‘Even Congress doesn't remember Nehru as much…': Kanimozhi vs Amit Shah in Lok Sabha during Op Sindoor debate
Taking a swipe at the BJP for frequently invoking former Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, Kanimozhi said, 'Even the Congress doesn't remember Nehru ji as much as you do. But I want to thank you for that — because of you, people in Tamil Nadu have gone back to reading about Periyar and Ambedkar, and people everywhere have returned to reading Nehru.'
She added, 'Today, young students all over the world are finding out about Nehru Ji — a man who was so powerful that he changed history. And, even till today, he is so powerful that he is responsible for every mistake you do.'
Parliament Monsoon Session - Track live updates here
Kanimozhi was speaking after Union home minister Amit Shah traced history back to India's first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, as he criticised successive Congress governments for an alleged lack of strength in their foreign policy, particularly towards Pakistan.
Criticising the government's response to the recent Pahalgam terror attack and the Opposition's alleged sidelining in matters of national interest, Kanimozhi said, 'We had to go on these delegations (MPs delegation on Operation Sindoor global outreach) because peace had failed us, and you (central government) had failed the people of India.'
The DMK MP, however, acknowledged the government's move to involve Opposition MPs in international delegations post-Operation Sindoor but added a pointed remark, 'For the first time, the BJP has shown some confidence in the Opposition, and they sent us out as leaders of (MPs) delegations to represent this country. I thank them. But also, I would like to say, if the opportunity to lead these delegations had not arisen, then we would have been happier and more grateful.'
Taking a further dig at Amit Shah's speech in Parliament, she said, 'Today, the home minister in his speech only intended to blame the Opposition. Today, it has become a blame game.'
Hitting back at the BJP's criticism of the Opposition's past conduct, Kanimozhi reminded the House of the UPA government's response to the 2008 Mumbai attacks, 'You have not even learnt humility; Prime Minister during the 2008 Mumbai attacks apologised to the country.'
What did Amit Shah say?
'Today, China is in the United Nations Security Council, and India is not,' Amit Shah said, referring purportedly to permanent membership of the UNSC.
"Jawaharlal Nehru's stand is responsible for this... When our jawans were facing Chinese soldiers in Doklam, Rahul Gandhi was holding a meeting with the Chinese ambassador... This love for China has passed down three generations from Jawaharlal Nehru, Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi..." Shah alleged.
'PM Narendra Modi is trying his best to get India to become a part of the UN Security Council,' he added.
He said during the 1962 war with China, 'then PM Nehru bid goodbye to Assam in a speech on Akashvani (state radio)'.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
24 minutes ago
- Business Standard
China pushes back at US demands to stop buying Russian, Iranian oil
US and Chinese officials may be able to settle many of their differences to reach a trade deal and avert punishing tariffs, but they remain far apart on one issue: the US demand that China stop purchasing oil from Iran and Russia. "China will always ensure its energy supply in ways that serve our national interests," China's Foreign Ministry posted on X on Wednesday, following two days of trade negotiations in Stockholm, responding to the US threat of a 100 per cent tariff. "Coercion and pressuring will not achieve anything. China will firmly defend its sovereignty, security and development interests," the ministry said. The response is notable at a time when both Beijing and Washington are signalling optimism and goodwill about reaching a deal to keep commercial ties between the world's two largest economies stable -- after climbing down from sky-high tariffs and harsh trade restrictions. It underscores China's confidence in playing hardball when dealing with the Trump administration, especially when trade is linked to its energy and foreign policies. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, emerging from the talks, told reporters that when it comes to Russian oil purchases, the "Chinese take their sovereignty very seriously". "We do not want to impede on their sovereignty, so they would like to pay a 100 per cent tariff," Bessent said. On Thursday, he called the Chinese tough negotiators, but said China's pushback has not stalled the negotiations. "I believe that we have the makings of a deal," Bessent told CNBC. Gabriel Wildau, managing director of the consultancy Teneo, said he doubts President Donald Trump would actually deploy the 100 per cent tariff. "Realising those threats would derail all the recent progress and probably kill any chance" for Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping to announce a trade deal if they should meet this fall, Wildau said. In seeking to restrict oil sales by Russia and Iran, a major source of revenue for both countries, the US wants to reduce the funding available for their militaries, as Moscow pursues its war against Ukraine and Tehran funds militant groups across the Middle East. China plays hardball When Trump unveiled a sweeping plan for tariffs on dozens of countries in April, China was the only country that retaliated. It refused to give in to US pressure. "If the US is bent on imposing tariffs, China will fight to the end, and this is China's consistent official stance," said Tu Xinquan, director of the China Institute for WTO Studies at the University of International Business and Economics in Beijing. WTO is the acronym for the World Trade Organization. Negotiating tactics aside, China may also suspect that the US will not follow through on its threat, questioning the importance Trump places on countering Russia, Tu said. Scott Kennedy, senior adviser and trustee chair in Chinese Business and Economics at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said Beijing is unlikely to change its posture when it sees inconsistencies in US foreign policy goals toward Russia and Iran, whereas Beijing's policy support for Moscow is consistent and clear. It is also possible that Beijing may want to use it as another negotiating tool to extract more concessions from Trump, Kennedy said. Danny Russel, a distinguished fellow at the Asia Society Policy Institute, said Beijing now sees itself as "the one holding the cards in its struggle with Washington". He said Trump has made it clear he wants a "headline-grabbing deal" with Xi, "so rejecting a US demand to stop buying oil from Iran or Russia is probably not seen as a deal-breaker, even if it generates friction and a delay". Continuing to buy oil from Russia preserves Xi's "strategic solidarity" with Russian President Vladimir Putin and significantly reduces the economic costs for China, Russel said. "Beijing simply cannot afford to walk away from the oil from Russia and Iran," he said. "It is too important a strategic energy supply, and Beijing is buying it at fire-sale prices." China depends on oil from Russia and Iran A 2024 report by the US Energy Information Administration estimates that roughly 80 per cent to 90 per cent of the oil exported by Iran went to China. The Chinese economy benefits from the more than one million (10 lakh) barrels of Iranian oil it imports per day. After the Iranian parliament floated a plan to shut down the Strait of Hormuz in June following US strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, China spoke out against closing the critical oil transit route. China also is an important customer for Russia, but is second to India in buying Russian seaborne crude oil exports. In April, Chinese imports of Russian oil rose 20 per cent over the previous month to more than 1.3 million (13 lakh) barrels per day, according to the KSE Institute, an analytical centre at the Kyiv School of Economics. This past week, Trump said the US will impose a 25 per cent tariff on goods from India, plus an additional import tax because of India's purchasing of Russian oil. India's Foreign Ministry said on Friday its relationship with Russia was "steady and time-tested". Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff and a top policy adviser, said Trump has been clear that it is "not acceptable" for India to continue financing the Ukraine war by purchasing oil from Russia. "People will be shocked to learn that India is basically tied with China in purchasing Russian oil," Miller said on Fox News Channel's "Sunday Morning Futures". He said the US needs "to get real about dealing with the financing of this war". (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Economic Times
24 minutes ago
- Economic Times
China pushes back at US demands to stop buying Russian and Iranian oil
AP China pushes back at US demands to stop buying Russian and Iranian oil U.S. and Chinese officials may be able to settle many of their differences to reach a trade deal and avert punishing tariffs, but they remain far apart on one issue: the U.S. demand that China stop purchasing oil from Iran and Russia. "China will always ensure its energy supply in ways that serve our national interests," China's Foreign Ministry posted on X on Wednesday following two days of trade negotiations in Stockholm, responding to the U.S. threat of a 100% tariff. "Coercion and pressuring will not achieve anything. China will firmly defend its sovereignty, security and development interests," the ministry said. The response is notable at a time when both Beijing and Washington are signaling optimism and goodwill about reaching a deal to keep commercial ties between the world's two largest economies stable - after climbing down from sky-high tariffs and harsh trade restrictions. It underscores China's confidence in playing hardball when dealing with the Trump administration, especially when trade is linked to its energy and foreign policies. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, emerging from the talks, told reporters that when it comes to Russian oil purchases, the "Chinese take their sovereignty very seriously." "We don't want to impede on their sovereignty, so they would like to pay a 100% tariff," Bessent said. On Thursday, he called the Chinese "tough" negotiators, but said China's pushback hasn't stalled the negotiations. "I believe that we have the makings of a deal," Bessent told CNBC. Gabriel Wildau, managing director of the consultancy Teneo, said he doubts President Donald Trump would actually deploy the 100% tariff. "Realizing those threats would derail all the recent progress and probably kill any chance" for Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping to announce a trade deal if they should meet this fall, Wildau said. In seeking to restrict oil sales by Russia and Iran, a major source of revenue for both countries, the U.S. wants to reduce the funding available for their militaries, as Moscow pursues its war against Ukraine and Tehran funds militant groups across the Middle East. China plays hardball When Trump unveiled a sweeping plan for tariffs on dozens of countries in April, China was the only country that retaliated. It refused to give in to U.S. pressure. "If the U.S. is bent on imposing tariffs, China will fight to the end, and this is China's consistent official stance," said Tu Xinquan, director of the China Institute for WTO Studies at the University of International Business and Economics in Beijing. WTO is the acronym for the World Trade Organization. Negotiating tactics aside, China may also suspect that the U.S. won't follow through on its threat, questioning the importance Trump places on countering Russia, Tu said. Scott Kennedy, senior adviser and trustee chair in Chinese Business and Economics at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said Beijing is unlikely to change its posture when it sees inconsistencies in U.S. foreign policy goals toward Russia and Iran, whereas Beijing's policy support for Moscow is consistent and clear. It's also possible that Beijing may want to use it as another negotiating tool to extract more concessions from Trump, Kennedy said. Danny Russel, a distinguished fellow at the Asia Society Policy Institute, said Beijing now sees itself as "the one holding the cards in its struggle with Washington." He said Trump has made it clear he wants a "headline-grabbing deal" with Xi, "so rejecting a U.S. demand to stop buying oil from Iran or Russia is probably not seen as a deal‑breaker, even if it generates friction and a delay." Continuing to buy oil from Russia preserves Xi's "strategic solidarity" with Russian President Vladimir Putin and significantly reduces the economic costs for China, Russel said. "Beijing simply can't afford to walk away from the oil from Russia and Iran," he said. "It's too important a strategic energy supply, and Beijing is buying it at fire‑sale prices." China depends on oil from Russia and Iran A 2024 report by the U.S. Energy Information Administration estimates that roughly 80% to 90% of the oil exported by Iran went to China. The Chinese economy benefits from the more than 1 million barrels of Iranian oil it imports per day. After the Iranian parliament floated a plan to shut down the Strait of Hormuz in June following U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, China spoke out against closing the critical oil transit route. China also is an important customer for Russia, but is second to India in buying Russian seaborne crude oil exports. In April, Chinese imports of Russian oil rose 20% over the previous month to more than 1.3 million barrels per day, according to the KSE Institute, an analytical center at the Kyiv School of Economics. This past week, Trump said the U.S. will impose a 25% tariff on goods from India, plus an additional import tax because of India's purchasing of Russian oil. India's Foreign Ministry said Friday its relationship with Russia was "steady and time-tested." Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff and a top policy adviser, said Trump has been clear that it is "not acceptable" for India to continue financing the Ukraine war by purchasing oil from Russia. "People will be shocked to learn that India is basically tied with China in purchasing Russian oil," Miller said on Fox News Channel's "Sunday Morning Futures." He said the U.S. needs "to get real about dealing with the financing of this war." Congress demands action Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina, is pushing for sanctions and tariffs on Russia and its financial backers. In April, he introduced a bill that would authorize the president to impose tariffs as high as 500% not only on Russia but on any country that "knowingly" buys oil, uranium, natural gas, petroleum products or petrochemical products from Russia. "The purpose of this legislation is to break the cycle of China - a communist dictatorship - buying oil below market price from Putin's Russia, which empowers his war machine to kill innocent Ukrainian civilians," Graham said in a June statement. The bill has 84 co-sponsors in the 100-seat Senate. A corresponding House version has been introduced, also with bipartisan support. Republicans say they stand ready to move on the sanctions legislation if Trump asks them to do so, but the bill is on hold for now.
Indian Express
24 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Congress and the OBCs
Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi last month admitted that the Congress had 'fallen short' in its relationship with Other Backward Classes (OBCs), which allowed the BJP to build political support among these communities. 'I do feel that when it came to OBCs, the Congress party's understanding of their issues, the challenges they were facing and the type of actions that the party should have and could have taken, we fell short,' Rahul said at a gathering of his party's MPs and Telangana leadership on July 24. 'We opened the space for the BJP because we were not responsive to the aspirations, to the desires of the OBCs,' he said. Rahul was not wrong. Congress has indeed missed several opportunities to reach out to these castes. It has also failed to claim credit for policy changes with regard to OBCs that were, in fact, initiated by Congress governments. Here's a short history. Inaction on Kalelkar report The clamour for greater political representation for the backward classes, as well as demands for reservation for these communities on the lines of the quotas in government jobs for the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs), began soon after Independence. In 1953, the government of Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru set up the first Backward Classes Commission under Rajya Sabha member Dattatreya Balkrishna Kalelkar, popularly known as 'Kaka' Kalelkar. The Kalelkar Commission report, submitted to the government on March 30, 1955, formulated criteria for identifying socially and educationally backward classes, and made several recommendations for their uplift. These included a caste census in 1961 that was to be advanced to 1957, treating all women as a class as 'backward', and reserving 70% seats in technical and professional institutions for qualified students from backward classes. The recommendations were, however, not unanimous, and three of the members were opposed to the acceptance of caste as a criterion for social backwardness and reservation in government jobs. Kalelkar himself wrote a long letter to President Rajendra Prasad expressing his disagreement on a number of issues. The report was tabled before both houses of Parliament but never discussed. Nehru's government did not implement it. First quota for OBCs Meanwhile, OBCs in the Hindi heartland had already begun to move towards the socialist leader Ram Manohar Lohia. Until Lohia's untimely demise in 1967, his anti-Congress politics was powered by these communities. By the 1970s, OBC politics had gained significant momentum to pressure state governments to take decisions regarding OBC reservation. For instance, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna in October 1975 appointed the Most Backward Classes Commission under the chairmanship of Chhedi Lal Sathi. This first push for an OBC quota in UP came under a Congress government. And it was another Congress government, of Chief Minister N D Tiwari, that the state cabinet announced a 15% quota in government jobs for OBCs in UP, in April 1977. Within a week of this decision, however, Tiwari's government was dismissed by the Janata Party government of Prime Minister Morarji Desai that had routed the Congress in the Hindi heartland in the post-Emergency elections of March 1977. As a result, it was the Janata government in UP, led by Ram Naresh Yadav, which ultimately implemented the OBC quota — and also took the credit for it. The Mandal challenge In 1978, Prime Minister Desai constituted a new commission for the OBCs. The Second OBC Commission, headed by former Bihar Chief Minister B P Mandal, submitted its report to the government on December 31, 1980. By this time, the Congress under Indira Gandhi was back in power. Over the next nine years, however, neither Indira nor her son and successor Rajiv Gandhi implemented the Mandal Commission report, which recommended a 27% quota for OBCs in central government jobs and public universities. It was only in 1990, that the government of Prime Minister V P Singh announced its intention to implement the report, unleashing a wave of OBC assertion and fundamentally altering the politics of North India — to the Congress' detriment. In his 2006 biography of V P Singh, Manzil Se Zyada Safar, Ram Bahadur Rai quoted the former PM as having said: 'Congress leaders were obsessed with power equations. They were least concerned with the social equations and changes taking place… and thus unable to read the Mandal phenomenon.' The BJP, at that time still considered a largely Brahmin-Bania party, however, was far more flexible. For instance, it projected OBC leaders such as Kalyan Singh, a Lodh Rajput, in UP, to counter Mulayam. As Mulayam's support base outside the Samajwadi Party's Yadav-Muslim core started to fragment, Kalyan rallied smaller OBC communities behind the BJP, eventually forging a non-Yadav OBC vote bank. The BJP would eventually revamp its leadership at every level to accommodate OBCs politically. This was crucial from the late 1990s onwards, as the Panchayat Raj Act and reservation of seats in every level of three-tier rural and urban panchayats, provided an avenue for many OBC leaders to emerge from the grassroots. This was even as Congress' organisation continued to erode, and struggled to truly accommodate OBC politics. In UPA years In 2006, Union Human Resource Development Minister Arjun Singh pushed through 27% reservation for OBCs in admissions to central educational institutions, which had been pending since the implementation of the Mandal report. This was one of the biggest decisions in favour of OBCs, and a defining moment in OBC politics — but hardly any political gains accrued to the Congress. In 2010, the UPA-2 government tried to move for a caste census. Then Law Minister Veerappa Moily wrote to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh about collecting caste/ community data in Census 2011. But Home Minister P Chidambaram opposed the decision in Lok Sabha. Singh's government ultimately decided to conduct a full Socio Economic Caste Census (SECC) instead. The SECC data was published in 2016 but remains unavailable today. The Narendra Modi government has said it is 'not reliable'. This means that seven decades after the Kalelkar Commission recommended a caste census, there is still no precise estimate of India's OBC population. Rahul Gandhi's push for a caste census in recent years is an acceptance of the many missed opportunities during decades of Congress rule in the past, and a realignment of the party's politics with a view of taking on the BJP.
