Every Monday to Saturday, The Dispatch brings to you a selection of Editorials from leading newspapers across the country.
Lighting up the field
“Foreign players have enriched Indian football for decades. In a shared crisis, India must not treat them poorly,” reads the editorial of The India Express. It further reads, “Johnny Acosta is an established name in Costa Rican football. He has played in the World Cup twice — 2014 and 2018 — and captained his club in the highest division of the country’s domestic league. But the love showered on him by the Indian fans made him give up a comfortable life at home and move to Kolkata in March. This week, Acosta left the City of Joy with a sense of gloom. At the first sight of a crisis, apparently, he was abandoned by his club East Bengal, which terminated his contract prematurely. At a time when international flights are grounded, this left him without wages or a place to stay. Acosta found shelter at the Costa Rican embassy in New Delhi,” read the full editorial here.
“Economic retaliation against China will have limited impact, building domestic capabilities and leveraging the market is key,” read The Editorial of The Indian Express. It further reads, “In the aftermath of Monday night’s confrontation between India and China in the Galwan Valley, there has been a growing clamour for a boycott of Chinese products — in effect, a demand to use trade as a blunt instrument of retaliation against China. The Department of Telecommunications has reportedly conveyed to state-owned BSNL that it must not use Chinese made equipment in its network upgradation plans, even as the government is “actively considering” asking private mobile service providers to reduce their dependence on China-made equipment. Another Chinese engineering company is likely to lose a contract with the Indian railways, and there is reportedly talk of cutting down imports of products such as electronics from China. While the demand for boycotting Chinese goods may make for good optics, at this critical juncture, there is need to exercise caution, and for a considered approach. The harsh reality is that economic retaliation will have its own set of consequences. As India accounts for a minuscule share of China’s export market, it will at best have limited impact on China. And the implications for India of such actions will play out at multiple levels,” read the full editorial.
Mess in Manipur
“With the BJP-led coalition government in crisis, governor must uphold constitutional principles, ensure fair play,” read the editorial of Indian Express. It further reads, “The BJP-led coalition government in Manipur appears to be unravelling with three BJP MLAs quitting the party and joining the Congress, the principal Opposition in the state, ahead of the Rajya Sabha election on Friday. The BJP’s chief ally in the state, the National People’s Party (NPP), with four MLAs, has also withdrawn support to the government. The Congress has asked the governor, Najma Heptulla, to convene a special session of the Assembly to vote on a no-confidence motion against Chief Minister N Biren Singh, and also proposed a resolution for the removal of the speaker of the Assembly,” read the full editor al here.
Too little, too late
“Knee-jerk reaction after border clash not strategic planning,” reads the editorial of The Tribune. It further reads, “The more the fog lifts, the worse the Indian situation appears. During the telephone call between External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar and his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi on Wednesday afternoon, India insisted that premeditated and planned action by Chinese troops was directly responsible for violence and casualties on June 15. If that be so, it only proves that India was caught napping diplomatically and militarily. Worse, Jaishankar explained that the People’s Liberation Army’s actions reflected its intent to change the facts on the ground in violation of agreements to maintain status quo. This is the first admission from the Indian side that status quo has been violated by the Chinese, which implies that the Chinese have indeed set up structures and camps on Indian territory. Indian soldiers seem to have fallen defending our territory against a barbaric attack by the Chinese using nail-studded iron rods. Our military leadership has a lot to answer,” read the full editorial here.
Protecting lives and livelihood
“The PM is right to focus on both. But more needs to be done ,” reads the editorial of The Hindustan Times. It further reads, “Over two days, Prime Minister Narendra Modi interacted with chief ministers — the sixth such interaction since March — on the coronavirus pandemic. There were three key threads to his message. The first was that the phase of the lockdown is over and governments need to extend the relaxations in a planned manner. This is an important intervention at a time when, due to a surge in cases, rumours about a lockdown have proliferated. The prime minister’s remarks make it clear that there will be no national lockdown anymore. This is positive. At the same time, state governments need to be flexible on the issue, for in particular geographies, hard measures may be required in case of a surge,” reads the full editorial here.
Priests’ plea: Reclaiming non-Hindu sites of worship
“The verdict on the Ayodhya land dispute obviously forms the immediate context for the petition against Section 4 of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991,” reads the editorial of The telegraph. It further reads, “Trust is elusive. It has been so damaged that an intervention application has been filed in the Supreme Court with regard to a petition that has not even been listed for hearing. An organization of priests from the majority community, the Vishwa Bhadra Pujari Purohit Mahasangh, has petitioned against Section 4 of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 that prohibits any change in the religious character of a place of worship after August 15, 1947. The petition claims that this prevents the majority community from ‘reclaiming’ shrines that have been seized by other religions, and is thus unfair to Hindus. It favours other religions, presumably Islam, with regard to repossession of places of worship. It is the constitutionality of the law that is being questioned, because it seems to support, by hindsight, the destruction of Hindu shrines by foreign invaders. Thus the petition assumes, first, a supreme knowingness regarding history — the Archaeological Survey of India’s conclusion that there was once a temple beneath Babri Masjid was questioned by other experts who observed the evidence — and second, a right to occupy places of worship used by other faiths. Whatever the technicalities of the law, the thrust of the petition is clear enough,” read the full editorial here.
Support Ethical Journalism. Support The Dispatch
The Dispatch is a sincere effort in ethical journalism. Truth, Accuracy, Independence, Fairness, Impartiality, Humanity and Accountability are key elements of our editorial policy. But we are still not able to generate great stories, because we don’t have adequate resources. As more and more media falls into corporate and political control, informed citizens across the world are funding independent journalism initiatives. Here is your chance to support your local media startup and help independent journalism survive. Click the link below to make a payment of your choice and be a stakeholder in public spirited journalism