Indian PM lays foundation of temple at razed mosque site

1 / 2
Members of the Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP) watch a live telecast on a screen of India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi (C) participating in the groundbreaking ceremony of the Ram Temple in Ayodhaya, at the Gujarat BJP headquarters in Gandhinagar on August 5, 2020. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 06 August 2020
Follow

Indian PM lays foundation of temple at razed mosque site

  • In a controversial judgment in November last year, the Supreme Court allocated 2.7 acres of land to Hindu petitioners

NEW DELHI: In a highly provocative speech following the groundbreaking ceremony to kick off the construction of a Hindu temple at a controversial site that has been contested by Muslims for decades, Prime Minister Narendra Modi marked the “beginning of a golden era” for the country.

“It’s the beginning of a golden era. The wait of centuries is ending,” Modi said after the event on Wednesday, launching the construction of the Ram temple in Ayodhya, in the north Indian state of Uttar Pradesh.

Until 1992, the site was home to the Babri Mosque, which was razed to the ground by a Hindu mob who believed the place was a holy site for them long before Muslim rulers built the structure there in 1528.

The demolition resulted in some of India’s bloodiest communal violence, in which about 2,000 people, mostly Muslims, were killed.

“See the amazing power of Lord Ram. Buildings were destroyed, there was a lot of effort to eradicate his existence, but Ram remains in our mind even today,” the premier added.

The move follows a concerted and divisive political campaign by the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in the 1980s and 90s, which led to polarization in the country and catapulted the party to the forefront of national consciousness, with the group becoming a major political force.

After the demolition of the Babri Mosque, the matter went to court and, in a controversial judgement in November of last year, the Supreme Court allocated 2.7 acres of land to Hindu petitioners and a separate 5 acres to Muslims to construct a structure of their choice.

In his speech on Wednesday, Modi compared the event to India’s independence on Aug. 15.

“Like Aug. 15, today’s day holds a similar significance for (the multitudes) of people who devoted and sacrificed their lives for the cause of Ram temple. Today Ram’s birthplace stands liberated,” he said.

Professor Shiv Visvanathan of Sonipat-based O.P. Jindal Global University termed the move “a sad moment in the history of India.”

“It is not only majoritarianism. I think the old dream of constitutional India, which was plural, open-ended and tolerant of minorities, is declining completely,” Visvanathan told Arab News.

In preparation for the event, Ayodhya was decorated in festive colors on Wednesday. Due to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, however, the government had extended invitations to a select few, with a majority of the 175 guests belonging to the BJP, its patron Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and hardcore Hindu groups. 

Two Muslims, Iqbal Ansari and Mohammed Sharif, were also invited.

“I am happy to have been invited to the event. It’s time to forget the past and move on. The court has given the verdict, and we should accept it,” Ayodhya-based Ansari, who was the original litigant and had fought the disputed site’s case on behalf of Muslims, told Arab News.

“Hindus and Muslims have always lived together, and we should maintain that tradition despite our differences,” he added.

Sharif, on the other hand, was honored for his selfless service after cremating the victims of the religious riots in 1992.

“It was a good gesture by the administration to invite me,” he told Arab News.

Meanwhile, Modi’s decision to inaugurate the temple has drawn sharp criticism from liberal and secular sections of society.

On Wednesday, a group of 300 individuals, including activists, lawyers and members of the National Federation of Indian Women, appealed to Modi to uphold the secular values of the country and not attend the ceremony.

“The prime minister going to Ayodhya to lay the foundation of the temple undermines our secular framework and endorses the majoritarian Hindutva agenda, despite his claims of building an inclusive India. It implies the negation of the Constitutional values,” the signatories said in a statement.

Political experts see the decision as a “major milestone” in the evolution of India as a majoritarian state.

“The problem with Modi is that he is always exclusionary in his politics. India has been turning majoritarian for a long time. Wednesday’s event marks a major milestone in the evolution of India as a Hindu supremacist state,” New Delhi-based political analyst and author of several books Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay told Arab News.

He added that there was a “deliberate design” to choosing Aug. 5 as the day for the ceremony, as it coincides with the first anniversary of the abrogation of Article 370 in Kashmir.

“Kashmir is also part of the Hindu nationalistic agenda. Defining religion and nationalism on the twin heads of religious-cultural nationalism is the basic definition of the Hindu majoritarian party. Modi deliberately chose Aug. 5 as a snub to the people of Kashmir; he is deliberately putting a finger in the wounds and asking ‘Is it still painful?’” Mukhopadhyay, who wrote the book “Narendra Modi: The Man, The Times,” added. 

Professor Shiv Visvanathan of Sonipat-based O.P. Jindal Global University termed the move “a sad moment in the history of India.”

“It is not only majoritarianism. I think the old dream of constitutional India, which was plural, open-ended and tolerant of minorities, is declining completely,” Visvanathan told Arab News.

Meanwhile, Dr. Satish Mishra of the New Delhi-based think-tank Observer Research Foundation said the move was “a triumph of the Hindu majoritarian project.”

“Aug. 5 marks the success of the Hindu majoritarian project launched in the 1980s by BJP leader Lal Krishna Advani,” Mishra told Arab News.

He warned that the BJP would continue using religiously divisive issues to divert the attention of the people from core problems relating to the economy and governance.

“Religious topics will keep on dominating the political discourse. The BJP and other Hindu groups will pick up other religiously contentious issues to keep the focus of the people away from larger issues, like employment and other necessities of life,” Mishra added.


CIA and other spy agencies set to shrink workforce under Trump administration plan

Updated 8 sec ago
Follow

CIA and other spy agencies set to shrink workforce under Trump administration plan

  • The administration plans to reduce the CIA workforce by 1,200 over several years, and cut thousands of positions at the NSA and other intelligence agencies

WASHINGTON: The White House plans to cut staffing at the CIA and other intelligence agencies, including the National Security Agency, Trump administration officials told members of Congress, The Washington Post reported Friday.
A person familiar with the plan but not authorized to discuss it publicly confirmed the changes to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.
The administration plans to reduce the CIA workforce by 1,200 over several years, and cut thousands of positions at the NSA and other intelligence agencies. The Post reported that the reductions at the CIA include several hundred people who have already opted for early retirement. The rest of the cuts would be achieved partly through reduced hirings and would not likely necessitate layoffs.
In response to questions about the reductions, the CIA issued a statement saying CIA Director John Ratcliffe is working to align the agency with Trump’s national security priorities.
“These moves are part of a holistic strategy to infuse the Agency with renewed energy, provide opportunities for rising leaders to emerge, and better position CIA to deliver on its mission,” the agency wrote in the statement.
A spokesperson for Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment. Gabbard’s office oversees and coordinates the work of 18 agencies that collect and analyze intelligence.
The CIA and NSA have already offered voluntary resignations to some employees. The CIA also has said it plans to lay off an unknown number of recently hired employees.
The new administration has also eliminated diversity, equity and inclusion programs at intelligence agencies, though a judge has temporarily blocked efforts to fire 19 employees working on DEI programs who challenged their terminations.
Trump also abruptly fired the general who led the NSA and the Pentagon’s Cyber Command.
Ratcliffe has vowed to overhaul the CIA and said he wants to boost the agency’s use of intelligence from human sources and its focus on China.
 


Trump’s tariffs bite at quiet US ports

Updated 11 min 8 sec ago
Follow

Trump’s tariffs bite at quiet US ports

  • The Port of Long Beach says for the entire month of May it is expecting a 30 percent drop in imports

SAN PEDRO: At the Port of Los Angeles, the frenetic choreography of cranes unloading containers from Asia has slowed to a tiptoe, and the noise of the busiest docks in the US is quieting.
“You could hear a pin drop, it’s very unusual,” Port Director Gene Seroka told AFP.
By this unofficial barometer, the American economy faces slowdown under US President Donald Trump amid his trade war with China.
Along with the next-door Port of Long Beach, the area represents the biggest gateway in the United States for goods from China and the rest of Asia.
That has made it among the first victims to a burgeoning crisis threatening to disrupt the lives of millions of Americans.
Trump’s on-again-off-again tariffs — and the retaliation launched by other countries — has cowed importers, whose usual orders for furniture, toys, and clothing have dwindled.
For the week of May 4, the Port of Los Angeles will receive up to 35 percent less cargo compared with the same period last year, Seroka said.
The Port of Long Beach says for the entire month of May it is expecting a 30 percent drop in imports.
Dozens of ships have canceled their voyages to these ports.
“Many retailers and manufacturers alike have hit the pause button, stopping all shipments from China,” said Seroka.
The Asian manufacturing giant is the hardest hit by Trump’s tariffs, with levies as high as 145 percent on some goods. Sales of Chinese goods to the US last year totaled more than $500 billion, according to Beijing.
And while sales may not be going up this year, prices undoubtedly will.
“Effectively, the cost of a product made in China now is two and a half times more expensive than it was just last month,” said Seroka.
Trump last month announced a range of differing tariffs against nearly all countries in the world — including an island populated mostly by penguins — using a formula that baffled economists.
He reversed course a few days later and left a blanket 10 percent rate against most of the planet.
That extra cost, which is paid by the importer of a product, not by the seller, will affect trade across the United States.
“This is not just a West Coast issue,” warned Long Beach Port Director Mario Cordero.
“It affects every port, whether it’s in the East or in the Gulf” of Mexico, which Trump has decreed should be known as the Gulf of America.
At the start of the year, Long Beach and Los Angeles saw American companies scurry to get ahead of tariffs that Trump promised on the campaign trail.
Cargo volumes surged as they tried to build up as much untaxed inventory as possible.
But as the tariffs begin to bite, they will undoubtedly hold buying to eat into that inventory.
Without a reversal from the White House that would re-open the trade spigot, that could mean shortages that consumers will start to notice, and soon, according to Seroka.
“American importers, especially in the retail sector, are telling me that they have about five to seven weeks of normal inventory on hand today,” he said.
“If this trade dispute goes on for any length of time, we’ll likely see fewer selections on store shelves and online buying platforms.
“The impact on American consumers will be less choice and higher prices,” he said.
“The American consumer is going to get hit right in the wallet.”


For Antonio Montalbo, one of the 900,000 logistics workers in Southern California, the ordeal has already begun.
As the owner of a small trucking company, he needs to replace the starter on one of his vehicles; the part, made in China, now costs twice as much.
Trump has “created a hostile environment at the port for the drivers,” says the 37-year-old.
“We’re angry at Donald Trump. He needs to go check out the country a little bit, because he has a lot of angry truck drivers.
“It seems like he doesn’t care about the public or the working class.”
Between skyrocketing maintenance costs and the fall-off in work, he estimates he could be laying off staff within six months.
Montalbo says he voted for Trump last November because he was fed up with inflation, and trusted him to fix the economy.
“I thought that he was a businessman.
“Now we have something worse than inflation, called tariffs.”


US judge strikes down Trump order against law firm, scolds him for ‘settling personal vendettas’

Updated 12 min 39 sec ago
Follow

US judge strikes down Trump order against law firm, scolds him for ‘settling personal vendettas’

  • Judge Howell rules Trump’s order violates free speech and due process
  • Trump’s order targeted Perkins Coie over Clinton campaign and diversity policies

 A federal judge on Friday struck down Donald Trump’s executive order targeting law firm Perkins Coie as a violation of the US Constitution’s protections of free speech and due process, and castigated him for “settling personal vendettas.”
US District Judge Beryl Howell’s ruling represented the broadest rebuke yet for the Republican president’s pressure campaign against law firms that he has accused of “weaponizing” the justice system against him and his political allies.
It was also the first ruling by a judge deciding the legal merits of any of the several directives Trump has aimed at law firms that have handled legal challenges to his actions, represented political adversaries or employed lawyers who have taken part in investigations of him.
Howell, in a sharply worded, 102-page opinion, said Trump’s executive order was an attack on foundational principles of American jurisprudence and the role lawyers play in ensuring the fair and impartial administration of justice.
“Settling personal vendettas by targeting a disliked business or individual for punitive government action is not a legitimate use of the powers of the US government or an American President,” Howell wrote.
Perkins Coie said in a statement it welcomed the judge’s ruling and was grateful to “those who spoke up” in support of the firm’s lawsuit.
“As we move forward, we remain guided by the same commitments that first compelled us to bring this challenge: to protect our firm, safeguard the interests of our clients, and uphold the rule of law,” a spokesperson for the law firm said.

 

White House representatives did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Howell, based in Washington, barred federal agencies from enforcing Trump’s March 6 order against Perkins Coie. The judge had previously issued a temporary restraining order blocking enforcement of key provisions of Trump’s directive.
The Justice Department can appeal Howell’s order to the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Perkins Coie, a 1,200-lawyer firm founded in Seattle, represented the campaign of 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, who Trump defeated in his first presidential run.
Trump’s executive order sought to restrict Perkins Coie’s lawyers from accessing government buildings and officials, and it threatened to cancel federal contracts held by the firm’s clients.
The firm sued, calling the order a violation of the Constitution’s First Amendment protections against government abridgment of speech and Fifth Amendment guarantee of due process — a requirement for the government to use a fair legal process.
US Justice Department lawyer Richard Lawson, defending the orders in court, argued in each case that Trump was lawfully exercising his presidential power and discretion.
“In a cringe-worthy twist on the theatrical phrase ‘Let’s kill all the lawyers,’” Trump’s executive order “takes the approach of ‘Let’s kill the lawyers I don’t like,’ sending the clear message: lawyers must stick to the party line, or else,” Howell wrote.

Protesters march during a May Day demonstration in Denver, Colorado on May 1, 2025, against US President Donald Trump and his policies. (AFP)

Three other major law firms — WilmerHale, Jenner & Block and Susman Godfrey — also sued the administration to block the executive orders Trump issued against them. Other judges have temporarily blocked those orders while the cases proceed.
Nine rival firms — including Paul Weiss, Latham & Watkins; Skadden Arps; and Willkie Farr — have reached deals with Trump that averted punitive actions, pledging a combined total of nearly $1 billion in free legal services to advance causes he supports.
Trump’s targeting of firms has drawn condemnation from many within the legal industry. Some have criticized the firms that reached agreements as capitulating to presidential coercion.
Perkins Coie argued it was targeted over its work for Clinton’s campaign and the firm’s policies promoting workplace diversity and inclusion.
Trump’s order accused Perkins Coie of “dishonest and dangerous activity.”
It also said Perkins Coie “racially discriminates” in its hiring — referring to the firm’s diversity policies. Trump and his allies have portrayed such policies as discriminatory against white people. Trump’s order also criticized the firm’s work representing Clinton’s campaign.
Each of the firms suing the administration called the orders against them existential threats. They argued that the orders limited the ability of their lawyers to practice law and sought to intimidate their clients into seeking new counsel.


Despite economic contraction, Trump insists US will have ‘greatest boom in history’

Updated 03 May 2025
Follow

Despite economic contraction, Trump insists US will have ‘greatest boom in history’

  • Economy was down in first three months of the year as Trump began his plans for sweeping tariffs

WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump insisted Friday that his policies will bring a boom in the US economy even as he acknowledged the possibility of a recession.
The US economy, the world’s largest, unexpectedly contracted in the first three months of the year as Trump began his plans for sweeping tariffs.
“This is a transition period. I think we’re going to do fantastically,” Trump told NBC News show “Meet the Press with Kristen Welker.”
Pressed on whether the United States could dip into recession, Trump said, “Anything can happen.”
“But I think we’re going to have the greatest economy in the history of our country. I think we’re going have the greatest economic boom in history,” Trump said in excerpts of the interview, which will be aired in full on Sunday.
Financial markets have been in tumult since Trump took office and moved to revamp the global economic order with a return to sweeping tariffs on imports.
Share prices rose on Friday, however, after a solid jobs report in the United States.
 

 

 


NYPD shared a Palestinian protester’s info with ICE. Now it’s evidence in her deportation case

Updated 03 May 2025
Follow

NYPD shared a Palestinian protester’s info with ICE. Now it’s evidence in her deportation case

  • Leqaa Kordia, whose mother is an American citizen, was arrested at a protest outside Columbia University on March 13
  • New York City law generally prohibits police from sharing information about arrests with federal immigration officials

NEW YORK: New York City’s police department provided federal immigration authorities with an internal record about a Palestinian woman who they arrested at a protest, which the Trump administration is now using as evidence in its bid to deport her, according to court documents obtained by The Associated Press.
The report — shared by the NYPD in March — includes a summary of information in the department’s files about Leqaa Kordia, a New Jersey resident who was arrested at a protest outside Columbia University last spring. It lists her home address, date of birth and an officer’s two-sentence account of the arrest.
Its distribution to federal authorities offers a glimpse into behind-the-scenes cooperation between the NYPD and the Trump administration, and raises questions about the city’s compliance with sanctuary laws that prohibit police from assisting with immigration enforcement efforts.
Kordia, 32, was among the earliest people jailed in President Donald Trump’s crackdown on noncitizens who participated in pro-Palestinian demonstrations.
She was detained during a voluntary check-in with immigration officials in Newark, New Jersey, on March 13, then flown to an immigration jail in Texas. Her arrest was announced by the US Department of Homeland Security the next day in a statement that cited an expired visa and her role in “pro-Hamas protests.”
It remains unclear how immigration authorities were able to learn about Kordia’s presence at the protest near Columbia last April.
At the demonstration, police cited Kordia with disorderly conduct. But the charge was dismissed weeks later and the case sealed.
City law generally prohibits police from sharing information about arrests with federal immigration officials, although there are exceptions for criminal investigations.
On March 14, an NYPD officer generated a four-page report on Kordia and shared it with Homeland Security Investigations, a division of US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement.
In an emailed statement, an NYPD spokesperson said the department “received a request from a federal agency related to a criminal investigation and shared relevant information in accordance with our sanctuary city policies.”
“The NYPD does not participate in programs that are designed for visa revocation or any civil immigration matter,” the statement added.
The department declined to say what the investigation entailed.
Inquiries to the DHS and ICE were not returned.
Legal experts and civil liberties advocates said the document reflected a worrisome level of information-sharing between the city and the federal government, which has conflated criticism of Israel with support for Hamas, a US-designated terror group.
“The intention of the sanctuary laws is to protect against this kind of collusion and pretextual information sharing,” said Meghna Philip, the director of special litigation at the Legal Aid Society.
“It seems to be a clear violation of the law,” Philip added, “and raises questions about what guardrails, if any, the NYPD has around sharing information with a federal government that is seeking to criminalize speech.”
A low-profile protester
Kordia grew up in Jerusalem and the West Bank, and moved to New Jersey in 2016 with her mother, an American citizen. She studied English at a local exchange program, but let her student visa expire because she believed her application for permanent residency was sufficient to remain in the country legally, according to her attorneys.
Kordia’s case stood out among those ensnared by Trump’s crackdown. She was not an outspoken activist and had not publicly criticized Israel, either in social media posts or newspaper op-eds. She maintained no social media presence and did not appear on any of the public lists maintained by pro-Israel groups that seek to identify people who participate in pro-Palestinian demonstrations. Her name was not mentioned in news reports about the demonstrations.
While the Trump administration identified her as a Columbia student, she has never been affiliated with the university and was not enrolled in any college when she joined a protest in 2024 outside Columbia. Her attorneys said she was peacefully voicing her dissent against Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, which they said has killed over 100 of her relatives.
A spokesperson for the NYPD declined to say when they were first approached by federal authorities or whether the March 14 report was the first time they had shared information about Kordia’s arrest record.
Surveillance and interrogations
Beginning in early March, attorneys for Kordia say federal agents began interrogating members of her family and her neighbors. They also subpoenaed records from her MoneyGram account and “established a trace on her WhatsApp messaging account,” her attorneys said in a court filing.
“The investigation revealed nothing except that Ms. Kordia sent a single payment to a Palestinian family member in 2022, which itself is protected First Amendment” rights, the filing states.
At an April 3rd hearing, the federal government pointed to Kordia’s prior arrest for protesting as a reason she should not be released. An immigration judge found no evidence she had acted violently at the protest and agreed to grant Kordia a $20,000 bond, which her family paid.
The government has appealed that decision, keeping her detained for now.
In a petition seeking her release, attorneys for Kordia, a devout Muslim, said she had been denied halal meals since arriving at the jail. As a result, she has lost 49 pounds (22 kilograms) and fainted in the shower, according to facility records shared with her attorneys.
“The government’s entire argument that Ms. Kordia is a danger to the United States rests on a single summons for her participation in a demonstration,” Arthur Ago, her attorney, said. “The only reason she’s confined right now is because of her political viewpoint.”
Mayoral cooperation
New York City Mayor Eric Adams has criticized the city’s sanctuary protections, while insisting his administration is “meticulously” following the law.
When asked by the AP last month if the NYPD could turn over information to its federal law enforcement partners about a summons issued to a protester, the mayor insisted no such request was ever made.
“We have no record that this happened,” Adams said. “When I inquired, they said we did not turn over anything and we don’t collaborate for civil enforcement. They said that over and over again.”
His office did not respond to inquiries Friday.