Magazine

In an interview to Iran's state media, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has said that Russia stands with Iran in the case of killing of Iranian nuclear scientist Mohsin Fakhrizadeh.

He said that Russia agreed that he was murdered for the purpose of creating unrest in the region.

Sergei Lavrov described Iran and Russia as "two important countries" playing an important role in the "New World Order of the World".

Iran's state-run TV network One (IRTV1) has translated Lavrov's words of Russian into Persian, saying he said, "We condemn the killing of scientist Mohsin Fakhrizadeh." We see this as an inciting terrorist act and an attempt to create unrest in the region. It is also an issue of interference of foreign governments.''

He also referred to the assassination of Lt Gen Qasim Sulemani on 3 January 2020 and said "it is unacceptable for any country".

Quds Force chief General Qasim Suleimani was killed in a US drone strike in Iraq. The United States had declared him and his Quds Force as terrorists, responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American citizens.

At one point in the interview, he emphasizes the point of cooperation between Iran and Russia. He says, "The level of our mutual cooperation with Iran is not with any country." Even during the Corona epidemic, our mutual trade has increased, not decreased.''

He also told that trade with Iran increased by 20 percent in 2019 and during the pandemic it has increased by eight percent.

He asserted that the trade agreements between Iran and Eurasia in 2019 provided opportunities for a larger market for Iran.

Sergei Lavrov criticized the US for withdrawing from the nuclear deal in 2015, as well as emphasizing the importance of removing the dollar in free trade.

Iran's banking sector is restricted and because of this, it cannot use the dollar in trade with foreign countries.

The country's top nuclear scientist Mohsin Fakhrizadeh was killed in an ambush by gunmen in the city of Absard, adjacent to Iran's capital Tehran. Iran's leaders have blamed Israel for the killing and said it will be avenged.

There has been a public outcry over debt payments between Maldives and China. There have always been concerns about China's debt in the Maldives, but the bickering hit the public stage last week.

The saying took place on Twitter between former President of Maldives and current parliament speaker Mohammad Nasheed and Chinese Ambassador to Maldives Chang Lichong.

Nasheed tweeted on 11 December 2020 that in the next two weeks, Maldives has to pay huge debt to Chinese banks.

His claim in this tweet was rejected by the Chinese Ambassador. The Chinese ambassador said that Maldives has to pay the debt but the amount is not as big as Nasheed claims.

Mohammad Nasheed is considered the most popular leader of the Maldives. He is also called pro-India.

Nasheed had said in his tweet, "In the next 14 days, Maldives has to pay $ 15 million somehow to the Chinese bank. Chinese banks have not given us any leeway in these loans. These payments are equal to 50 percent of the government's total income. Maldives is trying to recover somehow in the midst of the Corona epidemic crisis.''

Within two hours, the Chinese ambassador dismissed Nasheed's claims on Twitter. Chang Lichong said in response to Nasheed's tweet, "According to the information I have received from the banks, there is no loan payment of $ 15 million in the next 14 days. You check the account book and save it for the budget. Cheers.''

On 12 December 2020, the Chinese ambassador tweeted, "I have done some homework." The payment of debt of 17 lakh 19 thousand 535 in 2020 is correct. In Hulhumale Housing Project Phase 2, the loan amount of 23 lakh 75 thousand dollars taken for 1530 housing units is from a third country bank and not from China Development Bank. The debt in the Stelco project is to be paid in the second week of January 2021.'' The Chinese ambassador also posted some documents with this tweet.

In response to the Chinese Ambassador's tweet, a Twitter user quoted the Maldivian Ministry of Finance's statement as of December 31, 2018, "According to the annual report 2018, the Housing Development Corporation of Maldives set up 1530 housing units in Hulhumale Phase 3. For $ 4.2 million loaned from China Development Bank. If it comes to repaying this loan, then you will be able to show this screenshot, right?''

There was no response from the Chinese Ambassador on this. In such a situation, Mohammad Nasheed took it as an opportunity and tried to handle the situation.

Nasheed told the Chinese ambassador in his next tweet, "Thank you very much." Our relationship with China matters. Why should we wait for 11 more hours? Find some way out of this debt problem. Maldives needs another two years to repay the loan, otherwise we will never be able to repay these debts.''

Responding to Nasheed, the Chinese Ambassador wrote, "Respected Speaker, I appreciate your support. We have traditionally been friends and this is important to us. Discussions are already taking place on these issues. I am confident that there will be some concrete arrangement in terms of mutual benefit in both the countries so that it will help in bringing the economy back on track.''

Maldives and China have also clashed on Twitter before.

The current Chinese ambassador to the Maldives is known for his attendant response. The result of this is that their fans in Maldives are also very good.

In particular, supporters of former Maldives President Abdulla Yameen openly support the Chinese ambassador. After coming to power in 2013, Yameen grew closer to China than India. In many contract contracts, President Yameen chose China over India.

Yameen's supporters feel that China's ambassador is no less than an assistant to him in fighting the current government in the Maldives. The current government of Maldives is called pro-India.

In November 2020, Nasheed said that the debt of China cannot be repaid even if the people of Maldives sell their grandmother's jewelry too. In response, the Chinese ambassador said, "The jewelry of grannies is priceless but they have a price." I would prioritize friendship with Maldives which has no value.''

Another similar incident happened in November 2020. Dunya Maumoon, the daughter of former Maldives President Abdul Gayoom, was asked about an article in India Today on 10 November 2020. In this article, many things were said about Chinese investment in Male Airport.

The same day the Chinese ambassador told the daughter of former President Gayoom, "Read it as a fantasy." If you want the right information, take it from Maldives Airport.'' Gayoom was also considered as a Chinese-backed president.

Mohammad Nasheed said in an interview to the BBC in September 2020 that the Maldives had borrowed $ 3.1 billion from China. Nasheed had said that this included loans from both the Chinese government and the private sector there.

When the Maldivian Democratic Party of Nasheed came to power in 2018, Indian officials estimated the debt to be $ 1.5 billion.

Nasheed's party has been seeking financial help from India ever since it was formed. India has announced financial assistance of $ 1.4 billion to Maldives.

China and India are the centers of Maldives politics

Discussions in Maldives about China and India are hot in politics there. In September 2020, India Out campaign was being run on social media in Maldives.

Mohammad Nasheed then said that the India out campaign belonged to the ISIS cell. Nasheed had said that under this campaign, there is a demand to remove Indian soldiers from Maldives. The main opposition party was airing the India out campaign in Maldives. The main opposition party of Maldives says that the presence of Indian soldiers is against sovereignty and independence.

In response to the anti-India talk of the opposition party in Maldives, Foreign Minister Abdullah said that those who are "not digesting" the strong bilateral relations, are resorting to such criticism.

At the inauguration of an India-backed street lighting scheme, the foreign minister said, "This is a relationship between the two countries." It is a relationship connecting hearts. We thank him.

In August 2020, India announced a $ 500 million package, including a grant of $ 100 million. Earlier in 2018, India announced $ 800 million for the Maldives.

Prince Turkey al-Faisal of Saudi Arabia has strongly criticized Israel at the Bahrain Security Summit held on 6 December 2020.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi joined it online. This development has presented challenges in the way of any further dialogue between Arab countries and Israel.

According to the news agency AP, Israel has been surprised by the strong remarks of Prince Turkey al-Faisal in the Manama Dialogue because the Israeli Foreign Minister did not expect this to happen.

Especially when the Israelis were warmly welcomed by the authorities of Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates following agreements that normalized relations.

There has been controversy and conflict between Israel and the Palestinians for decades. The Palestinians think that these agreements are a betrayal of them and are as if their Arab comrades have stabbed them in the back.

Prince Turkey al-Faisal began his talk by describing the notion of 'a nation of Israel's peace-loving and high moral values' as a far more dark Palestinian reality under 'Western colonial power'.

Prince Turkey al-Faisal said that "Israel held the Palestinians in captivity, citing security reasons where the elderly, men and women are rotting in a way without any justice." They are demolishing homes and killing anyone they want.''

Prince Turkey al-Faisal also condemned "Israel's undeclared stockpile of nuclear weapons and the Israeli government's attempts to weaken Saudi Arabia".

Prince Turkey al-Faisal reiterated Saudi Arabia's official stand that the solution to the problem lies in implementing the 'Arab Peace Initiative'.

In the Saudi Arabia-sponsored 'Arab Peace Initiative' agreement in 2002, in 1967, in exchange for all kinds of relations with Arab countries of Israel, the territory occupied by Israel was sought to be given the status of Palestinian country.

He said, "You cannot cure open wound with painkillers".

Israeli Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi said immediately after the talk by Prince Turkey al-Faisal, "I would like to express my regret on the remarks of the Saudi delegates." I don't think that the words and changes that are happening in his words are seen in the Middle East.''

Israeli Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi reiterated the Israeli stand, saying that "Palestinians are responsible for the lack of a peace settlement". We have a choice about the Palestinians whether we solve it or not or just keep on accusing them.''

Dor Gould, a former ambassador to the United Nations and Netanyahu's close-knit Dorn Gould, who was watching the Bahrain Security Summit, said on the remarks of Prince Turkey al-Faisal that many false allegations have been made in the past.

Prince Turki al-Faisal also attacked them.

Saudi vs israel

Saudi Arabia has historically been critical of the treatment of Israel and its Palestinians, and the Arab media has been dismissing Israel as a 'Jewish country'.

In the remote and rural areas of Saudi Arabia, people have seen not only Israel but all the Jewish people as their enemies.

However, many misleading theories about Jews no longer appear. One reason for this is that Saudi people spend a lot of time on the Internet and because of this, they are very aware of the things going on in the world.

Despite this, there is still a doubt about outsiders in a section of the Saudi population. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf countries have a bizarre history of relations with Palestine.

The Gulf countries have generally been supportive of the Palestinian issue. For decades, they have been helping Palestine politically and financially. However, when Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat supported Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's invasion and occupation of Kuwait in 1990, he found it a major fraud.

After Operation Desert Storm, led by the United States and independent in 1991, Kuwait drove out the entire population of Palestinians present in its place and was replaced by thousands of Egyptians.

The old rulers of this region have taken a long time to forget the deception of Arafat.

India has rejected the proposal passed in the meeting of foreign ministers of member countries of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), an organization of Islamic countries. Kashmir has also been mentioned in this proposal.

The Indian Ministry of External Affairs stated that India's reference in the resolution passed in the OIC is factually incorrect, unreasonable and inappropriate.

There was a meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers (CFM) of the OIC on 27 and 28 November 2020 in Niamey, the capital of Niger, and Kashmir is also mentioned in the resolution passed in this meeting.

Pakistan is also a member of the OIC. Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi attended the meeting and raised the issue of Kashmir loudly.

Pakistan is happy with the mention of Kashmir in the resolution passed in the meeting of the Foreign Ministers of the OIC. This proposal is being called Niamey Declaration and Pakistan has welcomed it.

India ended Kashmir's special status on August 5, 2019. Since then Pakistan has been raising this issue on the international stage but so far there has been no concrete success. OIC has also not been very active about this till now.

Regarding the proposal passed in the CFM of OIC, India's Foreign Ministry has said in its statement, "We are factually incorrect, inappropriate and unreasonably passed in the OIC's 47th CFM in Niger's capital Niamey, India. Let's dismiss the mention of We have always said that the OIC has no right to speak on India's internal affairs. Jammu and Kashmir is also an integral part of India and the OIC has no right to speak on it.''

India has said in its statement, "It is regrettable that the OIC is allowing any one country to misuse its platform." The country that the OIC is allowing to do so has a disgusting record of religious tolerance, extremism and injustice with minorities. That country is always engaged in anti-India propaganda. We are seriously advising the OIC to refrain from saying such a thing about India in future.''

Kashmir has also been included in the resolution passed at the meeting of foreign ministers of the OIC member countries in Niamey.

However, Kashmir was not included in the OIC's CFM agenda. It is being said that due to the stubbornness of Pakistan, it has been included only. The resolution said that the OIC's stand on the Kashmir dispute has always been that it should be resolved peacefully as per the UN Security Council resolution.

However, it is also being said that the mention of Kashmir in the proposal of OIC is a ritual and it is not surprising for India. Despite the pressure from Pakistan, Kashmir was not included as a separate agenda in this meeting.

The OIC is dominated by Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Pakistan's relations with these two countries are deteriorating. Saudi Arabia wants Pakistan to pay its debts quickly. Especially since when Pakistani PM Imran Khan tried to create an organization with Turkey, Iran and Malaysia parallel to the OIC. Last week, the UAE temporarily banned the issuance of new visas for Pakistani nationals.

Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi also raised the issue separately in the OIC meeting with the UAE Foreign Minister but no concrete assurance has been received so far.

Is Kashmir a victory in the Niamey Declaration?

This meeting was held in Abu Dhabi in March 2019. In this meeting, the then Foreign Minister of India Sushma Swaraj was also called by the UAE.

Pakistan had opposed the calling of Sushma Swaraj and boycotted the inauguration ceremony. Sushma Swaraj then addressed the CFM meeting of the OIC.

There was no mention of Kashmir in the resolution passed in this meeting. It welcomed the decision of Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan in which he sent back Wing Commander Abhinandan of India.

Kashmir is nothing new in the proposal that comes after the meeting of the Foreign Ministers of OIC. It has been mentioned before also. This time the proposal is being called Niame Declaration. Its operative paragraph eight states that the OIC wants the resolution of the Jammu and Kashmir dispute to be peaceful as per the UN Security Council resolution and it has always been the same.

This was the first meeting of the Foreign Ministers of the OIC after the end of special status of Jammu and Kashmir on 5 August 2019. Pakistan hoped that this time a strong statement would be issued against India, but this did not happen.

Pakistan's Ambassador to India Abdul Basit has posted a video on Twitter and he has said many things about Niamey Declaration.

Basit has said, "This was the first meeting of the Foreign Ministers of the OIC after August 5 and we were hopeful that some strong statement about India would be issued." We felt that India's decision would be condemned but it did not happen. There is nothing very happy for Pakistan in the Declaration.

He said, "The way Kashmir is concerned about Palestine, Azerbaijan and terrorism in this Declaration does not belong to Kashmir. Compared to last year, we can be happy that this time, at least it has been mentioned. India should have condemned what it did on August 5, but it did not happen. Niger has good relations with India and the convention center in which this conference took place is made with the help of India only.

The Maldives is also a member of the OIC. Maldives Foreign Minister Abdullah Shahid attended the meeting. Abdullah posted a tweet on November 27, 2020 in which pictures of that conference center in Niamey were posted. With these pictures, Abdullah wrote in his tweet, "OIC's 47th CFM meeting is being held at the beautiful Mahatma Gandhi International Conference Center in Niamey. When the world is facing many challenges and crises, these can be faced together. ''

However, Pakistan is considering its victory with the mention of Kashmir. Pakistan's Foreign Ministry has tweeted, "The inclusion of the Jammu and Kashmir dispute in the Niamey Declaration suggests that the OIC has always stood by the Kashmir issue."

Ever since India abolished the special status of Kashmir, Pakistan has been calling for a meeting of the foreign ministers of the OIC member countries but to no avail.

In August 2020, Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi had threatened to withdraw from the OIC and raise the Kashmir issue. This angered Saudi Arabia and Pakistan had to issue an explanation. But by then the situation had deteriorated and Pakistan Army Chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa had to visit Saudi to handle it.

The recent report of an internal working group constituted by the Reserve Bank of India in India remains a matter of discussion.

This Internal Working Group (IWG) was formed to review the existing ownership guidelines and corporate structure for private sector banks in India.

The recommendations of this Working Group remain a cause for discussion as it suggested that after necessary amendments in the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, large corporate / industrial houses may be allowed as promoters of banks.

This means that large corporate houses like Adani, Ambani, Tata, Piramal and Bajaj can take a license for the bank and if they are found suitable, they can also open a bank.

It cannot be argued that the Indian banking system is very weak.

The report of the Internal Working Group states, "At the time of India's independence in 1947, commercial banks (many of these banks were under the control of business houses) were lagging behind in meeting social objectives. Therefore, the Government of India nationalized 14 large commercial banks in 1969 and 6 in 1980.

"However, with the introduction of economic reforms in the early nineties, the role of private banks has become increasingly accepted."

The report also considers the fact that "the Indian banking sector has grown significantly in the last few years but the total balance sheet of banks in India is still less than 70 per cent of GDP, which is equivalent to the global counterparts." Much less than that for a bank-dominated financial system. '

This means that Indian banks are struggling to meet the growing demand for finance of a developing economy.

Currently State Bank of India is the only bank in India that is a part of the top 100 banks in the world. The report states that private sector banks are outpacing public sector banks as they are more efficient, profitable and risk takers.

According to the report, "Public sector banks are continuously losing market share in the hands of private banks, this process has accelerated in the last five years."

There is no doubt that if India wants to become a five trillion dollar economy, it will have to grow its banking sector and IWG's suggestions are mostly related to this.

But, former RBI Governor Raghuram Rajan and former Deputy Governor Viral Acharya have raised the problem arising out of it. Raghuram Rajan has shared a post about it on his LinkedIn account.

In this three-page post, he has said that allowing corporate houses to enter the banking sector is explosive.

He has also questioned the timing of these recommendations.

Rajan and Acharya said in a joint post, "Have we come to know of anything that allows us to disregard all precautions before allowing industrial houses into banking?" We will not argue. In fact, on the contrary, today it is even more important that the tried and tested boundaries of corporate participation in banking be maintained. ''

Rajan and Acharya say that if allowed to do so, the economic power will be reduced to the hands of a few corporates.

These corporates themselves also need financing and in such a situation, they will easily withdraw money from their own banks. It would be very difficult to question them. This will lead to a bad debt situation.

Rajan and Acharya wrote, "The history of such linked debts has been extremely disastrous. When the borrower is the owner of the bank, how will the bank be able to give the loan properly? Even an independent and committed regulator with access to information around the world is difficult to monitor everywhere to prevent bad debt distribution. Information on loan performance is rarely timely or accurate. Yes Bank managed to hide its weak credit risks for a long time.

He also said that the regulator can also come under heavy political pressure due to these entities.

Rajan and Acharya said, "In addition, highly indebted and politically connected business houses will have the ability to force more licenses. This will further increase the importance of money power in our politics. ''

Both have agreed that India needs more banks because the amount of money deposited for GDP is very low i.e. how much capacity does the country have to pay its liabilities?

He has emphasized that "RBI has allowed the first industrial houses to come in with the payment banks." These banks can tie up with other banks to provide retail loans (such as personal loans, credit cards and mortgage). ''

They have said that when we already have these options, then why do we need to give license to industrial houses to open a full bank? Why now? That too at a time when we are trying to learn a lesson from the failure of ILFS and Yes Bank?

Apart from the timing and intentions of this recommendation, both have suggested that handing over poorly performing public sector banks to corporates would be extremely silly.

Giving these public banks to corporates means that we will hand over bad administration of these existing banks to disputed ownership of corporates.

International ratings agency S&P Global Ratings has also voiced concern about these recommendations. The agency said "internal conflicts of interest, potential conflicts of interest, centralization of economic power and financial stability are potential risks in allowing corporates to open banks."

There is no doubt that India needs finance to grow and public sector banks are not able to do so.

The government is already facing major challenges due to the corona virus epidemic. In such a situation, large industrial houses having financial capacity can meet the lack of money in India. But how safe is it to allow these corporates to own banks completely, the question remains to be answered by the RBI.

RBI has invited to express its views on the committee's report which can be submitted by 15 January 2021.

Iran's President Hassan Rouhani has said that the killing of the country's senior nuclear scientist will not slow down the country's nuclear program.

Hasan Rouhani accused Israel of killing top nuclear scientist Mohsin Fakhrizadeh and said that these steps show how upset he is and how much he hates us.

Iran had earlier appealed to the UN Secretary-General and the Security Council to condemn the killing of its top nuclear scientist Mohsin Fakhrizadeh.

According to the information received so far, Fakhrizadeh was ambushed by gunmen in the city of Absard, adjacent to the capital Tehran. However, no news of any attacker has been caught so far.

Ambassador to the United Nations of Iran Majid Takht Ravanchi said the killing of Mohsin Fakhrizadeh was a clear violation of international laws, which was carried out with the aim of creating unrest in the region.

At the same time, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has appealed for restraint in this matter.

According to Reuters, Guterres spokesman Farhan Haq said on 27 November 2020, "We have noted the news of the killing of an Iranian nuclear scientist near Tehran today. We urge restraint and avoid any action which may increase tension in the area. ''

Other Iranian authorities have accused Israel of murder and warned of revenge.

Israel has not yet responded to this, but has previously accused Mohsin Fakhrizadeh of being the mastermind of a secret nuclear weapons program.

What is the whole matter?

Iran's Ministry of Defense informed that one of its top nuclear scientist Mohsin Fakhrizadeh has been killed. After the attack Fakhrizadeh was taken to a local hospital but his life could not be saved.

Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Jawad Zarif condemned Fakhrizadeh's murder, calling it 'a state-sponsored terror incident'.

Intelligence agencies of Western countries believe that Mohsin Fakhrizadeh was behind Iran's intelligence program.

Foreign diplomats called him 'the father of the Iranian atomic bomb'. Iran has been saying that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes.

Four nuclear scientists from Iran were killed between 2010 and 2012, and Iran blamed Israel for this.

How was Mohsin Fakhrizadeh murdered?

Iran's Defense Ministry issued a statement on 27 November 2020 saying, "Armed militants targeted the car carrying Mohsin Fakhrizadeh, the head of the Ministry of Defense's research and innovation department."

According to the ministry, "He was badly injured in the skirmish between the militants and Fakhrizadeh's bodyguards and was taken to a local hospital but unfortunately all attempts by the medical team to save him failed."

According to Iranian news agency Fars, the eyewitnesses first heard the sound of explosions and then firing from machine guns.

According to the agency, eyewitnesses have also said that three-four extremists were killed.

Is Israel involved in this murder?

Iran's Foreign Minister Jawad Zarif tweeted, "Terrorists have killed a prominent Iranian scientist today. These rude actions, which have serious indications of Israel being at hand, reflect the assassins' intention to fight. ''

Zarif said, "Iran urges international communities, especially the European Union, to end their shameful double stance and condemn this terrorist move."

He said in another tweet, "Iran is once again a victim of terrorism. Terrorists have brutally murdered a great Iranian scholar. Our heroes have always faced terrorism for stability and security in the world and our region. The punishment of those who do wrong is the law of Allah.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) of the Iranian Army has said that Iran will avenge the killing of its scientist.

Major General Hussein Salami of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said, "There is a clear attempt to stop us from accessing modern science by killing nuclear scientists."

Who was Mohsin Fakhrizadeh?

Mohsin Fakhrizadeh was Iran's foremost nuclear scientist and a senior IRGC official. According to security experts from Western countries, he was very powerful in Iran and had a major role in Iran's nuclear weapons program.

Israel claimed to have obtained some intelligence documents in the year 2018, according to which Mohsin started Iran's nuclear weapons program.

At the time, Netanyahu gave Mohsin Fakhrizadeh a key scientific agreement for Iran's nuclear program in a press conference, saying, "Remember that name."

In 2015, the New York Times compared Mohsin Fakhrizadeh to J. Robert Openheimer. Openheimer was the scientist who led the Manhattan Project that produced the first atomic bomb during World War II.

Israel has not yet reacted to Fakhrizadeh's assassination.

Why was Mohsin Fakhrizadeh targeted?

Mohsin Fakhrizadeh was certainly an important figure as head of the Department of Research and Innovation in the Iranian Ministry of Defense. This is the reason why Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said in a warning tone two years ago, 'Remember his name'.

Since the US split from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, Iran has moved forward. Iran has accumulated reserves of low enrichment uranium and has cultivated uranium higher than the level set in the agreement.

Iranian officials have been saying from the beginning that enriched uranium can be destroyed, but it is very difficult to eradicate the work done towards research and development.

Ali Asghar Sutlaniya, former Ambassador of Iran to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), recently said, "We cannot go back."

If Mohsin Fakhrizadeh was really as important to Iran's nuclear program as Israel is alleged to have been in his accusations, his assassination probably suggests that someone is trying to rein in Iran's momentum.

America's newly elected President Joe Biden said that he would return to the Iran nuclear deal after coming to power. The murder of Mohsin Fakhrizadeh could also be an attempt to make any such possibility difficult.

Reliance Industries in India has recently invested Rs 620 crore in NetMedes, a Chennai-based online pharmacy company.

Reliance Retail Ventures has made these investments in Vitalik Health and its affiliates. The companies in this group are known as NetMeds.

With such a huge investment in Reliance Industries' online pharma company, there is a lot of competition expected to start in online pharmacy or e-pharmacy in India.

Amazon has already entered this. The pilot project of its Pharma Service has started in Bengaluru. At the same time, Flipkart is also preparing to come in this area.

Netmeds is an e-pharma portal selling prescription-based medicines and other health products. This company does home delivery of medicines.

Similarly, there are already many startups in the field of e-pharmacy. Such as 1mg, PharamaEasy, Medlife etc.

Before the arrival of these big players, the debate has started again about the e-pharmacy platform which was in controversy.

Institutions representing retailers and pharmacists have raised concerns over snatching employment of millions of people. However, e-pharma companies deny this.

Letter written to Mukesh Ambani

The All India Organization of Chemists and Druggists Association (AIOCD) has written a letter to Mukesh Ambani, Chairman and Managing Director of Reliance Industries Limited, objecting to the investment in his netmaids.

The letter reads, "It is very sad to see a company of Reliance industry investing in an illegal industry." The letter says that the e-pharmacy industry is not under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act (Drugs and Cosmetics Act) Aata, which regulates the import, manufacture, sale and distribution of medicines.

AIOCD has written one such letter to Amazon. The letter has also been sent to India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Union Home Minister Amit Shah, Union Commerce and Industry Minister Piyush Goyal and other ministries.

Working model threatens jobs

With big companies taking steps in the e-pharmacy industry, the concerns of retailers and pharmacists have increased. The institutions representing them have been objecting to e-pharmacy in two ways.

First, they believe that the working model of e-pharmacy platforms can lead to the jobs of millions of retailers and pharmacists. Their business may be closed.

Second, they raise questions about the legal aspect of operating e-pharma companies.

Abhay Kumar, president of the Indian Pharmacist Association, says that the working model of the e-pharma platform will gradually eliminate the jobs of pharmacists.

Says Abhay Kumar, "E-Pharma platforms will create their own stores, warehouses or inventory, where they will store medicines directly from companies or distributors and then supply medicines from there itself." In such a situation, the role of the local chemist shop will end. ''

There is already a crisis on pharmacists' jobs. The vacant posts of pharmacists in hospitals are not filled. After three years of study, the youth find themselves unemployed. So, as a chemist, do they want to take away the means of earning? "

Giving high discounts to e-pharma companies is also a cause for concern for retailers. AIOCD President J.S. Shinde says that a small retailer will not be able to compete with them in the way e-pharma companies offer more discounts.

Js Shinde said, "Retailer gets 20 percent and wholesaler 10 percent margin. However, new players coming to e-pharmacy are offering 30 to 35 percent discount. They can give deep discounts, can also cause some losses, but, the general retailer does not have that much capital. This will be a problem for the customers as they will be monopolized when retailers move out of the market and it will be difficult to control prices.

He says that there are around eight and a half lakh retailers in the whole country and one and a half lakh stockists and substockists, whose livelihood is about to be snatched away. Together, the working people and their families will become destitute of about 19 million people. It will be a double whammy for people suffering from recession due to Corona virus.

What do e-Pharma companies say

However, e-pharma companies completely deny all these allegations. He says that there are misconceptions among people about his working model. Their way of working will increase convenience for customers rather than take jobs, make it easier to access medicines and increase demand for pharmacists.

There are two types of business modus operandi in online selling of medicines. One marketplace and the other inventory led hybrid (online / offline) model.

In the marketplace model, e-pharmacy platforms take online prescriptions from the customer. These prescriptions can be uploaded directly to the website or app, through WhatsApp, email or fax. The prescription is then delivered to a local licensed pharmacist (chemist), from where the medicine is taken and delivered to the customer.

At the same time, in the inventory model, the company that runs the e-pharmacy platform keeps the stock of medicines itself and delivers the medicines on a prescription basis. That online platform itself acts as a chemist.

Some companies are working on a hybrid model. She also maintains a warehouse or store of medicines and also delivers medicines through contact with local chemists. They have a license to build a warehouse or store of medicines.

Now retailers and pharmacists have concerns about the inventory or hybrid model as the role of chemist shops will end in this.

But, Digital Health Platform, an association of leading e-pharmacy companies, says that e-pharma platforms will operate solely on the marketplace model.

"There are many misconceptions about the e-pharmacy model," said Dr Varun Gupta, Convenor of Digital Health Platform. The e-pharmacy marketplace model will help the existing pharmacy deliver online services. This will create a network by connecting different pharmacies on one platform. With this, inventory management will be better, access will increase, prices will be reduced and customers will get better services. ''

Doctor Varun says that the Covid-19 epidemic has shown how the two mediums can work together in the sale of drugs. People have insecurity and anxiety about any beginning. Similar opposition has also been seen earlier when new technology comes.

An expert associated with the online pharmacy industry also says that they do not give too much discount. If someone continuously gives such a discount, then they will not be able to survive in the market. E-pharmacy platforms fix their margins with local pharmacists.

Abhay Kumar says that if companies adopt a marketplace model and create opportunities for pharmacists, then they have no objection but this is very unlikely. Even now some platforms are working on hybrid models. They have more benefit in this. Therefore we oppose it.

E-pharmacy platform and existing law

E-Pharma companies have been working in the Indian market for many years but are still at a very small level. The use of the e-Pharma platform has also increased in lockdown due to Corona virus. They are mostly used for chronic medicines, ie medicines of long-standing diseases.

In terms of statistics, according to a report by the Economics Times, the market for drugs for e-pharmacies in India can reach $ 18.1 billion by 2023. It was $ 9.3 billion in 2019.

But, the validity of the e-pharmacy platform has been questioned for a long time. Even this matter has reached the court.

Js Shinde says, "E-pharmacies are not currently covered under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, so it is illegal to run them. The act does not mention online sale of drugs. So it is difficult to monitor and control them."

At the same time, e-pharma companies have been claiming that they are working in the legal realm. Dr. Varun Gupta explains that the e-pharma business model falls under the Information Technology Act, 2000, the concept of middleman, and licensed pharmacists (who deliver prescription drugs) are covered under the Drugs and Cosmetic Act. E-Pharma companies are operating under this model.

E-pharmacy draft

After the objections of many parties, on 28 August 2018, a draft of the rules was prepared to regulate the online sale of drugs, i.e. to bring them under the law. Based on this, the Drugs and Cosmetic Rules, 1945 were to be amended. Opinion was sought from general public / stakeholders on this draft.

This draft includes registration of e-pharmacy companies, inspection of e-pharmacy, process for distribution or sale of drugs through e-pharmacy, prohibition of advertisement of drugs through e-pharmacy, grievance redressal mechanism, e-pharmacy There were provisions related to monitoring, etc. But, nothing further has been done on this.

When the matter reached Delhi High Court in December 2018, the court ordered a ban on the online sale of drugs without a license. After this, the single bench of Madras directed not to do online business of medicines till the draft rules were notified. However, in January 2019, the Division Bench of Madras stayed this instruction.

It is discussed that the government is considering amending the Drugs and Cosmetics Act so that online sales of medicines can also be brought under its purview.

However, the Pharmacists and Retailers Association is considering all aspects of this and is demanding to make a law related to it.

Js Shinde says that in countries where the e-pharmacy industry is running, what are its effects and what should be done in India to avoid them. It should not be allowed without considering all the sides.

They told that we will give 21 days notice to the government that they will listen to our concerns and take any step. If there is no response from the government, then all the drug dealers will go on strike.

The United Nations' Nuclear Monitoring Agency has said that Iran has collected more than 10 times as much uranium as it can hold under the international nuclear deal.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has stated that Iran's reserves of enriched uranium have now reached 2,105 kg, while under the 2015 agreement it could not exceed 300 kg.

Iran said in July last year that it had started using new and advanced technology centrifuge devices for uranium enrichment.

Centrifuges are used to separate the chemical particles of uranium from each other.

Uranium is cultivated in two places in Iran - Natanz and Fordo.

After enrichment, it can also be used to develop nuclear power or nuclear weapons.

Iran has long emphasized that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only.

Iran allowed IAEA observers to investigate one of its two previously suspected nuclear targets.

Now the agency has said that it will take samples from another location this month.

Last year, Iran deliberately and openly began violating the 2015 nuclear deal promises.

The United States, Britain, Russia, Germany, France and China also signed with Iran on this nuclear deal.

Iran started enriching uranium more than permitted in 2019. However, it was far below the level required to build nuclear weapons.

Can Iran make nuclear weapons with this?

Iran will need 3.67 percent enriched 1,050 kg of uranium to make nuclear weapons. But an American group 'Arms Control Association' says that later it will have to be increased by 90 percent.

U-235 isotopes of low-enriched three to five percent density uranium can be made using electricity as fuel.

The uranium used to make weapons is 90 percent or more enriched.

Experts say that even if Iran does, it will take a long time to complete the process of Enrichment.

Iran said last week that it had let arms observers investigate their targets in 'harmony' so that issues related to nuclear security could be resolved.

The IAEA criticized Iran for not allowing the investigation of the two bases and not answering questions about secretly kept nuclear material and its activities.

Now the International Monitoring Agency has issued a statement saying that "Iran has given samples to the agency's supervisors. These samples will be tested in the laboratories of the agency's network.

Iran stopped following the terms of the international nuclear deal last year. He took this step after US President Donald Trump announced his withdrawal from the deal.

Some members of a rare tribe living on an island in the Andaman Islands in India have been found infected with corona.

According to the BBC, a health official has reported that four members of the Great Andamanese tribe have been infected. Two of them have been admitted to the hospital. The other two are housed in a care center in Quarantine.

It is believed that only 53 people from the Great Andamanese tribe are still alive and are residents of one of the 37 residential islands in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

So far, 2985 cases of corona virus infection have been reported in the eastern part of Andaman and Nicobar Islands. 41 of these people have also lost their lives. The first case was reported here in early June.

According to the BBC, a senior health officer, Dr Abhijit Roy, reported that the first case of infection in the Great Andamanese tribe came to light last week when 53 members of the tribe were tested corona on Strait Island.

A team of health and emergency officials arrived on Strait Island last week where the tribe lives.

According to the BBC, Dr Abhijeet Roy said, "They were all very supportive."

Doctor Roy says that many of these people keep coming to Port Blair from their isolated island. And the infection may have reached them only through them.

Some of these people also do small jobs in the city.

Now the biggest challenge for the health authorities is that the infection does not spread to the remaining tribes of the islands.

"We are watching their movements," says Doctor Roy. Also doing a collective testing of some other tribes.

Tribes of Andaman

The Andaman Islands are home to five tribes on the verge of extinction. These are - Jarawa, North Sentinelies, Great Andamanese, Ong and Shompan.

Among these, the Jarawa and North Sentinelis tribes have not come in contact with the common people. The North Sentinelies are quite aggressive towards outsiders. That is why no one is allowed to visit his island.

In the year 2018, an American named John Allen Chow attempted to visit his island but he was shot with arrows by members of this tribe.

According to Survival International, a London-based organization working among the tribes here, when Britain colonized the islands in 1850, there were close to 5,000 Great Andamanese.

With the arrival of outsiders, new diseases also came here due to which their population continued to decrease.

Sophie Grigg, a researcher at the organization, said, "It is very dangerous news that some people in the Great Andamanese tribe have been found infected." Those people know about such diseases because their forefathers have died in the past.

In 2010, Boa Sr., the last eldest speaking Great Andamanese language, died at the age of 85.

The Andaman Islands are called the dream folk of anthropology researchers because the linguistic diversity here is astonishing.

Jarawa tribe is also concerned

Officials say that in the meantime, people of the Jarawa tribe, with about 476 members, have been sent to a part of the forest to protect them from infection. The Jarawas live in a forest reserve between South and Middle Andaman.

Authorities fear that these tribes may not come in contact with such people who use the Grand Andaman Road passing through it.

These travelers have been isolated to remove the possibility of the Corona infection reaching Jarawa.

Andaman Trunk Road was built in 1870. It runs from Baratang to Diglipur via 400 villages in the middle of the forest reserve.

Other tribes are also on the radar

Now a team of health workers will go to test 115 members of the Ong tribe. Apart from this, people of Shompen tribe will also be tested.

All the health workers involved in the testing of the Great Andamanese Tribe were first tested in Corona and were kept in quarantine for a week on their return.

Doctor Roy said that infection has been found on ten islands of the Andaman Islands so far.

Andaman has two hospitals, three health centers and ten care centers to fight Covid. Here the testing rate is also much higher than the rest of India.

Tribes in Brazil and Peru have also been hit by Kovid 19. More than 280 people of the tribes living in the Amazon jungles of Brazil have died due to coronavirus.

Russian President Vladimir Putin himself announced on Tuesday the creation of the world's first vaccine for the corona virus. Russia has named this vaccine Sputnik 5.

When the whole world is plagued by the Corona virus, there should have been a celebration about vaccine formation, but why is there so much indifference?

This is because many countries of the world were involved in the race to make vaccines. In such a situation, many countries passed exasperating Russia. This is because many countries see the corona epidemic as an opportunity. For them, the corona epidemic has brought great opportunities for trade.

With the announcement of the first vaccine made by Russia, these countries are seeing the plans of earning trillions of dollars from this epidemic. On the other hand, Russia is ready to supply its vaccine. Which is like sprinkling salt on the burns of these countries. Now, after falling behind in the vaccine race, these countries will try to find different types of deficiency in the vaccine of Russia.

In India, due to corona, the situation is constantly getting worse. India has reached number four in terms of deaths from Corona. Even then, there is no enthusiasm about the Russian vaccine. As of Thursday, the Corona virus cases have reached 24,61,190 in India. 64,553 new cases were reported in India in one day and 1,007 people died.

The number of deaths due to corona virus has so far reached 48,040. There are 6,61,595 active cases of corona virus in the country and 17,51,555 people have been discharged.

At the state level, Maharashtra has the highest number of cases. So far 56,01,26 cases have been reported here. Mizoram has the least 649 cases.

India has to understand that either it can make its own vaccine as soon as possible. Or wherever he gets the vaccine, buy it and give the vaccine to people all over the country. India has to understand that no country will give it vaccine for free, then why wait for any country? India only has to think about its citizens, otherwise the rapid corona epidemic is spreading in India, India will have to suffer serious consequences.

Brazil is badly engulfed in the corona virus epidemic compared to India. More than one lakh people have also died here. Despite this, Brazil is skeptical and indifferent to the Russian vaccine. Brazil has said that it needs more information before buying a Russian vaccine.

The Brazilian health minister said on Thursday that he would talk more about the Russian vaccine. Brazil ranks second among the countries worst hit by the Corona virus.

Brazil is also conducting several vaccine trials. Brazilian Health Minister Eduardo Paazuelo said that the Russian vaccine is still in its early stages.

He said, "This vaccine has just arrived. I do not have any such detailed information about which I can say anything. We are not monitoring its data. There is a lot to be talked about right now. ''

According to CNN, Russia proposed to give the US its vaccine to deal with Kovid 19, but the US has refused to take any such help.

A Russian official from CNN said, "There is a lack of trust in the two countries, so cooperation in technology, vaccines, testing and treatment is hardly possible."

On Thursday, White House press secretary Kylie McNanni said that President Trump had been briefed about Russia's vaccine. Kylie said that vaccine work is going on in America and everything is positive.

He said that the US vaccine is in Phase III trials and is of very standard standard. The World Health Organization has also said about Russia's vaccine that it does not know much about it so it cannot do any evaluation.

India has not officially said anything about the Russian vaccine.