PM Modi holds bilateral with Cuban President, discusses boosting economic ties, healthcare, ayurveda
The PM said in a post on X after their meeting in Rio de Janeiro on Sunday:
'It was wonderful to meet President Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermúdez of Cuba. In our talks, we covered a wide range of subjects. Economic relations between our nations have a lot of potential to grow in the coming times.
'Equally promising are sectors like technology, healthcare and energy. The growing acceptance of Ayurveda in Cuba is surely a great thing. We even discussed ways to strengthen disaster management apparatus.'
The Cuban President said in a post on X that it was a fruitful meeting with the Indian PM.
'In fruitful meeting with the Prime Minister @narendramodi, we analyze the areas of special economic-commercial interest, cooperation and investments that currently exist between the #India and #Cuba.
'We agree on the excellent state of bilateral relations.'
The MEA spokesperson said in a post on X:
'PM @narendramodimet with President Miguel Diaz-Canel Bermudez of Cuba on the sidelines of the 17th BRICS Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Both leaders exchanged views on various facets of relationship including in the areas of economic cooperation, biotechnology, pharma, Ayurveda and traditional medicine, Digital Public Infrastructure & UPI, disaster management, and capacity building.'
The Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez P, in a post said the two leaders highlighted the potential in areas such as biotechnology, energy, agriculture, communications, and tourism.
'In a meeting with the Prime Minister of #India, @narendramodi, President @DiazCanelB highlighted the existing potential in economic-commercial and cooperation areas, mainly in fields such as biotechnology, energy, agriculture, communications, and tourism.'
According to a readout:
Prime Minister Modi had earlier met President Diaz-Canel at the BRICS Summit in Johannesburg in 2023, where Cuba was a special invitee.
"The two leaders reviewed bilateral ties in the areas of economic cooperation, development partnership, fintech, capacity building, science and technology, disaster management and healthcare.
"Acknowledging India's expertise in the digital domain, President Diaz-Canel expressed interest in India's Digital Public Infrastructure and UPI. Prime Minister conveyed appreciation for Cuba's recognition of Ayurveda and extended support for integrating Ayurveda into Cuba's public health system.
"Prime Minister proposed Cuba's recognition of Indian pharmacopoeia, which will lead to access to Indian generic medicines.
"The two leaders agreed to work on issues of concern to the global South, including in the areas of health, pandemics and climate change. They appreciated the cooperation between the two countries in the multilateral arena."
UNI RN
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
23 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Don't see other risks, Sebi is upgrading surveillance': Chairman Tuhin Kanta Pandey
MUMBAI: Sebi chief Tuhin Kanta Pandey on Monday assured investors there were not many other risks in the market like the one seen recently in the event of market manipulation by US-based quant fund Jane Street. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The Sebi chief also said that the Jane Street issue was more of a surveillance issue and that the regulator is in the process of upgrading now. The chairman of of the markets regulator was speaking to the media after inaugurating a new investor empowerment facility on the apps run by the two depositories, CDSL and NSDL. Late on Thursday Sebi through an enforcement order had temporarily banned Jane Street and three of its affiliates from the Indian market for manipulation in stocks and futures & options (F&O) markets. The regulator had also asked the entities to together disgorge nearly Rs 4,850 crore, alleged to be Jane Street's illegal gains. Asked if there were other similar funds that have manipulated the market, Sebi chief said he didn't think there were "very many other risks." Pandey said that what happened in the Jane Street matter was a surveillance issue, and the regulator was upgrading its surveillance systems. A day earlier, the markets regulator had said that along with Sebi, the two leading bourses were also in the process of upgrading their surveillance systems so that cases like Jane Street did not occur. He had also assured investors that Sebi will not tolerate any attempt at market manipulation. The Sebi chief also said that the action it took against Jane Street was within the confines of the regulatory powers. Pandey also said that was not the regulatory powers but better surveillance and enforcement systems which would act as deterrents against market manipulators.
India Today
33 minutes ago
- India Today
Ex-chief justices back simultaneous polls, flag poll body's broad powers in bill
Former Chief Justices of India have supported the constitutionality of the 'one nation, one election' concept but raised concerns about the provisions of the proposed bill, particularly the wide powers granted to the Election Commission of India (ECI). Their views were conveyed to a parliamentary committee examining the bill on simultaneous a written opinion submitted to the Joint Committee of Parliament, former Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud dismissed the opposition's contention that synchronising Lok Sabha and state assembly elections violates the Constitution's basic argument that staggered elections are a part of the Constitution's basic structure (or form part of the principles of federalism or democracy) does not hold. Staggered timing of elections cannot be considered as a feature of the original Constitution, let alone an immutable feature,' he said. Chandrachud, however, expressed reservations over the 'sweeping powers' the bill seeks to grant the Election Commission. He warned that such 'unbounded authority' could allow the poll body to extend or curtail the tenure of a state assembly beyond the constitutionally mandated five years under the pretext of aligning elections with the Lok Sabha. 'The Constitution must define, delineate and structure the circumstances under which the ECI may invoke this power,' he Chief Justices Ranjan Gogoi and J S Kehar are scheduled to appear before the committee on July 11 for discussions with members over the bill's provisions. Gogoi had earlier appeared before the committee in March and shared concerns about excessive powers being given to the Chief Justice U U Lalit had appeared in February and advised that simultaneous polls be introduced in a phased manner. He warned that cutting short the terms of state assemblies with significant tenure left for synchronisation could invite legal their concerns, all three former Chief Justices agreed that the idea of simultaneous elections does not breach the Constitution. Chandrachud said, 'Simultaneous elections will not infringe upon the voters' right to elect their representatives and that the bill ensures that electors remain continuously represented by their duly elected MPs or MLAs.' He further criticised arguments against the bill as being based on the belief that 'the Indian electorate is naive and can be easily manipulated.'Chandrachud also cautioned that simultaneous elections could marginalise regional and smaller parties due to the influence of better-funded national parties. 'To ensure a level playing field among political parties, the rules governing electoral campaigning, particularly those relating to campaign finance, must be strengthened,' he pointed out that while individual candidates face spending limits under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, there are no caps on party the bill's proposal that houses elected through midterm polls will only serve the remainder of the original five-year term, Chandrachud flagged concerns about the effectiveness of such short-term governments. He said their ability to implement meaningful projects would be constrained, as the Model Code of Conduct would apply six months before the next members of the parliamentary panel have echoed this concern, questioning the capacity of short-tenure governments to deliver on policy and governance.- EndsMust Watch IN THIS STORY#One Nation One Election
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
Abu Salem to stay in jail till 2030, Bombay High Court rules out early release
The Bombay High Court on Monday observed that gangster Abu Salem's sentence in prison will get over only in 2030 and not on March 31, 2025 as he was bench of Justices AS Gadkari and Rajesh S Patil admitted his plea, which will be heard later and noted that the Supreme Court in its order had said that he could be sentenced only to 25 years, which would get over in the year 2030. The bench said, "We reckon that your date of arrest is October 2005. According to it, 25 years are yet to be completed."advertisementSalem, extradited from Portugal in 2005, was sentenced to life imprisonment for his role in the 1993 serial blasts by a special court under TADA and for the murder of builder Pradeep Jain. Salem had filed an appeal against that order and pointed out that when he was extradited, the Indian government had assured Portugal that he would not be sentenced for more than 25 years. It was in this context that the Supreme Court observed that he could be sentenced to 2030 lawyers, Rishi Malhotra and Farhana Shah, contended that Salem had earned three years and 16 days of remission for good conduct, along with a one-month credit granted by the Supreme Court for time spent in custody in Portugal. They claimed that these factors pushed his total sentence duration beyond 25 years, making him eligible for the Central Bureau of Investigation strongly opposed this argument. Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh, appearing for the CBI, submitted that Salem was mixing up the calculations to meet the 25-year threshold. Singh also said that Salem should approach the Supreme Court for clarification if he believes its earlier order was not being followed Malhotra insisted that the 2030 timeline failed to account for the remission period, the bench responded sharply, saying, 'Are you saying that the Supreme Court order is wrong? Even applying simple logic, 25 years is yet to be completed.'The court admitted Salem's plea and agreed to an expedited hearing, but no date has been set.- EndsMust Watch
