Education, entrepreneurship and ethics determine future prosperity: Abhay Firodia
Education, entrepreneurship and ethics are equivalent to future prosperity, Abhay Firodia, Chairman, Force Motors Ltd., said in Coimbatore on Thursday, after receiving the prestigious Arutchelvar Dr. N. Mahalingam Award of Kumaraguru Institutions from Governor of Maharashtra C.P. Radhakrishnan.
Mr. Firodia put forth his perspective on the country's progress as an improvisation over late President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam's emphasis on the equivalence between Education and Future, for the prosperity of younger generation.
Referring to the patriotic fervour with which Arutchelvar Dr. N. Mahalingam had fostered education, enterprise and value systems, India, Mr. Firodia pointed out, was moving in the right direction in safeguarding culture and tradition, and in wealth generation. India has enhanced its standing by excelling in Operation Sindoor, he said.
The awardee spoke at length about Abhay Prabavana, the world-class museum and knowledge centre he had established at Pune. He recounted that the 12 years spent in establishing Abhay Prabhavana, a world-class museum and knowledge centre, showcasing spiritual essence, philosophy and tenets of Jainism was his contribution towards India's timeless wisdom and cultural legacy.
Delving into patriotic services of Arutchelvar Dr. N. Mahalingam as a Gandhian and his contributions to the society through educational uplift, the Maharashtra Governor observed that a nationalistic outlook by States will expedite progress of the country as a whole. Regionalism will cause obstacles, he added.
Presiding over the function, B.K. Krishnaraj Vanavarayar, Chairman, Kumaraguru Institutions, dwelt on the feat of Arutchelvar Dr. N. Mahalingam in establishing 35 educational institutions since 1957 right till his nineties, enabling youth to transform into enlightened citizens.
Shankar Vanavarayar, president, Kumaraguru Institutions said the award instituted in 2014 was meant to recognise the services of exalted personalities in the realms of spirituality, enterprise and literature.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Gazette
an hour ago
- India Gazette
"We support right of self-defence of each other": Israeli envoy on India's Operation Sindoor
New Delhi [India], June 13 (ANI): Israel's Ambassador to India, Reuven Azar, has expressed support for Operation Sindoor, which was launched by Indian Armed Forces on May 9, targeting terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK), saying that Israel and India support the right of self-defence of each other. In an exclusive Interview with ANI, Azar stated that Israel and India have been working together to deal with common threats when it comes to building capabilities. He emphasised that India and Israel have a relationship of trust, and it will deepen as the challenges faced by the two nations increase. When asked about he sees Operation Sindoor, he responded, 'First of all, as much as we are not part of the conflict between India and Pakistan, India is not a part of the conflict between Iran and Israel. And therefore, it is very natural that we will not be involved directly in conflicts that we are not involved in. On the other hand, I think that we support the right of self-defence of each other, and we've been working together to deal with common threats when it comes to the building of capabilities. So we consider ourselves close friends and allies, strategic partners, and we want to be in a situation where this cooperation continues. I'm sure it will continue because it benefits both countries. This is a relationship of trust. and this will only deepen because the challenges against us are only mounting.' In response to the April 22 Pahalgam terrorist attack, which claimed the lives of 26 people and injured several others, India launched Operation Sindoor on May 7. Indian Armed Forces targeted terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir, resulting in the deaths of over 100 terrorists linked to groups such as Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), and Hizbul Mujahideen (HM). Reuven Azar emphasised that nations are responding responsibly to Israel's action against Iran. He noted that Israel has shared intelligence with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), friends and Western powers and mentioned that they understand the 'ferocity and radicalism' coming from Iran. When asked about a perception that Israel is the aggressor following its strikes on Iran, Reuven Azar said, 'I haven't seen, I've seen the responses following what happened tonight. I think that many countries are responding in a very responsible way. Of course, they're in a situation of alarm and concern, but they haven't delegitimised our right to self-defence. I think the fact that we have shared intelligence, both with the IAEA and with other Western powers and other friends. People understand the ferocity and the radicalism coming from Iran, the fact that they have been doing all these activities to destroy us, and haven't seen condemnation so far. We are, of course, in touch with the Indian government as well, and we are coordinating briefs to our colleagues to present them with both the information we have and the action that we've taken.' Defending Israel's action against Iran, he stated that Israel has been acting very responsibly and has given many chances to Iran to retract from its policy. According to him, Iran intends to take Jerusalem and wants to control the Islamic world. Azar stated, 'I think that Israel has been acting very responsibly because we've been postponing this military action for a very long time. Iran has been given many, many chances to retract from this policy. They have been sanctioned, they've been negotiating with. We have seen many, many attempts by different countries in the world to try to divert Iran from this line of action, and the fact that we have reached this point is because it's an imminent moment that we couldn't continue living with, and therefore, we took action. I think people appreciate the degree of our restraint.' 'And I can tell you that many countries in the Arab world feel as threatened by Israel as Israel, if not more, because, you know, what the Iranians are doing is very clear for many countries. Iran wants to take Jerusalem, but it's only a stop on the way to Mecca and Medina. This is what they want to do. They want to control the Islamic world, and they have been attacking other countries in the past. Look what happened more than four years ago in Saudi Arabia when they directly attacked the oil production of Saudi Arabia. So, I think that Israel is actually supported, and people, even if they don't support, they understand why we are taking this action,' he added. He stressed that the international community is facing a challenge in dealing with rogue states and mentioned that the nations need to be more efficient in finding ways of dealing with them. When asked whether Israel understands India's apprehension with IAEA as Pakistan under its watch exchanged nuclear material for ballistic missile technology from North Korea, he responded, 'We have a problem with the success or lack of success of the international community in dealing with rogue states. When you want to generate world order and you put forward a series of agreements to create a code of conduct, and then some countries are abusing that, like Iraq, which, you know, cheated and tried to create a nuclear arsenal. Like Syria, under Assad, they cheated and worked to create a nuclear weapon. Like Libya, under Gaddafi, they did that. So, we have a challenge as an international community to deal with rogue states, and we have to be more efficient in finding ways of dealing with that, because if we fail, then we get to situations like we have today.' 'There have been countries assisting Iran in their nuclear program, the ballistic missile program, not only the country that you mentioned, but also North Korea and others. Israel is acting against an actor that has stated publicly time and again that it wants to annihilate us and has acted, taken action to attack us through their proxies. That is Iran. That's why we are acting against Iran and not against other countries, ' he added. Earlier in the day, Israel Defence Minister Israel Katz said that Israel began a preemptive strike against Iran on Friday, as per The Times of Israel. He declared an emergency across the country due to Israel's action in Iran. 'Following the State of Israel's preemptive strike against Iran, a missile and drone attack against the State of Israel and its civilian population is expected in the immediate future,' The Times of Israel quoted Katz as saying. Katz said that he signed 'a special order, according to which a special state of emergency will be imposed in the home front throughout the entire State of Israel.' 'You must obey the instructions of the Home Front Command and the authorities and remain in the protected areas,' Katz added, as per The Times of Israel. Sirens wailed across Israel as the Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu convened his security cabinet, as Israel began the airstrikes. (ANI)
News18
2 hours ago
- News18
Operation Sindoor And After: India Must Prepare For A Two-Front War
Last Updated: India should prepare for war not because it is imminent, but because peace must always be secured from a position of strength After Operation Sindoor, it has become abundantly clear that the spectre of a two-front war, where Pakistan and China work in tandem against us, is a reality that cannot be ignored anymore. The collaboration may not be overt, through a joint declaration of war, but the alliance of hostile congruence is undeniable. The idea of a collusive China-Pakistan military front against India is not new. Even before the ink dried on the Simla Agreement of 1972, Pakistan had begun cosying up to China. Their relationship, described over the years as 'higher than the mountains, deeper than the oceans", is not just a diplomatic aphorism. It is a strategic reality that has gained menacing proportions in the last two decades. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a flagship of Xi Jinping's Belt and Road Initiative, snakes through territory India claims as its own—Gilgit-Baltistan. This project is not merely an infrastructure endeavour but a visible assertion of China's strategic intent in India's immediate periphery. Add to this, regular joint military exercises, arms sales, intelligence sharing, and even potential nuclear cooperation, and one begins to grasp the nature of the challenge that confronts us. There are those who argue that war is improbable, if not impossible, in the nuclear age. To them, the logic of mutual deterrence ensures peace. But history has shown that even nuclear-armed nations can engage in limited wars or protracted conflicts below the threshold of nuclear engagement. Kargil in 1999, Galwan in 2020, Uri in 2016, Balakot in 2019, and Operation Sindoor (2025) are reminders of this reality. Moreover, one cannot ignore that China is no longer the aloof continental power it once was. Under Xi Jinping, it has adopted an aggressive, almost imperial posture—whether in the South China Sea, Taiwan Strait, or along the Line of Actual Control with India. Its claims are expansive, its patience limited, and its contempt for the rules-based international order increasingly visible. On the other hand, Pakistan, emboldened by its nuclear arsenal and sustained by a military that acts with near impunity, has found in China not only a patron but also a strategic mentor. The two have aligned not only militarily but ideologically—in their contempt for India's rise and its civilisational model. The time has, therefore, come to actively prepare to deal with this scenario. National security cannot be a matter of episodic attention triggered by the next skirmish on the border or an election season. It requires sustained investment—intellectual, financial, and diplomatic. In other words, we need to put in place a national strategic and defence policy. What could be its possible elements? Expand alliances with like-minded nations. Strategic autonomy does not mean strategic solitude. The ability to balance our interests with Russia and America is particularly important. Both are important sources of defence supplies. Simultaneously, we must strengthen Quad partnerships, further improve ties with ASEAN, and maintain a functional dialogue with China. Equally, we need to accelerate our ongoing defence indigenisation while selectively sourcing cutting-edge technologies from allies. We must also Invest much more in cyber and space defence, where the wars of the future will be shaped before the first bullet is fired. Our efforts to upgrade our border defence infrastructure must be urgently expedited. Finally, we must ensure internal political stability and social harmony. A nation divided within, cannot be united without. While pursuing the above, there is no need for paranoia. We have certain undeniable strengths, and both Pakistan and China have their obvious weaknesses. Pakistan is a nation on the verge of implosion. It is politically unstable—a sham democracy, ostensibly ruled by an unpopular civilian government, but actually run by an army junta that is fast losing credibility. It is also financially bankrupt, running on international doles, most of which goes to pay off old debts. It is internally facing secessionist threats, including unrest in Balochistan and POK. Its most popular leader is languishing in jail, and his party is under shackles. China's economy is lagging, internal resentments over unemployment are growing, and it lacks the safety valve of a democracy. Moreover, under Xi Jinping, its imperialist posture is creating an increasingly cohesive international pushback. Allying with a failed and unstable state like Pakistan could prove to be a proposition with diminishing returns for the Chinese. As against the above, India is a democratic country with close to 1.5 billion people, the fastest growing economy in the globe, and a nuclear power with one of the finest armed forces in the world. It is also one of the world's largest emerging markets, and an entrepreneurial hub. Yet, India must prepare for a two-front war. Not because war is imminent, but because peace must always be secured from a position of strength. For in the end, as Kautilya wrote in the Arthashastra: 'He who is prepared, is the master of his own destiny.' The writer is a former diplomat, an author, and a politician. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18's views. Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: June 13, 2025, 17:16 IST News opinion Opinion | Operation Sindoor And After: India Must Prepare For A Two-Front War
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
Comparing 1971 India-Pakistan war & Operation Sindoor
Dr. Prashant Prabhakar Deshpande has post-graduated in Economics with a Gold Medal in 1976 and was awarded a Ph.D in Social Sciences from Nagpur University in 2007. Introduction In the aftermath of the Operation Sindoor Congress has been highlighting Pakistan's surrender to India in 1971 Bangladesh war during Smt Indira Gandhi's premiership. However, according to experts, the exercise is futile. According to them, while both achieved their respective objectives, they differ significantly in context, scale, and impact and should be viewed within their distinct historical and strategic frameworks. According to experts, the 1971 war was a full-scale military conflict triggered by widespread human rights violations and a massive refugee crisis in East Pakistan, now Bangladesh, where the Pakistani army persecuted the Bengali population, forcing nearly 10 million refugees to flee to India. In response, India initially provided humanitarian aid and extended support to the Bengali resistance force, the Mukti Bahini. When Pakistan launched an attack on both eastern & western fronts, India declared a full-scale war, engaging across land, air, and sea, achieving a decisive victory, leading to the liberation of East Pakistan and the creation of Bangladesh, leading to a significant territorial and political shift in South Asia. According to experts, Operation Sindoor in contrast, was a precision military strike launched to dismantle terror camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (POK) to avenge the massacre of 26 Indian tourists in J&K's Pahalgam on 22nd of April, 2025 destroying 9 terror hideouts using advanced technology, including drones, satellite imagery, and precision-guided weapons. The operation was aimed solely at terrorist infrastructure avoiding civilian or military targets, the objective being to curb terrorism and deliver a strong message to Pakistan without escalating into a full-scale war. After Pakistan's retaliatory strikes, however, India responded firmly that culminated into an agreement to hold fire & military action on May 10, 2025. Comparing 1971 & 2025 According to military experts, comparing the 1971 war with Operation Sindoor is not appropriate, as both had vastly different objectives and contexts. While the 1971 war resulted in the creation of Bangladesh, Operation Sindoor was a limited but targeted military action aimed at dismantling terrorist infrastructure. While the 1971 war reshaped South Asia's political landscape, Operation Sindoor sent a strong message to Pakistan and the terrorist groups it backs, without escalating into a broader conflict. Achievements of Operation Sindoor Operation Sindoor reportedly targeted terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and PoK, resulting in the destruction of two terrorist headquarters, reportedly killing several terrorists, including 2 designated by the United Nations and 8 on India's most-wanted list. Operation Sindoor highlights a shift towards a proactive defence strategy adopted by India, ensuring national security and regional stability. The destruction of terror camps and Pakistani military assets has sent a strong message to adversaries, reinforcing India's commitment to counter-terrorism. India's precision strikes under Operation Sindoor showcased a modern military doctrine targeting terror camps and Pakistani military installations without engaging in prolonged warfare. India's approach focuses on economic dominance, strategic deterrence, and controlled military engagements, underscoring India's long-term vision, ensuring national security without compromising economic growth under the Viksit Bharat Vision. India agreed to the Pakistani DGMO's request to halt firing & military action only after it achieved its objective to destroy terrorist camps, forcing Pakistan's military to plead. India's actions demonstrated its firm stance against terrorism and cross-border aggression. The country demonstrated its military prowess neutralising half a dozen US and China-made fighter jets along with hundreds of Turkish and Chinese drones deployed by Pakistan in addition to destroying 9 terror camps, eliminating 100+ terrorists, including masterminds behind the Kandahar hijack and 26/11 Mumbai attacks & causing significant losses estimated at $10 billion+. Operation Sindoor demonstrates a decisive shift in India's counter-terrorism strategy, aimed at delivering swift and targeted responses, rather than issuing warnings . Reasons behind India's agreeing to Pakistan's request to hold fire & military action According to experts in today's world, military confrontations are not solely about territorial gains but about economic stability, precision strikes, and global influence. Unlike 1971, when full-fledged warfare was the only viable option, today's geopolitical landscape demands calculated actions that align with economic and strategic priorities, according to them. A prolonged war with Pakistan would derail India's economic growth, disrupt Foreign Direct Investments (FDIs), and slow down job creation, negatively impacting the country's development trajectory. As global manufacturing shifts away from China, a prolonged conflict could prevent India from emerging as a key manufacturing hub, securing Beijing's economic dominance. Unlike traditional warfare, modern conflicts focus on precision military operations that weaken adversaries without engaging in prolonged war. Economically fragile and politically unstable Pakistan has nothing to lose from prolonged military engagements. However, China and the US Deep State have vested interests in India's prolonged involvement as: – Pakistan serves as a front for major global powers to sell weapons and destabilize India. – A long military conflict would weaken India's global position, similar to how the West pushed Russia into a multi-year war with Ukraine. Opposition's Nefarious design to play politics on Operation Sindoor Indian opposition parties, including India's grand old party, Indian National Congress, which was in power at the Centre which remained passive after the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, are now pushing for war to: Disrupt the government's economic policies by forcing it into a long military conflict, and; Create public discontent if the government refuses to escalate the war, labelling it as weakness. These parties do not realise or do not want to realise that they are playing into the hands of India's adversary, Pakistan, which has been since long harbouring terrorists, doing a disservice to the nation, discrediting & demoralising the country's Armed forces. Epilogue India's recent military operations highlight a shift towards proactive defence strategies & by destroying terror camps, sends a strong message to adversaries, reinforcing India's commitment to counter-terrorism. According to experts, while the Shimla Agreement signed after the 1971 war was aimed at diplomatic resolution, India's modern defence approach underscores the necessity of military deterrence in safeguarding national interest, considering it futile to compare 1971 war & Operation Sindoor. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
