&w=3840&q=100)
PM Modi hints at new Indus waters strategy, putting it in abeyance not a knee-jerk reaction
PM Modi's comments came during an address to celebrate 20 years of the 'Gujarat Urban Growth Story' when he reiterated that the Cabinet Committee on Security's (CCS) decision to put IWT in abeyance was taken in response to the April 22 Pahalgam attack read more
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has said that after putting the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) in abeyance, India is resolved to use the river system more robustly, adding that the previously 'badly negotiated' terms of the deal did not allow the country to use its fair share of the resource.
He said, 'I would like to tell the younger generation how this country was ruined. A closer look at IWT will leave you shocked. It was decided that the dams built on the rivers of J&K would not be cleaned. Desilting would not be done. The lower gates for clearing sediments were to remain shut. For 60 years, these gates were never opened. As a result, the reservoirs could effectively use only 2-3% of their storage capacity.'
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
His comments came during an address to celebrate 20 years of the 'Gujarat Urban Growth Story' when he reiterated that the Cabinet Committee on Security's (CCS) decision to put IWT in abeyance was taken in response to the April 22 Pahalgam attack.
Refresh for updates.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Govt Favours Wealth Creation; Profit Not a Bad Word, says FM
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman Saturday said the Modi government promotes wealth creation and encourages entrepreneurs to earn profits through ethical practices without inhibitions. This is in stark contrast to the stance adopted by the votaries of socialism or communism, who looked down upon wealth creation in earlier decades, she said, indicating that resources can be distributed only when they are was addressing the National Commemorative Seminar on 60 Years of Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya's Integral Humanism Lectures.'Profit was a bad word (for socialists and communists), whereas that's not what we believe in. We would like to have profit created by genuine ethical practices, and that is what is going to create wealth for the nation,' she creation has never been considered a taboo in the long Indian tradition, the finance minister said, emphasising that 'wealth creators are not thieves'.Sitharaman said every government policy under former PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee and PM Modi has been very reflective of this 'integral humanism'.Upadhyaya, leader of the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, the forerunner of the Bharatiya Janata Party, was a proponent of the philosophy of integral humanism.'Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya wanted that while planning, we must keep in mind the person at the very bottom of the system so that he can be uplifted keeping his dignity intact,' she also cited Upadhyaya's insistence on focusing on seven 'M's while making policies for employment generation with a view to building 'Bharatiya technology'— man, money, material, management, motive, market and finance minister also sought to distinguish between the economic model followed by former prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru in the immediate aftermath of independence and the vision of capital-intensive growth model was influenced by that of the USSR, Sitharaman said, but Upadhyaya—conscious of the fact that the Indian economy had been shaped for centuries by small and medium businesses and that 'we are a labour-intensive country'—believed it was a flawed model. So, he was in favour of an economic framework that would give due emphasis on labour-intensive industries, she said AI is set to improve productivity. The minister pointed out that AI poses some challenges in terms of training people, among others, but it also brings a lot of opportunities with it which need to be said young people inclined towards AI are being trained in it through various initiatives, she said. 'The government has announced four centres of excellence for AI in the fields of education, agriculture, health and cities of the future.'poses some challenges in terms of training people etc but it also brings a lot of opportunities. Alot of young people are being trained in AI through various govt initiativesFinance minister .
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Prashant Kishor slams Modi govt's ‘ceasefire' with Pakistan: 'Can't achieve anything by distributing sindoor boxes'
Jan Suraaj founder Prashant Kishor has questioned Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led Union government's decision to agree to a cessation of hostilities with Pakistan after four days of military action post Operation Sindoor last month. The political consultant-turned-politician suggested by halting action India may have been a missed opportunity for the Indian Army to push its advantage further. Kishor said, going by External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar's statement, Pakistan wanted the the cessation, indicating that neighboring country was under pressure and fearful of defeat. "I'm thinking, if Pakistan wanted a ceasefire, as our Foreign Minister is saying, that means our army was doing a good job, we were defeating Pakistan. It must have been out of fear that Pakistan wanted a ceasefire. So if Pakistan wanted a ceasefire, why did we agree to it? The Army should have let it go on for two more days," Kishor said during a press conference in East Champaran on Saturday. Kishor priased Jaishankar calling him 'very educated and sensible.' "Regarding the issue of the ceasefire, our country's EAM Jaishankar is a very educated and sensible person. I have great respect for him. I read his statement where he said the ceasefire was done at Pakistan's initiative," he added. India carried out precision strikes under Operation Sindoor on nine terror infrastructures in Pakistan and Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir, on 7 May in response to the22 April Pahalgam terror attackthat killed 26 people, mostly tourists in Jammu and Kashmir. Following the Indian action, Pakistan attempted to attackIndian military baseson 8, 9 and 10 May. The Pakistani attempts were strongly responded to by the Indian side by inflicting heavy damages to a number of key Pakistani military installations including air bases, air defence systems, command and control centres and radar sites. The two nations, however, agreed on an understanding to halt military action on 10 May. Kishor said the situation on the ground suggested that India's military was in control. "That's exactly what our army personnel are saying, what the citizens of this country are saying, that during the fight, we had them on the back foot, sirens were going off, people were hiding, Pakistan was on the defensive, begging for a ceasefire." Kishor was referring to External Affairs Minister, S Jaishankar's comments in which he had said that it was the militaries of the two nations that negotiated directly and resolved the conflict through agreement and understanding for a cessation of fire and military action. 'Then why did you halt the action? It should have continued for a few more days. And if you did go for a ceasefire, why mislead the public? It's clear that what he's saying is wrong… You can't achieve anything by simply distributing boxes of sindoor (vermillion),' he said Kishor also challenged claims made by foreign leaders about who led peace efforts. "Although, Trump said something else, that he did it and that he deserve da Nobel Peace Prize, from brekenring peace. But why should we believe what Trump said? We will believe our own Foreign Minister," Kishor said On May 23, days after United States President Donald trump claimed that he played a role in settling the escalating tensions between India and Pakistan, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar reiterated that it was the militaries of the two nations that negotiated directly. You can't achieve anything by simply distributing boxes of sindoor. Kishor's statement comes ahead of the Bihar Assembly election to be held in October-November this year wherein the NDA, which consists of the BJP, JD(U), and LJP, will be once again looking forward to returning to power. In contrast, the INDIA Bloc will be giving competition to the incumbent Nitish Kumar government. Kishor's party Jan Suraaj is contesting first Bihar assembly election this year.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
What TN case tells us about the need to ease Centre-state friction
Several developments have taken place over the last two weeks concerning Centre-state relations. One, Tamil Nadu sued the Union govt in the Supreme Court for withholding over Rs 2,000 crore under the Samagra Shiksha Scheme. It claimed the Centre was surreptitiously linking the implementation of the three-language formula to the disbursement of education funds. Two, the NITI Aayog chaired its tenth governing council meeting but three Opposition CMs decided to give it a miss. In the absence of the Planning Commission and the complete neglect of the Inter-State Council, this is the only platform where all the CMs, the PM, and Union ministers meet each other. Three, even inter-state language wars are escalating as another kerfuffle in Bengaluru over a bank manager refusing to speak Kannada revealed. This time, several political leaders got involved. On social media, all war-related national integration was quickly replaced by the generic north-south flame wars. Cheque, mate? TN CM MK Stalin with Modi. The state's decision to sue the Union will have broader implications While the PM stressed the idea of Team India to realise the goal of Viksit Bharat 2047, these instances highlight yet again that cooperative federalism is merely a nice-sounding idea thus far. What we need are structures in which real cooperation can happen. Here are four such ideas that could be worth considering. 1 | An 'umpire' for bargaining This idea comes from economist Dr M Govinda Rao. He writes in his book, Studies in Indian Public Finance, that India lacks an institution that can act as a credible umpire between various states (horizontal bargaining), and between the states and Centre on the other (vertical bargaining). The National Development Council, created for this purpose, is defunct. The Inter-State Council hasn't met for the last eight years. The Rajya Sabha no longer functions as the council of states and Union finance commissions are dissolved after making their recommendations. The NITI Aayog is yet to establish itself as an institution that speaks for the states and the Union equally. The GST Council is perhaps the only remaining bargaining and negotiation platform in our federal structure, but its mandate is limited to sharing taxes on consumption. The result is that we have no functional institution to truly champion cooperative federalism. One model to consider is Vijay Kelkar's idea of a NITI Aayog 2.0, one which has fiscal powers to allocate conditional funds to states for long-term transformational goals. But there's a risk that such powers could transform NITI Aayog 2.0 into a Planning Commission 2.0, restricting the states' fiscal autonomy. Thus, we need a debate to construct a new institution for cooperative federalism. 2 | More funds with less strings All federalism debates almost exclusively focus on just one issue: horizontal devolution, i.e. the formula used for sharing resources between states. It also gets inaccurately framed as a 'north vs south' debate — how the taxes collected from the south are frittered away in the north. But the problem really lies in vertical devolution i.e. how the tax resources are split between the Union govt and all states as a whole. If the Union govt keeps less money to itself, all states stand to gain together. This is why the TN petition has broader implications beyond who wins this case. It is an opportunity to increase vertical devolution to states. As long as there are centrally sponsored schemes, which are designed by Union ministries and only implemented by states, the Centre is within its rights to change the scheme's design. States must demand that grand schemes falling under the state and concurrent lists be scrapped and that they receive untied funds instead. This way, they an decide their priorities while the Union can focus on a select few centrally sponsored schemes, mainly focused on states that need its help. This point was raised by the TN CM at the NITI Aayog meet as well. 3 | All-party delegations to states As the recurring language wars illustrate, trust levels between states are dipping. Lok Sabha seat reapportionment stemming from delimitation; charges of unfair fiscal redistribution; and the insider-outsider debates sparked by local reservations will only worsen the situation. Like India's all-party delegations meant for global outreach after the Pahalgam attack, we need a domestic mechanism where states send delegations to other states explaining their visions for development and growth. Such efforts could perhaps bridge the gap. 4 | Union-state sub-groups Another interesting idea comes from Andhra CM Chandrababu Naidu, who proposed three sub-groups at NITI Aayog on GDP growth, population management, and leveraging artificial intelligence. While these themes are not set in stone, this approach could allow states to partner with each other and with the Centre. Creating a Team India ain't easy, but it could happen with the right systems in place. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
