Magazine

Raghuram Rajan: You have to think on these two now. You cannot wait for the effects to come out because you are fighting the virus on one side and the whole country is in lockdown on the other side. Surely people have to provide food. The homes have to see the status of the migrants who have left, they need shelter, medical facilities. This needs to be done all at once.

I think it has to be set priorities. Our capacity and resources are both limited. Our financial resources are very limited compared to the West. We have to decide how to handle both the fight against the virus and the economy simultaneously. If we open now, then it will be like that we have come out of bed from illness.

The first thing is to keep people healthy and alive. Food is very important for this. There are places where PDS has not reached. Amartya Sen, Abhijeet Banerjee and I talked about the temporary ration card while talking about this subject but you have to see this epidemic as an extraordinary situation.

We need to think out of the box for what is needed. Decisions have to be made keeping in mind all budgetary limitations. We do not have many resources.

Rahul Gandhi: What do you think about the agricultural sector and the workers? What do migrant laborers think about? What should be done about their financial status?

Raghuram Rajan: In this case, direct benefit transfer is the way right now. Let us think about all the arrangements by which we reach the poor. We adopt many methods in widow pension and MNREGA itself. We have to see that these are the people who do not have employment, who do not have the means to livelihood and we will help them for the next three-four months as long as this crisis is there.

But, in terms of priorities, it would be most beneficial to keep people alive and not force them to go out in the midst of a lockdown in protest or in search of work. We have to find ways through which we can also reach cash to maximum people and also provide them food through PDS.

Rahul Gandhi: Dr. Rajan, how much will it cost to help the poor, to directly deliver cash to the poorest?

Raghuram Rajan: About 65,000 crores. Our GDP is 200 lakh crore, removing 65,000 crore from it is not a huge amount. We can do this. If this saves the lives of the poor, then we must do this.

Rahul Gandhi: India is in a difficult situation right now, but after the Kovid epidemic, can India have any major strategic advantage? Will there be some change in the world that India can take advantage of? How do you think the world will change?

Raghuram Rajan: Such situations rarely bring good conditions for a country. Nevertheless, there are some ways in which countries can benefit. I believe that after coming out of this crisis, the global economy needs to think in a whole new way.

If there is any chance for India, that is how we communicate? In this dialogue, we should think more than a leader because it is not a matter between two opposing parties, but India is such a big country that we should be heard well in the global economy.

In such a situation, India can find opportunities in industries, it can find opportunities in its supply chain, but the most important thing is that we should turn the dialogue in a direction that involves more countries, a multi-polar global system and not a bipolar system.

Rahul Gandhi: Don't you think there is a crisis of centralization? The power has become so centralized that the negotiations have almost stopped. Dialogue and communication solve many problems, but is this communication breaking due to some reasons?

Raghuram Rajan: I believe that decentralization is important not only for exposing local information but also for empowering people. It is the situation all over the world that decisions are being made elsewhere.

I have one vote to choose someone remote. I may have panchayat, may be the state government but there is a feeling among people that their voice is not heard in any case. In such a situation, they become victims of different powers.

I will ask you the same question. The impact of the Panchayati Raj that Rajiv Gandhi brought and how beneficial it proved to be.

Rahul Gandhi: It had a tremendous impact, but we have to say with regret that it is now decreasing. We are coming back from the progress that was made on the Panchayati Raj front and we are going in a district based system. If you look at the South Indian state, there is good work happening on this front, decentralization of the systems is taking place, but the centralization of power is happening in the North Indian states and the powers of the panchayats and land organizations are decreasing.

The more people the decisions are taken together, the more able they will be to monitor the decisions. I believe this is an experiment that should be done.

But why is this happening globally? What do you think is the reason that centralization is happening on such a large scale and the dialogue is ending? Do you think there is something at the center or there are many reasons behind it?

Raghuram Rajan: I believe that there is a reason behind this and that is the global market. It has become such a belief that if the markets are being globalized, then the firms participating in it also apply the same rules everywhere, they want the same system everywhere, they want the same type of government, because it gives them confidence Increases.

Significant dialogue between former National President of the Indian National Congress, Rahul Gandhi and former Governor of Reserve Bank of India, Raghuram Rajan on the Corona epidemic, India's Modi government's claims to deal with it and the future economic challenges arising out of it.

Rahul Gandhi: Hello.

Raghuram Rajan: Good morning, how are you?

Rahul Gandhi: I'm good, nice to see you.

Raghuram Rajan: Me too.

Rahul Gandhi: In the era of Corona virus, there are a lot of questions in the mind of the people, what is happening, what is going to happen, especially with regard to the economy. I thought of an interesting way to answer these questions, to talk to you about it so that I as well as the common people can know what you think about all this?

Raghuram Rajan: Thanks, for talking to me and for this dialogue. I believe that at this critical time, as much information as possible can be obtained on this issue and it should be conveyed to the people as much as possible.

Rahul Gandhi: What I think is a big issue right now is how do we open the economy? What are the parts of the economy that you think are very important to open and what should be the way to open them?

Raghuram Rajan: This is an important question because as we try to reverse the curve of infection and prevent congestion in hospitals and medical facilities, we need to think about resuming people's livelihood Have to start. It is very easy to put a lockdown in the long run, but obviously it is not good for the economy.

You do not have a fixed security but you can start opening up areas that have relatively few cases, with the thought and policy that you will screen people as effectively as possible and when the case comes up you We will try to stop him and make sure that all the arrangements are in place to stop it.

It should have a sequence. First of all, we have to identify places where distance can be maintained, and this should not only apply to work places, but also to and from work. Transport structure has to be seen. Do people have personal vehicles? They have bicycles or scooters or cars. Will have to see all this. Or people come to work from public transport. How will you ensure distancing in public transport?

It will take a lot of work and hard work to make all this arrangement. At the same time, it has to be ensured that the workplace is relatively safe. Along with this, it has to be seen that if there are no accidental cases coming up accidentally, then how fast we can isolate people without implementing the third or fourth lowdown. If this happens, there will be a crisis.

Rahul Gandhi: Many people say that if we end the lockdown in a phased manner. If we open now and are forced to lockdown again. If this happens, it will be very dangerous for the economy because it will completely destroy trust. Do you agree with this?

Raghuram Rajan: Yes, I think it is right to think. Talking about the second lockdown, it means that we were not fully successful in the first time. This raises the question that if opened this time, then there will be no need for a third lockdown and this will bring credibility.

With this I would like to say that we talk about 100 percent success. That is, there should be no case anywhere. That is difficult to achieve at the moment. In such a situation, what we can do is to start removing the lockdown and isolate it wherever the case appears.

Rahul Gandhi: But in this whole arrangement it would be very important to know where there is more infection? And testing is the only way for this. At the moment there is a feeling in India that our testing capacity is limited. In a large country, our testing capacity is limited compared to the US and European countries. How do you see a small number of tests taking place?

Raghuram Rajan: Good question. Take the example of America. There are up to one and a half lakh tests a day, but experts there, especially experts in infected diseases, believe that this capacity needs to be tripled, that is, if there are 5 lakh tests per day, then you think about opening the economy. Some are talking about testing up to 10 lakhs.

Given India's population, we should test it four times. If you want to reach America's level, then we have to do 20 lakh tests everyday but we are only able to do 25-30 thousand tests now.

Rahul Gandhi: See now, the effect of the virus is there and after some time the economy will have an impact on the people. It will be a setback that is going to happen in the next two months. How can you balance the fight with the virus and its effects over the next 3-4 months?

Raghuram Rajan: You have to think on these two now. You cannot wait for the effects to come out because you are fighting the virus on one side and the whole country is in lockdown on the other side. Surely people have to provide food. The homes have to see the status of the migrants who have left, they need shelter, medical facilities. This needs to be done all at once.

Rahul Gandhi's conversation with Raghuram Rajan on the corona virus and its economic impact, Episode - 2

The Solicitor General of the Government of India says that the country is in crisis, so "shops of professional PILs should be closed".

He said this through teleconferencing in front of the Supreme Court justices Nageswara Rao and Deepak Gupta.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta called the petitioners 'professional shopkeepers of public interest'. He objected to the petition being accepted for hearing. The court has given the central government seven April time to file its reply.

What was the petition? The petition was that the government was forced to migrate from the cities, giving financial assistance to the poor where they are. Former IAS officer Harsh Mander, advocate Anjali Bhardwaj and social activist Swami Agnivesh, who filed the petition, said the government had not taken adequate steps for the poor.

The Solicitor General had appeared as the representative of the government, so what he has said is the government's stand. One basic thing the government is saying is that this petition should be dismissed because there is a crisis on the country right now.

Corona virus infection started in China in November last year. China says that since then, the corona virus has killed 3,300 people. Now the corona virus infection has spread all over the world. Even more deaths have occurred in Italy, Spain and America than in China. There are all-round questions on the death toll in China.

It is being said that the statistics of death and destruction from Corona are being given by the Chinese administration, they cannot be trusted.

BBC News's China correspondent Robin Brant says on China's data, "The world has been skeptical of the data provided by the Chinese government. China's record in this case is very poor. These data are not incomplete but are designed intentionally. The Communist Party government here often works according to its goal. If he does not reach his target, then he hides the truth. Avoiding failures. In such a situation, the credibility of the Chinese government in terms of statistics has been doubtful. China has been refraining from showing actual growth even with GDP data.''

"There are similar doubts on the statistics of corona virus deaths and infections in China," says Brant. It was delayed by three weeks in release and delayed even after the infection spread. The number mentioned cannot be easily trusted. Just days after the infection spread, officials in China's Hubei province said they had not counted cases of corona virus infection that had no apparent symptoms. One more question is arising that was there really no case of corona virus infection outside Hubey province of China? ''

The US also says that correct information was not given to China regarding the Corona virus. The Trump administration is alleging that China did not allow information about the Corona virus to come out. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that China needs transparency and correct information to fight the Corona pandemic. Pompeo said that China is now pretending to send medical supplies to show itself well.

The Citizenship Amendment Act in India is facing protests across the country. As a result, India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah are repeatedly making false claims in favor of the Act.

On Saturday, Home Minister Amit Shah said during a rally in Hubli, Karnataka, "In Afghanistan, the effigy of Buddha was fired from a cannon. He (Hindu-Sikh) was not given the right to contest elections there (Afghanistan-Pakistan), was not given health facilities, did not arrange education for him. All the refugees who were Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists and Christians came to seek refuge in India.

In fact, in advocating for the Citizenship Amendment Act, Amit Shah was explaining how Sikhs, Hindu refugees from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh are being persecuted in their country and are not being given fundamental rights.

This new law talks about granting citizenship to non-Muslim communities from neighboring Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh. People are opposing this provision of the Act.

Amit Shah claimed that minorities in Pakistan and Afghanistan cannot contest elections? Is Amit Shah's claim correct? Are minorities in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh not allowed to contest elections or vote?

To find out, the BBC tried to understand the electoral rights of minorities in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh. At the same time, it was investigated that what rights have been given to them in the electoral process at the present time.

Electoral rights of minorities in Pakistan

According to Article 51 (2A) of the Constitution of Pakistan, 10 seats in the National Assembly, the lower house of the Parliament of Pakistan, are reserved for minorities. In addition, reservation has been given for 23 seats in the assembly of four provinces.

Pakistan has a total of 342 seats and out of which 272 seats are directly elected by the public and send their representatives. 10 seats are reserved for minorities and 60 seats are reserved for women.

There are two ways for minorities to reach Parliament:

These reserved 10 seats are divided by political parties based on how many seats they have won out of 272. The party itself decides the minority candidates on these seats and sends them to Parliament.

Another option is that any minority can contest any seat. In such a situation, his victory will be based on the votes received directly from the public.

Any minority is free to vote for any candidate contesting from their constituency. That is, the right to vote is equal for all.

After independence, the constitution of Pakistan was made in 1956, then it was repealed and the second constitution came in 1958 and it was also repealed and the third constitution was made in 1973 which is still valid. This constitution talks about giving equal rights to minorities in Pakistan.

That is, not only are seats reserved for minorities in Pakistan, they can also contest from other seats.

In the 2018 elections Mahesh Malani, Hariram Kishwari Lal and Gyan Chand Asrani contested from parliamentary and un-reserved seats of assembly from Sindh province and reached Parliament.

What are the electoral rights of Hindu-Sikhs in Afghanistan?

Now talk about Afghanistan. Since 1988, Afghanistan has been the victim of civil war and Taliban violence. The location of the extremist organization al-Qaeda also remained in Afghanistan. In 2002, an interim government was formed and Hamid Karzai became the President. After this, in the elections of 2005, the representatives of the lower house and upper house of the country elected and the parliament of Afghanistan became stronger.

What is the population of Afghanistan? Its exact official data does not exist because the census could not be done here after the 70s. But according to the World Bank, the population here is 3.7 crore.

At the same time, according to the report of the US Department of Justice, in which the number of Hindu-Sikh minorities here are just between 1000 and 1500.

There are 249 seats in the lower house of Afghanistan, ie, where the public directly elects representatives. Minorities have the freedom to contest elections here. But according to the rules, at least 5000 people had to show their support while naming in the parliamentary elections in Afghanistan.

These rules were the same for all but it made it difficult for the minority community to send their representative to the Parliament. Ashraf Ghani came to power in 2014 and has reserved a seat in the lower house, given the equation of Hindu-Sikh minorities.

At this time, Narinder Singh Khalsa MP is on this seat. In addition, a seat in the Upper House of Afghanistan is reserved for religious minorities. Right now, Anarkali Kaur Honyar is the Member of Parliament in this House. These names are decided by the minority community, which are sent directly to Parliament by the President.

Apart from this, any minority can vote for the candidate of his / her constituency. Also, minorities can contest elections from any seat, provided they get the support of five thousand people for themselves.

The BBC spoke to Afghan MP Narinder Singh Khalsa and wanted to know how the minority Sikh-Hindus of Afghanistan have electoral rights?

He said, "Minorities have the freedom to contest elections and also have the freedom to vote. There was never a ban, but in the last thirty years, due to the violence of Taliban, there was a rapid migration and our numbers kept decreasing. Four years ago we got a reserve seat because we could not muster five thousand support. And the matter was heard. We have problems with the Taliban, not the government. Even today, no Hindu-Sikh, whether I vote or my favorite candidate, there is no restriction on the voters. If we gain support, then we can contest elections in more than one seat. ''

The BBC Pashto journalist based in London, Emael Pasharli, says that "a stable government is being formed in the country since 2005". But minorities were never denied the right to vote or contest elections. In the last three decades, not only Hindu-Sikhs, but also those who believe in other religious beliefs have migrated. Civil war has been the reason for this. ''

Any minority can contest elections in Bangladesh

In the parliamentary elections in Bangladesh, seats have not been reserved for any minority community, but only 50 seats have been reserved for women.

Bangladesh Parliament has 350 seats out of which 50 seats are reserved for women. In the 2018 parliamentary elections, out of 79 minority candidates, 18 candidates had reached Parliament.

Earlier, there were similar minority MPs in the 10th Parliament of Bangladesh. According to the local newspaper Dhaka Tribune, 14 MPs in the 9th Parliament of Bangladesh were from the minority community, while eight MPs in the Eighth Parliament were in the minority.

That is, minorities have been given equal electoral rights in Bangladesh politics.

How is reservation in the Indian Parliament different from Pakistan and Afghanistan?

Article 334 (a) of the Constitution of India provides for reservation for Scheduled Castes (Hindus) and Scheduled Tribes (Hindus) in the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies. Presently, this is the only reservation in the Lok Sabha and the State Legislative Assembly in which seats are reserved for Scheduled Castes (Hindus) and Scheduled Tribes (Hindus). There are no seats reserved for minorities in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies in India.

According to the 1950 notification of the President of India, only Hindu castes would be scheduled castes.

Out of 543 Lok Sabha seats, 79 are reserved for Scheduled Castes (Hindu) and 41 seats for Scheduled Tribes (Hindu). At the same time, out of 3,961 seats in the assemblies, 543 seats are reserved for Scheduled Castes (Hindu) and 527 seats for Scheduled Tribes (Hindus). Everyone votes in these seats, but only the SC or ST candidates.

A reserved seat in India means that the candidate on this seat will be from the scheduled class. All political parties will give tickets to such candidates but their election will be based on the vote of the people.

India does not have a seat reserved for minorities like Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The Modi government abolished two seats reserved for Anglo-Indians in the Lok Sabha, the lower house of Parliament, last year.

Amit Shah claims that minorities cannot contest elections in Pakistan and Afghanistan? His claim is completely untrue.

In the midst of protests across India on Wednesday, 144 petitions related to the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) were heard in the Supreme Court, after which the court said that the CAA cannot be stayed without hearing.

141 petitions were filed against the CAA in court, while three in its favor.

The Supreme Court has said that if they make a constitutional bench, then the same bench will give an interim order.

There is uneasiness and protest among the people about this law In view of that, why did the Supreme Court not stay this law?

In this regard, Faizan Mustafa, constitutional expert and vice-chancellor of Nalasar Law University, Hyderabad, said that it would have been better to see the chaos in the country if the government itself would have told the court that we do not mind that you stay on it Put it, but the government opposed the stay, so the Supreme Court did not stay it.

Faizan Mustafa said, "If the government had agreed to stay on its own today, then all the protests and protests would have ended today."

But the question is, why would the government stand up for its stay? Faizan Mustafa says, "Stay would mean that it will not be implemented until the court decides on hearing it."

He adds, "In cases where the interpretation of the constitution is a matter, stay is rarely found."

At the same time, law expert Alok Prasanna says that what was said in the court today should not be taken to mean that the government is relieved and those who petitioned against the law have been disappointed.

He said, "Nothing has been done yet. The government will have to reply in four weeks."

"The 60 petitions that were filed earlier were against the CAA. Later 80 petitions were filed, many against NPR and some to prevent the CAA from coming into force in Assam. The case has now grown a bit. Therefore, the government's response should also come on other issues raised.

According to Alok Prasanna, no one should be happy or disappointed by today's statement of the court.

He says, "If anyone expected relief today, it was wrong to think like that. The matter has just started.

On the court's decision to dispose of the petitions filed by Assam, Alok Prasanna says, "There is no need to make a deep sense of it. The resentment of the people of Assam is that the CAA deadline is 2014 Which is against the Assam Accord, where the time limit has been kept 1971.''

Experts say that NRC is applicable in Assam, therefore, the separate hearing of its petitions is the right decision.

These petitions have been filed by Congress leaders Jairam Ramesh, Mahua Moitra of Trinamool Congress, Asaduddin Owaisi and many others.

On 9 January, the court expressed displeasure over the violent incidents taking place during the protest against the citizenship law, saying that all the petitions related to the case would be heard only when the violent incidents ceased.

The three-member bench headed by Chief Justice SA Bobde and Justice S Abdul Nazeer and Justice Sanjeev Khanna on these petitions issued notice to the Central Government during the hearing on January 9 and sought reply.

The petitioners have urged the repeal of this law against the basic spirit of the constitution and as divisive.

A drone attack occurred outside Baghdad Airport in the early hours of 3 January. Initial media reports did not see it being linked to any major action. But when the truth came out that Qasim Sulemani, one of Iran's top commanders, was among the dead, it caused panic in the entire Middle East.

After this, US President Donald Trump made it clear by tweeting that Qasim Suleimani had been killed in US action which the US considered 'militant'. Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the commander of the Iran-backed militia Qataib Hizbollah, was also killed in the action.

Sulaimani was the head of Iran's Al-Quds Force. Iran's security force is known for its operations outside the country. It was declared a terrorist organization by America.

After this action, tensions in Iran and America reached their peak and they have carried out several missile attacks on the US military base in Iraq, but no American soldiers have been killed in these attacks so far.

The US did not retaliate after the Iranian missile attacks. America's non-action was seen to be linked to many things, the biggest reason being the US general elections due this year.

Experts believe that America will not want to go to war in the election year, but if Iran goes to war then its economy will be destroyed. But the biggest question that arises is whether Iran can influence US elections?

On this, Chintamani Mahapatra, Professor at the Center for Canada, USA and Latin American Studies of Jawaharlal Nehru University, says that the issues of the US presidential election are similar to the elections of other countries. America's economic, social status and foreign policy have a huge impact on this election.

Professor Chintamani Mahapatra says, "In the 2020 presidential elections, Trump will benefit the administration on economic policy, employment and inflation. On the other hand there are social issues. How is social stability and the situation of minorities, how much racism dominates. It Everyone also affects the elections.

If we look at the history of America, then the Presidents have enjoyed the benefit of war or any major action during the presidential elections.

The then President Barack Obama got the benefit of the killing of Al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden. George Bush Jr. benefited from his second term when he entered Afghanistan. When he went to Afghanistan, there was a message that he is a very strong leader.

During the Second World War, due to the way Franklin D. Roosevelt fought the war, he became the President of America for three consecutive times.

Will Donald Trump benefit from elections in war with Iran? On this question, Professor Chintamani Mahapatra says that foreign and defense policy does not have much impact on elections, but if there is a fight in the time of elections and it involves American soldiers then the issue will come out in the presidential debate. People's support in America's fight against terrorism is supported.

He says, "President Trump will not benefit from America's attack on Iran because political divisions have started in the United States on this issue. The Democratic Party has denied Trump's policy and is non-binding in the House of Representatives." A proposal has been brought which aims to curb the war powers of the President and seek the permission of Congress before starting the war. ''

"But there is a fear in the general public of America that what action will be taken by Iran after Qasim Suleimani is killed? On the other hand, if we look at the European Union countries (Germany, France), they do not support Trump's Iran policy. They want the nuclear deal to remain with Iran. In this perspective, voters who are politically aware and understand international issues, those voters Will vote against Onald Trump. ''

After the death of Qasim Suleimani, Iran has attacked the US airbase several times in Iraq, but the US has not retaliated.

Reports from the Pentagon said that the decision to kill General Suleimani was taken on the spot. Donald Trump has been against the war in the Middle East. During his election campaign for 2015-16, he has said that fighting the war will waste money.

Professor Mukhtar Khan of the University of Delaware, USA, says that one benefit to Donald Trump after killing General Suleimani is that the case of impeachment against him is not getting TV coverage.

He says, "Now the focus of the TV is only on Iran. With this the acceptance of Donald Trump in the Republican Party has gone up to 95%. However, protests in Iran have intensified after the Ukrainian plane was killed. The reason is that Iran may be forced to enter into a new agreement with America. It will be like a victory for America if a stronger agreement than the previous nuclear agreement is reached this time.

"If this agreement is not even done, Trump will try to take advantage of it in the election campaign. He will say that Obama killed Laden but he has killed both Sulemani and Baghdadi. The class that is very concerned about security, say that Trump has a lot to offer. ''

At the same time, Professor Mohapatra says that like Iran, America does not want war because it will not benefit it in elections.

He says, "If an American soldier was killed in Iran's action, the pressure of action would have increased on him and it would also have an impact in American politics that his soldiers were killed because of Trump, so Trump is afraid that Iran will be able to control the circumstances Do not spoil it so that the elections are not affected.

America's war in Iraq and Afghanistan is still going on. The United States believed that its war in Iraq would end in four-five weeks, but in 17 years an estimated two and a half trillion dollars have been spent in it. At the same time, the US debt is 21 trillion dollars, there is a debt on it, but the economic condition of America is quite good.

Professor Muktadar Khan says that only 25 percent of Americans want a war with Iran, while 75 percent want the issue to be resolved through diplomacy or economic sanctions.

He says, "Apart from spending money, on the other hand, America's fear is that Iran will attack back if there is war and could attack Saudi Arabia or UAE. They can destroy their oil wells. Because of this The global economy will come to a standstill. America has one year of oil while Japan and European countries have only one week of oil. If oil exports stop, it will destroy many economies. ''

"At the same time, Iran has a number of militia forces like Hezbollah that can strengthen Iran. It can be understood by this example that if a suicide bomber of these militia army blows himself up in an embassy then by suicide attack Iran will benefit.

Trump of Republican supporters still remains cherished and wants to see him again in the electoral fray. On the other hand, the voting percentage in America is very low as compared to other democratic countries.

Professor Muktadar Khan says that Trump's 43-45% vote is not taking the name of moving, while the opposition is hovering at 53%, out of the total number of people who can vote in the country, only 60% are registered to vote. Only 60 percent of the registered voters vote. If they get half the votes, then a person can become the President of the United States.

He says, "Trump's election result depends on the voting percentage. Democrats will lose Trump if they find a candidate who inspires people to vote. Historically, Conservatives or Republicans are big honest voters who consistently Votes but Democratic voters do not vote consistently. ''

On the other hand, the case of impeachment also does not seem to harm the Trump much in the elections. The impeachment case against Donald Trump is set to fall in the Senate because there is a Republican majority and he stands firmly with Trump. If Trump loses in the Senate, he will have to give up the seat but it is difficult to do so.

Muktadar Khan calls the process of impeachment an initiative of liberal Democrat leaders.

He says, "52-55 percent of Americans hate Trump and hardly hated any other leader. Democrats are doing this to motivate these people to vote. If Democrats don't go ahead on impeachment These voters are not motivated if they grow. Trump also keeps motivating his voters.

How strong will Trump get from a Democrat candidate? It will also decide on the Democrat candidate how he takes his policies to the public. On the other hand, it is not yet clear whether a leader from the Republican Party will challenge Trump.

If no one comes forward to challenge Trump, he will become the Republican candidate himself, being the current President. But the race for the US presidential election is very long and issues and circumstances change from moment to moment in the election process that lasts almost a year.

The impasse that began in Malaysia and India first over Kashmir and later NRC-CAA seems to be growing.

Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad had strongly criticized India for ending the special status of Jammu and Kashmir and the NRC-CAA.

After this, India almost banned palm oil imports from Malaysia in response. Malaysia has expressed concern about this attitude of India but Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad has once again said that even though his country has to suffer financial losses, he will continue to speak against 'wrong things'.

India is the largest importer of edible oil. According to the news agency Reuters, Indian businessmen have effectively stopped the import of refined palm oil from Malaysia since last week. Malaysia is the second largest palm oil producer and exporter in the world after Indonesia.

In recent times, Mahathir has fiercely targeted both India and Saudi Arabia. When India ended the special status of Jammu and Kashmir, Mahathir Mohammad said that India has attacked Kashmir and kept it in its possession.

Malaysia's palm oil refinery is going to suffer major damage by stopping India's imports. Mahathir has said that his government will come up with a solution.

Mahathir told reporters, "We are worried about this because India has been a big buyer of our palm oil. But on the other hand if something is going wrong then we need to be clear. We will call wrong as wrong. If we see the benefits and let them go wrong then many things will go in the wrong direction. Then we will also start doing wrong and will tolerate the rest. ''

According to Reuters, the palm oil delivery contract for India for the month of March has come down to 0.9%. The Indian government had informally ordered traders to stay away from Malaysia's palm oil purchases. Indian businessmen are now buying palm oil at a price of $ 10 more per tonne than Indonesia for Malaysia.

India's Foreign Ministry said on Thursday that the purchase of palm oil cannot be linked to any particular country. The Ministry of External Affairs had said that any kind of business depends on the relations of the two countries and on this basis, trade relations are also formed.

India was the biggest buyer of Malaysia's palm oil in 2019. In 2019, India bought 40.4 lakh tonnes of palm oil from Malaysia. Indian businessmen say that if the relations between the two countries do not improve, India's palm oil imports from Malaysia will fall below 1 million tonnes in 2020.

Malaysian officials say that this stance of India will cause heavy damage to Malaysia. Malaysia is trying to make up for the loss with Pakistan, the Philippines, Myanmar, Vietnam, Ethiopia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Algeria and Jordan.

But it is being said that the removal of the top importer is not easy to compensate. In such a situation, the Malaysian Trade Union Congress, which also includes the palm workers, has urged that the matter be resolved by negotiating with India.

The Malaysian Trade Union Congress has said in its statement, "We urge both governments to find a solution keeping aside private and diplomatic importance".

Malaysia's Ministry of Primary Industries, which works under the Ministry of External Affairs, has said that efforts are being made to talk to India to resolve the issue.

Mahathir Mohammad has been the Prime Minister of Malaysia from 1981 to 2003 and in 2018 he was once again elected PM. Pakistan and Malaysia have come close after being re-elected.

Malaysia is now trying to compensate for this after purchasing palm oil in India. Malaysia's Primary Industries Minister Teresa Kok said on Sunday, "Pakistan is a regular buyer of our palm oil and is dependent on us."

Coke also met Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan's Commerce, Textile, Industry, Production and Investment Adviser Abdul Razzaq Dawood on an official visit to Pakistan.

"In 2018, Pakistan imported 10.16 lakh tonnes of palm oil," it said in a statement issued by Malaysia's Ministry of Primary Industries. The business was worth $ 730 million. We are seeking to increase imports from Pakistan. ''

Dr Oh E Sun, a political analyst at the Singapore Institute of International Affairs on the conflict in India and Malaysia, told Arab News, "The deadlock will only worsen the bilateral relations between the two countries." The Prime Minister of Malaysia, Mahathir Mohammed, was speaking out against Kashmir and the Citizenship Amendment Act and India's ban on palm oil is being seen as a retaliation.

The Modi government wanted to bring Islamic scholar Zakir Naik to India, but he is still in Malaysia. Mahathir did not help Zakir Naik's case either. Dr. Oh says that India was a big buyer of Malaysia's palm oil and its removal will have a bad impact on Malaysia's palm oil industry.

Palm oil accounts for two-thirds of the food oils used in India. India imports 9 million tonnes of palm oil every year and is mainly from Malaysia and Indonesia.

"There has been a good relationship between Malaysia and Pakistan for a long time," said Ravichandran Dakshinamurthy, an expert on strategic studies at the National University of Malaysia from the South China Morning Post. After Malaysia's independence in 1957, Pakistan was one of the countries that first recognized it as a sovereign country.

Ravichandran said, "Both Pakistan and Malaysia are associated with many Islamic organizations and cooperation. China's case is completely different with respect to these two. The relations between Malaysia and China are quite normal but the relationship between Pakistan and China is very special. China is the largest arms supplier in Pakistan and the relationship between China and Pakistan is not good with India. As long as Mahathir Mohammad was in power, relations with Pakistan remained good. ''

Pakistan's Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi on Sunday said that India's new citizenship law is anti-Muslim and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) should raise its voice effectively.

The OIC is an organization of Islamic countries and is dominated by Saudi Arabia.

Addressing a press conference in Multan, Pakistan, Qureshi said that the OIC should effectively oppose human rights violations in Kashmir and India's citizenship amendment law.

The Pakistani Foreign Minister said that he has spoken to other Islamic countries regarding these matters and has proposed a meeting of foreign ministers of the OIC member countries. Qureshi said that he has received positive response in this matter.

Radio Pakistan reported in its report on Sunday that the OIC has decided to hold a meeting in India-administered Kashmir on human rights violations and India's citizenship amendment law. It is being said that such a meeting will be held in Islamabad in April next year.

The Pakistani Foreign Minister claimed in this press conference that India had clearly divided into secularism and Hinduism ideology during the reign of Narendra Modi.

He said, "India's minority and educated Hindu population are against the anti-Muslim citizenship amendment law. Since the enactment of this law on December 11, 25 people have died during protests in India. Critics of this law say that it discriminates against Muslims. International newspapers around the world have slammed this law.''

Qureshi said, "Chief Ministers of at least five states of India have refused to implement this law. I have also written several letters to the UN Security Council regarding Kashmir.''

Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud visited Pakistan last week. According to Pakistani newspaper The Express Tribune, in this tour, it has been agreed that OIC will meet foreign ministers of its member countries on Kashmir and disputed citizenship amendment law.

The relationship between Pakistan and Saudi was said to be tense for the past few weeks as Saudi barred Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan from attending the Kuala Lumpur Summit held in Malaysia on 19-20 December.

It was only then that the Saudi Foreign Minister visited Pakistan. Pakistan defended its decision not to attend the Kuala Lumpur summit, saying that it wanted to build bridges in the Islamic world and not intensify conflict.

Recently, the OIC issued a statement regarding the Babri Masjid, the Citizenship Amendment Act and Kashmir. In this statement, the OIC said, "We are closely watching the recent developments in India. Many things have happened that have affected minorities. We have concerns about citizenship rights and the Babri Masjid case. We reiterate again that the safety of Muslims and their holy place in India should be ensured.

The OIC had said that minorities should be protected without any discrimination as per the principles and obligations of the United Nations. The OIC said that if these principles and obligations were neglected, the security and stability of the entire region would be severely affected.

Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan is also trying to garner support globally on the Kashmir issue. On Saturday, Imran Khan said, "India's lobby in America is stronger than Pakistan. Due to strong lobbying of India, Pakistan's side is always suppressed and the result is that in the US policies, India prevails over us.''

When India ended the special status of Jammu and Kashmir, the OIC was almost silent. The OIC is dominated by Saudi Arabia and its allies. Saudi also did not support Pakistan in the removal of Article 370 and the United Arab Emirates called it an internal matter of India.

In March this year, the UAE invited the then Foreign Minister of India Sushma Swaraj to the OIC Foreign Ministers' Meeting. Pakistan had raised a strong objection to this. After this, India ended the special status of Jammu and Kashmir on August 5, then the OIC did not criticize India. However, Turkey and Malaysia openly criticized India in this matter.

It is common opinion among the policy makers of Pakistan that the Saudi-led OIC did not support India at all against Kashmir. On the other hand, Iran, Turkey and Malaysia want to directly challenge the OIC that it has failed to understand and stage the sentiments of the Islamic world.

At the same time, Saudi Arabia wants to maintain political and diplomatic influence in the Muslim world through the OIC. If the efforts of Malaysia, Turkey and Iran are successful, the relevance of the OIC will be seriously challenged in the coming months. It is being said that Malaysia, Turkey, Iran and Pakistan were also going to discuss Jammu and Kashmir at this summit.

Malaysia and Turkey were also openly spoken against India in the general body of the United Nations after the special status of Kashmir was abolished. It is being said within Pakistan about Saudi that he has his own interests with India, so he is not speaking himself in Kashmir.

On 14 August, Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan, while addressing the assembly in Muzaffarabad of Pakistan-administered Kashmir, said that the world's one and a half billion Muslims are united on Kashmir but unfortunately the ruler is silent.

Imran Khan has been repeatedly urging Muslim countries to mobilize on Kashmir, but in the meantime Mukesh Ambani had announced that Saudi Arabia's oil company Aramco is going to make the largest investment in Reliance in India.

It is a Saudi state-owned company and is controlled by King Salman. This announcement was in sharp contrast to Imran Khan's wish.

On Sunday, Ramlila Maidan in Delhi, India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi claimed that there is no Detention Center in India, he called it a rumor.

Modi said "Only the rumors of the Detention Center raised by Congress and Urban Naxalites are false, ill-intentioned, full of evil intentions to destroy the country - it is a lie, a lie, a lie."

He said, "Muslims of the soil of India, whose ancestors are the children of mother Bharati. Brothers and sisters, both citizenship law and NRC have nothing to do with them. The Muslims of the country are not being sent to the Detention Center, There is no detention center in India. Brothers and sisters, this is a white lie, this is a bad-intentioned game, it is a nefarious game. I am surprised that to what extent can they go to lie.''

Is India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi telling the truth about Detention Center? Let us examine Modi's claim.

Contrary to Modi's claim, a 2018 report by BBC correspondent Nitin Srivastava tells the story of people coming out of the detention center.

According to a report by BBC correspondent Nitin Srivastava, "For those who are living here or for those who have lived here, this Detention Camp is a nightmare that has been consumed day and night."

Similarly, BBC correspondent Priyanka Dubey has also reported about detention centers in Assam.

According to a report by BBC correspondent Priyanka Dubey, "The future of Assam's children lost in the arduous legal process of deciding citizenship seems to be shrouded in darkness. Sometimes the detention of a parent is forced to live in a tight prison environment. Without his shadow, no one is going to take care of these children alone, suffering the harsh world outside.''

If we look at the questions and answers made in the Parliament of India this year, it is known that the Detention Center has been discussed in the Parliament and the Central Government has admitted that they have written to the State Governments.

In response to a question asked in the Rajya Sabha on 10 July 2019, Minister of State for Home Affairs Nityanand Rai had said that the illegal people who came into the country are not confirmed until their citizenship and they are not expelled from the country, till then states will have to keep them in Detention Center. No record has yet been kept of the exact number of such detention centers.

He had said that on 9 January 2019, the Central Government has given a 'Model Detention Center or Holding Center Manual' to all state governments and Union Territories to set up detention centers in their state.

According to a report published in The Hindu in August this year, on July 2, 2019, BJP leader Nityanand Rai had said in the Lok Sabha that the state governments had been asked to set up detention centers in their states in the years 2009, 2012, 2014 and 2018.

In response to a question asked in the Lok Sabha on 2 July 2019, Minister of State for Home Affairs, G. Krishna Reddy said that the Ministry of Home Affairs has created a Model Detention Center (Holding Center Manual) which was given to all the state governments and union territories on 9 January 2019.

In reply, he said that according to this manual, necessary facilities are provided in the Detention Center.

In response to a question asked in the Lok Sabha on 16 July 2019, Minister of State for Home Affairs G. Krishna Reddy said that Detention Centers have been set up in Assam.

He had said that these centers have been created under Section 3 (2) (e) of the Foreigners Act 1946 to keep those people whose citizenship has not been confirmed.