Withheld X Accounts of Reuters, TRT World, Global Times Restored
As The Wire reported yesterday (July 6), the X accounts of these news sites said that the move was made in response to a 'legal demand'.
PTI then quoted an unnamed government source as having said that a demand for blocking Reuters' X account alongside several hundreds of other accounts was made during Operation Sindoor and it appeared that X had belatedly acted on this demand. The Wire was among news outlets whose webpages or social media accounts were blocked at the time when India was conducting strikes on Pakistani terror sites and combating counter-attack in May.
Later in the day on July 6, an official spokesperson of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology was quoted by news agencies as having said that 'there is no requirement from the government of India to withhold the Reuters handle. We are continuously working with 'X' to resolve the problem.'
By this morning, it appeared that all the accounts had been restored.
Reuters is the news and media division of Thomson Reuters, and the news agency provides information on breaking news and multimedia content from 2,600 journalists across 165 countries.
The Global Times is a daily Chinese tabloid under the auspices of the Chinese Communist Party's flagship newspaper, the People's Daily.
TRT Global, previously named TRT World, is a Turkish public broadcaster.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
34 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Trump is already making the next Fed chair's job harder
Reuters U.S. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell testifies before a House Financial Services Committee hearing on "The Semiannual Monetary Policy Report to the Congress," on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. President Donald Trump has acknowledged the intense pressure he's laying on the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates is, in fact, making it harder for the central bank to do just he may also be sabotaging the person he picks to succeed Jerome Powell, whose term as chair expires next pledging to pick 'somebody that wants to cut rates,' Trump has potentially undermined the next chair's standing even before they're selected. The public and investors will likely question whether the nominee will safeguard the central bank's independence or bow to Trump's demands. 'People will wonder what sort of promises or implicit promises or winks or nods may have gone on in order to get the nomination,' said Jon Faust, a fellow at the Center for Financial Economics at Johns Hopkins University and a former special adviser to Powell. 'I think that's very bad for the next Fed chair. I think that's very bad for the credibility of the Fed.' Trump has pointed to recent tame inflation readings and lower policy rates in other countries in his calls for the Fed to reduce borrowing costs, while maintaining the central bank can raise interest rates should inflation re-accelerate. He's also argued the Fed — which was late to hike interest rates to counter the inflation surge that followed the Covid-19 pandemic — has often waited too long to adjust its policy. In an emailed statement, White House spokesman Kush Desai said it was Trump's First Amendment right 'to voice his concern about flawed policymaking, and that includes monetary policy that's holding our country's economic resurgence back.'Powell hasn't responded directly to Trump's badgering. Instead, he has emphasized that policymakers are squarely focused on doing what they judge to be in the best interest of the economy and within their legal mandate.'I have a little more than 10 months left on my term as chair and all I want, and all anybody at the Fed wants, is to deliver an economy that has price stability, maximum employment, financial stability,' Powell said on July 1. Right now, Powell and his colleagues have decided that means holding off on rate cuts. They want more clarity on how Trump's tariffs and other policies will affect inflation and employment. That's stoked Trump's ire, and others in his administration have ramped up the attacks in recent days.'I fully understand that my strong criticism of him makes it more difficult for him to do what he should be doing, lowering Rates,' Trump said of Powell on social media last LessonsIn recent decades, elected officials and Fed policymakers alike have aimed to insulate monetary policy from political interference. That's a result of painful lessons learned when central bankers yielded to outside Volcker, who became Fed chair in 1979, is remembered for waging a dogged fight to quell an inflation problem that many believe went unchecked because the Fed gave in to pressure from President Richard Nixon. Economic historians credit Volcker with reestablishing the Fed's credibility on price stability and setting the stage for a long period of low lesson, and similar examples from around the globe, have led researchers to broadly agree that economies perform better when central banks set rates independently. 'If you believe that the central bank is going to make decisions that even marginally tilt more toward political pressures, you're going to expect higher inflation, more volatility in the macroeconomy,' said Julia Coronado, founder of research firm MacroPolicy Perspectives. 'All of that has a price in the bond market and in financial markets generally.'Coronado said she expects the next Fed leader to be less invested in the central bank's independence than the last few chairs.'It's not going to be some arsonist that comes in and lights the institution on fire. I think it'll be more incremental, but still meaningful,' she said. 'At the margin, they're going to try to guide that committee to easier policy because that will be the political pressure and it will have some impact.'The CandidatesTrump has said he has three or four people in mind to succeed Powell and his pick will come 'very soon.''If I think somebody's going to keep the rates where they are or whatever, I'm not going to put them in. I'm going to put somebody that wants to cut rates,' he said last the White House spokesman, said the president 'will continue to nominate the most qualified individuals who can best serve the American people.' Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent – who is reportedly among those under consideration – said on June 30 the administration will work on naming a successor over the coming weeks and months. Other candidates said to be in contention include Kevin Warsh, a former Fed governor, and a current governor, Christopher Waller. Kevin Hassett, the White House's National Economic Council director, and former World Bank President David Malpass are also said to be in the mix. Bessent, Hassett and Malpass have echoed Trump's view that the Fed should already be cutting rates. Waller, citing recent economic data, has said a rate cut could be appropriate as soon as this month. He has also touted the importance of central bank independence. While in wait-and-see mode for now, most Fed officials still expect the central bank will cut rates at least once this year. And some analysts have noted economic conditions could evolve in a way that makes the rate cuts Trump seeks a less contentious policy choice even before a new chair takes addition, checks on the Fed chief will remain regardless of whom Trump picks. The chair is just one of 19 policymakers on the Federal Open Market Committee, and one of 12 who vote on interest-rate next chair could still be viewed as having credibility if they offer a reasonable intellectual framework for lowering rates, said Derek Tang, an economist at LHMeyer/Monetary Policy Analytics in Washington. He said he'll be watching how investors' expectations for future inflation react once Trump names a pick as an indication of whether markets view the choice as credible.'The candidate has to thread a needle to be pleasing enough to Trump,' Tang said. 'But then at the same time be able to convince the market they're going to stand up for Fed independence and defend the inflation mandate. They have to do both things at once, which is hard.'
Hindustan Times
36 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Inside the secret military dialogue between Britain and Argentina
America's top brass worries about the South Atlantic. It is a jumping-off point for Antarctica , where Russia and China boast 15 bases between them, scrambling to lock down resources . It is linked to the Pacific by the Strait of Magellan, the only safe maritime route between the two oceans other than the drought-hit Panama Canal . Traffic through the Strait is surging, as is illegal Chinese fishing on either side. China is pushing infrastructure projects across the region. America's top generals have visited Argentina's deep south three times in the last two years. At first glance the United States is well positioned to manage any threat. President Javier Milei of Argentina is a hyper-willing ally. Britain has Typhoon fighter jets and the HMS Forth patrol vessel stationed in the Falkland Islands. But Argentina's armed forces are in bad shape. Britain's are focused on defending the Falklands (sovereignty over which Britain has and Argentina claims) from Argentina. As a legacy of the Falklands war, Britain has tight restrictions on weapons sales to Argentina. These have hamstrung the latter's efforts to improve its armed forces and pushed it towards buying Chinese planes and weaponry, alarming the United States. Now a mix of factors, including Mr Milei's unusual perspective on the islands and American enthusiasm for Argentina's military modernisation, have created an openin At first glance the United States is well positioned to manage any threat. President Javier Milei of Argentina is a hyper-willing ally. g for a new strategic arrangement in the South Atlantic. Quietly, after a long hiatus, dialogue between the Argentine and British defence ministries has restarted. Argentina wants Britain to loosen its restrictions on arms purchases. Britain wants discreet acceptance of its role in the rest of the South Atlantic even while Argentina maintains its constitutional claim over the Falklands. Britain also wants Argentina to work with it on practical matters to improve life on the Falklands. The warming began in February 2024, a few months after Mr Milei took office. British defence attachés visited the ministry of defence in Argentina for first time in three years. In September that year the British and Argentine foreign ministers met and arranged a visit by Argentines to the graves of family members on the Falklands. They also agreed to share fisheries data and to restart monthly direct flights to the Falklands from Argentina. Defence dialogue then ramped up. An Argentine delegation visited London in January. Next, a British one is expected to visit Buenos Aires. Mr Milei wants to modernise his country's armed forces with the best NATO-compatible equipment. He is cutting government spending savagely, but raising the defence budget from 0.5% of GDP to 2% over the next seven years. Last year Argentina applied for NATO-partner status. Britain is interested in a deal, too, but cautious. It shares the American concerns about the South Atlantic. Argentina's de facto acceptance of Britain's relevance in the region would facilitate closer co-operation on everything from science to security, not just with Argentina but also with its neighbours, Chile and Uruguay. But while the Argentine families visited in December, Argentina has not yet shared fishing data or restarted flights, stepping stones to progress on arms policy. The islanders are wary. 'We feel very secure,' says Leona Roberts of the Falklands' Executive Council, 'but we would probably not be wildly comfortable with the UK supplying military equipment to Argentina.' Britain has long blocked sales of military equipment with British components to Argentina, even by third countries. Given the strength of Britain's arms industry this has been a serious constraint. In 2020 it blocked the sale of Korean fighter jets with some British parts. The stated policy is to block sales that could 'enhance Argentine military capability'. Yet there is wriggle room. Britain may allow sales that 'are not detrimental to the UK's defence and security interests'. A first step could be to interpret that clause more flexibly. The shape of things to come There are several reasons to believe a new arrangement is possible. Few consider Argentina a real threat to the Falklands. 'It's militarily unthinkable…[Britain] would wipe us off the planet,' says Alejandro Corbacho, a military historian at the University of CEMA in Buenos Aires. Britain seems more willing to reconsider its restrictions if Argentina planned to make large purchases, as that would boost Britain's defence industry. If so, that would suggest the embargo is more about politics than protecting the Falklands. Britain knows its restrictions are anyway losing bite as more countries make military kit. That the United States wants a new arrangement matters too. In public statements it has offered 'steadfast' support for the modernisation of Argentina's armed forces. In private, one American with knowledge of the matter calls Argentina 'a huge partner' but says its military is 'in very sore need of equipment and training'. But that equipment must be Western, not Chinese. Britain's embargo makes that harder. Continued intransigence could end up bolstering those in a post-Milei government that believes Argentina's future, in weaponry and politics, runs through China rather than the West. Argentina's dalliance with American adversaries is real. Mr Milei likes trading with the Asian giant. In 2023, before he took office, a Chinese firm looked set to build a large port near the Argentine entrance to the Strait. That project collapsed amid intense objections both foreign and domestic, but China, which operates a space station in Patagonia, remains keenly interested in the region. Under the last administration Argentina was 'gnat's-ass close to buying Chinese fighter aircraft', warns the American. In 2021, weeks before the invasion of Ukraine, the previous government signed a deal with the Russian ministry of defence allowing Argentine officers to travel to Russia for training. During Joe Biden's presidency the United States pushed Britain to let Argentina buy modern F-16 fighter jets with a British-made ejector seat. Britain was reluctant and an alternative was found. Argentina bought older F-16s from Denmark with $40m of American money. These did not have British parts, so its approval was not required. However, the United States still sought to explain and justify it to Britain, which accepted it. That was progress. 'The US government was also interested in whether the broader export controls could be ended,' says a former American official. A spokesperson for the British government says it has 'no current plans to review the UK's export-control policy for Argentina'. But it is easy to imagine Britain's position shifting. The Trump administration is pushy, ignores orthodoxy and is close to Mr Milei, whose pro-Western stance probably helps Britain to be flexible. His conciliatory tone and taboo-breaking on the Falklands is crucial. He openly admires Margaret Thatcher, who led Britain during the Falklands war. He admits that the islands 'are in the hands of the UK' and assures that Argentina will not try to retake them by force. Recently, he even seemed to imply that the islanders have a right to self-determination, Britain's position. Domestic politics remain a formidable barrier in both countries. Argentina appointed a new foreign minister in October. Despite enthusiasm in other parts of government, better ties with Britain seem less of a priority for the new man. For its part, Britain worries about who comes after Mr Milei. Selling arms to a Milei-led Argentina may be okay, but he will leave office in 2027 or 2031. An attempt in 2016 to reset relations was torn up after the left-wing Peronists returned to power. It would be embarrassing to help Argentina modernise its armed forces only for that to happen again. In both countries the flag-waving opposition could paint an agreement as a concession and use it to whip up anger. In Britain, Nigel Farage's Reform UK party is surging in the polls and could easily pressure the government over any new arrangement, framing it as a betrayal of the war dead, perhaps. In Argentina the Peronists have already attacked Mr Milei for his stance on the Falklands. With mid-term elections in October he and his team may prefer to steer clear of the issue for now. Yet the overriding logic of Mr Milei's foreign policy is airtight alignment with the United States (notwithstanding trade with China). Britain has a similar, if less absolutist, tradition. The Trump administration is so exercised about Chinese influence in Latin America that it threatens to seize the Panama Canal. It is also clear about the threat in the South Atlantic. If it pushes harder its two allies may draw a similar conclusion—and act accordingly.
Time of India
36 minutes ago
- Time of India
Reuters X account restored in India after suspension over legal demand
HighlightsThe Reuters News account on the social media platform X was restored in India on Sunday after being suspended due to a legal demand, with the platform indicating compliance with local laws. The Indian government's Press Information Bureau clarified that no agency had requested the withholding of the Reuters account and that officials were collaborating with X to resolve the issue. The 2000 Information Technology Act allows government officials to demand the removal of content deemed to violate local laws, which has led to ongoing tensions between X and the Indian government over content removal requests. The Reuters News account on X was restored in India on Sunday, a day after the social media platform suspended it, citing a legal demand. "At this time, we are no longer withholding access in INDIA to your account," X said in an email to the Reuters social media team, without elaborating. Representatives for X, Reuters and the Indian government did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the restoration of the account. Earlier on Sunday, a spokesperson for the Indian government's Press Information Bureau told Reuters that no Indian government agency had required withholding the Reuters handle, adding that officials were working with X to resolve the problem. A Reuters spokesperson had said the agency was working with X to resolve this matter and get the Reuters account reinstated in India as soon as possible. Reuters World, another X account operated by the news agency which was blocked in India, was also restored late Sunday night. The main Reuters account, which has more than 25 million followers globally, had been blocked in India since Saturday night. A notice told X users that "@Reuters has been withheld in IN (India) in response to a legal demand". In an email to the Reuters social media team on May 16, X said: "It is our policy to notify account holders if we receive a legal request from an authorized entity (such as law enforcement or a government agency) to remove content from their account." "In order to comply with X obligations under India's local laws, we have withheld your X account in India under the country's Information Technology Act, 2000; the content remains available elsewhere". Reuters could not ascertain if the May 16 email was linked to Saturday's account suspension nor could it determine what specific content the demand referred to, why its removal was sought or the entity that had lodged the complaint. While the email did not specify which entity had made the request or what content they sought to remove, it said X had been advised that in such cases, a user could contact the secretary of India's Information and Broadcasting Ministry. The secretary, Sanjay Jaju, did not respond to requests seeking comment. The 2000 law allows designated government officials to demand the takedown of content from social media platforms they deem to violate local laws, including on the grounds of national security or if a post threatens public order. X has long been at odds with India's government over content-removal requests. In March, the company sued the federal government over a new government website the company says expands takedown powers to "countless" government officials. The case is continuing. India has said X wrongly labelled an official website a "censorship portal", as the website only allows tech companies to be notified about harmful online content.
