English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest world news

Should Journalists Protect National Interest Or Publish And Be Damned?

Published

9 years ago

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”.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Latest world news

India envoy Dinesh Trivedi meets PM Modi after talks with Bangladesh PM Tarique Rahman 

India’s High Commissioner to Bangladesh Dinesh Trivedi met PM Modi after talks with Bangladesh PM Tarique Rahman amid diplomatic tensions.

Published

4 days ago

on

August 12, 2026

By

India’s High Commissioner to Bangladesh Dinesh Trivedi met Prime Minister Narendra Modi in New Delhi on Tuesday, a day after his meeting with Bangladesh Prime Minister Tarique Rahman in Dhaka.

According to the High Commission of India in Bangladesh, Trivedi sought PM Modi’s guidance on further strengthening the bilateral relationship between India and Bangladesh through a constructive and people-centric approach.

The meeting came a day after Trivedi held discussions with Tarique Rahman on matters of mutual interest and ways to advance ties between the two neighbouring countries.

Dinesh Trivedi Meets Bangladesh PM

During his meeting with Tarique Rahman on Monday, Trivedi conveyed greetings from Prime Minister Modi and reiterated India’s commitment to working with the Bangladeshi administration and its people in a positive, constructive and forward-looking manner.

The two sides discussed issues of mutual interest and explored avenues for strengthening India-Bangladesh relations with a people-centric approach.

The engagement took place at the Prime Minister’s Office in the Cabinet Division at the Bangladesh Secretariat. Trivedi also shared his experience of serving in Dhaka over the previous two months.

Sheikh Hasina Extradition Request

The meeting assumed significance as Bangladesh has expressed hope that India will expedite the extradition process involving former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, who was ousted following a student-led uprising in 2024.

According to a statement issued by the Bangladesh Prime Minister’s Office, Dhaka also reiterated its request for India to return individuals it alleges were involved in the killing of Shahid Osman Hadi, a prominent figure associated with the July uprising who was shot on December 12, 2025.

Tarique Rahman stressed the need to create a suitable environment to take forward relations between Bangladesh and India.

Bangladesh Foreign Minister Khalilur Rahman, Prime Minister’s Foreign Affairs Adviser Humayun Kabir and other officials attended the meeting.

India-Bangladesh Ties Amid Diplomatic Friction

The latest high-level engagements come amid diplomatic tensions between the two countries following a virtual press interaction by Sheikh Hasina in New Delhi on August 5.

The event, organised by the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of South Asia to mark the second anniversary of her ouster, prompted strong objections from Dhaka.

During the interaction, Hasina said she remained determined to return to Bangladesh in December and restore democracy, while acknowledging the possibility of imprisonment or a death sentence upon her return.

Bangladesh’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs subsequently registered a strong protest and said the development had affected public sentiment and complicated efforts to strengthen bilateral cooperation.

India has said the government had no involvement in the event. Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said it was organised by a private media entity and clarified that New Delhi did not endorse views expressed at the forum.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

Trump, PM Modi will resolve tariff issue over Russian oil trade, says US official

White House Trade Adviser Peter Navarro said Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi will resolve the issue over US tariff threats linked to India’s Russian oil trade.

Published

4 days ago

on

August 12, 2026

By

Modi trump

US President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi will resolve the issue surrounding the threat of US tariffs linked to India’s purchase of Russian oil, White House Trade Adviser Peter Navarro said on Tuesday.

Navarro’s remarks came days after the US Senate passed a bill authorising the US President to impose tariffs of up to 100 per cent on the top five purchasers of Russian oil. The measure argues that such purchases directly contribute to financing Russia’s war in Ukraine.

Navarro comments on India’s Russian oil trade

Speaking to reporters at the White House, Navarro said India was not involved in the oil trade with Russia before the Ukraine war began in 2022.

He alleged that India became heavily involved in the trade after Russia’s invasion and sold refined products on behalf of Russia, which he said helped support the Russian war effort.

“Prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, India was not involved in the oil trade with Russia, but afterwards it got heavily involved,” Navarro said.

The White House adviser also claimed that the issue had since been resolved and attributed some of the shift in India’s Russian oil trade to an opinion article he recently wrote in the Financial Times.

Trump and Modi will resolve issue, Navarro says

Navarro said the relationship between Trump and Modi would help address the tariff-related issue.

“The president and your prime minister have a very good working relationship. They are going to work that out amongst themselves,” he said, adding that it was not his place to intervene.

His comments come amid US concerns over countries purchasing Russian oil and proposed measures aimed at imposing additional tariffs on major buyers.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

US Senate passes Russia sanctions bill, India-China face 100% tariff risk

The US Senate has passed a Russia sanctions bill that could allow 100% tariffs on major buyers of Russian oil and gas, including India and China.

Published

1 week ago

on

August 8, 2026

By

Donald Trump

The US Senate has approved a bipartisan Russia sanctions bill that could allow President Donald Trump to impose tariffs of up to 100% on major buyers of Russian oil or natural gas, including India and China.

The legislation was passed by an 86-11 vote and will now move to the US House of Representatives, which is scheduled to reconvene on August 31.

The bill is named in honour of Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, a strong supporter of Ukraine who died on July 11. Graham had pushed for tougher sanctions against Russia over its war in Ukraine.

India and China among major Russian energy buyers

The legislation gives the US president the power to impose tariffs on the world’s top five purchasers of Russian oil or natural gas.

India and China are among those countries, along with Azerbaijan, Hungary and Slovakia.

The bill also contains an exception for countries importing less than 15% of their natural gas from Russia and taking steps to reduce their dependence on Russian supplies.

What does the Russia sanctions bill contain?

Apart from the proposed tariffs, the legislation includes sanctions targeting Russian President Vladimir Putin, senior Russian political and military officials, financial institutions and energy projects.

The bill would also expand US sanctions to older and reflagged oil tankers allegedly used by Moscow to bypass existing restrictions on Russian oil and energy revenues.

At the same time, the White House would have the option to waive sanctions or restrictions if the president certifies to Congress that doing so is in the national interest.

Bill also extends Iran sanctions law

The legislation also contains a provision related to Iran. It would extend the expiration date of the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 until 2031.

The law penalises companies that invest in Iran’s energy sector.

The bill’s passage in the Senate marks the next step in the US legislative process, but it still needs approval from the House of Representatives before it can move forward.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com