China plans another conspiracy against India, makes move to disturb power balance in Asia, Modi govt is biggest challenge due to...
Not just at the borders, but India is giving a hard time to China at other fronts too. China is preparing to form a new group under its leadership to replace the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). However, India has emerged as the biggest hurdle in this effort of China. Analysts say that due to its economic strength and crisis management capability, India remains important for future regional cooperation. In such a situation, it is useless to imagine any group or alliance in South Asia without India. India had distanced itself from this group due to Pakistan-sponsored terrorism and its dogmatism. Due to this, the meetings of SAARC are pending.
What is China-Pakistan planning together?
According to reports, discussions are in advanced stages between Islamabad and Beijing on a possible alternative to the China-led SAARC. Experts believe that China is using this as a geopolitical ploy to sideline India. Bangladeshi officials reportedly attended a meeting about the new grouping in Kunming, China on June 19, but Dhaka downplayed any political implications.
Why is SAARC eclipsed?
SAARC was established in 1985 by seven countries including India. Later in 2007, Afghanistan also joined this alliance. The member countries of SAARC are India, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. But, SAARC has been largely inactive since 2016. India refused to attend the SAARC meeting due to the attack by Pakistan-sponsored terrorists in 2016. Since then its meetings are pending and the rest of the members have also backed out from it.
Why India's neighbors will not join China's SAARC?
China's bid to expand its influence in South Asia is based on strategic, economic and security interests. Through projects such as the Belt and Road Initiative, Beijing not only seeks to boost regional connectivity but also secure energy routes and counter the rise of India, analysts say. But countries such as Sri Lanka, Bhutan and Nepal may be reluctant to join any new regional body that excludes India.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi invited all SAARC leaders to his first swearing-in ceremony in 2014. He also attended the SAARC summit in Kathmandu that year, where he called for a motor-vehicle agreement to enhance connectivity. When Pakistan blocked the deal, India signed a similar agreement with Bangladesh, Bhutan and Nepal the following year. India also pushed ahead with the South Asia Satellite Project in 2017, even after Pakistan had already backed out, which was intended to benefit all other SAARC countries.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
22 minutes ago
- Mint
At UNSC, India reaffirms commitment to peace, slams Pakistan for cross-border terrorism – 'at the other extreme is…'
India has reaffirmed its commitment to international peace and security through multilateralism and peaceful settlement of disputes, while strongly condemning cross-border terrorism and calling out Pakistan at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) High-Level Open Debate. 'As we complete 80 years of the United Nations, it is a useful moment to reflect on how far the spirit of multilateralism and peaceful settlement of disputes as enshrined in the UN Charter has been realized,' Ambassador Parvathaneni Harish, Permanent Representative to the UN, said delivering India's statement, news agency ANI reported. 'In the recent decades, the nature of conflicts has transformed, with a proliferation of non-state actors, often propped up as proxies by state actors; and cross-border funding, arms trafficking, training of terrorists, and spread of radical ideologies, facilitated by modern digital and communication technologies,' he said. On the need to ensure accountability for terrorism, the Ambassador referenced the April 22 terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, that killed 26 innocent tourists. "Consequent to the gruesome terrorist attack in Pahalgam... and based on the Council Statement of 25 April... India launched Operation Sindoor targeting terrorist camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK), which was focused, measured, and non-escalatory in nature. On achieving its primary objectives, a cessation of military activities was directly concluded at the request of Pakistan," the Ambassador said. He stressed that "national ownership and consent of parties are central to any efforts to achieve peaceful resolution of conflicts," adding, "There should also be a serious cost to states who violate the spirit of good neighbourliness and international relations by fomenting cross-border terrorism." Addressing recent remarks by Pakistan's representative, Harish said, 'The Indian Sub Continent offers a stark contrast in terms of progress, prosperity and development models. On the one hand, there is India which is a mature democracy, a surging economy and a pluralistic and inclusive society. At the other extreme is Pakistan, steeped in fanaticism and terrorism, and a serial borrower from the IMF.' "It ill behoves a member of the Council to offer homilies while indulging in practices that are unacceptable to the international community," he said. The Ambassador also emphasised India's role as the largest cumulative contributor to UN Peacekeeping forces and a pioneer in promoting women in peacekeeping. "We are at a time, where there are growing doubts about the multilateral system, especially the United Nations," he said, stressing the urgent need to address "serious question marks over the representativeness of the UN Security Council." Harish reaffirmed, "India remains committed to working towards international peace and security through multilateralism and peaceful settlement of disputes."
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
22 minutes ago
- First Post
FTA signing, talks on Khalistan and more... Why PM Modi's UK visit is important
Prime Minister Narendra Modi is off for his fourth trip to the United Kingdom. The visit, which begins today (July 23), is expected to witness the signing of a bilateral Free Trade Agreement (FTA). Modi's discussions with British PM Keir Starmer will also touch upon a range of bilateral issues including security and technology read more PM Narendra Modi will hold talks with British PM Keir Starmer on a range of issues. File Photo/Reuters Prime Minister Narendra Modi will embark on an official visit to the United Kingdom on Wednesday (July 23). The trip is expected to witness the signing of a bilateral Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between India and the UK. The two sides had concluded negotiations for the trade agreement on May 6. During his trip, Modi will discuss various issues with British PM Keir Starmer concerning bilateral relations. From the UK, PM Modi will depart for Maldives for a state visit from July 25-26. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD As the Indian leader begins his two-nation tour, here's what's on the agenda during the UK visit. Recent uptick in India-UK ties The relations between India and the UK have been on the rise in recent years. The Strategic Partnership between the two countries was elevated to Enhanced Partnership for the Future in 2010. The historical ties have got a boost since Brexit. In 2021, India and the UK upgraded their ties to a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership. They also adopted Roadmap 2030 to boost the relations in trade and investment, defence and security, and people-to-people contact and so on. In 2023, India and the UK established the 2+2 Foreign and Defence Dialogue. Last year, they launched the Technology Security Initiative. In May, New Delhi and London concluded talks to reach a bilateral Free Trade Agreement deal, discussions for which first began in January 2022. Business ties have also enhanced between India and the UK, with goods trade surpassing $23 billion in 2024-25, Indian Express reported, citing data by Indian government sources. PM Modi in the UK PM Narendra Modi, who is on his fourth visit to the UK, will hold discussions with his British counterpart Keir Starmer on a range of bilateral issues. 'They will also exchange views on issues of regional and global importance,' the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) said in the official announcement. The Indian leader is also slated to meet King Charles III. PM Narendra Modi interacts with Britain's Keir Starmer on the sidelines of the G20 summit at the Museum of Modern Art in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in November 2024. File Photo/Reuters During the visit, PM Modi will review the state of the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership (CSP), 'with a specific focus on trade and economy, technology and innovation, defence and security, climate, health, education and people to people ties,' the MEA said. PM Modi is also likely to interact with business leaders in the UK. FTA, Khalistan & more A key part of PM Modi's UK visit is the finalisation of the trade agreement between the two countries. India and the UK are expected to sign the FTA on July 24. 'We are working on legal scrubbing and other last-minute work that needs to be done,' Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri told a press conference on Tuesday, ahead of PM Modi's visit. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The India-UK FTA would eliminate duties on 99 per cent of Indian exports to Britain, including key sectors such as textiles, leather, gems and jewellery and auto parts and engines. In return, India will reduce or remove tariffs on 90 per cent of British products, including medical devices and alcoholic beverages. According to British estimates, the India-UK FTA will enhance bilateral trade by £25.5 billion annually by 2040. PM Modi had announced the trade deal with the UK on May 6, calling it 'ambitious and mutually beneficial'. The UK government has described the agreement as 'the biggest and most economically significant bilateral trade deal'. Commerce and Industry Minister Piyush Goyal will accompany PM Modi to London for the signing of the India-UK FTA. The talks will reportedly feature matters related to security and technology. India is likely to raise the issue of a surge in Khalistani threat in the UK. 'The presence of Khalistani extremists…we have brought to the attention of our partners in the UK. This should be a matter of concern for our partners as well,' Misri told the media. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Modi had flagged the issue to Starmer on the sidelines of the G7 Summit in Canada in June. The two leaders had also interacted during the G20 Summit in Brazil last year. The extradition of fugitives could also be among the top agendas during PM Modi's UK visit. India is seeking the extradition of Lalit Modi, Nirav Modi and Vijay Mallya, who are wanted for financial fraud, from the UK. 'There are a few questions related to fugitives from Indian law and justice in the UK. These have been a matter of discussion between both sides, and we continue to make the case for these fugitives to be rendered to India. Obviously, there is a legal process that such requests and such issues go through in the other country, and we continue to follow up very closely with our partners in the UK on these matters,' the Indian foreign secretary said. With inputs from agencies STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Hindustan Times
22 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Maha approaches SC against acquittal of 12 in Mumbai blasts
A day after the Bombay High Court acquitted all 12 men convicted of planning and executing the July 11, 2006 serial bomb blasts on Mumbai's suburban rail network, including five on death row, the Maharashtra government on Tuesday rushed to the Supreme Court seeking a stay on the verdict and an urgent hearing of its appeal. Maha approaches SC against acquittal of 12 in Mumbai blasts Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the state government, mentioned the matter before Chief Justice of India Bhushan R Gavai, requesting that the petition be heard without delay. The CJI agreed to list the case for a hearing on July 24, even as he remarked: 'But we have been reading that some of them have already been released from jail.' Responding to the observation, Mehta acknowledged the development but added: 'The state still wants the appeal to be heard expeditiously.' The special leave petition challenging the High Court judgment was filed earlier in the day. The state's legal challenge argues that the High Court erred in reversing the trial court's judgment and seeks a stay on the acquittal to prevent further release of the accused. The acquittals triggered political outrage, with Maharashtra chief minister Devendra Fadnavis on Monday calling the verdict 'shocking' and vowing to challenge it in the Supreme Court. The appeal comes in the wake of Monday's decision by the Bombay High Court, which overturned the 2015 convictions handed down by a special court under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA). The High Court held that the prosecution 'utterly failed to establish the offence beyond reasonable doubt,' describing the investigation as riddled with procedural lapses, unreliable evidence and grave violations of the accused's constitutional rights. The 2006 blasts were among the deadliest terror attacks in India's history, killing 188 people and injuring 829. Seven powerful improvised explosive devices, planted in pressure cookers, ripped through first-class compartments of Mumbai's crowded local trains within six minutes during evening rush hour. The carnage left behind mangled steel and shattered lives, and prompted a massive terror investigation led by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS). Within four months, 13 men were arrested by the ATS, which claimed that the attacks were orchestrated by former members of the banned Students' Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) and aided by the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT). The ATS further alleged that 12 Pakistani nationals had infiltrated India to provide explosives and training to the accused—claims that ultimately failed to stand judicial scrutiny. In 2015, the MCOCA court convicted 12 of the 13 accused, awarding the death penalty to five and life imprisonment to the others. One man, Abdul Wahid Shaikh, a schoolteacher who refused to confess, was acquitted by the trial court. One of the 13 accused died during the lengthy appeals process before the Bombay High Court. On Monday, the Bombay High Court bench of Justices Anil S Kilor and Shyam Chandak delivered a 400-page verdict that raised fundamental questions about the fairness of the investigation and trial. It described the prosecution's case as a 'deceptive closure' that undermined public trust while allowing the true culprits to remain at large. The high court pointed out that the prosecution's reliance on confessional statements, which formed the bedrock of the ATS's case, was deeply flawed. Most of these statements, recorded between October 4 and 25, 2006, bore tell-tale signs of being 'cut-copy-paste' reproductions and raised suspicions of being extracted under coercion. Several accused retracted their confessions during trial, alleging torture in custody -- a claim the court found credible in light of procedural violations. The high court also noted that the accused were not informed of their right to consult their lawyers before confessing, despite being represented by advocates on record. This, the court ruled, was a violation of their fundamental rights. Furthermore, it cast serious doubt on the credibility of eyewitnesses, including two taxi drivers and a few train passengers, who claimed to have seen the accused planting the bombs. Their testimonies, recorded more than 100 days after the incident and four years later during identification parades, were found to be unreliable. The test identification parades themselves were conducted by officials not authorised under law. Material evidence, such as recovered RDX, circuit boards, pressure cookers, soldering guns and maps, was also deemed inadmissible. The court found that the chain of custody was broken and that the items were not properly sealed before being sent for forensic testing, casting doubt on their origin and connection to the accused. Additionally, the high court raised questions about the applicability of MCOCA in the case and noted serious procedural lapses in invoking its provisions. Ends
