"Ab andar ghus ke marega": Sanjay Kumar Jha reiterates India's "new pproach" to terror in Jakarta
Jakarta (Indonesia), May 30 (ANI): All party delegation led by JD (U) MP Sanjay Kumar Jha on Friday while addressing the Indian diaspora in Jakarta reiterated India's new approach in combating cross-border terrorism from Pakistan.
'The new India will not just share information and data. If anything happens to the country, 'India ab andar ghus ke marega'...PM Modi said very clearly that this is the new normal. Our nation is progressing, and there is peace,' said Jha.
He emphasised that terrorists' attempts to spread communal disharmony have failed, showcasing India's maturity in handling such incidents.
'The way terrorists targeted a particular community, their purpose was to spread communal disharmony in our country, but we are a mature nation. Even a small incident did not erupt... ,' Jha said while addressing the diaspora.
He further stated that India's war against Pakistan was not over, and added that India would treat activities by Pakistan accordingly.
'Many people say that it is over, but it is not. India has cleared that any activity by Pakistan will be considered as an act of war against India and be treated accordingly... 140 billion Indians are one...' Jha said, addressing the Indian diaspora.
He further stated that the Pahalgam attack shook the entire world, a result of which India destroyed nine terror camps.
'The Pahalgam terror attack shook the entire world. We thought Pakistan would take action against it, but it didn't. So on May 7, India destroyed nine of their terror infrastructure... Pakistan tried to attack India on May 9; they attacked civilians in Poonch. In retaliation, India destroyed the Noor Khan air base and many other places... After which, their DGMO reached our DGMO and requested a ceasefire, to which we agreed...' he further added.
Member of the delegation, Salman Khurshid, stated that India was not greedy for Pakistan's territory and only had a vision on the future.
Khurshid further stated that India had bigger roles in the world.
'We are not greedy for their territory. Our vision is on our future....You see, here is mini India. It is complete hogwash if somebody says we call them. DGMO Pakistan called us. We showed restraint. We are not Pakistan, we are much larger than Pakistan. We have a bigger role in the world...' he added.
Member of the delegation Abhishek Banerjee stated that India's engagement with Pakistan would be on reclaiming PoK, further stating that terror and talks could not go together.
'This time when we engage with Pakistan we should engage with them on reclaiming PoK.... Terror and talks cannot go together. We have been engaging in Pakistan from last 50 years...' he stated.
He further stated that while India was not alone in it's fight against terrorism and had it's own diaspora, there was also enough proof in the world that Pakistan was promoting terrorism.
'In this war against terrorism, India in its fight is not alone, has its diaspora...It is not a issue of India's security. Cross border terrorism has become an imperative of entire world....There is enough proof in the public about Pakistan promoting terrorism,' Banerjee said.
The delegation to Indonesia, Malaysia, the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Singapore is led by JD-U MP Sanjay Kumar Jha and includes Aparajita Sarangi (BJP), Abhishek Banerjee (Trinamool Congress), Brij Lal (BJP), John Brittas (CPI-M), Pradan Baruah (BJP), Hemang Joshi (BJP), Salman Khurshid and Mohan Kumar. (ANI)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
27 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Restricting air access is akin to shooting yourself in the foot: Emirates
Restricting air access to foreign carriers by not granting them more bilateral rights is akin to shooting yourself in the foot, as air transport is a wealth multiplier for India's economy, Emirates President Tim Clark said on Sunday. The remark comes amid a long-standing tussle over bilateral flying rights between India and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Under the 2014 bilateral air service agreement, carriers from each country can operate up to 66,504 seats per week in each direction. Emirates, which already runs 334 weekly flights between Dubai and India, has maxed out its share. The UAE has repeatedly pushed for more capacity, but the Indian side — due to a strong push from Air India — has resisted, citing concerns that greater foreign access would undercut its own ambitions in the long-haul market. Clark on Sunday said the Indian diaspora forms a large part of Dubai's population, which has grown rapidly over the past decade. He noted that the scale of travel by Indians to and from Dubai underscores the missed opportunity in not expanding seat entitlements for Emirates. He added that the Indian government's policy of limiting foreign carrier capacity may stem from its own strategic reasons but hoped it would recognise the critical role of aviation in driving economic growth. 'After all, it's been a catalyst for so many economies in the past 20-30 years that have grown well. And, if you look at the air access that comes as part of that operating model, it's quite clear that not doing that will only have you shoot yourself in the foot in the end. But, it's up to the Indian government to decide what they want to do on that,' he observed. His remarks were made during a press conference held on the sidelines of the annual general meeting of the International Air Transport Association. The airline has been expressing frustration for several years over India's continued reluctance to expand flying rights. In March 2023, Clark described the decision as 'very vexing', adding that it was a 'pity' the carrier could not operate additional flights despite strong demand. Indian carriers remain divided on the issue of granting more bilateral rights to West Asian countries. In June 2024, the chief executive officers (CEOs) of Air India and SpiceJet opposed any expansion, arguing that the government should prioritise developing Indian airports into global hubs. On the other hand, the CEOs of Akasa Air and IndiGo called for a holistic evaluation before taking a final decision. Air India CEO and Managing Director Campbell Wilson went so far as to warn in June 2024 that granting more rights would be akin to pulling the rug out from under Indian carriers. 'Indian carriers have recently ordered more than 1,000 aircraft. We have an appetite for more. We are committing to that on the basis that there would be an economic return to that investment, which, if you add it all, is well over $100 billion… If the rug is pulled out from under us (by granting more bilateral rights), and if we can't fly those aircraft, we will not take them,' he said. Gulf carriers such as Emirates and Qatar Airways have been urging India to expand bilateral entitlements to allow for more flights. However, Indian airlines like Air India argue that such a move could hamper their long-haul and ultra-long-haul expansion plans, particularly to destinations in North America and Europe.
The Hindu
29 minutes ago
- The Hindu
India warms to foreign law firms, but legal concerns simmer
In the winter of February 2000, a sea of black coats surged towards Parliament House. Braving water cannons, tear gas, and lathi charges, over 40,000 lawyers staged an intense protest aimed at blocking the entry of foreign law firms and lawyers into the Indian legal system. A quarter of a century later, the landscape has shifted dramatically. On May 14, 2025, the Bar Council of India (BCI) — the regulatory authority for the legal profession — formally notified a set of rules permitting foreign law firms and lawyers to practice in India. Their role, however, is restricted: they may operate only in non-litigious matters, limited to foreign and international law, and solely on a reciprocal basis. A past steeped in resistance The nationwide agitation 25 years ago was triggered by the Law Commission of India's Working Paper, which proposed amendments to the Advocates Act, 1961, to allow foreign legal consultants to practice in India. 'The entire legal fraternity stood united,' recalled advocate and former Delhi Bar Association president Rajiv Khosla, who had led the lawyers' march and lost an eye in a scuffle with the police. The Supreme Court later reinforced this sentiment in March 2018 when it ruled that foreign law firms and foreign lawyers could not practise law in the country either on the litigation or non-litigation side. One of the central arguments then was reciprocity, given that Indian advocates were not allowed to practice in the U.K., U.S.A., Australia, and other foreign nations without complying with onerous restrictions such as qualifying tests, proof of experience, and work permits. The turnaround In March 2023, the BCI floated a notification permitting foreign lawyers to function in non-litigious areas only. Although that notification was challenged in the Delhi High Court, and remains under judicial consideration, the latest iteration in May 2025 has cemented the policy shift. Lalit Bhasin, chairman of the Society of Indian Law Firms (SILF), who was once a vocal opponent of foreign law firms entering India, reflected on the shift in tone: 'We welcome them. They can learn from us, we can learn from them. It would be a good opening for our young lawyers also who can work with them.' Still, he expressed concerns that the latest BCI notification might contravene the Supreme Court's 2018 rulings. Mr. Bhasin said the BCI's 2023 notification was kept in abeyance, but the current development amounts to 'old wine in a new bottle.' 'Our view is, why can't the Parliament just amend the law, that is, the Advocates Act, giving liberty to foreign lawyers to come to India to practice? Because the existing law does not permit it,' Mr. Bhasin stressed. 'Encouraging global integration' Haigreve Khaitan, Senior Partner at Khaitan & Co, called the move 'a positive step'. He said, 'This will result in increased knowledge sharing, innovation, and faster adoption of global best practices. Regulatory reforms must now ensure a level playing field.' 'The amendment's spirit is to safeguard domestic litigation while encouraging global integration,' said Abhishek Prasad, founder of his eponymous chambers. It also creates new opportunities for Indian lawyers and law firms through the dual registration provision, which allows them to practice foreign and international law without relinquishing their right to practice Indian law, he added. Shailendera Singh, partner at GnS Legal, added a pragmatic note: 'The amended Rules do not specify if foreign lawyers are restricted in appearing in international arbitration only when the applicable law is Indian law, making it possible for them to appear so long as one of the parties is a foreign party.' 'Reciprocity is an illusion' Former Bar Council of Delhi chairman K.C. Mittal raised questions about reciprocity. 'The whole action is against the Advocates Act, as the same requires amendments in the basic Act. The claim of reciprocity is illusionary. Reciprocal means our law degree and enrolments certifies are recognised by them and any lawyer from India can go, appear and argue but it's not so,' he said. Mr. Khosla echoed these concerns. 'So far, the BCI hasn't specified which countries have extended reciprocal access to Indian lawyers. Other countries aren't accepting us, yet we're moving ahead — I don't understand why,' he said.
India Today
30 minutes ago
- India Today
Mamata Banerjee can oppose Waqf Act till 2026, won't be in power later: Amit Shah
Union Home Minister Amit Shah, while addressing the BJP workers meeting in Kolkata asked the crowd if there's something wrong with the Waqf Act. He further said the West Bengal Chief Minister can oppose the act only till 2026 because she won't remain in power after that. News agency ANI shared a video of Amit Shah addressing the people. "...Is something wrong with the Waqf Act? Should the land of Bengal be sacrificed because of Waqf? Who is Mamata Banerjee favouring by opposing the Waqf Act?... Mamata Banerjee may oppose the Waqf till 2026 because after that she will not be the CM anymore," he said.
