PM praises young Ganjam weightlifter in Mann Ki Baat
on Sunday praised a 16-year old weightlifter from Berhampur, who set two new national records in the recently concluded Khelo India Youth Games-2025 in Bihar.
"The brilliant performances of Asmita Dhone of Maharashtra, Harshvardhan Sahu of Odisha, and Tushar Chaudhary of Uttar Pradesh in the weightlifting competition won everyone's heart," Modi said in the 122nd edition of his '
' radio address.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
"I was surprised when the PM mentioned my name along with other Khelo India participants in his Mann Ki Baat address," said Sahu who is now training at Netaji Subhas National Institute of Sports (NSNIS), Patiala for the upcoming Commonwealth Games. "I feel encouraged by his praise and will try to do better in the coming events," he said.
A resident of Haradakhandi here, Sahu bagged a gold medal and set new records in the 7th Khelo India Youth Games held from May 4 to 15.
In the 49-kg category, Harshvardhan lifted 88 kg in snatch and a record 115 kg in clean and jerk, totalling 203 kg. He broke the previous record of 202 kg set by Jharkhand's Babulal Hembrom.
He had secured a bronze by lifting 197 kg (87 kg in snatch and 110 kg in clean and jerk) in the World Youth Championships at Lima.
Hailing from a middle class family, Harshvardhan started practising weightlifting at a private club here.
Before shifting to Patiala, he trained at Army Sports Institute (ASI), Pune.
"Young weightlifters, particularly those in Odisha will be encouraged after the PM's praise," said K Ravi Kumar, an Arjuna award winner.
Deputy chief minister Pravati Parida, commerce and transport minister Bibhuti Bhusan Jena and several MLAs of Ganjam district thanked PM Modi for praising Harshvardhan.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
8 minutes ago
- Time of India
'This is what we get from PM Modi's friend...': Priyanka on Trump imposing 25% tariff on India
Congress and other opposition leaders on Wednesday took jibes at the Modi government over Donald Trump announcing a 25 per cent tariff and an extra penalty on Indian goods, but also slammed the US President's move, terming it unfortunate. "PM Modi goes everywhere, makes friends and then this is what we get," Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra said. Show more Show less
Indian Express
8 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Trump's tariff shock to India: What Modi government could have done differently
After sealing a deal with the European Union and Japan, agreeing to a 15 per cent tariff in the case of these developed industrial economies, and even as he strings China along, United States President Donald Trump has shocked India, a low-middle-income developing economy, imposing 25 per cent tariff. Till recently, the official Indian briefing to the media was that discussions were still on and India may get a couple of weeks' reprieve in August to strike a deal. Hours after the Lok Sabha saw Prime Minister Narendra Modi unwilling to give any credit to President Trump for the pause in Operation Sindoor, the latter hit hard. Even after the PM's and foreign minister's statements in Parliament, President Trump tweeted for the nth time his claim that he had stopped the war. He had always linked that to trade. There's more to the Trump action than just trade and tariffs. Never since 1971 has India found both the United States and China on the same side on a matter concerning Pakistan, while at the same time having to defend her relationship with Russia. This is perhaps the lowest point for Indian foreign policy that has consistently endeavoured for three decades to keep the US on the Indian side while having to deal with the China-Pakistan alliance. The Parliament must undertake a comprehensive review of Indian foreign policy. India is now stuck in a Catch-22. Damned if he will, damned if he won't, Prime Minister Modi will not admit that US intervention played a role. If the issue was only about how the war ended, the matter would have rested there. After all, even in the past, the US did play a role in sorting out issues between India and Pakistan, even with India consistently maintaining that all disputes between neighbours can only be settled bilaterally. No US President has made a big deal of it in the past. This time it's different. Not only has President Trump made a big deal of his intervention, explicitly seeking credit for it, but he has gone a step further and linked this to the outcome of the trade and tariffs negotiations. While the EU and Japan are relatively happy with the outcome of tariff negotiations, making promises on investment, and China is working its way through Washington DC's corridors of power, India has been hit. Worse, as one longstanding watcher of US-India relations said on a social media post, Trump has rubbed salt into Indian wounds by striking a deal with Pakistan, 'whereby Pakistan and the United States will work together on developing their massive oil reserves.' Could Prime Minister Modi have handled President Trump differently? The problem goes all the way back to Indian expectations about a second Trump presidency. Even as Prime Minister Modi tried to remain neutral between Trump and Kamala Harris in the run-up to the presidential elections, many in India and many Indians in the US continued to assume that Trump would be better for US-India relations. When Trump chose to invite President Xi Jinping of China to his inauguration in January without extending such an invitation to Modi, alarm bells would have sounded in New Delhi's South Block. Both the PM and External Affairs Minister worked over time to reach out to President Trump and retrieve ground. It is possible that after this initial shock, the Prime Minister and his diplomatic team may have re-assessed the status of US-India relations. The earlier assumption that President Biden was unfriendly towards India, and in fact friendly towards Pakistan, while President Trump would rebalance the equation ought to have been dismissed and a new assessment made about what lies ahead. It appears Pakistan made such a re-assessment and quickly invested in the Trump entourage, buying up support. When President Trump unveiled his trade and tariff policy, he repeatedly named India a 'tariff king' and as a target for action. Perhaps the Modi government had hoped that by buying more defence equipment from the US, showing how it is contributing to the US economy, Trump could be appeased. The government even proposed a bilateral free trade agreement and hoped the negotiating process would get India off the hook. There was considerable optimism within the Union commerce ministry on this count even as late as April this year. Matters, however, had not been sorted out. Caught in this trade trap, the Modi government had a fantastic opportunity to feed President Trump's ego and vanity by thanking him for his role in the declaration of the ceasefire. Of course, it would be argued that Prime Minister Modi would not have wanted to depart from India's longstanding diplomatic posture of denying any role to the US or any other country in settling a bilateral dispute with Pakistan. But there was a way out. After ceasefire was declared, Prime Minister Modi could have called President Trump, referred to the conversations he had with Vice-President J D Vance, and the foreign minister had with his counterpart, and thanked Trump for his interest in ending wars and maintaining peace around the world and then added a line about how India-Pakistan issues can only be settled bilaterally. By linking his role in terminating Operation Sindoor to a trade deal, Trump appeared to be seeking a quid pro quo – credit for his role in exchange for concessions on trade. The official Indian position could have been, 'Yes, President Trump was concerned about the situation getting out of hand. He reached out to both sides. We thanked him for his concern. But, we declared ceasefire only after our objectives were met.' End of story. Modi would have acknowledged Trump's role without giving him credit for the final decision and sticking to the standard Indian position that India-Pakistan disputes will only be settled bilaterally. Whatever happened on those four fateful days in May this year, the government was clearly not prepared to deal with the larger challenge of the Trump presidency – that of pandering to and appeasing Trump's ego. The present Indian leadership does not have the toolkit to deal with egos as big as their own. This is all the more surprising given that few heads of government around the world had established a better equation with President Trump than Prime Minister Modi. The government and foreign affairs scholars owe an explanation to the lay public as to why US-India relations have deteriorated to the point we find ourselves in today. The writer was member, National Security Advisory Board of India, 1999-2001 and media advisor to the Prime Minister of India, 2004-08
The Print
36 minutes ago
- The Print
India must not retaliate to Trump's tariff tactic. Secure interim deal, fix internal issues
Undoubtedly, India has posed one of the highest import tariffs worldwide across many products, and maintained daunting non-tariff barriers. This is unsustainable for its globally integrated economy. Analysts have feared that Prime Minister Modi's Make in India mission signals India's return to higher tariffs. However, the lowering of import tariffs is an inevitable shift, despite some key Indian industry leaders seeking to rely on the callipers of high import duties. The Make in India mission can only benefit from riding on the wave of enhanced manufacturing competitiveness amidst an environment of lower regulatory cholesterol and a much higher ease of doing business. Business groups batting for protectionism will predictably register their discomfort but would eventually relent to lower import tariffs as the new rules of engagement. India must allow this pragmatic realisation to spur the next round of trade negotiations with the US. The unfavourable announcement is likely to pose headwinds for India's GDP growth. The US has simultaneously pushed the boundaries of trade negotiations towards strongarming India to comply with its stance on the war in Ukraine by levying a yet-unspecified penalty for India continuing to purchase Russian oil and defence equipment. A 25 per cent tariff will leave India worse-off against its immediate competitors until a new deal is struck. Rather than retaliating unwisely to these pressure tactics, India must do whatever it takes to fast-track the BTA negotiations. At a time when active negotiations to secure the US-India Bilateral Trade Agreement or BTA are underway, the US' decision to impose a 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods starting 1 August is surely not good news for the Indian economy and business sentiments. India's exports of automotive components, pharmaceuticals, marine products, apparel, gems and jewellery, chemicals, oilseeds and leather goods are expected to be worst affected due to this levy. US-India BTA As is well known, the major roadblock has been over tariffs for US agricultural commodities and dairy products exports to India. Washington has been pushing for greater access to India's agriculture sector, viewing this untapped market as a huge opportunity. New Delhi has been resisting this expectation due to its domestic sticking points over food security and securing the interests of hundreds of millions of small and marginal farmers earning below subsistence levels of income. The apprehension of hurting the sentiments and interests of small Indian farmers is not an imaginary fear but a serious political reality. The Indian government has been reluctant to overlook these concerns, particularly after the domestic backlash to its efforts to liberalize the agriculture sector through three Farm Bills which were repealed following large-scale farmers' protests in 2020-21. Compounding India's concerns is the issue of genetically modified (GM) crops which has led to resistance to the lowering of tariffs on American GM produce like maize and soya. India does not allow such products due to the perceived health risks for its 1.4 billion-strong population. The US needs to appreciate that India has very limited elbow room to bend significantly on these issues. A key feature of India's economic history this decade has been its growing willingness to enter into free trade agreements (FTAs) and preferential trade agreements with major Western economies. Following the Australia-India Economic Cooperation and Trade Agreement (ECTA) in 2022, and the U.K.-India Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) in 2025, India is already negotiating an FTA with the European Union. With a recent thaw in the frosty diplomatic relations of the last two years, India has also resumed negotiations for an FTA with Canada, which had been suspended since 2023. The most notable of these efforts to open its doors to the West is the US-India BTA, which had already concluded its fifth round of negotiations. A full-blown BTA intends to improve mutual market access, reduce tariff barriers, remove non-tariff barriers, expand consumer benefits, and improve the integration of supply chains. Despite the fact that some irritants still remain and the US has already announced a 25 per cent tariff and a penalty on Indian exports, the US and India need to expedite discussions leading to an interim trade deal, pending a full-blown BTA. Also read: Modi's 'Make in India'—a case study in what happens when strategy is replaced by storytelling Win-win trade deal The post-pandemic world has been contemplating a partial relocation part of its manufacturing supply chains to destinations other than China. India is a major prospect on this front as an alternate manufacturing destination. While trying to capitalize such opportunities, India has tasted limited success as not very many supply chain shifts to India have actually occurred so far. A win-win trade deal between the US and India would bring more FDI especially from the US into India, create more jobs, provide both nations better access to raw material and capital goods, and improve the competitiveness of Indian manufacturing. Such a scenario would surely pave the way for India's emergence as a viable alternative to China in the global exports market. The US' total goods trade with India in 2024 was USD 129 billion out of which the US goods exports to India were USD 42 billion (up 3.4 per cent vis-à-vis 2023) and US goods imports from India were USD 87 billion (up 4.5 per cent vis-à-vis 2023). India has a large trade deficit with its largest trading partner China, but enjoys a goods trade surplus with the US of around USD 46 billion in 2024. Prime Minister Modi and President Trump have set an ambitious target of doubling bilateral trade to USD 500 billion by 2030. In most countries, international trade represents a significant share of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). India's trade to GDP ratio was reported at 44.67 per cent in 2024, according to the World Bank. The impending US-India trade deal offers India a major opportunity to further boost its trade-to-GDP ratio which is generally considered a healthy indicator for any economy. India has already emerged as the world's fourth largest economy having equalled the GDP of Japan. It is also the fastest growing economy among major countries. With a long history of non-alignment and strategic independence in its trade policy, India has largely shielded itself from international pressure. With the high approval ratings of the BJP-led regime and its strong nationalistic overtures, there is unlikely to be any significant domestic perception of India being bullied by the US and therefore, this is unlikely to affect the impending trade deal with the US. Win-win negotiations are always about give and take, a deft combination of assertion and acquiescence. A mutually acceptable trade deal would do a lot of good to both countries. It will be a shot in the arm for India. Once in the bag, the EU-India trade deal will be finalised in due course of time. These deals would mean a significant liberalization of India's trade regime ensuring far more open markets with two major Western economies. As long as these deals do not rock the boat for the Indian agriculture and dairy sectors, they will also find traction amongst its constituency of middle-class voters for whom Western markets are aspirational. For any future FDI, India would emerge a very lucrative destination as border roadblocks would reduce. The US stands to gain by way of greater access to Indian markets and the emergence of India as a viable manufacturing destination. Avoiding laying most of its eggs in the Chinese basket will also be consistent with the US's strategic interests in the Indo-Pacific. Though President Trump's announcement of a 25 per cent tariff may seem a setback in the short-run, India's national interest lies in treating this as an opportunity to urgently seal, at the very least, an interim trade deal with the US for immediate relief. This will provide legroom to iron out India's domestic concerns, de-link trade negotiations with its long-standing ties with Russia, and arrive at a sustainable long-term free trade agreement with the US down the line. Jayant Krishna is a senior fellow (non-resident) with the Chair on India and Emerging Asia Economics at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC, and an adjunct professor of business negotiation at the Indian Institute of Management (IIM), Lucknow. Ujjwal Krishna is an academic fellow with the Australia India Institute at the University of Melbourne, an adjunct research fellow with the Centre for Human Security and Social Change at La Trobe University, and a consultant at The Asia Foundation's Regional Governance Unit. Views are personal.
