Mediaboss Marketing

A message is being circulated on social media claiming that several countries across the world have imposed new lockdown restrictions amid the rise in COVID-19 cases in their countries. This post claims that Saudi Arabia, Tanzania, Brazil, Spain, United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Italy have imposed lockdown once again to control the second wave of the COVID-19 virus. Lets verify the claim made in the post.

Claim: The list of countries that imposed new lockdown restrictions to contain the second wave of COVID-19 virus.

Fact: The same message is being circulated on social media at least since December 2020. According to the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker, several countries eased the lockdown restrictions imposed during the rise of second-wave cases in their countries. The countries mentioned in the list are implementing lockdown with only a few restrictions. Hence, the claim made in the post is MISLEADING.

When we searched for the details of the claim made in the post, it is found out that the same message is being circulated on social media at least since December 2020. Old social media posts that shared the same message can be seen here, here, and here.

The Governments in different countries are implementing a wide range of preventive measures to contain the spread of the COVID-19 virus. To track and compare the policy responses of different countries, Oxford University created a database called The Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker. This tool provides the visual representation of the lockdown measures using the COVID-19 Government Response Stringency Index, a composite score developed by researchers at Oxford University. Financial Times provided the visual representation of the COVID-19 Government Response Stringency Index of different countries on their website. Based on this information, lets check the lockdown measures of different countries mentioned on the list.

Saudi Arabia:

According to the latest report of Geo News, Saudi Arabia lifted most of the COVID-19 virus-related restrictions from 07 March 2021. In February 2021, Saudi Arabia banned travellers from 20 different countries as a preventive measure to control the spread of COVID-19 second-wave. Saudi Arabia lifted these restrictions on 07 March 2021. The Oxford University COVID-19 Government Response Stringency Index score of Saudi Arabia was between 50-75.

Tanzania:

According to the article published by QUARTZ AFRIA, the Tanzania government underreported the rise of COVID-19 cases in their country. On 21 February 2021, the World Health Organization (WHO) called upon Tanzania Government to take robust actions to contain the COVID-19 virus spread in their country. Acknowledging the rise in COVID-19 cases, Tanzania President John Magufuli advised the people of Tanzania to wear masks and maintain physical distance. John Magufuli reiterated that country will not impose a lockdown again.

Brazil:

According to the latest reports, Brazil Government imposed a two-week lockdown in Brazilia amid the rise of COVID-19 cases in the state. Hundreds of Brazilians protested the Brazil Governments decision to reimpose a lockdown in Brazilia. The Oxford University COVID-19 Government Response Stringency Index composite score of Brazil was between 50-75.

Spain:

According to a news report, Spain lifted down most of the lockdown restrictions from 15 March 2021. Night curfew remains in place from 10 pm. The Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Stringency Index score of Spain is 50-75.

United Kingdom:

According to the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker, UK is implementing strict lockdown measures to contain the COVID-19 virus spread in their country. The Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Stringency Index score of the UK was between 85-100. On 08 March 2021, Boris Johnson led UK Government implemented the first phase of Englands roadmap to lift down the lockdown restrictions. Boris Johnson assured the people of the UK that almost all COVID-19 restrictions in the country could be lifted by 21 June 2021.

France:

According to a BBC news report, France is implementing a curfew between 6 pm to 6 am. Schools have opened with extra testing in place. France imposed weekend lockdown measures in parts of the French Riviera, including Nice and Cannes, as well as parts of the north coast. The Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Stringency Index composite score of France is 50-75.

Germany:

According to the latest report of The Hindu, Germany extended lockdown restrictions until 28 March 2021. But, the German Government eased most of the restrictions and allowed the businesses to reopen in areas with low infection rates. The Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Stringency Index composite score of Germany was between 75-85.

Italy:

According to the latest report of The New York Times, Italy imposed a strict regional lockdown from 15 March 2021 to contain the spread of the coronavirus. A nationwide curfew between 10 pm to 5 am continues in Italy. The country is divided into red, yellow, orange, and white zones depending on the infection rates. The Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Stringency Index composite score of Italy was between 75-85.

To sum it up, an old message is now revived as the new lockdown restrictions in different countries to contain the second wave of COVID-19.

Continue reading here:
Old message revived as new lockdown restrictions in various countries to contain second wave of COVID-19 - Factly

Conspiracy theorists, fascists, far-right, loonies, nutjobs are just some of the words used to describe the crowds that have taken to the streets to protest against lockdown measures.

Some of these words accurately describe some of those in attendance. There is no doubt that the anti-lockdown movement has been infiltrated by far-right fascists. There is no doubt that conspiracy theories have successfully twisted peoples sense of reality.

But to laugh, scoff and label everyone on the streets as a loonie or nutjob is both highly inaccurate and extremely damaging to how were going to recover from the effects of the past year.

The people who have taken to the streets are your neighbours, your colleagues, your schoolmates, your local publican.

In other words, they are regular people who have been driven to the point of despair by the longest lockdown in Europe.

They have watched the lockdowns affect their children, their relationships, their livelihoods, and many feel like they have nothing left to lose.

We have watched over the past year as the same political parties who bailed out the banks, and failed to gain any control over a housing and healthcare crisis, have stumbled their way through the pandemic.

The same parties have failed to implement common-sense approaches to fighting the virus and have been responsible for contradictory restrictions, irresponsible Government leaks and, dare I mention it, Golfgate.

The pull of conspiracy theories

Peoples frustrations are more than justified and many people who took to the streets are just that frustrated. But there is a murkier side to this movement that we need to talk about.

I have been monitoring online conspiracy theory and far-right movements for almost five years and what I am seeing being discussed within anti-lockdown communities in Ireland is very concerning.

Pre-pandemic, Ireland had active and bubbling anti-5G, anti-vaxx and far-right movements. They were part of an international online ecosystem where pseudo science and the opinions of bad actors reigned. When the pandemic struck, these groups banded together and used this online ecosystem to spread their theories on the pandemic to the masses.

Extended periods of time spent indoors and online, coupled with powerful social media algorithms that boost content designed to generate reactions began pushing these theories into peoples news feeds. The online ecosystem exploded.

Protesters clash with garda during the anti-lockdown protest in Dublin in February. Picture: Damian Eagers/PA Wire

Recent research conducted by my colleague Ciaran OConnor at ISD shows that Irish Covid conspiracy communities have almost doubled in the last six months. New influencers came on the scene who spoke determinedly about how lockdowns and masks were unnecessary and were infringing on your civil rights.

If this was a real pandemic, surely people would be dying in the streets, they said.

Ill never forget the videos of overcrowded hospitals in Wuhan, or scenes of bodies piled up on the streets in Ecuador, that prove exactly why lockdown was the only answer, especially in Ireland, where videos of overcrowded hospitals were commonplace, even without a pandemic.

Conspiracy theory belief is driven by fear, anger, insecurity and distrust, all things that have increased dramatically among the general population in the last year.

When you enter these online communities, you find just that, a community, something people have been without for a year. Here are thousands of people, all feeling as disaffected as you and determined to collectively find a purpose to fight back.

They vent their frustrations at the Government, speculate about what they think is really going on and misinterpret small pieces of information that lack context. Many share convincing videos outlining the idea that the pandemic is all part of a global plot, or that the vaccines are designed to harm you. They constantly reassure each other of their new reality where nothing is as it seems.

Aoife Gallagher: 'Online anti-lockdown communities in Ireland are consistently peppered with content from other conspiracy theory movements such as QAnon, sovereign citizen anti-government movements and various far-right and white nationalist movements.'

Conspiracy theories often erase the fact that humans act as individuals with their own thoughts and decision-making abilities in a world that is random.

They propose a world where a small number of elites have the ultimate control, and they in turn control those in governments, the media and science. No one working in these industries can be trusted as a result and they are often dehumanised and presented as the ultimate evil force.

Conspiracy theories can be empowering and addictive and if you believe in one, it's much easier to believe in more, as the enemies are often the same. The online world creates the perfect environment for this rabbit-hole effect.

Online anti-lockdown communities in Ireland are consistently peppered with content from other conspiracy theory movements such as QAnon, sovereign citizen anti-government movements and various far-right and white nationalist movements.

Given the right narrative and timing, this can lead to radicalisation and people becoming completely dissociated from friends and family members, as seen in countless stories out of the US in the past year. Pulling people back into reality is extremely difficult and often unsuccessful.

Far-right involvement

The far-right has the most to gain from sending people into this conspiratorial alternate reality. In real life, their opinions are abhorrent and despicable. In the conspiracy theory world, they are reasonable and warranted.

In Ireland, it has been well reported that the far-right has been fanning the flames of the anti-lockdown movement, organising rallies that resulted in violence and using online influencers to spread falsehoods.

They use populist talking points, mixed with powerful disinformation tactics, to present themselves as the ultimate opposition to the Government, and good, unsuspecting people are being taken in by their narratives.

This is the same far-right that spreads vile disinformation following tragedies, launches homophobic smear campaigns against gay politicians and consistently harasses people that do not fit their archaic definition of what it means to be Irish.

Ireland should not underestimate the power of these movements. The past four years in the US has shown us what can happen when a populist leader takes hold by spreading lies, fear and conspiracy theories.

The language and phraseology I see in anti-lockdown conversations here is frighteningly similar to those Ive monitored in the US.

What can we do?

What can we do, you ask? If you know people going down these paths, reach out and talk to them. You dont have to talk about lockdowns or Covid, the goal is to keep them connected to reality.

Informing people on how to discern truth from fiction online is key to tackling this. Both adults and children need to be able to navigate the online world without falling into dangerous movements or believing in harmful lies. Media Literacy Irelands Be Media Smart campaign is a great example of how this can be done.

The elephant in the room is, of course, the social media platforms. Their lack of regulation, along with a business model that is powered by the amount of time people spend online, means that tackling this issue requires some bold, brave thinking.

Ireland houses the headquarters of some of the worlds largest social media companies, putting us in a unique position to lead on finding regulatory and policy-based solutions to tackle these issues.

The next few years are going to be some of the hardest this country has ever faced and murky far-right forces are going to spread lies and fear to exploit every minute of it.

Collectively, as a nation, we need to remain vigilant and call out their hate, lies and spin for exactly what they are.

Aoife Gallagher is a Research Analyst at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue

Read more here:
Anti-lockdown frustrations are justified, but we need to talk about the darker side of this movement - Irish Examiner

Data-Driven Thinking is written by members of the media community and contains fresh ideas on the digital revolution in media.

Todays column is written by Jeff Green, CEO atThe Trade Desk.

There is an index for the equities markets that tracks volatility called the VIX, used by many to gauge fear or stress in the market. If there were a VIX for advertising (maybe there will be someday), it would have doubled or tripled since Google wrote its blog post a week ago regarding its approach to identity technology and the replacement for cookies.

Since that post, Ive spent a lot of time with clients and partners that have worked with us to develop Unified ID 2.0 (UID2), correcting misinformation, and interpreting Googles recent moves. Ive also spent time with Google, more than usual, in the last week discussing the future of identity and our partnership. Ill come back to the partnership, but spoiler alert: Its in good shape.

Most of the biggest brands and content owners Ive talked to this week dont believe Google is proposing a solution for consumer privacy on the open internet. If anything, it has accelerated moves among the biggest brands, agencies, publishers and TV content owners to adopt UID2 in order to do that work.

Google is protecting itself. Thats okay, and to be expected. They have one of the largest and arguably most sensitive pools of personally identifiable information (PII) on the internet within its own four walls, so promoting itself as privacy-centric is smart. Living up to it is honorable.

But lets be clear. Google is not proposing a solution for the open internet. Google is not announcing that it is ceasing the use of PII. I believe Google will continue to rely on PII and its billions of email-based logins to target ads on publishers that they dont own.

(Ed: A Google spokesperson said this is not accurate).

I believe Google is sincere in raising the bar on privacy in its ecosystem. Like almost everyone, I tell Google everything. When I have a problem, I google it. If I need advice and information whether its about my health, my relationships, my children, or anything else Google is there to help me. So we should all be glad that it is focused on making things more secure. The jury is out on whether FloCs accomplish that or might make it worse, but that isnt really the point of its post last week. Google is trying to secure its ecosystem. Their ecosystem.

But what about the rest of the internet? The one where all of journalism and this amazing new era of CTV content lives and pretty much everything else for that matter?

Last year, the ad tech community came together to create a replacement for cookies. It was an unprecedented industry-wide collaboration. Why? Because wed all learned from the past. The EUs General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) was fresh in memory. As an industry, most publishers waited to implement GDPR changes until CPMs dropped. And then together we played catch-up, working to implement changes that should have been carefully and deliberately implemented along the way. The industry learned its lesson. And this time, its better prepared.

The governance organizations for advertising, such as the IAB and the Partnership for Responsible Addressable Media (PRAM), all wanted a replacement to cookies, but it had to meet certain criteria and those criteria were all-encompassing. It needed to be more secure, give consumers more control, explain the value exchange of free content on the internet more effectively, enable third-party governance, maintain efficacy for advertisers, and preserve yield for publishers.

Thanks to this unprecedented and timely collaboration, UID2 checks all these boxes. And its never been more necessary.

Think about the current state of TV. We are in a new golden age of TV content, which has kept most of us sane during the past year as weve worked from home. Personally, I never want to see the now showing ad 1 of 3 to turn into now showing ad 1 of 10. But without data-driven advertising, it will.

Most consumers cant afford new TV subscriptions without offsetting the cost with ads. If we turn $30 CPMs that come from targeted ads into $10 CPMS that come from untargeted ads (or ads from only FLoCs), well be back to a linear-like ad load with a linear-like efficacy. And in that world, we wont be leveraging data to optimize the experience for consumers, advertisers and publishers.

For this reason, it was very telling that one of the first adopters of UID2 was Nielsen, the gold standard in media measurement. As Nielsen innovates its measurement tools for a cross-channel advertising environment, its deploying UID2 because it will become a new common measurement currency across all digital channels on the open internet.

Think about journalism, which has often struggled with the shift to digital, but is currently coming out of recovery and poised to thrive. 10 years ago at a conference in San Francisco, I spoke to hundreds of leaders of the biggest newspaper companies in the United States and reinforced that their success would depend on their ability to put programmatic advertising next to their content. I believed that then and I believe it now. Without targeted advertising, journalism will struggle and the number of journalists doing important work will massively shrink to a few scaled outlets.

This is why Im so encouraged that one of those scaled outlets The Washington Post and its technology arm, Zeus has adopted UID2 well in advance of the phasing out of third-party cookies early next year. That means that the hundreds of smaller news outlets like the Miami Herald, The Seattle Times, and The Dallas Morning News that use Zeus can get higher CPMs from targeted advertising.

As a consumer, the health of journalism and the quality of TV content is important.

As the CEO of The Trade Desk, I also want to live up to the principles I outlined in our S1 before we went public. Our mission is to help our clients compete in the marketplace of ideas the place in media and public discourse where ideas and messages compete in the open market for the mindshare of men and women around the world.

I also want to live up to the small sign that my grandfather hung on his office wall: God bless my competitors, because they make me better, faster, and stronger.

I want there to be a marketplace of ideas. I want a competitive marketplace. I dont want a monopoly or an oligopoly. I want to help other companies thrive, and I want the market to be vibrant. Thats what motivates me.

That is the beauty of the open internet. It is an open market where competition inspires creativity, innovation, progress, and efficiency. And when companies compete, consumers win.

In the wake of Googles announcement last week, some even suggested that the ad industry should embrace walled gardens, monopolies, and concede the internet to Google, Apple, Facebook, and Amazon. None of those companies are even asking for that. In fact, quite the opposite. Theyre not focused on the open internet.

And this is why a unifying ID is so important. UID2 is for the open internet. Its for TV, and news, and consumers. As a consumer, I prefer fewer, more relevant ads. Most consumers do. And we dont want all of our data in any one company. UID2 was designed with a philosophy to give consumers control. Data doesnt move unless a consumer wants it to, and unless the consumer gives consent. Even the use of the ID requires consent that has to be given explicitly to each site or app. There is no central data base or company that controls it. The consumer does.

Key to this consumer control is a log-in for the open internet based on an email address, similar to how consumers log in to the fastest-growing channels of the digital ecosystem today, such as CTV. This puts the consumer in control in a way that was never possible with cookies and would never be possible if the internet only consisted of a series of walled gardens.

Regarding our partnership with Google it is not a monolithic, singular entity with a uniform point of view. Google is one of the worlds largest companies with different divisions that have different goals and interests. There are many at Google who love The Trade Desk, perhaps because we are evidence of a competitive market, and some who dont like us as much, perhaps for the same reasons.

But our partnership with Google Ad Manager (GAM) and its ad exchange is strong. Our discussions this week have focused on how GAM can continue to support its publisher base by giving those publishers the power to utilize IDs that preserve data driven advertising, such as UID2.

I suspect it is not lost on most AdExchanger readers that in a world without cookies or unifying IDs, there is little need for ad exchanges. And Google did not announce that is it shutting down Google Ad Manager. It also did not announce a spinning out of DoubleClick or that it is reducing DV360 to a buying tool for YouTube. And so this collaboration continues. Were a happy client and expect that to continue.

Ultimately every big tech walled garden is dealing with increased privacy scrutiny. As a result, none of them will take actions that will hurt the open internet. If anything, theyre trying to stay out of it.

For the rest of the ad tech industry, that makes our mission very clear. We must develop an alternative to cookies that preserves the value exchange of relevant advertising for marketers; helps consumers make better, more educated decisions; and enables TV content owners, journalists, and publishers to monetize their content and create more of it.

And thats why there has been so much positive UID2 momentum from all corners of the industry in a very short period of time.

Im glad the advertising VIX is up a bit. It is driving the biggest players in media into action.

Follow The Trade Desk (@TheTradeDesk) and AdExchanger (@adexchanger) on Twitter.

Follow this link:
Why A Unified ID Is Critical To The Open Internet, Journalism, And TV - AdExchanger

The Modi Government earlier this week, on Monday to be precise, introduced a Bill in the Lok Sabha making the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) government in Delhi largely irrelevant.

The Bill, according to media reports, seeks to clarify that the expression Government in Delhi shall mean the L-G in the context of any legislation passed by the Assembly. This, it says will be consistent with the status of Delhi as a Union Territory and will address the ambiguities in the interpretation of legislative provisions.

The Bill seeks to give discretionary powers to the L-G even in matters where the Legislative Assembly of Delhi is empowered to make laws. Henceforth, according to this Bill the L-G is necessarily to be granted an opportunity to give his or her opinion before any decision is taken by the Council of Ministers (or the Delhi Cabinet) is implemented, according to media reports.

Governors in states have very little discretionary powers. Remember the clash between the then Governor of Gujarat Kamla Beniwal and the then chief minister of Gujarat Narendra Modi over the appointment of Lokayukta in 2013, just a few months before BJP decided to make Modi its Prime Ministerial candidate? For several years when Modi refused to appoint a Lokayukta to review any act of corruption or financial indiscretions committed by his government, despite hurling all kinds of insinuation against the then UPA Government at the Centre, Kamla Beniwal, decided in consultation with the chief justice of Gujarat High Court, to appoint a Lokayukta.

Modi was so incensed that he passed a legislation in the Gujarat assembly withdrawing the discretionary powers of the Governor and the Chief Justice of the state and sent up the Bill for the approval of the Governor. This was the time when BJP was on agitating on the streets of Delhi with Anna Hazare demanding the appointment of a Lokpal with most wide ranging powers.

Returning to Delhi, in December 2012, a young intern physiotherapist returning from a late night movie taking a lift in a private bus was gangraped and horribly brutalised in the bus by its six occupants while her male friend was also badly beaten up. This caused huge outrage and violent protests in the national capital led by many present day leaders and apologists of the present regime including Baba Ramdev and General V K Singh questioning the lack of control of the Delhi government then led by Congress leader Sheila Dikshit over law and order. The BJP then announced that once it came to power it would restore full powers to the Delhi government, including control over the Police.

BJP and even its earlier incarnation the Jana Sangh have, since the 1960s, made political capital out of the fact that the citizens of Delhi have no elected body to govern them and the Centre which controlled everything in Delhi was far too busy with national affairs to pay much heed to the people of Delhi. Their first agitation led to a compromise between the Centre and the political representatives of Delhi. So, in 1966 the Centre granted and constituted a Metropolitan Council for Delhi called the Delhi Metropolitan Council (DMC). This body was governed largely by all the rules governing a legislative body, like the chairman, the chief executive councillor (CEC), an equivalent of the chief minister and a couple of executive councillors imparting the functions of a ministers, was still merely an advisory body.

It was a deliberative body, devised as a compromise between a legislative assembly with full legislative and financial powers and administered by the President through his nominee, the Administrator. With effect from September 7, 1966, the Administrator was designated as Lt. Governor. Under Section 30 of the 1966 Act, the Lt. Governor worked under the general control of the President and complied with such particular direction as may from time to time be given by him. The first DMC was constituted in 1966 with Congress leader Mir Mushtaq Ahmad as the CEC and Jag Pravesh Chandra as the chairman of the Council.

In 1967 general elections, Congress lost the election to the newly constituted DMC while Jana Sangh came to power with Vijay Kumar Malhotra as the CEC and L K Advani nominated to the post of the chairman. But in the 1971-72 elections the Congress swept out the Jana Sangh and Mir Mushtaq Ahmad became the chairman and Radha Raman the CEC of Delhi, who remained in this post till 1977 wherein again the Congress was routed and now the Janata Party was elected to the DMC with Kedar Nath Sahni becoming the CEC. But in 1980 when Mrs Gandhi returned to power, she dissolved almost all the opposition assemblies and DMC putting in place a Congress-led DMC with Jag Pravesh Chandra as the CEC. This lasted till 1987 by which time the leader of Opposition in the DMC Madan Lal Khurana and the BJP continued agitating on a daily basis for a full-fledged Delhi state. there were electoral compulsions linked to escalating statehood in the national capital.

After suffering a resounding defeat in the 1984 general elections, the BJP was keen to re-establish its pre-eminence in its traditional pocket burrough Delhi, and the statehood demand perfectly suited its campaign to regain popular support. Indeed, statehood demand was one of the key contributing factors that propelled BJP to political power in Delhi in 1993. This earned Madan Lal Khurana the title of Dilli Ka Sher (Lion of Delhi), according to Niranjan Sahoo, who has done a research on the subject of Delhi statehood.

In the meantime, Mrs Gandhi was assassinated in October 1984 and Rajiv Gandhi became the Prime Minister and heeding to the overwhelming demand by the Opposition led by Khurana and the BJP, he dissolved the DMC and appointed Sarkaria-Balakrishnan (first Justice Sarkaria and then on his resignation, Justice Balakrishnan committee to study the demand for a full fledged assembly. The committee noted that most of the difficulties faced by the citizens of Delhi were due to the structural inadequacies and flaws of the existing system. It further held that while the federal government should have substantial control over the governance of the national capital, the people in the city also needed a representative body to look into sectors of administration that impact their daily lives. Even as it maintained Union Territory status for Delhi, the report made a strong recommendation for the restoration of legislative assembly with appropriate powers to deal with matters concerning the citizenry, said Sahoo, adding The BJP and the Janata Dal made a strong plea before the committee, demanding an urgent end to the prolonged chaos and confusion due to multiplicity of authorities in Delhi. Both parties argued for full statehood to provide the citizens of the national capital the right to self-governance.

But meanwhile in 1989 Rajiv went out of power and there were several changes of regime in between; first V P Singhs National Front government, then Chandra Shekhars four-month government; the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi in the midst of 1991 elections and the return of the Congress party at the Centre led by P V Narasimha Rao which got the Parliament to pass the Constitution (69th Amendment) Act, 1991, which inserted articles 239AA and 239AB in the Constitution, providing for Delhi legislative assembly.

The Act also supplemented the term Union territory for Delhi with The Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCT) Act, 1991 to supplement the constitutional provisions relating to the legislative assembly and the council of ministers. Briefly, the 69th Amendment Act virtually restored the kind of governance system that was offered to Delhi in 1952: a Union Territory with a legislative assembly, council of ministers and an elected chief minister with a limited mandate. BJP and Madan Lal Khurana who were making this demand for long, stood vindicated and reaped a political capital from this by winning the first elections to the Delhi assembly in 1993 and becoming Delhis chief minister.

Soon Khurana had to resign because his name appeared in the Jain diary hawala case and Sahib Singh Verma became the chief minister. Meanwhile the BJP-led NDA government assumed office with Atal Bihari Vajpayee as the Prime Minister in 1998. However Sahib Singh had made such a mess of Delhi administration and the cases of crime shot up so much that the BJP decided to make Sushma Swaraj Delhi chief minister who made a big thing of visiting police stations at night to apparently monitor the law and order situation, when the Police and law and order were never a state subject in Delhi.

Despite this brief effort of the BJP to retrieve lost political ground, it lost badly to the Congress in 1998 Delhi assembly elections mainly on the law and order question and the limited powers of Delhi government and Sheila Dikshit, an able administrator became Delhi chief minister for the next 15 years, though she too had no jurisdictional control over Delhi Police or Delhi land.

Now out of power the BJP once again brought the demand for full statehood for Delhi to the fore. In fact, the BJP-led NDA government at the Centre prepared a draft Delhi Reorganisation Bill in 1998 (with Sahib Singh Verma leading the draft preparation) that proposed full statehood for Delhi minus the NDMC (New Delhi Municipal Corporation) area. The bill stated that while the centre would have control over public order and police for the entire city, it will have a say on the subjects of land and local government only for the NDMC area and the Delhi government would have jurisdiction on land and local government of the rest of Delhi.

The demand for statehood reached its high point in 2003 when the then Deputy Prime Minister L.K. Advani tabled the State of Delhi Bill, 2003, which promised statehood with maximum autonomy for Delhi.[30] The Constitutional Amendment (102) Bill intended to repeal two constraining articles: 239AA and 239AB. After its introduction, the bill was moved to Standing Committee for further deliberations. With the BJP losing Delhi assembly elections in December 2003 and the general elections later, the statehood bill died prematurely.

However, BJP maintained its position on statehood all through the term of the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) governments during 200414. It put full statehood as its top agenda in its 2013 election manifesto. But the moment the NDA government of Narendra Modi assumed office, the party dropped the statehood demand from its Vision Document in the 2015 assembly elections, an unprecedented move in four decades of the partys vocal advocacy. Curiously the Vision Document was prepared by another Delhi leader and Modis most trusted confidant then late Arun Jaitley.

Since then, the BJP-led government at the centre has completely shunned the idea of statehood (and has taken the complete opposite stance at the Supreme Court hearing on statehood, something that goes against the partys original stance.

And now it has also introduced a Bill which would curtail even the limited powers that the Delhi government and state assembly bestowed upon it by the 69th amendment to the Constitutiion.

( The writer is a senior commentator. Views are personal)

Continued here:
BJP spearheaded the demand for statehood but now takes away even the limited powers of Delhi Govt - National Herald

Khan said on Wednesday that India will be benefitted economically by having peace with Pakistan as it will enable New Delhi to directly access the resource-rich Central Asia region through Pakistani territory.

"India will have to take the first step. Unless they do so, we cannot do much," Khan said while delivering the inaugural address at the launch of the two-day Dialogue.

Khan said that having a direct route to the Central Asian region will economically benefit India. Central Asia is rich in oil and gas.

Central Asia, in the modern context, generally includes five resource-rich countries -- Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan.

In his address, Gen Bajwa also said that peace between Pakistan and India would help to "unlock the potential of South and Central Asia" by ensuring connectivity between East and West Asia.

The powerful army, which has ruled Pakistan for more than half of its 73 plus years of existence, has hitherto wielded considerable power in the matters of security and foreign policy.

Their remarks came weeks after the militaries of India and Pakistan announced on February 25 that they have agreed to strictly observe all agreements on ceasefire along the Line of Control (LoC) in Jammu and Kashmir and other sectors.

India and Pakistan signed a ceasefire agreement in 2003, but it had hardly been followed in letter and spirit over the past several years with more violations than observance of the pact.

"Our neighbour will have to create a conducive environment, particularly in Kashmir, Gen Bajwa said in his address, adding that any effort to improve ties without addressing the core issue would be vulnerable to external political factors.

"The Kashmir issue is at the heart of this. It is important to understand that without the resolution of the Kashmir dispute through peaceful means, the process will always remain susceptible to derailment to politically motivated bellicosity, he said.

Though, both Prime Minister Khan and Gen Bajwa didn't specify the minimum steps that India should take but many experts in Pakistan believe that some positive measures in Kashmir could ease pressure on the Pakistan government before entering into talks or restoring the normal diplomatic ties.

Gen Bajwa also talked about poverty which he said was linked with the regional tension that had hindered the regional connectivity and integration.

"Despite being impoverished, we end up spending a lot of our money on defence, which naturally comes at the expense of human development," he said.

However, he added that Pakistan was resisting the temptation to become part of the arms race or increase defence budget despite rising security challenges.

"This has not been easy, especially when you live in a hostile and unstable neighbourhood. But having said that, let me say that we are ready to improve our environment by resolving all our outstanding issues with our neighbours through dialogue in a dignified and peaceful manner," he said.

Ties between India and Pakistan nose-dived after a terror attack on the Pathankot Air Force base in 2016 by terror groups based in the neighbouring country. Subsequent attacks, including one on Indian Army camp in Uri, further deteriorated the relationship.

The relationship dipped further after India's war planes pounded a Jaish-e-Mohammed terrorist training camp deep inside Pakistan on February 26, 2019 in response to the Pulwama terror attack in which 40 CRPF jawans were killed.

The relations deteriorated after India announced withdrawing special powers of Jammu and Kashmir and bifurcation of the state into two union territories in August, 2019.

Talking about the concept of national security, Gen Bajwa said that it was not just about protecting countries from an external and internal threat.

"Today, the leading drivers of change in the world are demography, economy and technology However, one issue that remains central to this concept is economic security and cooperation, he said.

He said that since national security involved ensuring human security, national progress and development, it was not solely the function of the armed forces and required a national effort to safeguard a nation.

The rest is here:
Its time for Pakistan & India to bury the past and move forward, says Pakistan Army chief Qamar Javed Bajwa - National Herald