Letters to The Editor — April 26, 2025
All the steps taken by India in its anger to punish Pakistan could turn out to be double-edged swords. India cannot take back the areas under the occupation of Pakistan (PoK) without unleashing a war which could end up with catastrophic consequences given that both nations possess nuclear weapons. 'Annulling' the Indus Waters Treaty unilaterally is legally complex and might have significant risks for India's international standing and also ensuring regional stability. Completely stopping the natural flow of rivers into Pakistan is also not immediately feasible. India must also not forget that China too is waiting to use water as a weapon. Therefore, what is required at the moment is not to over react. India needs to take steps, patiently and diplomatically, to isolate Pakistan from its staunch supporters and to dent its influence in the Muslim world.
A.Thirugnanasambantham,
Coimbatore
What happened in Pahalgam will scar Kashmir for years to come. Precious lives have been lost, families shattered, and a region already fatigued by decades of suffering has been left in shock once again. The Pahalgam carnage was a deliberate attempt to instil fear, fuel division, and weaponise religion.
R. Sivakumar,
Chennai
It is good to see that all political parties have risen as one and expressed their support to whatever measures the Centre is going to take. Any response should not be too hasty, as it could cost the country goodwill. There needs to be a well-drafted plan based on sound intelligence.
S.V. Venkatakrishnan,
Bengaluru
India's strong line — that 'India will identify, trace and punish every terrorist involved in this dastardly assault' — has obviously shaken Pakistan.
India's neighbour must note that the bond between India and Kashmir cannot be broken. Steps must be taken to isolate radical and violent elements in Kashmir.
Mani Nataraajan,
Chennai
India should not be satisfied with the initial steps taken after the Pahalgam attack but should systematically expose Pakistan's terror network globally. India should leverage new allies such as Saudi Arabia to further isolate Pakistan, and pressure China not to obstruct the listing of and sanctions on Pakistani-backed terrorists. If China changes its stance, it will be a major setback for Pakistan's terror networks. The unprecedented public anger after the Pahalgam attack is severely damaging Pakistan's narrative. Now is the time for India to vigorously expose Islamabad's support for terrorism globally and also campaign to uproot all the structures that fuel terrorism.
Mohammad Asad,
Mumbai
The crux of the problem is identifying and locating the perpetrators of crime at Pahalgam. Without local support and a recce, the attack could not have been executed. Therefore, the starting point is zeroing in on local handlers. Once they are identified, the rest of the investigation falls in place. Last but not the least: utmost restraint from both sides is the need of the hour lest it become another Palestine issue.
A.V. Narayanan,
Chennai
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
29 minutes ago
- India Today
Major Adil Raja claims threats, family targeted after exposing Pakistan army
In an explosive interview with India Today's Geeta Mohan, former Pakistan Army officer and whistleblower Major (Retd) Adil Raja has accused the Pakistani military establishment, particularly the ISI, of weaponising the UK's libel laws to silence dissent abroad. Raja, now living in exile in London, faces a high-stakes defamation trial starting on 21 July 2025, a case he describes as a 'strategic lawsuit against public participation' (SLAPP) designed to undermine his journalism and intimidate critics of the Pakistani trial pits Raja against serving Pakistani military officer Brigadier Rashid Nasir, who claims defamation after Raja publicly accused him of political and judicial manipulation — allegations Raja insists are supported by evidence and widely shared in Pakistan. Cleared of terrorism charges by UK authorities following a 9-month enquiry in 2023, Raja states this civil lawsuit is the ISI's new tactic in what he calls 'lawfare', the use of legal systems abroad to export former officer recounted shocking reprisals against his family in Pakistan, including his mother's purported house arrest and passport cancellation, and the acid attack on a key witness, Shahzad Akbar, in the UK. Raja warns that a ruling against him could set a dangerous global precedent, emboldening authoritarian regimes to silence exiled journalists through foreign courts. 'This isn't just my fight,' he said, 'it's about press freedom everywhere.' Q: What happens when a man in Pakistan wants to speak truth to power? What happens when a man has to leave that country and live in exile? What happens when he has to leave his services and then follow what he thinks is right for Pakistan? Major Adil Raja is no longer in the army, but he has served in Pakistan and now lives in exile because he's questioned the Pakistani army, and he continues to, now as a journalist in London, question what's happening in Pakistan. And what does he get in return? He gets a defamation case. What is the case all about? Is this muzzling by the Pakistani ISI, and how is the Pakistani administration doing it today? To discuss all this and more, I'm being joined by Adil Raja himself. Thank you so much for doing this, Adil. It is a very tough one — you've had a tough few months, so to say. First, just break it down for us — what is this case that you've been fighting against the administration in London?A: Well, you see, it's not been a tough few months but tough few years, I would say. Because the defamation case started in August of 2022, and it is going to trial next week, starting Monday, the 21st of July, 2025. It is a strategic lawsuit against public participation — it is part of the lawfare launched against me by the Pakistani military establishment and its intelligence arm, the ISI, with whom I was once working, as a third-generation Pakistan Army officer. And this lawfare is making use of the UK's relaxed libel laws, which favour the claimant — and that's why the UK, and London in particular, is called the libel tourism capital of the world. And that's not me or you saying it — that's Geoffrey Robertson, the King's Counsel, in his book Lawfare: How the Rich and the Government Try to Prevent Free Speech. He writes this, and it is a well-established fact that lawfare in the UK is launched by the rich and powerful. If you've got one to three million British pounds to spare, you can silence anyone in the UK — and that is why it's called the libel tourism capital of the the details, you'll have to read the book Lawfare by Geoffrey Robertson — I've just quoted him. But I'll give you a brief background: before this libel case, the Pakistani state — only because I was a whistleblower, exposing crimes against humanity in my country — targeted me. I was committing the cardinal sin: being a former army officer, a third-generation Pakistani army man, exposing the crimes of my institution — the regime change operations, controlling the government, political manipulation, judicial manipulation, and corruption. That is a cardinal of that, they got me arrested here in the UK by the counterterrorism police, saying that—advertisementQ: When were you arrested?advertisementA: I was arrested in 2023 by the UK's counterterrorism police for a few hours, but I was kept on bail for nine months. The Pakistani media reported it — it was the Pakistani state that got me arrested under the counterterrorism laws, saying my journalism was inciting violence in Pakistan. But the UK's counterterrorism police conducted an inquiry for nine months and cleared me of all the charges. They didn't even charge me — they cleared me of all that didn't stop my previous institution, which I served as a third-generation officer, they deciding to court-martial me in Charges — what were the specific charges?A: The counterterrorism charges were that I was inciting violence abroad — they showed a few tweets and a livestream on YouTube. Because of this, they got my channels on YouTube terminated. They said the livestream was about five hours, which I did with Pakistan's leading dissenting journalists — Dr. Moeed Pirzada, Shaheen Sahbai (who's a witness in my case), Colonel Syed Akbar Hussain (another witness in my case), Wajahat S. Khan, Haider Mehdi — we were reporting on the events of May 9th, 2023, which were already public on social they said that was incitement of violence, and reported it to the UK police.Q: But you've been cleared.A: Cleared — after nine months, they could find nothing. They had to end the case with no further action. But they still went ahead and court-martialed me in absentia, sentenced me to 14 years of rigorous imprisonment under the Official Secrets Act.Q: Back to Pakistan — your homeland.A: Yeah, my home, where my mother is, who got abducted by them and is kept hostage in Pakistan, so I don't go and see her. She's practically under house arrest — her passports have been cancelled. She was abducted on her way to the airport once, alongside my uncle, who has passed away — he was a retired colonel. Now she's not allowed to leave. My entire family's passports have been blocked and cancelled — their nationalities too — just because I'm speaking up for the truth and the people of they came up with this SLAPP — strategic lawsuit against public participation — and started serving me notices. This is just one of the files — I have entire stacks of such files. They started this lawfare against me because they've got money to spare, influence — definitely they have influence in the UK. But they haven't been able to get me under counterterrorism, so now they're trying their luck in the courts in the UK, since the UK is the libel tourism capital of the world — as King's Counsel Geoffrey Robertson Coming back to your family, is there any provision in Pakistani laws that family members' passports can be rescinded, revoked, taken away, so that they can be kept in the country, not allowed to leave at all?A: What law are you talking about, Geeta? There's no law in Pakistan — except martial law. Once the army chief decides something, he'll do it. He decided his buddy — my brother-in-law — should torture my sister, send her back home and snatch her son — they did it. I'm sorry for getting emotional — I've never—Q: I understand — I know, I know it must be very difficult.A: But they've done it, nobody can stop them. Might is right; that's the rule of law in Pakistan. Pakistan is an authoritarian state, Amnesty International reports, and Human Rights Watch says partially free. I say it's not free at all. If you can fly in and out, fine, but if you stay shut. You try to speak up, you end up in jail like Imran military rules military doesn't have a public mandate. So they create chaos if Imran Khan, who had the public mandate, tried to build bridges with India, the military created chaos instead. They plan attacks so that chaos keeps people distracted jingoism keeps people distracted from the real issues.Q: How is the UK administration allowing this? How did the Pakistani High Commission take this forward to ensure there's a defamation case against a dissenter living in London? Many advocates of media freedom say this trial could set a very wrong precedent.A: Very pertinent. As far as the UK government is concerned, they cleared me after nine months. They kept me on strict bail, but my excellent legal team and my rights helped they drop the case. So justice did prevail, the UK establishment does believe in fair play, and wants to protect when it comes to lawfare, anyone with millions of pounds can come to the UK and exploit its libel laws. The burden of proof is on the defendant, not the claimant. That's how the ISI is taking me to court here: the ISI's senior officer — Brigadier Rashid Nasir, the Punjab sector commander — came to the UK while serving in 2022, claiming I defamed him by saying he's involved in political manipulation, judicial manipulation, which even kids in Pakistan know.Q: So he has to come to London every hearing?A: Yes — he's in London now, goes to court. But I don't go because the UK police gave a witness statement that I'm under threat, so I appear via remote link.Q: Is this a civil case, Adil, or a Pakistani crackdown on foreign soil?A: It's technically a civil case, but it's a Pakistani crackdown on foreign soil. The National Union of Journalists here passed a motion saying I'm facing a SLAPP. They said this case represents a significant threat to press freedom and journalistic integrity — SLAPPs are designed to silence journalists through costly legal resolved to fully support me, circulate my press release, encourage media coverage, and invite me to share details. They know what's going on. The UK works on case law — if I lose, it'll set a precedent for muzzling dissent globally. That's why many British journalists are shifting to France — because the EU passed anti-SLAPP laws in witnesses — Pakistan's senior journalists like Shaheen Sahbai, Colonel Syed Akbar Hussain, Shahzad Akbar — their families are being threatened. Their social accounts hacked — propaganda campaigns run. The ISI is using all its power to silence this. They just don't want any coverage, because it exposes their soft belly.Q: How confident are you that the ruling will be in your favour? Or are you worried about what the ISI could influence in a London court?A: It's delicate — 50-50. There's no jury — it's all up to the judge. Why would a judge rule the ISI rigs elections? But everything I've said is proven. Still, considering UK-Pakistan relations, they may not go there. The harm claimed is absurd — I spoke the truth in public delicate, the ISI is spending millions, hiring top legal chambers — the same one Keir Starmer worked at. So it's a big machine.Q: Other than Brigadier Rashid Nasir, who do you blame in Pakistan?A: The Army Chief, General Asim Munir, is directly involved. The DG ISI, Lieutenant General Asim Malik, is also directly involved. They know their chances aren't bright, so they keep it low-key and muzzle coverage. The English media in Pakistan is controlled dependent on state advertising, so they only print what the establishment wants.Q: Adil, you've been brave. But are you scared? The threat is real — we've seen leaders lose their lives. Benazir Bhutto is an example. Imran Khan says the same.A: I'm not scared, but yes, I'm careful. There's a thin line between foolishness and bravery. My family is scared that my pensions, assets, bank balances, and property are all gone. I live at a police-protected address, I'm in hiding, can't move of my witnesses, Shahzad Akbar, suffered an acid attack at his home here in the UK. So yes, the threat is real, but I have to fight. I was groomed as a soldier. I took an oath to the people, not the generals. Pakistanis want democracy, their mandate respected, that's what I'm fighting for.Q: How do you see political stability coming? Imran Khan's sons, Reham Khan's new party — what do you make of this?A: Imran Khan's sons aren't interested in politics, only in getting relief for their father. Reham Khan's party I don't take it seriously, maybe it'll survive if the military supports it. The real plan is bigger, creating chaos, attacking India, using war jingoism to justify an emergency and more plan is allegedly by the Army Chief, Asim Munir, putting his brother-in-law as PM, himself or another general as president, a Musharraf-style accountability push to claim they cleaned up Pakistan. That's the plan; whether they succeed depends on whether they can provoke war.Q: Final question, God forbid, if there's an attempt on your life, who would you blame?A: The Pakistani military establishment. The Army Chief Asim Munir. The DG ISI, Asim Malik. Major General Faisal Nasir. Brigadier Rashid Nasir. They are behind the threats, the same people threatening my witnesses. The only reason they haven't got to me is because I'm careful, trained, and protected by British police. But yes, this fight is high stakes. I read Faslon ko Takalluf as a kid. My nation is my life. I'll fight for it. Peace is the only way forward — peace can make South Asia the richest region again, like before colonisation.- Ends
The Print
an hour ago
- The Print
18 Muslim women made it to Lok Sabha since independence; 13 of them dynasts: Book
From royalty to a tea vendor-turned-politician's wife and from a first lady to a Bengali actress, the 18 Muslim women who treaded the hallowed corridors of power in the Lok Sabha are an eclectic mix, with each of them having an interesting backstory, but one common thread — their path to power was always strewn with struggle and hurdles. And while dynastic politics may not be conducive for democracy to deepen its roots, it has played a positive part in giving chances to Muslim women, with 13 out of the 18 being from political families. New Delhi, Jul 20 (PTI) That women were always under-represented in the Lok Sabha is a known fact, but Muslim women members have been a greater rarity with only 18 making it to the Lower House since independence, according to a new book. The story of these 18 Muslim women has been chronicled in an upcoming book– 'Missing from the House — Muslim women in the Lok Sabha' by Rasheed Kidwai and Ambar Kumar Ghosh. Kidwai says he wanted to document the profile of 20 Muslim women who made it to the Lower House, but two of them — Subhasini Ali and Afrin Ali — had openly proclaimed that they did not follow Islam. 'Only eighteen Muslim women have made it to the Lok Sabha since the first parliamentary polls in 1951-52. It is a shockingly abysmal figure, considering Muslim women are about 7.1 per cent of India's 146 crore population. Out of the 18 Lok Sabhas constituted till 2025, five times the Lok Sabha did not have a single Muslim woman member,' Kidwai and Ghosh write in their book, published by Juggernaut and will be released next month. Equally shocking is the fact that the number of Muslim women elected to Parliament in one tenure never crossed the mark of four in the 543-seat lower house of Parliament, the book points out. The book also notes that none of the five southern states — Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Telangana — otherwise known for better political representation than the North and with better literary levels and other socio-economic indicators, have not yet sent a single Muslim woman MP to the Lok Sabha. The 18 Muslim women who made it to the Lok Sabha include Mofida Ahmed (1957, Congress); Zohraben Akbarbhai Chavda (Congress, 1962-67); Maimoona Sultan (Congress, 1957-67); Begum Akbar Jehan Abdullah (National Conference, 1977-79, 1984-89); Rashida Haque (Congress 1977-79); Mohsina Kidwai (Congress, 1977-89); Abida Ahmed (Congress, 1981-89); Noor Bano (Congress, 1996, 1999-2004); Rubab Sayda (Samajwadi Party, 2004-09); and Mehbooba Mufti (People's Democratic Party, 2004-09, 2014-19). The other Muslim women who entered the Lower House are Tabassum Hasan (Samajwadi Party, Lok Dal, Bahujan Samaj Party 2009-14); Mausam Noor (Trinamool Congress 2009-19); Kaisar Jahan (Bahujan Samaj Party, 2009-14); Mamtaz Sanghamita (Trinamool Congress 2014-19); Sajda Ahmed (Trinamool Congress 2014-24); Ranee Narah (Congress, 1998-2004, 2009-14); Nusrat Jahan Ruhi (Trinamool Congress, 2019-24); and Iqra Hasan (Samajwadi Party, 2024-present). A dominant political figure who made an indelible mark on Indian politics was Mohsina Kidwai. She not only entered the Lok Sabha but also went on to join the council of ministers and hold several portfolios, including labour, health and family welfare, rural development, transport and urban development. Another fascinating personality that the book talks about is the wife of Mohammad Jasmir Ansari, a tea vendor-turned-politician. In 2009, Kaisar Jahan, wife of Ansari, won a fiercely fought four-corner contest even though she had barely thirty-five days to prepare and campaign. As 2009 Lok Sabha polls neared, Mayawati summoned MLA Jasmir and Kaisar Jahan to Lucknow. 'Jasmir and Kaisar stopped at 'Sharmaji ki Chai' in Hazratganj before heading to the chief minister's residence. Jasmir was anticipating a ministerial position, but instead, Mayawati came straight to the point by asking him to contest the polls. The lingering taste of chai vanished quickly as Jasmir struggled, looking tentatively at his wife for an answer. Mayawati, a politician among politicians, sensed his unease. She directly asked Kaisar: 'Tu ladegi? The answer came immediately and spontaneously from both Jasmir and Kaisar-yes,' the book narrates. There is also a first lady among the 18 Muslim women – Begum Abida Ahmed, wife of the country's fifth president, Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed. Over four years after Ahmed passed away in 1977, Abida Ahmed agreed to fight a Lok Sabha by-election from Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, in 1981 and won, becoming the first and only First Lady of India to have entered the competitive arena of politics. She won again in 1984, making it two in a row from Bareilly. Begum Noor Bano, originally Mahatab Zamani and the widow of the former ruler of Rampur, was royalty who was a key figure in the political landscape of that area and fought many battles with Azam Khan of the Samajwadi Party and Jaya Prada, who also contested on an SP ticket. Her husband, Nawab Syed Zulfikar Ali Khan Bahadur, belonged to the Rohilla dynasty and was popularly addressed as 'Mickey Mian'. He was killed in a freak road accident in 1992 while returning from New Delhi to Rampur. Noor Bano won the 1996 and 1999 Lok Sabha polls, but her electoral battles with Jaya Prada in 2004 and 2009 ended in defeats. Among the 18 Muslim women, Bengali actress Nusrat Jahan Ruhi also broke a number of glass ceilings as she went on to win the Lok Sabha polls on a TMC ticket in 2019. In the current Lok Sabha, there is just one Muslim woman MP, and that is SP's Iqra Hasan Choudhury. From earning the distinction of being one of the youngest MPs after defeating a veteran leader from the BJP to becoming the centre of social media discussion as a young, London-educated Muslim woman leader, Iqra Hasan has appeared to have carved out a space for herself in the public imagination. In his foreword to the book, Congress MP Shashi Tharoor writes, 'Nearly seventy-eight years have passed since that portentous stroke of midnight on 15 August 1947, when Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru proclaimed a 'tryst with destiny' and India awakened to 'life and freedom.' …Yet even after almost eight decades, a shameful reality, which should deflate our self-congratulatory fervour over our democratic track record, still haunts us.' 'Not everyone has found 'utterance' in the world's largest democracy, many of whose towering leaders eulogize it as the 'Mother of Democracy.' This self-serving description is enabled, in part, by a too-pliant news media, an ineffectual civil society and a menaced academic class, so that no one dares point out the irony inherent in the claim,' Tharoor says. 'Although we depict India as a doting mother nurturing and nourishing a clamorous, combative and chaotic republic, corrupt and inefficient, perhaps, but nonetheless flourishing, the truth is that throughout our democratic history, we have consistently failed our women citizens: failed to afford them, in the thoroughfares of our country, a life of dignity and decency,' he says. PTI ASK RHL RHL This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
From the Opinions Editor: NCERT textbook revisions — a point-to-point counter isn't enough
Dear Readers, Revision of social science textbooks, especially history readers, has become par for the course. Most times, this exercise is not guided by the scholarly imperative to mirror developments in knowledge. Instead, it seems to bear the ideological hallmarks of those in power. Textbooks have borne this burden for long. However, there's still a difference in today's restructuring of reading material compared to schoolbook rewriting exercises of the past. In the last five years, parts of history textbooks have been either excised or modified and the changes have been ascribed to a variety of factors – from rationalising content to reducing the burden on students. These exercises claim to be motivated by a desire to ensure student 'well-being', but carry imprints of the ruling regime's anxiety to flatten social complexities. Introduced last week, the latest changes, dotted with references to the 'brutality' of medieval Muslim kings, carry a disclaimer, 'Notes on Some Darker Periods of History' : 'No one no one should be held responsible today for events of the past. The emphasis is on an honest approach to history with a view to drawing important lessons for a better future.' Historians have rightly underlined that the account is not as 'honest' as it claims to be. The selective references to destruction of places of worship by Muslim kings has not gone unnoticed. Scholars have rightly pointed out that such violence was not uncommon across a variety of ruling dispensations in ancient and medieval times. These are significant interventions. Yet, there is a broader challenge for historians: To underline the fundamental differences between the social and moral universe of pre-modern times with today's norms. Kings and sultans were not accountable for their actions, statecraft had very different objectives and wars were often critical to empire-building. All this is historical common sense. However, it's yet to become a general common sense. Narratives of the pre-modern era continue to be framed around heroes and villains. The search for a protonationalist in Ashoka, Akbar or Shivaji – depending on ideological inclination –and describing a Mahmud of Ghazni or Allaudin Khalji or Aurangzeb as evil might seem somewhat different endeavours. But both approaches obscure an understanding of epochs, much removed in time – Mahmud of Ghazini lived in the 10th-11th centuries, the Khaljis in the 13th and 14th century and the last great Mughal ruled from 1658-1707. That the latest revisions in textbooks bracket a more than 500-year period under the shibboleth of 'Dark Age' shows that even a section of historians – affiliated to the ruling regime – carry such blinkers. The challenge, in large measure, has to do with a historiographical deficit, plugging which remains a work in progress. Indian historians have produced groundbreaking studies on the extractive nature of medieval kingdoms, the ebbs and flows of commerce, the caste system and rise of kingdoms far away from sultanates in Delhi. Yet, an understanding of violence in pre-modern times is a relatively recent historiographical pursuit. Charges of destruction of places of worship continue to be countered by narratives which stress the political impulses behind such violence – as opposed to religious motives. The standard response also is that instances of destruction of places of worship by sultans and badshahs were far fewer, compared to the grants they gave to temples and monasteries. A historian should, of course, be judged by her fealty to facts. Viewed from that perspective, there is nothing wrong in how most professional historians have responded to allegations of 'brutality' levied on Islamic kings. However, today the challenge in classrooms – and beyond – is not just to provide a point-to-point counter. The internet, political propaganda, social media, films and TV make lives information heavy. Whatsapp chats have precipitated the collapse of some of the traditional filters on information. How can narratives that place violence in medieval times in their historical context help? Why do people need to understand the complexities of times when rulers could destroy some temples and give grants to many others? What purpose would it serve to depict Mughal, and several other, rulers as complex personalities who had the blood of their kin on their hand and yet presided over great cultural refinement? Why tell the stories of Shivaji's successors who struck terror in people in Bengal? Studies placing personalities in their times are, of course, needed for purely epistemological purposes. History is at its most vigorous, when it not only celebrates the resilience of societies but also tries to understand fault lines. The search for syncretism in medieval times was driven by a young nation's desire to place a salve on the wounds of Partition as well as the imperative to counter the colonial historian's charge that Indian history, before the arrival of Britishers, was nothing but an account of communal feuding. Histories of pre-modern violence, not prejudiced by colonial blinkers and innocent of sectarian agendas, have been few and they have not gone beyond academia. But why disturb the student's 'well-being' by introducing such complexities in textbooks? The latest changes have been introduced in Class VIII textbooks – a time when youngsters step into their teens. They are introduced to complicated concepts in mathematics and science – cell division, for instance. Why not in the social sciences? A textbook is perhaps the only text of history that a large majority of people, who do not engage with the discipline for professional purposes, will encounter in their lives – while they would be inundated with myriad accounts of the past. Critics of the revisions are, therefore, right in underlining the importance of rigour in reading materials. The task also is to find ways to communicate the complexity that informs their scholarship outside select circles – a difficult yet necessary imperative for the historian, inside and outside academia. Till next time, Kaushik
