Will welcome any Indian peace initiative for de-escalating tensions with US: Iran
New Delhi, Jan 8: Iran will welcome any peace initiative by India to de-escalate tensions with the US following the killing of Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani, the Iranian envoy here said on Wednesday while asserting that his country wants peace not war.
Iran's Ambassador to India Ali Chegeni also expressed the hope there would be no further escalation in hostilities between his country and the US.
The ambassador's comments came hours after Iran launched over a dozen ballistic missiles targeting at least two bases where US military and coalition forces' are stationed in Iraq. Tehran said it was a "slap in the face" of America.
"India usually plays a very good role in (maintaining) peace in the world. India belongs to this region. We welcome all initiatives from all countries, especially India as a good friend for us, to not allow escalation (of tensions)," Chegeni told reporters after a condolence meeting for Soleimani at the Iranian Embassy here.
"We are not for war, we are looking for peace and prosperity for everybody in this region. We welcome any Indian initiative or any project that can help peace and prosperity in this world," he said.
Maj Gen Soleimani, 62, the head of Iran''s elite al-Quds force and architect of its regional security apparatus, was killed when a US drone fired missiles into a convoy that was leaving the Baghdad International Airport early on Friday. The strike also killed the deputy chief of Iraq''s powerful Hashed al-Shaabi paramilitary force.
On the Iranian attack on US targets in Iraq, Chegeni said his country retaliated under its right to defend.
Amid spiralling US-Iran tensions over the killing of Soleimani, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar on Sunday had a conversation with his Iranian counterpart Javad Zarif and US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, voicing India's concerns over the escalation of tensions.
India has reached out to several stakeholders in the region over the security situation prevailing in the Middle East.
Jaishankar has also separately spoken with Omani Foreign Minister Yusuf Alawi, UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan, as well his Jordanian and Qatari counterparts Ayman Safadi and Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani respectively, on the tense situation in the region.
Noting that India is a "good friend", Chegeni said, "My minister (Javad Zarif) talked to Dr Jaishankar, they had a very good discussion. Recently we had the joint economic commission in Tehran...We see a very good future for the relationship. We have no problem with India."
He said Iran and India can jointly work for peace in the world.
Asked if Indian officials have reached out to the Embassy with a condolence message, the Iranian envoy said the embassy had opened a condolence book for two days and he expects Indian officials to come but it is "up to the Indian side".
"Usually we have good relations and sympathy between the two countries," he said.
The Iran Embassy here has been seeing a steady stream of envoys coming and expressing condolences on the death of Soliemani.
Concerns have mounted across the globe over fast-deteriorating diplomatic ties between the US and Iran, and the spiralling tensions in the Gulf after Soleiman was killed.
Soleimani's killing was the most dramatic escalation yet in spiralling tensions between Iran and the US.
Talking about the US drone strike that killed Soleimani, Chegeni said, "He was in a third country. So this is very important for the world to not allow such an inhuman, illegal act which is against international rights."
"He (Soleimani) was the one who removed the threat of ISIS from the world. Why you should kill him. That means you are supporting terrorists. If Gen Soleimani didn't act against ISIS, what would have happened to India, to Europe, and to all of the world because ISIS was really anti-human," he said.
The world owes a debt to "anti-terrorist hero" Soleimani, he said.
"That is why my country today officially retaliated based on the legitimate rights we have....We are not for war. We are not for escalation, but defending is our right," Chegeni said.
"Everyone has the right to defence, even animals and trees...," he asserted.
"This is not revenge, this was the right of our people. All the Iranian people asked for retaliation, early morning at the same time our national hero was attacked... we attacked the military bases," he 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.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
