&w=3840&q=100)
Best of BS Opinion: India's choices in a world of shifting alliances
In Washington, a purple sun casts long shadows on India-US trade. Peter Navarro defended a 25 per cent tariff on Indian exports in the Financial Times, linking it to discounted Russian oil purchases. Yet larger buyers like China and Turkiye face no such penalty, exposing selective logic in US trade policy. With India already reducing Russian imports, the imbalance remains, notes our first editorial, and the debate now is whether New Delhi should pre-emptively lower its own tariffs to turn the purple glare into long-term advantage.
Closer home, the unusual light also falls on Beijing's sudden warmth. Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi's first visit in three years promised cooperation on fertilisers, minerals, and visas, while signalling readiness for Prime Minister Narendra Modi's expected trip for the SCO summit. Disengagements on the border and resumed pilgrimages suggest easing tensions, but history shows Beijing's hues can change overnight, highlights our second editorial. For India, reducing dependence while broadening regional partnerships may be the only way to guard against sudden eclipses.
Meanwhile, Shyam Saran sees the same strange dawn in Europe's courtship of Donald Trump. Leaders, eager to brand him peacemaker, endorsed territorial concessions to Russia, a diplomatic win for Moscow disguised as compromise. For Russia, it was a quiet victory and for India, the lesson is clear: avoid pandering to volatile leaders, prepare for hostile tariffs that will not vanish, and guard against 'grand bargains' that may push New Delhi to the margins.
Yet amid the global haze, Vinayak Chatterjee points to the glow of opportunity within. He writes that India's Rs 1 trillion Urban Challenge Fund could finally give cities the resources to become growth hubs, provided projects are designed to attract private capital and avoid the stumbles of past schemes. With urbanisation accelerating, this could be the purple glow of opportunity on the horizon.
And finally, in Gunjan Singh's review of Joseph Torigian's biography of Xi Zhongxun, the father of Xi Jinping, the theme sharpens. Xi senior's life, marked by loyalty, purges, and resilience, shows how power bends people and systems alike. It is a reminder that a purple sun rises when history itself is in flux and we must learn to read the colours before they fade.
Stay tuned!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
a minute ago
- Economic Times
Stock Radar: NYKAA stock breaks out from 4-week consolidation; likely to hit fresh 52-week highs – what should investors do?
FSN E-Commerce Ventures (NYKAA), part of the e-retail industry, broke out from a 4-week consolidation on the weekly charts which has opened room for the stock to head higher and might even hit fresh 52-week traders can look to buy the stock for a target of Rs 238 in the next 3-4 weeks, suggest e-retail stock hit a high of Rs 229 on August 23, 2024. It closed at Rs 225 on August 20, stock got stuck in a range
Mint
a minute ago
- Mint
Junior Bankers Win Up to 30% Pay Hikes in Hong Kong Deals Boom
(Bloomberg) -- Citic Securities Ltd. and other Chinese brokers are raising pay levels again for junior bankers in Hong Kong to boost retention and handle a jump in dealmaking, according to people familiar with the moves. China's biggest broker is raising pay at its Hong Kong CLSA unit, giving 15% to 30% bumps to about HK$75,000 ($9,600) to HK$80,000 a month to select junior associates, the people said, asking not to be identified because they aren't authorized to discuss compensation. The raises don't apply across the board, one of the people said. Pay is now back at 2022 levels, but still below what first- to third-year associates earned in 2021, when deal activity hit multi-decade highs, one of the people said. China Merchants Bank Co.'s Hong Kong arm, CMB International, has also lifted pay to similar levels for juniors, while a number of other firms are considering raises to follow suit amid rising competition for talent, according to people familiar with the matter. The increases and planned bumps mark a stark turnaround after pay was lowered over the past few years and bonuses and perks were gutted, especially on the mainland, amid a political shift to rein in private enterprise. Bankers in particular were singled out by the ruling Communist Party as leading 'hedonistic' lifestyles, leading firms to also take a cautious approach in Hong Kong. Now dealmaking is flourishing in Hong Kong, mainly driven by the listing of mainland Chinese companies, triggering moves between brokers and demand for bankers. Stock markets are also staging a comeback on the Chinese mainland, even as the property market remains in crisis and the economy has struggled to revive. A Hong Kong-based spokeswoman at Citic declined to comment. CMBI wasn't immediately able to comment. Since late 2022, investment banks and brokerages have made multiple rounds of staff cuts as dealmaking dried up, China's economy faltered on deflation and property woes, and Beijing tightened oversight of the private sector. That has turned around over the past 12 months. Hong Kong saw a net increase of some 1,200 licensed financial professionals, driving the total number to almost 42,500 by the end of June, according to Securities and Futures Commission data compiled by Bloomberg. Citic Securities (Hong Kong), along with CLSA, led the growth in licensed financiers versus a year ago with about 300 additions. CMBI and Huatai Financial Holdings (Hong Kong) Ltd. also added about 70 individuals each, according to SFC data. --With assistance from Jinshan Hong. More stories like this are available on
Hindustan Times
33 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Can't let Governors sit on bills indefinitely: SC
New Delhi: Permitting governors to sit indefinitely on bills passed by state legislatures may render the democratic process and the will of the people 'defunct', the Supreme Court observed on Thursday, as it continued hearing the presidential reference on whether the courts can prescribe timelines for gubernatorial and presidential assent. The Supreme Court building in New Delhi. (HT Photo) A constitution bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Bhushan R Gavai and justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, PS Narasimha and Atul S Chandurkar is examining President Droupadi Murmu's Article 143 reference made in May. The reference seeks clarity on the top court's April 8 ruling which, for the first time, laid down timelines for governors and the president to decide on state bills pending before them. 'If a particular function is entrusted to the governor and for years he withholds it, will that also be beyond the scope of judicial review of this court? When this court has set aside constitutional amendments taking away judicial review as violating the basic structure, can we now say that however high a constitutional authority may be, courts will still be powerless if it does not act?' the bench asked. The bench also pressed the Centre to explain what remedy exists when governors indefinitely delay action. 'Under Article 200, if we hold that the governor has unlimited power to withhold a bill for time immemorial, what is the safeguard for a duly elected legislature? Suppose a legislature elected by a two-thirds majority passes a bill unanimously, and the governor simply sits on it, it would make the legislature totally defunct,' it further remarked. Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union government, countered that while the court's concern may be justified, it cannot assume jurisdiction to set time limits where the Constitution is silent. 'A justification can never confer jurisdiction. Every problem in this country may not have a solution in the Supreme Court. Some problems must find solutions within the system,' he said. According to Mehta, the solution was in the 'political process, not judicial directions'. He argued that chief ministers could engage directly with governors, prime ministers, or even the President to resolve such impasses. 'Such issues have been arising for decades but have always been resolved through political statesmanship and maturity. Why cannot we trust other constitutional functionaries? The remedy ultimately will lie with Parliament by way of an amendment, not by judicial legislation,' Mehta submitted. At this, the bench interjected: 'When there is no outer limit, can a constitutional interpretation be left to a vacuum? Though a time limit may not be prescribed, there must be some way the process works. There cannot be a situation where not acting on a bill itself is a full stop… nothing further.' The bench also questioned whether judicial review could be completely excluded. The court observed: 'The decision may not be justiciable, but the decision-making process certainly falls within the ambit of judicial review.' Mehta, however, warned that opening the door to scrutiny would lead to 'multilevel challenges' at every stage of a governor's or president's decision under Articles 200 and 201. 'Our problem is every step before the final decision will also be challenged because they can also constitute a 'decision',' he argued. He cited judicial precedents where the court held that fixed timelines for criminal trials could not be judicially prescribed, to reinforce his submission that timelines in constitutional processes too cannot be judicially imposed. But the bench pressed further, citing petitions already filed by Kerala, Punjab, and West Bengal. 'Suppose a decision is not taken for four years. What happens to the democratic set-up of the government? What happens to the will of the two-thirds majority of the legislature?' it asked. Mehta responded with an analogy: 'Take the example of a trial pending for 10 years. Can the President step in and declare that the punishment is deemed to have been undergone because the judiciary has delayed? Separation of powers means some issues are non-justiciable.' The court, however, made it clear that it was not dealing with a hypothetical concern. 'We are having petitions from at least four states,' the court underlined. The presidential reference, prompted by the court's April judgment in the Tamil Nadu case, asks whether the judiciary can impose timelines on constitutional authorities like governors and the president when the Constitution itself is silent. In that ruling, a two-judge bench also fixed a three-month deadline for the president to decide on bills referred by a governor, and one month for a governor to act on re-enacted bills. It had even invoked Article 142 to deem 10 Tamil Nadu bills as assented to, after holding that the governor's prolonged inaction was 'illegal'. Mehta criticised the notion of deemed assent. 'Deemed assent would mean your lordships substituted yourselves for the governor and declared the assent deemed to have been granted. Article 142 cannot be used to amend the Constitution,' he argued. The bench, however, maintained that courts cannot abdicate their role as custodians of the Constitution. 'Every wrong has to have a remedy. Whether the hands of the constitutional court will be tied when a constitutional functionary refuses to discharge their function without any valid reason? Whether the court will say we are powerless?' the bench asked. Arguments on the reference will continue on August 26.
