From declared emergency to undeclared emergency
Country is remembering those dark days of emergency imposed by the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. The very memory of those days is to uphold the significance of democracy. We need to go through this memory only to remind ourselves that the nation needn’t witness those uncertain days again.
Even if the ‘dictator’ is our own, we should follow him like meek sheep. One of the most renowned poets refers to this time in his works and says ‘how does it matter whether the sword was our own or was a foreign one?’ The memory of this phase should encourage us to strengthen the democracy further. There is no point in using this premise to just criticize a particular party.
Indira Gandhi does not signify emergency alone. Her strengths stretch beyond this dark phase too. Her contribution in strengthening India cannot be refuted. Land tenancy act and nationalisation of banks were some bold decisions she took to help the lowest strata of the society. She earned the wrath of the upper castes, rich and powerful in the meantime. If Indira Gandhi is just remembered for emergency alone like the BJP likes to project, why did people bring her back to power with a resounding victory?
It’s a very opportunist politics to project her as the architect of emergency alone, restricting her to Congress party and criticize her alone. It is important to remember the context in which emergency was imposed on the country, and the negative effects it created. Congress and RSS both organisations have reaped rich benefits of this phase. Many reports indicated RSS was also hand in glove with attacks on muslims during this time. The cons should be taken into cognizance in the context of not allowing this phase to repeat again.
Senior most leader of BJP L K Advani who had gone to jail during the dark times, has said in the past that this country is on the threshold of facing another emergency-like situation. He was referring to the current happenings in BJP. Another senior BJP leader who quit the party in Rajasthan, said he would fight against the ‘undeclared emergency’ in the country. BJP ally Shivasena is also speaking the same language. We need to remember during emergency, the freedom of expression was curtailed. Journalists and opposition party leaders were jailed. The people at lowest strata in the society never felt the heat of this time. The upper class people misused this term to their benefit. Muslims were attacked. The poor never understood what exactly was transpiring in the country. Including Karnataka, many states implemented land tenancy act during this time. But one can never defend this highly venomous act against small benefits.
The BJP leaders are criticizing emergency phase in strongest of terms. They must remember what happened in our own country during demonetization. People had to stand in queue before banks and ATMs to draw their own hard earned money. Some even died waiting in these queues. This step had a massive negative effect on rural India and people are still living through the ill effects of this time. Did this make sense in any form? No one can defend this either. Demo led to major benefits to the rich and miseries to the poor. RBI suffered losses. BJP became the richest party. Farmers today cannot sell livestock according to their preference. This situation didn’t exist even during emergency, per se.
Just the way as groups had attacked random people during emergency due to breakdown of law and order, Gau Rakshaks are attacking people and cattle traders. Farmers who care for cattle are victims of higher crimes committed against them. Hence today when we speak, we need to keep in context the new situation that’s almost on par with the old days of emergency. Dark and vulnerable indeed. Journalist Gauri Lankesh was murdered during this time and another media agency NDTV has been under continuous attack for its stance since the recent days. We may well refer to the past, but the new days of almost emergency are here for all of us to see. We need to devise a plan to face this and register out opposition in strong terms.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
US lawmakers seek clarity over financial burden, human cost, endgame in Iran conflict
Washington: Tensions rose at the US Capitol on Tuesday as lawmakers sought clearer answers from the Trump administration on the objectives, duration and costs of the ongoing military campaign against Iran, even as preparations advanced for votes aimed at curbing the president’s war powers.
Senior officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, briefed members of the House and Senate for a second consecutive day behind closed doors, as reported by the Associated Press. The sessions came ahead of votes on war powers resolutions that would limit President Donald Trump’s authority to continue joint US-Israel operations without congressional approval.
Rubio told reporters that the president acted to prevent Iran from striking first. He rejected suggestions that Washington moved only because Israel was poised to launch its own offensive, saying instead that Trump believed the weekend presented a rare opportunity to act with maximum impact. “There is no way in the world that this terroristic regime was going to get nuclear weapons, not under Donald Trump’s watch,” Rubio said.
ALSO READ: BLR airport sees 34 int'l flight cancellations amid Middle East crisis
The conflict has widened following US and Israeli airstrikes on February 28 that killed Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Iran has since launched missile attacks targeting US military bases in the region. At least six American service personnel have died so far.
The administration has indicated that supplemental funding may be required to sustain operations. It added that the concerns among lawmakers about the financial burden and potential for a prolonged engagement has disrupted legislative business, sharpening political divisions at the start of a competitive midterm election cycle.
Associated Press cited Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer’s concerns about what he described as possible “mission creep.” Senator Angus King questioned whether the United States had been drawn into war at Israel’s urging, while Senator Elizabeth Warren asked how the campaign aligned with Trump’s “America First” pledge to avoid extended foreign conflicts.
Defence official Elbridge Colby told senators the president had directed the military to degrade Iran’s missile capabilities and prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons, stressing that the objective was not nation-building. Trump, speaking separately from the Oval Office, dismissed claims that Israel had forced his decision and suggested the conflict could continue if necessary. He has not ruled out deploying US ground troops.
Senator Richard Blumenthal was quoted by Associated Press as saying that he feared the possibility of American boots on the ground while Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin defended the operation, saying the president had acted decisively.
Uncertainty over Iran’s future leadership has added to concerns, with questions mounting about who might succeed Khamenei as Trump rejected the idea of backing Reza Pahlavi, the exiled crown prince of Iran’s former monarchy. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said the future of Iran should be determined by its people and House Speaker Mike Johnson said the United States would not engage in nation-building.
Lawmakers from both parties also reported a surge in calls from constituents seeking assistance for Americans attempting to leave the region as hostilities intensify.
The US Constitution grants Congress the right to declare war, however presidents have routinely begun military activities without formal declarations. Both houses are anticipated to vote on proposals that would require explicit congressional approval to continue operations. Some members have also argued that if constraints are not imposed, Congress should consider issuing an Authorization for the Use of Military Force to put lawmakers on the record.
Associated Press quoted House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries questioning the rationale for the campaign and saying there would be strong support among Democrats for the resolution. Johnson, however, warned that restricting the president during active combat could pose risks.
