JNU accuses some students of forcibly entering library with personal books
New Delhi, Dec 13: The Jawaharlal Nehru University accused some students of forcibly entering the library with personal books, which, according to the varsity, is against the rules, even as the students' union maintained that they peacefully reclaimed the library.
The Jawaharlal Nehru Students' Union had protested on Wednesday against the library fund cuts and closing of one of the reading halls of the library.
The executive council meeting was held on November 20 and it took a decision to temporarily close one reading room in Dr BR Ambedkar Central Library in view of the potential safety and security hazards, JNU registrar Pramod Kumar said.
"This decision was taken on the basis of the information that this room has only one door for entry and exit which is very narrow and no more than one person can enter/exit at a time.
"When this room was temporarily closed due to safety concerns to the library users, some students began a misinformation campaign stating that the university has withdrawn reading room facility to the students which is a blatant lie," he said.
Another "canard" that has been in circulation is that the JNU Library budget has been drastically cut by the administration, but no decision has been taken to curtail the annual budget of the library, he added.
"Some students in the afternoon of December 13, manhandled the security personnel at the library gate and forcibly entered the library with personal books. This is not only violation of rules, but also this incident may have led to loss/damage of library property," Kumar alleged.
Manhandling of security guards who were diligently performing their duties is highly condemnable, he said, adding an inquiry will be constituted and appropriate action will be taken against such students as per university rules.
"Closing of one room is only a temporary measure and all other facilities, including the reading rooms, are available for the use of JNU students and research scholars. The JNU administration has taken the step keeping in mind the utmost need to provide safety and security to the library users," he added.
Meanwhile, the JNUSU alleged that the JNU Security placed guards in numbers to stop students wanting to read and take their personal books in library hall.
"JNUSU along with JNU students requested security not to hamper aspirations of students to learn and study as JNU like universities are for everyone to read. JNUSU likes to salute the spirit of each and every student who peacefully reclaimed the library from this fascist ideology and read the book, 'The Resistible Rise of Adolf Hitler: A View from Modi's India', by Arindam Sen in central hall of B R Ambedkar," the JNUSU added.
JNUSU condemned the administration's "lies" and demanded that the vice-chancellor to come clean on library finances and why the JNU administration is afraid to allow personal books inside library which were allowed previously, they said.
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.
When Will This War Finally End?
Three weeks into the US-Iran war, the world is holding its breath. Families in the Gulf are scared. Oil prices are shaking. And quietly, even Washington seems to be asking itself — how do we get out of this?
To understand when this war might stop, we first need to understand why it even started — and why it has not gone the way America planned.
America Walked In Overconfident
When the US launched its attack on Iran on February 28, it had three big beliefs. First, it thought the world was still in its favour — Russia was stuck in Ukraine, China was dealing with its own problems. Second, it believed that heavy bombing alone could shake Iran's leadership and break its will to fight. This is the old "shock and awe" idea — bomb hard, bomb fast, and the enemy will fall. Third, it counted on its many military bases and allies across West Asia to give it total control.
All three beliefs turned out to be wrong.
Iran Hit Back — And Hit Hard
Iran did not collapse. It hit back directly at American bases across the Persian Gulf. Satellite images confirmed that 25 targets were struck across seven US bases in five countries — radar systems, fuel storage, aircraft shelters, supply buildings. Even Donald Trump admitted publicly that he was surprised by Iran's sharp and effective response.
This changed everything.
Suddenly, the US bases that were supposed to be launching pads became weak points. Iran proved it could strike them. This created what experts call "mutually assured destruction" — a situation where both sides can hurt each other so badly that neither can attack freely without suffering serious damage in return. Think of two people standing very close to each other, both holding knives. Neither can strike without getting hurt themselves. That is exactly the position the US finds itself in today.
This is also why Trump quickly pulled back after Israel attacked Iran's South Pars gas field. Iran immediately targeted energy facilities in the Gulf. The risk of a much bigger explosion — economically and militarily — became too real to ignore.
Iran Was Always Misunderstood
Here is something most people do not realise. Iran does not fight like America. The US military is built to travel far, carry heavy weapons, and fight high-tech wars in other people's countries. Iran's military is built differently — simpler, smarter, and designed for one purpose: to make sure anyone who attacks Iran suffers badly in return.
This strategy is called "deterrence by punishment." In plain words — I cannot match you weapon for weapon, but if you hit me, I will hit you back so hard that you will regret it. Iran has spent years building a large stockpile of missiles and drones that are hard to destroy even from the air, and some of which can pass through American and Israeli defence systems. The 12-day war in 2025 already showed the world a glimpse of this.
Because most people judged Iran by American or NATO standards, they completely underestimated it. That was a costly mistake.
So When Does This End?
Three weeks in, America has not broken Iran's military. It has not broken Iran's political unity either. The big goals that Washington and the Pentagon announced at the start now look unrealistic. Public support for the war inside the US is falling. Global markets are nervous. Energy prices are unstable.
Reports, including from Iran's own Foreign Minister, say the US has already quietly tried to push for a ceasefire multiple times. But there is a big gap between what each side wants. The US wants to end the war but still keep its military influence in the region. Iran wants a lasting peace where its security is genuinely respected and the regional balance shifts in its favour. These two positions are almost impossible to bridge right now.
So the honest answer to "when will this war stop" is — not soon, and not easily.
As the real costs of the war become impossible to hide — for American taxpayers, for Gulf economies, for global oil supply — pressure will build on Washington to sit down for serious peace talks. That moment may come. But it will only come when the pain of continuing becomes greater than the pride of not giving in.
There is one more danger. Parts of this conflict are now deeply tied to internal American politics, with hidden groups who may actually benefit from keeping the war going — what strategists call a "fifth column." When powerful people profit from war, peace becomes even harder to achieve.
Until that changes, the world waits. And pays the price.
(Girish Linganna is an award-winning science communicator and a Defence, Aerospace & Geopolitical Analyst. He is the Managing Director of ADD Engineering Components India Pvt. Ltd., a subsidiary of ADD Engineering GmbH, Germany.)
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the views, policies, or position of the publication, its editors, or its management. The publication is not responsible for the accuracy of any information, statements, or opinions presented in this piece.
