Latest news with #SeventhFleet
Indian Express
24-06-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Durga, dictator, democrat. How the 3 veins ran parallel in Indira Gandhi
Fifty years after the Emergency, as fresh material and new books throw more light on a dark chapter in India's history, it is still tantalising how Indira Gandhi, the central character around whom the events of the 1970s revolved, could be a 'Durga' in 1971, a dictator in 1975 – and even as a dictator, call for elections in 1977, displaying a democratic streak in her — all within a timespan of five-six years. Mrs Gandhi's opponent Atal Bihari Vajpayee had hailed her as 'Durga' after she helped split Pakistan to create Bangladesh, changing geo-political realities. In a preemptive move, she signed a Treaty of Friendship with the then Soviet Union (now Russia), to counter the new Pakistan-China-America axis that was being formed. Displaying her steely side, she did not wilt when then US President Richard Nixon sent the Seventh Fleet to the Bay of Bengal in a show of strength. Early on in life, Indira Gandhi had learnt not to panic in a crisis. There is a story about a trip to Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) with her parents, when the jeep in which they were travelling skidded. The 14-year-old Indira, who was sitting in the front, jumped out. The driver prevented the vehicle from going over the precipice, but Jawaharlal Nehru was furious with his daughter and admonished her for what she had done. After that she rarely lost her cool in a crisis, which came in handy in the 1971 Bangladesh War. Actually, even before the opposition to her began internally, Mrs Gandhi's woes started, with the outbreak of the Arab-Israeli Yom Kippur war in the Middle East in 1972 – rather like the crisis in West Asia today. It led to spiralling inflation in India, creating a fertile ground for the rise of the Navnirman Movement in Gujarat, followed by the Jayaprakash Narayan-led movement against corruption and rising prices in 1973-74. The two agitations brought Opposition forces together to demand Mrs Gandhi's resignation. But, even as she kept her cool, her instinct was to 'choose order above democracy' when faced with situations that spelt conflict or instability. According to her biographer Katherine Frank, she did not share 'Nehru's faith that democratic institutions would survive unstable circumstances'. (In 1959, as the Congress president, she had prevailed on a reluctant Nehru to dismiss the Communist government in Kerala when there was unrest in the state.) In 1975 again, Mrs Gandhi chose so-called 'order' over democracy in imposing the Emergency on the night of June 25-26. This was 13 days after Justice Jagmohan Lal Sinha of the Allahabad High Court unseated her as MP, holding her guilty of electoral malpractices. She toyed briefly with the idea of resigning while hoping for reprieve from the Supreme Court, and appointing someone of her choice as PM. But very quickly she abandoned the idea – it was too risky and might jeopardise her kursi. Ultimately, Mrs Gandhi imposed the Emergency even without calling a meeting of the Union Cabinet (which was informed at 6.30 the next morning – and not consulted). A compliant President, Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, just signed on the dotted line. The Congress government then went about arresting leading Opposition figures – including JP, Vajpayee, L K Advani, Morarji Desai, Charan Singh, Chandra Shekhar – as well as thousands others opposed to her politics. The families of many did not know for three-four months where they had been taken. There were allegations of torture in prison. What followed is now well-known – the suspension of fundamental rights, press censorship, amendments to the Constitution, the strengthening of the Executive's powers, the weakening of the Judiciary. Besides, the forcible sterilisation of thousands, in one of the worst exhibitions of Sanjay Gandhi's 'extra-constitutional authority' in his mother's government. In 1976, I worked with the news magazine Himmat in Mumbai, which resisted Mrs Gandhi's authoritarian rule. (Many small papers similarly put up a valiant fight.) Himmat was first required to submit to 'self-censorship', then to pre-censorship when the authorities claimed 'violations', and finally pressure was mounted on the printing press, till it succumbed and refused to print Himmat. Chief Editor Rajmohan Gandhi, the grandson of Mahatma Gandhi, put out an appeal for funds to buy a small printing press so that Himmat could continue publication. It was so exciting to see the money orders – worth Rs 10, Rs 5, even Re 1 – come in, demonstrating a will to freedom. Finally, with around Rs 60,000 in, Himmat could buy its own press. Not long after that, Mrs Gandhi announced elections, to be held in March 1977. It is one of those supreme ironies of politics that 'dictator' Indira announced polls when she need not have done it. There were no external pressures like sanctions (though there were critical voices in the West). Most importantly, the elections held were free and fair – or the Congress would not have been routed all over North India. Later she also admitted to 'excesses' during the regime. Mrs Gandhi pressed ahead with polls even in the face of Sanjay's opposition. Then Haryana Chief Minister Bansi Lal, a member of Sanjay's core team, had stated publicly: 'Get rid of this election nonsense. Just make our sister (Mrs Gandhi) President for life, and there is no need to do anything else.' The debate continues to this day as to why Mrs Gandhi called for elections (which finally led to the lifting of the Emergency)? Was it because she was more democrat Nehru's daughter than Sanjay Gandhi's mother, as some would like to believe? Had Nehru and the freedom movement profoundly influenced her thinking in the early years? Or did she want to win back the approval of her friends in the Western world whom she had antagonised? Or was it a 'spiritual' impulse which goaded her, given J Krishnamurti's influence on her? Or, and this is more likely, did she hope to legitimise, nationally and internationally, Sanjay as her successor through elections, allowing him more time to work under her – and build a new team around him? Mrs Gandhi may have also calculated that elections would restore her weakening grip over the government. She was worried about the power Sanjay had come to wield, often going above her head and taking decisions on his own. He and his coterie wanted to move towards a Presidential form of government – and had even got four state Assemblies to pass resolutions to set up a new Constituent Assembly. As for Opposition leaders, she had managed to soften some of them in 1976 – and thought she would win. The balance of advantage, she would have calculated, lay in going for elections in early 1977. She had not foreseen Opposition leaders getting together to form a unified Janata Party within a few days of being released. Or on Babu Jagjivan Ram quitting the Congress soon thereafter, which hampered her efforts to induct new faces. Whether as Durga, dictator, or displayer of democratic sensibilities, Indira Gandhi understood the nature of power – and how to capture it at any cost. Successive generations of politicians across party lines studied and emulated her model of saam, daam, dand, bhed (using any means necessary to meet one's goals) – which de-institutionalised politics as also de-ideoligised it. Indira Gandhi (and Narendra Modi) have shown that the more powerful and popular a prime minister, the greater the likelihood of power getting concentrated in his or her hands and of democratic institutions coming under stress. The weaker the leader – as seen in coalition governments – the more the chances of safeguards against excesses of power. Neerja Chowdhury, Contributing Editor, The Indian Express, has covered the last 11 Lok Sabha elections. She is the author of How Prime Ministers Decide
Miami Herald
17-06-2025
- General
- Miami Herald
US Aircraft Carrier USS George Washington Counters China Navy Presence
Nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS George Washington is on patrol in the western Pacific, where China has been expanding its naval presence. Newsweek has contacted the Chinese defense and foreign ministries for comment by email. The George Washington is one of the U.S. Navy vessels homeported in Japan. The aircraft carrier, which is equipped with F-35C stealth fighter jets, returned to Yokosuka naval base near Tokyo in November 2024 after undergoing maintenance and upgrades in Virginia. The George Washington's first patrol since returning to Japan comes as two Chinese aircraft carriers were deployed simultaneously to the wider western Pacific for the first time earlier in June, marking a major milestone in China's efforts to challenge U.S. naval dominance. Another U.S. aircraft carrier, USS Nimitz, has been redeployed to the Middle East from the western Pacific amid the ongoing Iran-Israel conflict. This leaves the George Washington as the only U.S. aircraft carrier currently positioned to help keep China in check as of Monday. Officially released photos show the George Washington and its carrier strike group transiting the Philippine Sea on Monday. The U.S. Navy said the aircraft carrier is currently on patrol in the Seventh Fleet's operating area, which covers the western Pacific and Indian Oceans. The Philippine Sea lies east of the First Island Chain-a defensive line formed by Japan, Taiwan and the Philippines as part of a U.S. containment strategy aimed at restricting the Chinese navy-the world's largest by hull count-in the western Pacific in the event of war. In addition to the George Washington, which left its home port on June 10, the carrier strike group includes two other warships-the cruiser USS Robert Smalls and the destroyer USS Shoup. It remains unclear whether the George Washington will also be sent to the Middle East, should the situation there worsen. The Nimitz is expected to relieve its sister ship, USS Carl Vinson, in the region, allowing the latter to return home, U.S. Naval Institute News reported. The Chinese aircraft carriers CNS Liaoning and CNS Shandong remained underway in waters east of the Philippines as of Monday, each leading a naval task group and transiting westward, according to a map provided by Japan's Defense Ministry. The U.S. Navy said on Tuesday: "George Washington is the U.S. Navy's premier forward-deployed aircraft carrier, a long-standing symbol of the United States' commitment to maintaining a free and open Indo-Pacific region, while operating alongside allies and partners across the U.S. Navy's largest numbered fleet." U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth's said at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore on May 31: "China seeks to become a hegemonic power in Asia. No doubt. It hopes to dominate and control too many parts of this vibrant and vital region. Through its massive military build-up and growing willingness to use military force to achieve its goals…China has demonstrated that it wants to fundamentally alter the region's status quo." It remains to be seen whether USS America-a U.S. amphibious assault ship equipped with F-35B stealth fighter jets-will depart the South Pacific for the western Pacific to reinforce the U.S. naval presence in the region following the Nimitz's departure. Related Articles How Iran Could Retaliate Against US. Three Possible OptionsU.S. Tanker Aircraft Head to Middle East as Threat of Iran War RisesNuclear Bomb Map Shows Impact of US Weapons on IranIran Warns U.S. of "Painful Responses" Over Israel's Attacks 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Indian Express
08-06-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Tavleen Singh writes: Political poster boys
An unforeseen consequence of Operation Sindoor has been that South Asia's two poster boys of dynastic democracy surfaced and made fools of themselves. I speak of Bilawal Bhutto and Rahul Gandhi. They would not be considered political leaders at all if it were not for their illustrious surnames. As someone who believes dynastic succession should have ended when feudalism did, I watched the performance of these two political princes with real interest. The first performance came from Bilawal Bhutto, who made a speech on the banks of the Indus a day after India decided to suspend the Indus Water Treaty. In this speech, he threatened that either water would flow down the Indus or the 'blood of our enemies'. His Urdu remains bad, so he used melodrama to compensate and, in the manner of a crazed messiah, shrieked 'the Indus has always been ours, is ours, and will be ours'. This one speech was proof that not only was the heir to the mighty Bhutto dynasty linguistically challenged, but that he was politically challenged as well. But Pakistan's military rulers were clearly impressed with his performance and sent him off to Washington to convince people that it was Pakistan that was the victim of terrorism and that India's allegations were lies. It took Shashi Tharoor, who was also in Washington, one minute to demolish the narrative that Zulfikar Ali Bhutto's heir was trying to weave. Tharoor said he sympathised with Bilawal because his mother had been killed by jihadi terrorists, but he seemed to have forgotten Hillary Clinton's warning to Pakistan. If you breed vipers in your backyard, you cannot expect that they will only attack your neighbour. Pakistan's terrorists are home-bred. Last week came a performance from the heir to our own storied dynasty. Rahul has, since Operation Sindoor, made statements that have been applauded in Pakistan even by Hafiz Saeed. But last week, he outdid himself. In the manner of a schoolboy discussing a cricket match, and with a sneery grin on his face, he imitated Donald Trump having a conversation with our prime minister on the phone and saying 'Narendra, Surrender'. And then he mimicked Narendra Modi saying 'ji huzoor'. The point the Leader of the Opposition was trying to make was that when his grandmother was prime minister, the Seventh Fleet was sent by Richard Nixon to warn her that breaking up Pakistan would have consequences. And she had courageously remained fixed on the course that she had set. A dangerous analogy to evoke, because Indira Gandhi also ended up snatching defeat from the jaws of victory (to use that useful cliché) by signing the Simla Agreement. All the cards were in India's hands. There were more than 90,000 prisoners of war in the custody of the Indian Army, so she could have told Bhutto that there would be no agreement without a signed guarantee that the Kashmir issue would end now. Instead, the agreement has a feeble reference to Kashmir being decided bilaterally. Years later, I happened to learn from a close associate of Bhutto that he boasted afterwards that he had outdone her. What exactly was the point that Indira's grandson was trying to make? Was he trying to prove the debunked falsehood that Modi agreed to a ceasefire because of pressure from Trump? Was he trying to say that the war should have continued indefinitely? Or was he trying to say what Congress spokespersons have said in TV debates, which is that the war should have continued until Pakistan is broken up once more? This was never the objective of Operation Sindoor. It had the limited objective of destroying Pakistan's terrorist infrastructure and from all accounts this objective was achieved. To return, though, to the poster boys of dynastic democracy. Bilawal has lost his relevance in Pakistani politics and is now merely a spokesman for the military men who control the political chessboard. Rahul remains relevant because he is fully in control of our oldest political party. And the only national party, we have other than the BJP. We have no choice but to take what he says seriously, which is why it is worrying that he continues to sound like a schoolboy with a special grudge against Modi for daring to usurp India, which he considers his birthright to rule since his family once did. It is this idea that India remains the private property of the Dynasty that is destroying the Congress Party. If you have been following recent events, you would have noticed that the Congress leaders in the parliamentary delegations have done an extremely good job. The only people who have let the party down are those who constitute the coterie around our own poster boy of dynastic democracy. It could be time for those who want Congress to survive and thrive to come together and urge the Dynasty's heirs to consider playing the role that the Chairman Emeritus plays in companies. If they agree, they can continue to have relevance in the family firm, but can move away from playing an active role. How long does the Congress Party want to pretend that Rahul is its prime minister-in-waiting when he has been unable to win a single Lok Sabha election for the party? One way or another dynastic democracy is a bad idea. And it is abundantly obvious that India's voters saw this before our political leaders have.
Mint
05-06-2025
- Politics
- Mint
‘Normal in a democracy': Shashi Tharoor on Rahul Gandhi's criticism of PM Modi over Trump mediation claims
Congress MP Shashi Tharoor has responded to Rahul Gandhi's remark that Prime Minister Modi was scared with just one phone call by US President Donald Trump by saying that criticism was 'normal' in democracy. 'In a democracy, and this is normal, parties will contend, criticism will be expressed, demands will be made, points of view will be laid out. We are not here on a party political mission,' said Tharoor who is part of all-party delegation traveling abroad as part of the government's diplomatic outreach to highlight India's stand on terrorism following Operation Sindoor. Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi on Tuesday alleged Prime Minister Narendra Modi surrendered after a call from US President Donald Trump during the India-Pakistan military conflict. Addressing a party convention in Bhopal, he said the then Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi, didn't budge in the 1971 war despite the US sending its Seventh Fleet. "A call came from Trump and Narendra ji immediately surrendered - history is a witness, this is the character of BJP-RSS, they always bow down," Rahul stated after launching the Congress' 'Sangthan Srijan Abhiyan' here in the presence of Congress leaders and workers. Tharoor when asked to comment on Rahul Gandhi's remarks said, 'we are here as representatives of a united India. I often point out to my interlocuters that we have five political parties amongst my seven MPs." In a democracy, and this is normal, parties will contend, criticism will be expressed, demands will be made. As many as 26 people were killed and several others injured in the terrorist attack in Jammu and Kashmir's Pahalgam on 22 April. Indian Armed Forces launched Operation Sindoor on May 7, targeting terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir. "We have three religions, we have got seven states... it's an incredible cross section reflective of India's diversity. There is an old saying that our political differences stop at the edge of the border. Once you cross the border, you are an Indian and your other allegiances come second," Tharoor said. The delegation led by Tharoor arrived in the US on Wednesday. The delegation includes Shambhavi Chaudhary (Lok Janshakti Party), Sarfaraz Ahmed (Jharkhand Mukti Morcha), G M Harish Balayogi (Telugu Desam Party), Shashank Mani Tripathi, Tejaswi Surya, Bhubaneswar Kalita (all from BJP), Mallikarjun Devda (Shiv Sena), former Indian Ambassador to the US Taranjit Singh Sandhu, and Shiv Sena MP Milind Deora. Earlier, the all-party met Bipartisan co-chairs Ro Khanna and Rich McCormick, as well as vice co-chairs Andy Barr and Marc Veasey, on Wednesday. During the meeting, the parliamentary delegation briefed the Caucus members on the cross-border terrorism faced by India and India's strong and resolute stance against terrorism. The delegation also held a meeting with the US House Foreign Affairs Committee leadership in Washington. DC. HFAC Chairman Brian Mast, Ranking Member of the committee, Gregory Meeks, South and Central Asia Subcommittee Chair Bill Huizenga, Ranking members - Sydney Kamlager-Dove and Ami Bera, Subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific Chair, Young Kim.
NDTV
04-06-2025
- Business
- NDTV
"Any Narrative...": BJP MP On Rahul Gandhi's "Narendra Surrender" Remark
Quick Read Summary is AI generated, newsroom reviewed. BJP MP Aparajita Sarangi stated that internal political narratives lack global significance, responding to Rahul Gandhi's criticism of PM Modi. She highlighted the success of a multi-party delegation promoting India's anti-terror stance. New Delhi: Any political narrative created within India's borders does not carry weight on the global stage, BJP MP Aparajita Sarangi told NDTV when asked about Congress leader Rahul Gandhi's "surrender" swipe at Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Ms Sarangi has returned after a five-nation tour as part of an Indian delegation to expose Pakistan's link to terror activities in India and articulate New Delhi's position after the Pahalgam terror attack and India's response, Operation Sindoor. Asked about Mr Gandhi's jab at the Prime Minister, which has drawn a sharp response from the BJP, Ms Sarangi said, "The Congress party had its members in this delegation, and they too spoke in one voice on India's firm stance against terrorism. When we were abroad, we all echoed the same message. Any narrative being created within India's borders doesn't hold weight in the global arena." Ms Sarangi said the 14-day diplomatic outreach was a resounding success that showcased India's resolve to fight against terror and its global standing. "After fourteen days, it's a great feeling to be back. This visit was highly successful and deeply meaningful," he said. Ms Sarangi was part of the delegation led by JDU MP Sanjay Jha that visited Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Singapore, and Malaysia. The others on the delegation were BJP's Brij Lal, Pradan Baruah and Hemang Joshi, Trinamool's Abhishek Banerjee, CPM's John Brittas, Congress's Salman Khurshid and former diplomat Mohan Kumar. "We spent considerable time talking to different segments of the population, clearly communicating India's stand on cross-border terrorism. India does not want violence within its boundaries, and we do not want peace to be disrupted," Ms Sarangi said. She said the delegation was not aligned with any party and represented India. "This was not a BJP or NDA delegation, it was a multi-party mission. We were accepted, deliberated with, and acknowledged by all the nations we visited. Most of these countries extended unconditional support to India's cause," she added. Ms Sarangi also praised their reception by the five nations they visited. "Each country has its own set of internal issues, yet they were civil, courteous, and deeply respectful toward us." Mr Gandhi, Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha, has targeted the Prime Minister, alleging that the US brokered the ceasefire between India and Pakistan. "If slight pressure is put on them, they run away out of fear. When Trump called Modi ji-'Modi ji kya kar rahe ho, Narender-Surrender and with 'ji hazooor', Narender ji followed Trump. In the 1971 war, Seventh Fleet (came from the US), India Gandhi said I will do whatever I have to do. This is the difference. This is their character; all of them are like this. Since the Independence movement, they have this habit of writing letters of surrender," Rahul Gandhi said. While the Donald Trump administration has claimed credit for the ceasefire between India and Pakistan -- and Islamabad has thanked Washington, DC too -- New Delhi has maintained that the US role was restricted to expressing concern. Dr Jaishankar has said US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance had reached out. "We made one thing very clear to everybody who spoke to us, not just the United States but to everyone, saying if the Pakistanis want to stop fighting, they need to tell us. We need to hear it from them. Their general has to call up our general and say this. And that is what happened," he said. Responding to Mr Gandhi's remarks, BJP spokesperson Shehzad Poonawalla said, "Rahul Gandhi has once again understood that the meaning of LoP is the leader of Pakistani propaganda. The kind of propaganda that even Pakistan was not able to do, he is doing." "Rahul Gandhi, believe in what the DGMO said, what the Ministry of External Affairs said ... If not them, at least believe in Shashi (Tharoor), Manish (Tewari) and Salman (Khurshid). They have said that no mediation happened, India did not call up (Pakistan), their DGMO reached out to India," he said.
