English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest world news

Merkel and Corbyn: There’s Room for Decency in Public Life

Published

on

~By Saeed Naqvi

Two developments in Europe this week have brought cheer. First, Angela Merkel has held onto her job (even though only by the skin of her teeth). Secondly, the very citadel of western capitalism, The Economist, has editorially welcomed Jeremy Corbyn, a socialist in the Michael Foot mould, as Britain’s next Prime Minister, whenever elections take place. There is a stamp size photograph of Corbyn standing at 10 Downing Street, without a neck tie, of course.

 It is maliciously reported that smoke billowed out of Lord Peter Mandelson’s ears after he read the editorial while holidaying on an oligarch’s yacht. Tony Blair’s favourite sidekick and one of the architects of the now defunct New Labour, had sworn in 2015, that he would work hard to “undermine Corbyn”.

It is not that The Economist has suddenly turned pink. It is doing the best it can to cope with altered circumstances: if you can’t beat them, join them.

The trophy for prescience must go to Chris Mullin, writer and former Labour MP. In 2015, Mullin wrote an imaginary piece in The Guardian under the heading:

“All hail the Bearded One! The first 100 days of Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister”.

 “To general astonishment, among the early visitors to Downing Street is a grim-faced Rupert Murdoch. He is closeted with the new prime minister for more than an hour, at the end of which the following announcement is made.”

“First, that the Broadcasting Acts are amended, requiring Sky to compete on a level playing field with the main terrestrial TV channels. And secondly, that he relinquishes control of all his British newspapers which will, in future, be managed by a trust in which no single shareholder will have a controlling interest. Mr. Murdoch has accepted these conditions. Our discussions were amicable.”

While Corbyn is still in the realm of speculation, the historic German elections have stirred up the heart of Europe. From the wreckage around her, emerges Angela Merkel as a fourth term German Chancellor, testimony to the compelling power of decency in public life. If she were not a hardnosed politician also she would not be where she is – a titanic figure in world affairs. But a premium she places on moral and ethical values in decision making, shines through. This fourth term is her trophy on that count.

Daughter of a vicar in East Germany, her background has been something of an asset for her. It is the abiding Christian in her, in the highest sense of the term, that enabled her to rise above the din and keep compassion as an ingredient in her decision to accord hospitality to hapless Arab and North Africa migrants – totally against the prevailing political current.

She is too intuitive not to have known that she would be made to pay a price for her decision. As a consequence, the Bundestag will have for the first the ultra right wing AFD (Alternative for Germany) with 94 seats, making it the country’s third largest party much of it at Merkel’s cost. Marine Le Pen in France or Geet Wilder in the Netherlands also represent narrow, anti immigrant Xenophobia. In Germany the AFD resonates more frightfully. It stirs images of Nazism. But it would be a mistake to paint all the one million voters who moved away from the ruling Christian Democrats, with the same brush.

Let me add in parenthesis: voters moved away from CDU and its Bavarian partner, CSU, but, please note, much the largest number of the vote did not shift. They stayed with Angela Merkel. It must be put down to Merkel magic that in a House of 709, she still has 246 seats despite her immigration policy. But she is still 109 short of a majority. “One thing is clear” she announced with good natured mischief in her eyes. “They can’t form a government without us.”

 By the same token, she cannot form a government without them. The Social Democrats who were with her in a grand coalition in the outgoing government, have been decimated. They have decided to sit in the opposition.

If Merkel lost 8.5% of her vote because of her calculated decency, Martin Schulz of SPD is kicking himself for having lost 5.2% of his vote for the sin of looking like CDU’s B team. The fate of the Spanish Socialist party leader Pedro Sanchez must have haunted him. After two deadlocked elections, Sanchez was persuaded to abstain from a vote, enabling the Peoples Party Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy to sail through. Sanchez now looks a cipher in public life. Schulz wishes to escape that fate. There is accidental altruism in his decision too. By choosing to be in the opposition with 153 seats, he has effectively blocked AFD from taking the pulpit as leader of the opposition.

All of Merkel’s negotiating skills will be brought into play to forge what in German parlance is called a “Jamaica” coalition – black, yellow and Green representing the colours of CDU, FDP and Green. The combination happens to be the colour of the Jamaican flag.

How will Merkel reconcile her gentler, market approach to the Liberal, FDP leader, Christian Lindner’s unbridled capitalism?

Will there be difficulty striking a rapport with the Green’s Katrin Goring-Eckardt on environmental issues? Merkel did not hesitate calling off nuclear energy for Germany quite instinctively as soon as she witnessed Japan’s Fukushima disaster.

She will also work very hard to retrieve the million or so voters who drifted away from her because of her being “soft” on immigration. A hunch on Merkel is that she will not compromise on her core beliefs. One such belief concerns immigration. Refugees fleeing from the post 9/11 West Asian wars strike a very Christian chord with her.

Being practical, she will not accelerate migration; she will facilitate migrant leaders, NGOs, in establishing model migrant settlements. Unnecessary gestures unpopular with the electorate, will be discarded. She has already spoken with her usual honesty that talks with Turkey should be suspended on European entry. Where is the point in sustaining a dialogue with Turkey when nobody in Europe is willing to give up the medieval aversion to the “Turk”. Decades ago, French President Giscard d’Estaing declared with stunning candour: “European civilization is Christian civilization”. In it there was no room for a Muslim Turkey. Those were days when Turkey’s case could be supported because it still donned the secular cloak of Ataturk. Now Europe considers such support untenable: Turkey is quite transparently, Muslim Brotherhood.

Latest world news

General Asim Munir reaffirms Pakistan’s hardline stance on Kashmir and Balochistan

In a speech abroad, General Asim Munir reignites Indo-Pak tensions by reiterating Pakistan’s claims on Kashmir and dismissing concerns about terrorism and separatist movements.

Published

on

In a provocative address to overseas Pakistanis, Pakistan Army Chief General Asim Munir has reiterated Islamabad’s uncompromising position on Kashmir, asserting that it remains Pakistan’s “jugular vein” and would never be forgotten. His remarks, delivered while addressing a gathering of Pakistanis abroad, are likely to provoke a strong diplomatic reaction from India.

General Munir described those residing overseas as Pakistan’s “ambassadors” and urged them to uphold what he called a “superior ideology and culture.” He framed his statements within the context of the two-nation theory, which served as the ideological foundation for the creation of Pakistan in 1947. Emphasising civilizational differences, he said, “Our forefathers thought that we are different from the Hindus in every aspect of life… our religions, our customs, traditions, thoughts and ambitions are different.”

The two-nation theory, championed by Muhammad Ali Jinnah, has long been a source of ideological division between India and Pakistan. It directly opposes the vision of a united India based on secular values and shared heritage.

Assertion on Kashmir and national identity

Referring to the ongoing dispute over Kashmir, General Munir said, “It was our jugular vein, it will be our jugular vein, we will not forget it.” He further added, “We will not leave our Kashmiri brothers in their heroic struggle,” framing the Kashmir issue as central to Pakistan’s national narrative and identity.

In a broader nationalist tone, General Munir urged Pakistanis to keep narrating the country’s creation story to future generations to maintain a strong bond with the nation.

Stance on terrorism and Balochistan separatism

Touching upon concerns related to terrorism and investment, the Pakistan Army chief dismissed doubts about the country’s stability, stating, “The 1.3 million-strong Indian Army, with all its wherewithal, if they cannot intimidate us, do you think these terrorists can subdue the armed forces of Pakistan?”

On the issue of Balochistan, where separatist movements have long challenged the central authority, Munir declared the province to be “Pakistan’s pride” and warned against any illusions of secession. “You won’t be able to take it in 10 generations,” he said, pledging that the military will decisively counter separatist groups.

Implications for India-Pakistan relations

The Indian Ministry of External Affairs is yet to issue an official response, but given the sharply worded statements, diplomatic engagement or condemnation is anticipated. General Munir’s comments underscore the enduring friction between the two nations and reinforce the Pakistan Army’s dominant role in shaping Islamabad’s foreign and domestic policies.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

China halts Boeing jet deliveries amid trade war with US

This halt in Boeing deliveries could have significant repercussions for both China’s aviation industry and the American aerospace sector.

Published

on

In a significant escalation of trade tensions between China and the United States, Beijing has directed its airlines to stop receiving aircraft from American aerospace manufacturer Boeing, according to a report released on Tuesday.

Additionally, Chinese authorities have ordered their carriers to cease purchasing aircraft-related equipment and components from U.S. companies.

This development, initially reported by Bloomberg News, comes amid rising tensions in the ongoing trade conflict between Washington and Beijing, which began following the introduction of “reciprocal tariffs” under former President Donald Trump.

Since Trump took office in January, the two largest economies in the world have engaged in a reciprocal trade war, with the U.S. imposing tariffs as high as 145 percent on certain Chinese imports.

In retaliation, Beijing has described Washington’s actions as illegal “bullying” and has implemented counter-tariffs of 125 percent on American goods, claiming that further tax increases would be futile.

The recent Chinese government order to suspend Boeing deliveries, affecting both state-owned and private airlines, is interpreted as part of China’s broader strategy to address the U.S. tariffs.

This halt in Boeing deliveries could have significant repercussions for both China’s aviation industry and the American aerospace sector.

On the same day, China emphasized its commitment to forging stronger trade relationships, with the foreign ministry stating its preference for cooperation over conflict. Lin Jian, a spokesperson for the foreign ministry, remarked during a briefing that China aims to “tear down walls” and foster connections instead of creating barriers.

Meanwhile, the World Trade Organization has cautioned that the intense trade dispute between the two nations could lead to an 80% reduction in goods shipments between them and could severely impact global economic growth.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

Barack Obama backs Harvard University after Trump freezes $2.3 billion funding, says attempt to stifle academic freedom

The demands also called for banning face coverings—viewed as targeting pro-Palestinian protesters—and dismantling the university’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, which the government criticized as fostering “simplistic racial stereotypes.”

Published

on

Former United States President Barack Obama on Tuesday lauded Harvard University for resisting the Trump administration’s decision to withhold $2.3 billion in federal funding after the institution rejected a series of White House demands. Calling Harvard’s stance a beacon for other colleges, Obama praised its commitment to academic freedom amid intensifying political pressure.

Harvard President Alan Garber firmly rebuffed the administration’s conditions, which included overhauling admissions to prioritize “merit-based” criteria, curbing student activism, auditing diversity initiatives, and derecognizing certain student groups. The demands also called for banning face coverings—viewed as targeting pro-Palestinian protesters—and dismantling the university’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, which the government criticized as fostering “simplistic racial stereotypes.”

“Harvard’s rejection of this heavy-handed attempt to undermine academic freedom sets a powerful example for higher education,” Obama wrote on X, commending the university for fostering “intellectual rigor, open debate, and mutual respect.”

The clash escalated after the Department of Education’s antisemitism task force accused Harvard of neglecting civil rights laws and fostering an “entitlement mindset” while failing to protect Jewish students amid campus disruptions.

The White House argued that elite universities, flush with federal funds, have tolerated unrest tied to pro-Palestinian protests since Israel’s war in Gaza began, with some demonstrations accused of endorsing Hamas—a group the US labels a terrorist organization following its October 7 attack on Israel.

Garber, in a defiant open letter, declared, “No government, regardless of party, has the right to dictate what private universities teach, who they admit or hire, or what research they pursue.” Hours later, the Trump administration froze $2.3 billion in funding, marking a dramatic escalation in its campaign to reshape higher education.

Harvard’s stand makes it the first major US university to openly challenge such federal directives, which also urged cooperation with immigration authorities and the withdrawal of support for student groups linked to violence or harassment. The university’s endowment, valued at over $50 billion, may cushion the financial blow, but the standoff signals deeper tensions over campus autonomy.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com