English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest world news

Should Journalists Protect National Interest Or Publish And Be Damned?

Published

on

By Saeed Naqvi

Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s fate hangs in the balance on unexplained finances, most specifically for apartments he acquired on London’s most expensive stretch, Park Lane, facing Hyde Park. I visited the most prized of these apartments on October 15, 1999, days after Gen. Pervez Musharraf ousted him in a coup on October 12.

To make sense of the military handouts explaining the situation, I turned up in London to interview his youngest son, Hasan then 23, who, I presumed would have been in touch with members of his family in Islamabad and Lahore.

What struck me and my camera crew were the rich, opulent interiors, heavy curtains one would expect at the Savoy and the Dorchester, sofas with upholstery so expensive as to hover between class and vulgarity. The deep corridors lead to many bedrooms, one of which Hasan occupied even when he was at London University. To elevate the grand style of the Sharifs was a butler in attendance, wearing tails of impeccable cut, as if he were off to the Ascot races.

My interview with Hasan was about the coup and its aftermath, but as the 118 Park Lane acquired saliency in the current corruption saga, I looked at the video again from the angle of “ill-gotten wealth”. There was plenty of it in the footage.

A thought crossed my mind: it might be of interest to TV channels in Pakistan.

Immediately, my hand was stayed by a left-liberal friend in the media.

“This footage will weaken civil society which is suspicious of Imran Khan’s collusion with the army.”

Two schools of journalism were suddenly in conflict. Should Nawaz Sharif’s alleged corruption be overlooked because protecting him against Imran Khan served some higher purpose? Publish and be damned is what I had been taught when confronted with such situations.

Another story, ironically this one concerning Imran Khan, comes to mind.

I had turned up in Israel, to interview Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir totally against the advice of my left-liberal friends – Prof. Mushirul Hasan, for instance. Muslim Congressmen surrounding Rajiv Gandhi were advising him against upgrading relations with Israel “because the Muslim vote would be adversely affected.” This, I wrote, was rubbish. Salman Rushdie, Shah Bano, Babari Masjid and relations with Israel were not life and death issues for Indian Muslims. Education, entrepreneurial help, jobs were the substantive issue. It was this argument I had armed myself with for my journey to Jerusalem. We would be that much more influential on the Palestinian issue I had argued.

Linda, the Press Secretary to Shamir showed me a list of “Pakistanis who claimed to have been sent by Imran Khan to explore relations with the Jewish state”. Remember Jemima was married to Imran and her multi billionaire father, Sir James Goldsmith wielded great influence in Jerusalem. I did not write that story because Imran then was much more a cricketer than politician. Moreover, Linda had shared this information in confidence on a personal basis.

When Benazir Bhutto sought a conversation with Israeli President Ezer Weizman during Nelson Mandela’s inauguration in Pretoria in 1994, I did mention the fact. She was a Prime Minister, trying to connect with Israel clandestinely.

When the Janata government under Morarji Desai encouraged Bhutan to open up gradually in international affairs, south block was split on the pace of this openness. At this juncture the successor government of Prime Minister Charan Singh, hurriedly invited Shyam Nandan Mishra, the MP from Bihar, to attend the Non Aligned Summit in Havana in September 1979 as the new External Affairs Minister. A novice in world affairs, Mishra put his foot in his mouth on a secret treaty which guides Indo-Bhutan relations.

So cross was King Jigme Singye Wangchuk that he invited me to Mumbai where he was halting on his journey from Havana. This was most unprecedented. No king of Bhutan had ever given an interview to a journalist.

The interview, published behind the back of the establishment, created a sensation. The hawks in South Block were angry because I had provided a forum to the King to vent his anger on a very sensitive issue which may give a handle to China. In those days also “grazing grounds” between Bhutan and China were an issue. Head of Bhutan’s Geological Survey, Sonam Ragbey, was in and out of New Delhi with maps. It was all very hush, hush.

The dilemma facing me then was: should I have anticipated the Indian hawks and, posing as a protector of the national interest, killed the story? Or should I abide by the old dictum: publish and be dammed?

I took the latter route.

A quest for balance on International Affairs in the Indian media has always been a fool’s errand. The Imperial-colonial stranglehold obtains to this day. When Ronald Reagan bombed Bengazi and Tripoli in April 1986 because US intelligence had picked up chatter in a Berlin discotheque that Libyan terrorists were about to target Western locations, the story was either not noticed in India or the western version was wallowed hook line and sinker.

When I turned up in Tripoli to interview Qaddafi whose six month old daughter had been killed in the air raid on his Palace, I was regarded as a subversive, blackleg by the western press corps. I still remember a disapproving Kate Aide of the BBC in the hotel room opposite mine.

The entire anti Qaddafi propaganda was based on falsehoods. Should I go along with the powerful conventional wisdom forged globally or puncture it since I had witnessed the incontrovertible truth?

The interview made banner headlines in European newspapers like La Republica, but I also lived to see how powerful the western lobbies were on that solitary event.

Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, who had dispatched his external affairs minister, Bali Ram Bhagat to commiserate with Qaddafi in Tripoli, came under such heavy pressure from the Reagan White House, that he was obliged to make Bhagat the scapegoat. He was sacked.

It was clear as daylight once again that in situations like this, whatever the official line, the only principle a journalist with spine must abide by is, “publish and be damned”.

Latest world news

India eyes Rs 8,000 crore mid-air refuelling aircraft deal as PM Modi begins Israel visit

India and Israel are in talks for a Rs 8,000 crore deal to convert six Boeing 767 jets into mid-air refuelling aircraft for the Indian Air Force.

Published

on

PM Modi

Prime Minister Narendra Modi began his two-day visit to Israel on Wednesday, with a key defence agreement expected to be among the major outcomes of the trip.

According to sources, India and Israel are in advanced negotiations for a deal involving six mid-air refuelling aircraft for the Indian Air Force (IAF). The proposed agreement, estimated at around Rs 8,000 crore, would significantly strengthen India’s aerial refuelling capability.

Under the plan, an Israeli government-owned corporation is expected to collaborate with Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) to convert six pre-owned Boeing 767 passenger aircraft into military tanker jets for the IAF.

IAF’s long-pending tanker requirement

The Indian Air Force currently operates six ageing Russian-origin IL-78 mid-air refuelling aircraft. Efforts to procure additional tanker aircraft have remained unsuccessful for nearly two decades, leaving the force dependent on its limited fleet and, at times, leased aircraft to meet operational requirements.

If finalised, the new agreement would mark a significant upgrade in India’s aerial refuelling capacity, which plays a crucial role in extending the operational range and endurance of fighter jets and other aircraft.

Sources indicated that negotiations are ongoing, and the agreement is likely to be formalised in 2026.

High-level engagements in Israel

During his visit, Prime Minister Modi is scheduled to hold talks with his Israeli counterpart Benjamin Netanyahu. He will also address the Knesset and interact with members of the Indian diaspora.

In his departure statement, the Prime Minister described India and Israel’s relationship as a robust and multifaceted strategic partnership that has seen remarkable growth. He said he looks forward to discussions aimed at strengthening cooperation in areas such as science and technology, innovation, agriculture, water management, defence and security, trade and investment, and people-to-people ties.

The Prime Minister noted that his address to the Knesset would mark the first time an Indian Prime Minister addresses the Israeli Parliament.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

PM Modi to begin two-day Israel visit, defence and trade in focus

PM Narendra Modi begins a two-day Israel visit aimed at strengthening defence cooperation, trade ties and upgrading bilateral relations to a special strategic partnership.

Published

on

pm modi

Prime Minister Narendra Modi will begin a two-day visit to Israel on Wednesday, with defence and trade cooperation high on the agenda. The visit is expected to further deepen the growing strategic engagement between the two countries.

During the trip, India and Israel are set to upgrade their relationship to a “special strategic partnership”, marking a significant step beyond the strategic partnership established in July 2017 during the Prime Minister’s first visit to the country.

Sources indicated that the new framework would enable expanded collaboration, including joint development of advanced defence systems and a strengthened understanding to support each other during times of need.

High-level engagements in Jerusalem

Mr Modi will be received at the airport by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his wife Sara. The two leaders are scheduled to hold a one-on-one meeting shortly after his arrival.

In Jerusalem, the Prime Minister will interact with members of the Indian community before addressing lawmakers at the Knesset, a distinction reserved for select global leaders.

On Wednesday evening, he will attend a technology exhibition showcasing Israel’s advancements, with leading Israeli industry executives expected to be present. Mr Netanyahu will also host a private dinner in his honour.

Tribute at Yad Vashem and presidential meeting

On Thursday morning, Mr Modi will pay tribute to Holocaust victims at Yad Vashem. He is also scheduled to meet Israeli President Isaac Herzog during the visit.

Defence cooperation and technology partnerships

Several memorandums of understanding are expected to be signed, including a widely discussed agreement in the defence sector. As part of the proposed arrangement, a secrecy mechanism will reportedly be created to facilitate expanded cooperation in previously restricted areas.

Local media reports have indicated discussions around air defence systems and possible integration of India into Israel’s laser-based air defence system, Or Eitan.

Beyond defence, the two nations are expected to formalise cooperation in emerging and disruptive technologies such as artificial intelligence, quantum research and cybersecurity.

In New Delhi, the Ministry of External Affairs said the visit would reaffirm the deep-rooted strategic partnership and provide an opportunity to align efforts in addressing shared challenges while strengthening collaboration between the two democracies.

Defence cooperation has been a cornerstone of India-Israel relations, with Israel supplying a range of military platforms and weapon systems to India in recent years. Bilateral ties have also expanded in fields including scientific research, innovation and cybersecurity.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

Trump says tariffs will replace income tax, criticises Supreme Court setback in key address

Donald Trump has said tariffs collected from foreign nations could eventually replace income tax in the US, while criticising a Supreme Court ruling against his earlier import duties.

Published

on

trump

US President Donald Trump has said that tariffs collected from foreign countries could eventually replace the modern system of income tax in the United States, arguing that such a shift would ease the financial burden on American citizens.

Speaking during his annual State of the Union address, Trump defended his sweeping tariff measures, asserting that countries which had “ripped off” the US for years were now paying billions of dollars in duties.

“As time goes by, I believe that tariffs, paid for by foreign countries, will, like in the past, substantially replace the modern-day system of income tax, taking a great financial burden off the people that I love,” he said.

The Republican leader credited tariffs as a key driver behind what he described as an economic turnaround. According to him, the US collected “hundreds of billions of dollars” through import duties, which he said helped secure favourable economic and national security deals.

“Countries that were ripping us off for decades are now paying us hundreds of billions of dollars,” Trump said, adding that the arrangements had resulted in growth and no inflation during that period.

Supreme Court ruling draws sharp reaction

Trump also criticised a recent 6-3 ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States that struck down his earlier sweeping import duties. He termed the verdict “very unfortunate” but maintained that most countries and corporations would continue to honour agreements already negotiated.

He said alternative legal provisions would allow his administration to retain similar tariff measures without requiring new congressional approval. “They’re a little more complex, but they’re actually probably better,” he said, referring to the legal statutes under which the revised duties would be imposed.

Hours after the ruling, Trump signed a fresh order imposing a 15 per cent tariff on imports from around the world. The new measure falls under a law that limits such duties to 150 days and is expected to take effect almost immediately.

Reciprocal tariffs and global backlash

On April 2, Trump announced “reciprocal” tariffs of up to 50 per cent on imports from countries with which the US runs trade deficits, along with a 10 per cent baseline tariff on most other nations. He invoked a 1977 law to declare the trade deficit a national emergency, which he said justified the sweeping import taxes.

Following global backlash, the administration suspended the reciprocal tariffs for 90 days to allow negotiations. According to Trump, several countries agreed to new trade terms during that period, while others faced steeper duties for not complying.

Reiterating his stance, Trump also linked tariffs to what he described as conflict resolution efforts abroad, saying the “threat of tariffs” had helped him settle disputes.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com