VS at his scathing best
On former President A P J Abdul Kalam and former ISRO chairmen Madhavan Nair and K Kasturirangan. VS remarked while explaining his party's stand against the Indo-US nuclear deal, after being provoked by a media person's statement that Kalam had endorsed the deal.
'If the concerned minister goes astray, I have the nerve to call and tell him 'you idiot (pozhan), it should not be done that way'.'
On his cabinet colleague Binoy Viswam in a hypothetical context
'Grandmother' (Valyammachi)
On Elizabeth Mammen Mathai during election campaigning
'Elder aunt' (Valyamma)
On Sonia Gandhi
'Amul baby'
On Rahul Gandhi
'Monkey' (Kurangan)
On K E N Kunhahammed
'Jungle thieves who smuggle out temple assets in 'payasam' vessel.' (Payasapathrathil kshethramuthal kattukadathunna kaattu kallanmar)
On the erstwhile Travancore royal family
'All students in Malappuram pass examination by copying.' (Malappurathe kuttikal muzhuvan copy adichanu pareeksha pass akunnath)
While referring to examination malpractices
'That's right. Had it not been Sandeep's house, not even a dog would have gone there.' (Seriyanu. Athu Sandeepinte veedallenkill, oru pattiyum avide pokillayirunnu)
Responding to an outburst by Mumbai terror attack victim NSG Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan's father who said 'No dog need come here' (ivide oru pattiyum varenda).
'She was used and thrown away.' (upayogichu, valicherinju)
On Sindhu Joy who quit CPM to join the Congress, only to be sidelined
'You falling in hell where the worm does not die and the fire is not quenched. Ho! I cannot even think about it.'
Quoting from the Bible, on K M Mani
'Everyone knows, she's famous. In what way, you can find out.' (Ellavarkum ariyamallo, avar prasasthayanu, ethu tharathil ennu ningal anweshichal mathi)
On Lathika Subhash, his UDF rival in Malampuzha constituency
'He deserves to be hated' (ayaal verukkappettavanaanu)
On businessman
Faris Aboobacker
'Gunmon'
On former Chief Minister Oommen Chandy's gunman
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
19 minutes ago
- Mint
India, New Zealand conclude second round of FTA talks in Delhi; third round set for September in Auckland
New Delhi: India and New Zealand have completed the second round of negotiations for a free trade agreement (FTA), with both sides registering progress across key sectors, the commerce ministry said in a statement on Friday. The discussions, which concluded on 25 July in New Delhi, focused on deepening trade and investment ties and reflected growing alignment on a range of commercial and regulatory issues. The third round is slated for September in New Zealand, the ministry said. The development comes a day after India and the United Kingdom signed a landmark free trade agreement, adding to India's growing portfolio of bilateral trade agreements, including those with Australia and the UAE. The latest talks between India and New Zealand were held from 14-25 July and saw advancement in several negotiating pillars, including trade in goods and services, investment, rules of origin, customs procedures, technical barriers to trade, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, and economic cooperation. Negotiators from both sides indicated that early convergence had been achieved on multiple texts, and virtual intersessional meetings will be held to sustain momentum until the next in-person round. The FTA discussions were formally launched during New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon's visit to India in March, when he met with Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Both sides announced the launch of negotiations for a free trade agreement as part of efforts to deepen economic cooperation amid growing concerns over a potential global tariff war triggered by US President Donald Trump's aggressive trade stance. Mint was the first to report on India exploring renewed FTA negotiations with New Zealand, in a report dated 26 June 2024. The first round of negotiations between the two countries began in May 2025 in New Delhi. The latest round of talks signals steady movement towards what officials described as a 'balanced, comprehensive, and forward-looking agreement'. India's merchandise trade with New Zealand reached $1.3 billion in 2024-25, up nearly 49% from FY24, albeit from a relatively modest base. Trade analysts said an agreement with New Zealand, while smaller in scale compared with India's deals with the UK and the EU, would help New Delhi stitch a more strategic Indo-Pacific trade network. 'New Zealand is a gateway to the Pacific and has a relatively high per capita import appetite,' said Abhash Kumar, a trade economist. 'A well-negotiated deal will give Indian firms a secure and rules-based market while opening possibilities for trilateral arrangements with Australia or ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations).' India is focusing on improving access for sectors such as pharmaceuticals, textiles, information technology services, and agri-products, while New Zealand is expected to push for gains in dairy, meat, wine, and education services.
The Print
19 minutes ago
- The Print
Thailand-Cambodia clash is more than a border fight—it's a new front in Cold War 2.0
For observers in South Asia, the crisis strikes a familiar chord. Much like the subcontinent's own post-colonial challenges, this conflict is deeply rooted in contested borders callously drawn by colonial powers. In South Asia, the legacy lies with the British; in Southeast Asia, it's the French. Now in its second day, the hostilities continue and a ceasefire remains elusive, if not impossible. The implications for regional stability and the broader US-China strategic rivalry—often dubbed 'Cold War 2.0'—are already profound. The sudden military escalation between two ASEAN members, Thailand and Cambodia, has jolted the Indo-Pacific, a region that's already on edge amid the Great Power contestation between the United States and China. The timing couldn't be more telling. Global military budgets are rising amid geopolitical strains, and Southeast Asia is no exception. Even as ASEAN countries pursue deeper economic integration—modelling aspects of the European Union—defence spending has surged across the bloc. This, even though ASEAN is far from unified in its political, economic, or military postures. While the ASEAN Free Trade Area has made strides in tariff reduction, wide disparities persist. Singapore boasts high per capita income and advanced infrastructure, while countries like Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar continue to struggle with poverty, fragile institutions, and uncertain futures. The World Bank recently revised Cambodia's 2025 growth forecast down to 4 per cent, citing a range of economic vulnerabilities. Also Read: Trump's Ukraine U-turn puts Russia's trade partners at risk. India caught in the middle Fragmented security postures In security terms, ASEAN remains a mosaic of national agendas, even in the face of China's aggressive build-up in the South China Sea and its expansive nine-dash line claims over the EEZs of several member states. A common threat should have united the bloc. But as China is also ASEAN's largest trading partner, siding against it remains unaffordable for most, even those with a pro-West tilt. Military modernisation is progressing, but along divergent paths. Between 2013 and 2022, the region spent approximately $60.9 billion on weapons procurement and defence R&D, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). But looking closer, these investments reflect broader geopolitical alignments: some countries lean toward the US, like Thailand and the Philippines; some toward China, such as Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar; and some are building ties with Russia, such as Vietnam and Indonesia. The presence of the UK and France, as well as the growing influence of Turkey and Israel in the region, adds further layers of complexity. From imperial maps to military clashes Southeast Asia has long been a stage for Great Power rivalry. The roots of the current Thailand-Cambodia conflict lie in the 1907 Franco-Siamese Treaty. Under pressure from both Britain and France, Siam (modern-day Thailand) ceded territories to the French. At the time, Cambodia was under French rule, and the treaty left many areas of the border vague—sowing the seeds of future disputes. During World War II, Siam allied with Japan and briefly regained some of the lost territory. But following Japan's defeat, these areas returned to French control. When Cambodia gained independence in 1953, the problematic colonial borders remained. One hotspot is the Preah Vihear Temple. Though the International Court of Justice awarded it to Cambodia in 1962, the surrounding territory was left undefined, allowing the conflict to simmer. The Cold War further complicated the picture. Cambodia's civil war, the Khmer Rouge regime, and Vietnam's 1978 invasion turned the Thai-Cambodian border into a Cold War flashpoint. The US, China, and several ASEAN members supported anti-Vietnamese resistance, including remnants of the Khmer Rouge. Even after Vietnam withdrew in 1989, and the 1991 Paris Peace Accords attempted to stabilise the region, no durable border resolution was reached. Efforts at rapprochement resumed in the 2000s, culminating in a February 2024 strategic partnership between Cambodia and Thailand focused on de-escalation. But on 28 May 2025, a deadly clash between patrols in a disputed area killed a Cambodian soldier, shattering the fragile peace. Since then, serious escalation has happened. New theatre for the new Cold War? In the ongoing military standoff, Thailand has clearly dominated from the get-go. The skies over Southeast Asia quickly became a theatre of conflict, with Thailand deploying its F-16 fighter jets and reportedly decimating Cambodia's 8th and 9th infantry divisions. For the first time, Thailand also fielded its Ukrainian-made T-84 Oplot-M main battle tanks in combat, facing off against Cambodia's outdated T-55s. The disparity in military capabilities between the two countries is not merely significant—it is exponentially vast. Cambodia's decision to escalate, despite its weaker military, raises questions. One possible explanation is Chinese backing—part of a broader strategy to test the limits of US commitment to its allies. US arms sales, including to Thailand, are governed by strict end-use agreements that limit how and against whom they can be deployed. It is unlikely Thailand would have used F-16s without prior US consent. If true, this suggests Washington tacitly approved Thailand's response—a subtle yet pointed signal to Beijing, which has become Cambodia's chief military patron since 2017. After Cambodia dissolved its main opposition party and jailed political leaders, the US slashed aid. China quickly stepped in with military equipment, training, and joint exercises such as 'Golden Dragon'. More concerning is China's role in expanding the Ream Naval Base on Cambodia's southern coast. Though not officially a military base, satellite imagery shows a pier nearly identical in length and design to one at China's Djibouti base—capable of docking its largest aircraft carriers. US officials have repeatedly raised concerns about growing Chinese military access to the base. These developments may explain why Washington allowed Thailand to respond forcefully—viewing it as an opportunity to counterbalance Chinese influence. Also Read: Paradox of India's S-400 deal—key asset delayed when country needs it most The wider web of power projection This conflict must also be understood in the broader context of foreign power projection in Southeast Asia. The US has deepened ties with the Philippines, now one of ASEAN's most hawkish voices on China. Meanwhile, the UK exerts influence through the Five Power Defence Arrangements (FPDA)—a long-standing, though non-binding, security pact with Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, and Singapore. This agreement, notably, was originally designed to ensure peace between Malaysia and Singapore. For the uninitiated, on 9 August 1965, Singapore officially parted ways with Malaysia, becoming an independent and sovereign nation. The split was driven by serious political and economic disagreements between the leadership of both countries, which had fuelled communal tensions and led to racial riots in July and September 1964. Although those tensions have long since eased, the UK continues to maintain its involvement through existing defence agreements and regular military exercises. France, another former colonial power, also maintains a strategic presence in the Indo-Pacific. It often champions 'strategic autonomy,' positioning itself as a balancing force in a region crowded with competing powers—though it would side with NATO allies if a hot war broke out. Even intra-ASEAN military tensions carry geopolitical implications. Indonesia, for example, has long struggled to fully control its airspace, as parts of it—including the skies over the Riau Islands and the Strait of Malacca—are under Singaporean operational control. Jakarta is now addressing these concerns by upgrading its air defence capabilities, including a $10 billion deal for Turkish-built KAAN fifth-generation fighter jets, which will involve significant contributions from Pakistani engineers. It has also ordered a huge number of Rafale jets from France, amid other equipment. At its core, the Southeast Asian theatre remains central to the unfolding Great Power contest between the US and China (backed by Russia). But it is also a landscape where middle powers—France, the UK, Turkey, and others—continue to shape the strategic environment in nuanced but significant ways. The Thailand-Cambodia escalation underscores not only the unresolved trauma of colonial legacies but also how quickly they can be weaponised in today's fraught geopolitical climate. As great powers manoeuvre and middle powers assert their influence, the Indo-Pacific grows more complex. With war now an ever-present possibility rather than a distant threat, Southeast Asia finds itself not just at the centre of Cold War 2.0—but at the frontline of an increasingly crowded, competitive, and dangerous global order. Swasti Rao is a Consulting Editor (International and Strategic Affairs) at ThePrint. She tweets @swasrao. Views are personal. (Edited by Asavari Singh)
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Shashi Tharoor Hails India-UK Trade Deal, Calls It 'An Inflexion Point'
Last Updated: The FTA's true significance, he says, lies not just in the immediate economic uptick, but in its potential to shape a qualitatively better relationship for future generations The India-United Kingdom trade deal is an inflexion point, a strategic pivot that promises to redefine the contours of a historically rich yet often complex relationship, Congress leader and former external affairs minister Shashi Tharoor has said. The Free Trade Agreement, he wrote in an opinion piece for NDTV, is a profound testament to a maturing partnership and a critical investment in the prosperity and opportunities for future generations in both nations. 'For too long, the narrative of Indo-UK relations has been shadowed by the echoes of a colonial past," he said. 'While that history must never be forgotten, it is equally crucial to acknowledge the evolving dynamics of a modern, democratic India and a globally engaged Britain." From India's perspective, the agreement offers unprecedented market access to one of the world's most sophisticated economies, Tharoor pointed out. 'With 99% of Indian exports gaining duty-free access to the UK market, sectors like textiles, leather goods, marine products, gems and jewellery, and engineering goods stand to gain immensely," he wrote, calling it 'a powerful enabler of the 'Make in India' initiative". The true significance of the agreement, the Congress leader wrote, lies not just in the immediate economic uptick, but in its potential to shape a qualitatively better relationship for future generations. 'By institutionalising frameworks for cooperation in areas beyond traditional trade, such as innovation, research, climate action, and education, the CETA lays a robust foundation for a truly comprehensive partnership. The 'Vision 2035' roadmap, agreed alongside the CETA, emphasises collaborations in defence, technology, and green energy, recognising the shared strategic interests and global challenges both nations face," he said. According to Tharoor, the trade deal stands as a powerful testament to the enduring value of international cooperation and open markets. 'Prime Minister Narendra Modi has hailed the significance of the trade agreement for future generations. Indeed, for the young, this agreement is not just a trade deal; it is an inheritance of enhanced opportunities, deeper cultural understanding, and a more interconnected and prosperous world. It is an inflexion point—indeed, a turning of the page—to a qualitatively better, and brighter, shared future," he wrote. view comments Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
