whole saga.(With inputs from TOI)
Economic Times
39 minutes ago
- Economic Times
India strikes back at Trump's 'more tariffs' threat, says US targeting 'unjustified'
Synopsis India strongly protested against potential US tariffs for importing Russian oil, arguing that it's essential for affordable energy and national interest. The Ministry of External Affairs highlighted that the US and EU are unfairly targeting India while maintaining significant trade ties with Russia themselves, including energy and critical materials. India emphasized its role in stabilizing global energy markets. ANI US President Donald Trump India reacted strongly after US President Donald Trump again threatened substantial tariffs against the country for purchasing Russian oil and 'selling it on the open market for big profits'. It accused the US and the European Union of unfairly 'targeting' India when they themselves were importing key inputs from Russia.'The targeting of India is unjustified and unreasonable,' the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) said in a statement issued late Monday. 'Like any major economy, India will take all necessary measures to safeguard its national interests and economic security.'The MEA said the US had initially supported India's purchases from Russia, which had been forced to look elsewhere after the Ukraine war began.'India has been targeted by the United States and the European Union for importing oil from Russia after the commencement of the Ukraine conflict,' the MEA said. 'In fact, India began importing from Russia because traditional supplies were diverted to Europe after the outbreak of the conflict. The US at that time actively encouraged such imports by India for strengthening global energy markets stability.' Trump had last week announced a 25% duty on all Indian goods in addition to a penalty for buying a 'vast majority' of Russian military equipment and crude oil. 'India is not only buying massive amounts of Russian oil, they are then, for much of the oil purchased, selling it on the open market for big profits,' Trump said in his post on Truth Social on Monday. 'They don't care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian War Machine,' he said. 'Because of this, I will be substantially raising the tariff paid by India to the USA,' he said, without elaborating what the levy would be. India said its imports are aimed at ensuring predictable and affordable energy prices for the domestic consumer.'They are a necessity compelled by the global market situation,' the MEA said. 'However, it is revealing that the very nations criticising India are themselves indulging in trade with Russia. Unlike our case, such trade is not even a vital national compulsion.'The MEA pointed out that the EU still has strong commercial ties with Russia, even surpassing those of India.'The European Union in 2024 had a bilateral trade of € 67.5 billion in goods with Russia. In addition, it had trade in services estimated at € 17.2 billion in 2023,' it said. 'This is significantly more than India's total trade with Russia that year or subsequently. European imports of LNG in 2024, in fact, reached a record 16.5 million tonnes, surpassing the last record of 15.21 million tonnes in from energy, Europe's trade with Russia includes fertilisers, mining products, chemicals, iron and steel and machinery and transport equipment, it US also imports critical products from Russia.'Where the United States is concerned, it continues to import from Russia uranium hexafluoride for its nuclear industry, palladium for its EV industry, fertilisers as well as chemicals,' the MEA pointed had previously targeted India and Russia for their close ties and said the two countries can take their 'dead economies down together'.India had responded by reiterating that it will take all necessary steps to safeguard its national interest, besides pointing out that the country's economy — the fastestgrowing major one — was a bright spot amid global may be recalled that between 2022 and 2024, senior US officials had backed India's imports of Russian oil that helped keep global oil markets stable. In May 2024, then US ambassador to India Eric Garcetti admitted that India bought Russian oil because the US wanted someone to purchase it to ensure prices did not go up globally. In February 2024, then US secretary of state Geoffery Pyatt acknowledged India's role in stabilising global energy markets.
