logo
Stop all trade with China: Akhilesh in Lok Sabha

Stop all trade with China: Akhilesh in Lok Sabha

Hindustan Times4 days ago
Samajwadi Party president Akhilesh Yadav on Tuesday asked the Centre in Lok Sabha to fix responsibility for the 'intelligence failure' that led to the Pahalgam terror attack. Participating in the debate on Operation Sindoor, he raised questions on India ending the conflict with Pakistan abruptly and asked, 'Under whose pressure was the ceasefire done?' SP chief Akhilesh Yadav was participating in a debate on Operation Sindoor in Parliament. (HT file)
Yadav also alleged that India's foreign policy has 'completely collapsed' and called China a 'monster' that will 'gobble up our land and market'. The SP chief also demanded the Centre to stop all kinds of businesses with China.
Moreover, the Kannauj MP praised the Indian Army for its exemplary valour. 'When the world's brave armies are counted, the Indian Army is seen at the forefront. We are all proud of the indomitable valour of our army that attacked the terror camps of Pakistan and destroyed them,' he said.
'This is not a matter of the ruling party or the opposition. This is about the security of the country and the protection of the people. Why don't all of us come together and make such a strategy so that Indian borders remain safe and peaceful forever,' Yadav suggested.
'At the time of the Pahalgam attack, the tourists present there were asking why there was no one to protect them. The government claimed that after the abolition of Article 370, there would be no terrorist incident in Kashmir and tourism there will get a boost,' he said.
'The tourists had gone there on the trust and assurance of the government. There was a security lapse in Pahalgam. Who is responsible for this lapse? Who will take responsibility? This incident was an intelligence failure. The government should tell what steps it is taking to prevent such an incident in the future,' the SP chief said.
He also alleged that those in the government talked big and gave provocative speeches as they wanted to take emotional advantage from the public. 'The propaganda done in the name of Operation Sindoor is condemnable. Operation Sindoor is a symbol of the failure of the government,' Yadav alleged.
On the issue of threat from China, he claimed the country faced as much threat from China as it faced from terrorism. 'The government will have to seriously consider its economic policies. If the country's trade and business are strong, no one will be able to challenge it. The talk should not be only about trillion dollars but also about security and self-reliance,' he said.
'China is standing behind Pakistan. We have to be cautious about it. China is snatching away the land as well as the market here. The government should make a 10-15 year plan to curb terrorism and reduce trade with China. If trade with China continues, our country will never be able to become self-reliant,' the SP chief said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

A tribute to economist Shankar Acharya, A World in Flux, explores what needs to be done to achieve India's goal of becoming Viksit by 2047
A tribute to economist Shankar Acharya, A World in Flux, explores what needs to be done to achieve India's goal of becoming Viksit by 2047

Indian Express

timea minute ago

  • Indian Express

A tribute to economist Shankar Acharya, A World in Flux, explores what needs to be done to achieve India's goal of becoming Viksit by 2047

A confession — I have known Shankar Acharya, a friend and fellow cricket junkie, far longer than he or I are willing to admit. It is an honour to review 'A World in Flux – India's Economic Priorities', a timely and deeply researched collection of essays in honour of Shankar's thinking and contributions. The book is about what change is needed to allow India to meet its tryst with a destiny that is viksit by its 100th anniversary in 2047. The contributors are much more than eminent scholars — they are acknowledged experts in their fields. The biggest — and the most well-deserved — tribute to Shankar is that the contributors have chosen to write a learned and expert commentary. Much of what they have written and advocated as policy is spot on, so what is a reviewer supposed to do? I can summarise the issues raised by the authors, but the editors, Amita Batra and AK Bhattacharya, provide a must-read analysis — a model introduction to a very distinguished economist, policy advisor and policy-maker. There has only been one major policy question on which Shankar and I have disagreed — and continue to disagree — and that is the danger that fiscal deficits pose to growth and inflation. He, of course, initiated India's long-term fiscal policy in the early 1980s, at a time when such a roadmap was very much needed. Before going further, I want to add that we have differences — differences that arise not out of a difference in expertise or analysis but differences in our genes. Shankar, by his own admission, gravitates towards pessimism; and when I have to err, I err on the side of my DNA++ disposition. The 'what should be done about fiscal deficits' debate is a good point ofdeparture for illustrating why 'yeh dil mange more' than offered by the experts in the volume. Does India have a high fiscal deficits problem or a problem of plenty, one which allows policy makers from doing nothing (at best) or actually implementing bad policies? Sajjid Chinoy in his tour de force essay ('Getting Rich Before Getting Old') speaks about raising India's tax/GDP ratio from an already high level of around 19 per cent today. It is quite the fashion among Indian commentators (I include myself in this galaxy) to point to China as a worthy example to follow — when in doubt, do what China does and thou shalt succeed. China's tax/GDP ratio of 14.5 per cent in 2024 suggests we should radically decrease our rate of taxation. But our experts do not advocate that. Why? India's fiscal problem is one oftoo high taxation, not too little. 'Easy' revenue allows the government (state and central) to indulge in ever more wasteful expenditure (freebies) which slows growth. Our slow growth, relative to potential, is the problem, not that fiscal deficits are causing inflation to be at a historic low. The IMF orthodoxy of 'when in doubt, raise tax revenue' is now hopelessly outdated. Another example of divergence between necessary policy, and one offered by experts, pertains to the low share of manufacturing (and even the ever lower share of manufactured exports). We all agree that something needs to be done, but what? One favourite solution (like raising the tax revenue) is to join the China-led RCEP. This is dictated by the specious reasoning that since China leads in manufactured export growth, by joining RCEP we will do so too. However, 13 of 15 RCEP countries have lower growth of manufactured exports than before (joining) RCEP. As far as policy analysis goes, why not note that our two 'global champions' — Ambani and Adani-led enterprises — produce zero manufactured goods (unless an intermediate good like polyester is considered a final manufactured good, like shirts)? And why, iflack of textile growth is a problem (it is!), our reform experts (except Amitabh Kant) don't point to the fact that a very very low hanging fruit is the reduction of high import duties on manmade fibres? Why don't the experts argue that the government should choose winners like Ambani and Adani? The government should appoint these global experts to lead the march on manufactured goods. Instead of Production Linked Incentives (PIL) we should have EIL — Export Linked Incentives. If subsidies are involved (as they will be), the government should provide them. Learn from China (again) how to sidestep WTO regulations. This is how Korea, China and the US have succeeded — we will succeed too. Bhattacharya also has a much-needed, must-read chapter on the political economy of reforms. AK notes that in the near-50-year history of economic reforms in India, an important pattern emerges. 'But once the immediate economic crisis was overcome, the pace of implementing subsequent reforms slowed considerably'. Phrased differently, the story of economic reforms in India is that reforms stop because our politicians (and the Deep State behind them) are not risk-takers, but comfort-zone seekers. They like the comfort zone of 'not rocking the boat', and thereby insure that Viksit Bharat 2047 might very well be no more than a dream. Before ending, I have a quibble with even this most worthy chapter. Bhattacharya's path to reform is via consensus-building (the mantra of every failed and defeated optimist). But AK fails to note that the path to consensus is littered with sabotage by the major groups (or group) hurt by the proposed reforms. Why, if everything is as well-known and as dutifully documented by all of us, are we still asking for basic reforms in agriculture, manufacturing, and governance? Note that a Supreme Court survey conducted after the withdrawal of farm-reform legislation, found an overwhelming consensus (87 per cent) among farmers wanting the proposed farm laws reform. Bhalla is chairperson of the Technical Expert Group for the first official Household Income Survey for India. Views are personal

PM Modi underlines ‘economic priorities', gives call for Swadeshi push after Trump's ‘dead economy' jibe
PM Modi underlines ‘economic priorities', gives call for Swadeshi push after Trump's ‘dead economy' jibe

Indian Express

time2 minutes ago

  • Indian Express

PM Modi underlines ‘economic priorities', gives call for Swadeshi push after Trump's ‘dead economy' jibe

Days after US President Donald Trump labelled India a 'dead economy,' Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Saturday said that the country must remain alert to its 'own economic priorities' amid the instability and uncertainty facing the world economy. He urged Indians to stand firm on economic nationalism and self-reliance. Speaking at a public rally in Varanasi's Banauli village, Modi underscored that India is on track to become the world's third-largest economy amid growing international uncertainty. 'In such times, countries are focusing solely on their own interests. India, too, must remain alert to its own economic priorities,' Modi said, invoking a renewed push for Swadeshi. 'At a time when the world is going through uncertainty, let us take a pledge to sell only Swadeshi goods from our shops and markets. Promoting made in India goods will be the truest service to the country.' The remarks come days after Trump announced a 25 per cent import tariff on Indian goods, effective August 7, and warned of further penalties for India's ongoing purchase of Russian crude oil and military equipment. In a post on Truth Social, Trump said: 'They (Russia and India) can take their dead economies down together, for all I care.' After Trump's statement, India's response was measured. Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal told Parliament on Thursday that India remains the world's fastest-growing major economy and is widely expected to emerge as the third-largest globally in the near future. In his speech Saturday, Modi framed the global economic instability as a moment of opportunity for India. 'The feeling of Swadeshi in every action will define our future,' he said. 'This will also be a true tribute to Mahatma Gandhi. Only through collective effort can we fulfil the dream of a developed India.' He urged citizens to become conscious consumers and adopt the 'Vocal for Local' mantra. 'Whatever we buy, we should ask ourselves – has an Indian toiled to make this? If it has been made by the sweat of our people, with their skills, that product is Swadeshi for us.' The prime minister also called on all political parties to unite behind the goal of national economic advancement. 'If we want India to become the third-largest economy, every political party and every leader, keeping aside their hesitations, must work in the nation's interest and awaken the spirit of Swadeshi among the people,' he said.

'Disgrace': Putin Spares No One; Blasts ‘Corrupt' Zelensky; Hits US, Europe over 'Legal Corruption'
'Disgrace': Putin Spares No One; Blasts ‘Corrupt' Zelensky; Hits US, Europe over 'Legal Corruption'

Time of India

time2 minutes ago

  • Time of India

'Disgrace': Putin Spares No One; Blasts ‘Corrupt' Zelensky; Hits US, Europe over 'Legal Corruption'

'Take Dead Economies Down Together, Don't Care: Trump Stuns With Fresh Tariff Salvo At India, Russia US President Donald Trump has reignited trade tensions with India, announcing a 25% tariff on Indian goods, plus an additional "penalty tax" for New Delhi's continued oil and defense ties with Russia. Calling India 'a friend with unfair trade practices,' Trump said the tariffs are a necessary response to India's high duties on US goods and its unwillingness to cut ties with Moscow. This move complicates India's goal of doubling trade with the US to $500 billion by 2030 and places pressure on ongoing negotiations for a fair bilateral trade agreement. While India says it's reviewing the implications, Trump's aggressive stance could impact multiple sectors, including pharmaceuticals, IT hardware, and energy. As the global trade chessboard shifts, can India protect its strategic autonomy while balancing U.S. pressure and Russian ties? A dramatic flashpoint in U.S.-India relations is unfolding.#donaldtrump #pmmodi #narendramodi #india #unitedstates #russia #indiaustradedeal #ustariff #trumptariff #trumpindia #indiarussiaoil #indianews #usindiatrade #modivstrump #operationsindoor #foreignpolicy #indianeconomy #tariffwar #russianoil #indousrelations #globaleconomy #makeinindia #newcoldwar #trump2025 #modigovernment #trendingnow #usindia #breakingnews #trending #bharat #toi #toibharat 78.2K views | 2 days ago

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store