One day during a conversation with my 12 year old daughter Vrinda, she told me that “Aannya, my friend, is just an average student of my class”

“And how can you say that?” I asked

Vrinda: “She scored 80% marks in the exams, and most of my classmate gets more than 90% marks”

I made fun of the situation and said “In that case you must be considered a below average student as you scored 75%”

We ended up laughing.

All the concept of right and wrong has mostly been taught by our parents and teachers, then why the children are held responsible for their attitude?

While I was writing this article, coincidentally, Neha a friend, called up and said, “I am so pissed off with this system of education. My son’s teacher gave him less marks on writing the answers in his own words. The school just gives students marks for reproducing answers through rote learning. How to make them understand that bookish language is not as important as the understanding of the subject?”

I asked “But why are you bothered about him getting less marks?”

When Vrinda, my daughter was in the primary class, one day she came to me and said “mom, how to learn the text book answers? It is difficult to memorize word by word from the notes”

I said “It is very simple, just read it once carefully and write what you understood in your own words, like a story”

She did exactly that and she found it easy. After her school test she told me that her teacher did not give full marks on her answers.

I said, “But I am very happy that you understood the concept”

We hugged each other and celebrated her performance. She did the same for another few academic years. She was more relaxed during her exams and gradually not only did she scored better marks, but also became more creative and independent.

We cannot change the world by telling others not to pressurize our child; but it is in our hand not to pressurize them. As a parent the balance is missing in us; either we over pamper our child or send them to the boarding school to disciple them.

One day I thought it will be nice to give surprise to my friend by making a sudden visit. I rang the doorbell of her house. Her son opened the door. He is 12 years old and told me that mom was not at home. I asked him “how are your studies and school?”

He said “mom has sent me to the boarding school. And now I am on vacation”

I said, “Oh, how do you find the new place?”

He said, “Aunty,first year was very difficult but now I have adjusted”

The way he said that, something touched me. When we are at the job, we work as per norms. We make adjustments according to others, but what comforts us at the back of our mind is, when will the day will be over and we can go back home and relax in the way we want.

The net situation would be like this; we send kids daily to the school for some hours. At home they are free to sit, sleep, play and talk; to demand their favorite food and attention; to get a hug whenever they want. The power of hug is often underestimated. The simplest thing can change a child to a happy child. A hug means acceptance, it is a need like air, water and food.

No one can handle and love our child better than us. There always will be some challenges dealing with our children, their tantrums, anger, frustration and other negative emotions. Nectar cannot be attained without holding the poison in throat.

I still remember, when I used to annoy papa or misbehave. He never shouted or made face or said any harsh words to us. What I saw in his eyes was rather amazing; infinite Ocean of love and patience. It was so very beautiful; how his anger used to transform into love every time. No theory, no psychology; only pure love that he had inside him. Surprisingly my anger vanished by seeing those loving eyes. Sometimes I intentionally pushed him to be angry at me to see those eyes again. I was deeply in love with those eyes and wanted the same for myself. He is no more, but, whenever I close my eyes, I can feel his love.

I love you so much papa.

Courtesy: Pakistan Today

Dawn newspaper publishes an article as a rare example of responsible and realistic journalism

“There is no respect for beggars in the international community, especially when our image is portrayed as a state marred by terrorism and economic failure” admits the columnist

“In these circumstances, none of the countries will dare stand with us in these testing times” he adds, “Therefore, the only way to come out of this Kashmir imbroglio is to improve our economic conditions.”

“The current government came to power a year ago with a lot of promises of economic prosperity and investment but it seems none of the targets is being achieved.”

“We tried options like resorting to direct military interventions and using proxies to liberate Kashmir, but all in vain. We did not manage to liberate Kashmir. Similarly, we outsourced jihad to various ‘jaishs’ and ‘lashkars’ but these outfits further defamed us.”

Read More

Mirror To Mirror with Former BBC Correspondent Krishan Tyagi

Pakistan never recognised that Jammu & Kashmir enjoyed a special status in the Union of India through Article 370 and Article 35A in the Constitution of India. Pak government, establishment and media call the Indian region of Jammu and Kashmir “Maqbooza Kashmir” (Occupied Kashmir) using the formal phrase “Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK)”. But the moment the Modi government decided to abandon those provisions, Pakistan decided it is a violation of some agreement with Pakistan! Pakistani establishment claimed the Article 370 could not be removed unilaterally by India.

As the Indian parliament passed the resolutions to abrogate Article 370 (and Article 35A as a consequence) and reorganised the region into two Union Territories of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladhakh, Pakistan reacted sharply. Pakistan’s national assembly in a joint session condemned India for unilaterally changing the status of Jammu & Kashmir. Pakistan downgraded the diplomatic relations with India by sending the Indian envoy back home; the trade with India has been completely stopped; the train and bus services between the two countries have been stopped; Pakistani air space has again been restricted for Indian planes; and most importantly, Pakistan is taking the matter to the United Nations Security Council and International Court of Justice, if possible. Prime Minister Imran Khan has phoned world leaders and Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi has visited Beijing seeking China’s support at the UNSC in order to make India withdraw its measure in relation to Jammu and Kashmir.

There has not been much of a reaction from the Indian government to the unilateral measures taken by the Pak government. The only response from the Indian government that we saw during the week was that the Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Ravish Kumar asked Pakistan to review its decision to downgrade the ties with India.

However, the Indian media as well as Pak media have been taking great interest in the developments in Pakistan in the field. The Indian media in general dismissed the Imran Khan government’s attempts to garner international support against India as desperate and fruitless efforts. For instance, Palki Sharma Upadhyay at WION News, India’s global news channel, wished Pakistan “Good Luck” in its efforts. On the other hand, as expected Pak media has been very supportive of their government.

Different television channels have joined their government in severely criticising the present Indian government’s measure to absorb “disputed Jammu and Kashmir” into India; condemned “Indian atrocities on Kashmiri people”; and used abusive words for Indian prime minister Narendra Modi.

On the Pakistani television news channel 24 News,one of the senior most Pak journalists, Najam Sethi who also believed that India has acted inappropriately, presented a very realistic assessment of the options available to the Pakistan establishment in its opposition to the abrogation of Article 370 of the Indian constitution in relation to Jammu and Kashmir.

Mr Sethi reported that there was no positive response from Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, the US or China to PM Khan’s phone calls and FM Qureshi’s visit to Beijing. These countries at present have very strong trade and investment relations with India, and it is not in their national interest to annoy India. China particularly at this moment is not very happy with Pakistan. Turkey is the only country that has supported Pakistan on the issue. Basically, Pakistan doesn’t have much of international support.

Najam Sethi also talked of the UN Resolutions on Kashmir proposing a plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir. Generally the people in Pakistan think the plebiscite was supposed to take place in the Indian region of Jammu & Kashmir only. Because the plebiscite did not take place, Pakistan calls Indian region of Jammu and Kashmir, as mentioned, “Indian Occupied Kashmir” and the area under its own control “Azad Kashmir (Free Kashmir)”. Mr Sethi informed the 24 News viewers that according to the concerned UN Resolutions, the plebiscite was to be held in the whole of Jammu & Kashmir, INCLUDING THE KASHMIR UNDER PAKISTANI CONTROL.

However, as mentioned in the review, even Mr Sethi, a very mature journalist, omitted the extremely important detail of the UNSC Resolution 47, adopted on 21 April 1948, wherein the proposal to hold a plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir was made. The Resolution had recommended a three-step processfor the resolution of the dispute between India and Pakistan. In the first step, Pakistan was asked to withdraw all its nationals from Kashmir. In the second step, India was asked to progressively reduce its forces to the minimum level required for law and order. In the third step, India was asked to appoint a plebiscite administrator nominated by the United Nations who would conduct a free and impartial plebiscite. These steps were sequential, meaning the second step was to be taken up on the completion of the first one, and the third step was to be taken up on the completion of the second one. Mr Sethi kept quiet on the fact that the plebiscite did not take place because Pakistan did not fulfil the first condition. It never withdrew its nationals from Kashmir. So, the reality of the UN Resolutions on Kashmir is that they could not be acted upon because Pakistan did not keep its part. The responsibility for the non-implementation of the UN Resolutions lies with Pakistan.

Even more importantly, the fact is that the present state of Pakistan is not the state of Pakistan that was a party against the state of India in the UN Resolutions relating to Kashmir in 1948-1949. THAT STATE OF PAKISTAN NO LONGER EXISTS. More than half of the population of that State of Pakistan transformed itself into another State called Bangladesh in 1971. So, a smaller part of that State cannot claim itself to be the inheritor of the erstwhile State of Pakistan, the party to the dispute with India, even if it calls itself Pakistan. In that Resolution, present day Bangladesh, the then East Pakistan, was a joint claimant as a part of Pakistan. The present day Pakistan can only pursue that claim if Bangladesh joins it in pursuing that claim.

So, all the UN Resolutions relating to Jammu and Kashmir, where the State of India and the then State of Pakistan were the parties to the dispute, are null & void after the transformation of East Pakistan into Bangladesh.

But, no one including Indian political leaders and Indian media has ever told Pakistan.

Courtesy mirrortomirror.com

In a huge move, Home Minister Amit Shah on August 5, 2019, announced scrapping of Article 370 of the Constitution that provides special status to the state of Jammu and Kashmir. With it was also laid to rest the highly discriminatory provision of the state that penalized a woman for marrying an outsider but protected a male in similar circumstances.
Article 370 and 35A – as introduced in the Indian Constitution for granting special status to Jammu and Kashmir, were a fundamental breach of women’s fundamental rights as Indian citizens. A glorious tradition that believes in

Yatra naryastu pujyante ramante tatra Devata,
yatraitaastu na pujyante sarvaastatrafalaah kriyaah

“Where Women are honoured, divinity blossoms there, and where women are dishonored, all action no matter how noble it may be, remains unfruitful”,

the state of J&K deprived its daughters their basic right if they married an outsider. In Jammu and Kashmir, citizenship was unequal among men and women. The irony was never lost on the daughters when the entire country thronged to the most revered shrine of Mata Vaishno Devi, yet the same state displayed an unsavory bias against its girls.

What an anomaly. If a woman from J&K married a foreigner she would lose her right to inherit, own or buy immovable property in the state, whereas no such law affected a male in a similar situation. Consider this, if a boy from the state married a girl from outside, his wife not only became a state-subject (the certificate that confers special privileges on the state residents), but their children enjoyed the status by default. Whereas, if that boy had a sister and she also chose to marry an outsider, she stood to lose her state-subject and all the related rights. Her husband would never be welcomed as a traditional ‘Jamai’ in the state. Their children were aliens. All because of her gender!

You might exclaim, “Are you joking!” Yet, that’s exactly what it was. A poor joke played by the state on its own daughters.

An interesting example is the well-known family of Farooq Abdullah himself. Farooq Abdullah married a British woman and their son Omar Abdullah got to become the Chief Minister of the state. Omar’s wife was also not from the state, yet it did not impact his rights. On the other hand, Omar’s sister when she married an outsider she lost all rights as a state subject.

On October 7, 2002, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court overturned the established legal position. The court ruled that by marrying an outsider, a J&K woman did not lose her permanent-resident status. The decision was contested by the state’s political parties, who drafted a bill known as the Daughters Bill or the Permanent

Residents’ (Disqualification) Bill stripping a woman of permanent resident-status if she married a foreigner. Although the bill was not passed, a similar bill was introduced in March 2010. This bill was also not passed. It, however, had considerable political support

The 2002 ruling came after a bunch of women went to court to fight against the discriminatory nature of the law. The battle, however, was only partially won. Women marrying outside the state could inherit their parental property, but the rider was they still could not pass it on to their children.

Women have had to fight for their rights through history. However, in a modern India that enshrines equal rights to its women in the Constitution, the state of Jammu and Kashmir continued to practice the anachronistic denial of fundamental rights on the basis of gender.

August 5, 2019, spelt a historic victory for the women of the state. August 15 is India’s Independence Day, but in my opinion women of J&K could herald their independence 10 days in advance. By one fell well-deliberated swoop, Home Minister Amit Shah set the anomaly right. The Damocles sword was lifted from the neck of many a woman of the state who had inherited property, but by virtue of having married an outsider could not pass it on to her children. They always feared losing the property.

Besides other political and geographical implications of the August 5, 2019 move by the Home Minister under the aegis of PM Narendra Modi, it is a big day for the women of the state who now feel on par with men in their citizenship rights.

“I am a woman with thoughts and questions and shit to say. I say if I’m beautiful. I say if I’m strong. You will not determine my story–I will.” -Amy Schumer

Prasar Bharati Chairman, Surya Prakash

As reported by Hindu, Prasar Bharati Chairman Dr. A. Surya Prakash said that Vinod K. Jose, Executive Editor of The Caravan magazine, made a “blatant” anti-India presentation during a session on ‘Religion and the Media’ at the Global Conference for Media Freedom, calling many of his statements “false” and “inaccurate”.

What was really shocking were many a blatant lies by Mr. Jose. Believe it or not he said that “a hundred Christians were murdered in India” and “the RSS engineered the pogrom against the Sikhs in 1984”.

After Jose’s presentation, when the discussion was thrown open to the floor, Mr. Prakash rose to the occasion and said many of the statements made by The Caravan editor were “false” and that there were “inaccuracies” in the presentation.

India was not only the world’s largest democracy, but also the most vibrant. It was also the most diverse society in the world, he added.

Explaining his intervention, Dr. Surya Prakash said that if the audience left the hall believing Mr. Jose, democracy across the world would be in jeopardy. The video below, which documents his intervention is a must watch

S. Jaishankar, Ajit Doval and Narendra Modi

Getting Dr. S. Jaishankar, as a member of the Indian Cabinet is a master stroke by PM Modi. He was the negotiator of the Civil Nuclear Deal with USA, which required complex negotiations. Dr. S. Jayshankar worked with Manmohan Singh on the Civil Nuclear Deal. That was one of the greatest achievements of Mr. Manmohan Singh. I remember following the regular updates on this matter. The negotiations were really complex, and it was quite a task making the American Government turn around navigating through intricate International agreements.

Jayshankar was also the man behind diffusion of Doclam standoff. Besides he was the Ambassador to US and China. One couldn’t think of a better Minister of Foreign Affairs. The reappointment of Ajit Doval and inclusion of Hardeep S. Puri in the cabinet, shows a focus on India’s International Relations. Signs of India emerging as a Geopolitical power.

But Doval is the first NSA to have cabinet rank. A significant amount of credit for the success of the post-Uri surgical strikes in PoK, as well as the Balakot strikes post-Pulwama may go to Doval. In resolving the Doklam standoff, both Doval and Jaishankar reportedly played key roles.

Besides in his first innings the PM was disadvantaged by not having enough expertise in his cabinet. That is why Ministers like Arun Jaitley were overloaded with too many responsibilites and ministries. This time in his second inning’s the PM appears to be following the American model of installing professionals as his advisers.

The list of the ministries is out. Amit Shah has not been given Finance. A better qualified Woman from JNU has been given the responsibility -Nirmala Sitarman. These are her qualifications. So I am told:

BA (Economics)
MA (Economics)
M. Phil (Economics)
Assistant to Economist, Agricultural Engineers Association, UK
Manager, BBC
Senior Manager R&D, Price Waterhouse
Former Commerce Minister, India
Former Defence Minister, India
Now Finance Minister Of India

Here is the complete list of Ministers with Portfolios released by Rashtrapati Bhawan

Cabinet Ministers

Ministers of State (Independent Charge)

Ministers of State