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

Trump says Iran getting more serious in talks, no decision yet on major strikes

Donald Trump says Iran is becoming more serious in negotiations with the US but insists no decision has been taken on launching major military strikes against Tehran.

Published

2 days ago

on

July 25, 2026

By

Donald Trump

US President Donald Trump has said he has not yet decided whether to authorise major military strikes against Iran, stating that Tehran has become “more serious” in its negotiations with Washington even as tensions between the two countries remain high.

Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office on Friday, Trump said discussions with Iran were continuing and suggested diplomatic efforts were showing signs of progress.

“We’re talking to them right now. I think they’re getting more and more serious as the days go by,” Trump said, adding that no final decision had been taken on launching military action.

Trump says diplomacy remains an option

Trump said the United States remained prepared for military action if required but indicated that ongoing talks could still lead to an agreement.

“We’re locked and loaded and ready to go. But we’re talking to them, so I think while we’re talking, we’ll see what comes of it. I believe they’re very serious. They should be,” he said.

The US President also warned that Iran would face a “much higher level” of strikes if negotiations failed, while reiterating that preventing Tehran from developing a nuclear weapon remained his key red line.

The United States has said its military operations are aimed at preventing Iran from closing the strategically important Strait of Hormuz. Iran, meanwhile, has carried out retaliatory strikes on US bases, with four American service members reported killed.

Reports claim Trump discussed large-scale military operation

Trump’s remarks came after media reports suggested he met senior advisers to discuss the possibility of a large-scale military operation against Iran. Another report said he was considering a “massive attack”, although Trump did not confirm those reports during his interaction with journalists.

He also acknowledged that the prolonged conflict, which he had earlier expected to last only a few weeks, was approaching its fifth month and had become a political challenge ahead of the US midterm elections scheduled for November.

Trump issues warning over support for Iran

Trump also addressed reports claiming that Russia and China were providing intelligence or military support to Iran. He said both Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin had assured him they would not arm Tehran.

“I think they wouldn’t want to have me disappointed,” Trump said.

In a separate post on his Truth Social platform, Trump warned Moscow and Beijing against supplying weapons to Iran, saying such a move would not be in their interests.

He further stated that Xi had assured him during their meeting in Beijing in May that China would not provide weapons to Iran, while Putin had conveyed a similar position despite the ongoing war in Ukraine.

Continue Reading

India News

For second time, US strikes ship with Indian crew near Strait of Hormuz

Published

5 days ago

on

July 22, 2026

By

Strait of Hormuz

The United States Central Command (CENTCOM) has said that an oil tanker carrying Indian crew was drifting with its engine switched off near the Strait of Hormuz before it was struck by US forces.

A CENTCOM spokesperson said the vessel had stopped due to engine failure and was drifting after its crew repeatedly sought additional time to carry out repairs. US officials said the tanker was struck only after it failed to comply with directives issued by US forces enforcing a blockade on vessels allegedly transporting Iranian oil. The military said the strike was aimed at disabling the ship by targeting its engine room rather than sinking it.

The incident involved a tanker carrying Indian seafarers near the Gulf of Oman, close to the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s busiest maritime trade routes. The strike triggered a fire onboard, prompting rescue efforts by Omani authorities and maritime agencies. Indian authorities closely monitored the situation and coordinated with local officials regarding the welfare of the crew members.

The incident has drawn concern in India, with the government emphasising the safety of Indian nationals working aboard commercial vessels in the conflict-hit region. The Ministry of External Affairs has remained in touch with the authorities concerned as tensions between the United States and Iran continue to pose risks to international shipping.

In June, three Indian sailors were killed in a US strike on another oil tanker. The Strait of Hormuz handles a significant share of the word’s oil trade, and the latest incident has renewed concerns over the security of merchant vessels operating in the region. Maritime experts have warned that escalating hostilities could further disrupt commercial shipping and endanger civilian crews navigating one of the world’s most strategically important waterways.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

Trump announces phased tariff of up to 200% on generic drug imports, India may face impact

US President Donald Trump has announced a phased tariff plan on imported generic medicines, raising duties to 200% after three years, a move that could affect India’s pharmaceutical exports.

Published

5 days ago

on

July 22, 2026

By

Donald Trump

The United States has announced a phased tariff plan for imported generic medicines that could have implications for pharmaceutical exporters, including India. US President Donald Trump said the policy is intended to encourage companies to shift generic drug manufacturing to the United States by imposing steep tariffs after a two-year transition period.

The announcement is particularly important for India, one of the world’s largest suppliers of affordable generic medicines and a major exporter to the US market.

Trump outlines phased tariff plan

In a post on his Truth Social platform, President Trump said the new policy will take effect from August 1, 2026. Under the plan, imported generic medicines will continue to attract zero tariffs for the first two years.

Beginning in the third year, the tariff will increase to 100%, before rising further to 200% thereafter.

Trump said the measure is designed to encourage pharmaceutical companies to establish manufacturing facilities in the United States instead of relying on imports.

He added that companies choosing not to invest in US-based production during the transition period would face the higher tariff rates. According to Trump, the existing policy governing patented, branded and innovative medicines will remain unchanged.

Why India could be affected

India is widely regarded as the “pharmacy of the world” because of its large-scale production and export of generic medicines.

Indian generic drugs account for nearly 40% of the US generic medicine market by volume. According to a Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI) report, India exported pharmaceutical products worth USD 9.7 billion to the United States during the 2024-25 financial year, representing around 38% of the country’s total pharmaceutical exports of USD 25.8 billion.

However, the immediate impact of the newly announced tariff policy on Indian pharmaceutical companies remains uncertain.

Existing trade agreement and industry concerns

India and the United States struck a trade pact in February that states India would receive negotiated outcomes regarding generic pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients.

Despite that provision, previous tariff threats by Trump had already raised concerns within the pharmaceutical industry over the future of affordable medicine exports from India.

Indian pharmaceutical companies supply a wide range of generic medicines used to treat conditions including hypertension, diabetes, depression, cancer, infectious diseases and mental health disorders.

According to a Financial Post report cited in the source material, around 65% of birth control pill prescriptions in the United States during 2024 were manufactured by two India-based companies — Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. and Lupin Ltd.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com