A | "The actual intentions of Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan are inevitably sophisticated," says Dr. Chang Ching, a research fellow from the Taiwan-based Society for Strategic Studies and a lead military expert on the People's Liberation Army and regional security in Taiwan.,"To acquire a historical reputation is the obvious factor identified by many politicians. Delivering political signals to Beijing can also be another reason. Attempting to shape the political developments in Taiwan has been accused by certain political commentators as well. Nonetheless, the Chinese media basically define her maneuver as an 'impulsively sneaky visit,' which is a term generally applied to those people who are defined as politically hostile to the Beijing regime visiting certain territories protested by the People’s Republic of China," Dr. Chang continued.,Pundits have speculated about the possibility of Pelosi visiting Taiwan and China's reaction since April 2022; Beijing has clearly demonstrated its fierce opposition to the high-profile visit. After her tour was canceled in the spring after the House speaker reportedly got COVID-19, the debate got its second wind in July.,Pelosi neither officially confirmed nor denied her intent to visit Taipei. Likewise, the White House tried to distance itself from the Democratic politician's trip to Taiwan, while at the same time arguing that such a tour is by no means "uncommon" and that the US "shouldn’t be intimidated by [China's] rhetoric or... potential actions.",Pelosi Provocation Over Taiwan Leads US, World Into Age of Disorder And Instability: Martin Jacques10:27 GMT,"The worst indication reflected by Pelosi’s visit is the decline of the United States that no American politicians are willing to admit," says the Chinese scholar. "If Washington still keeps sufficient confidence to condition Beijing’s reactions to this issue, President Biden himself and his senior members of the government would not show their reluctance to support Pelosi’s visit. The differences between the executive branch and the legislative branch of the United States government on this visit are so clear to see.",Dr. Chang wonders why Pelosi chose to keep her Taiwan visit secret until the last moment. He notes that the House speaker cited "security concerns" over her travel plan.,"Actually, it is a matter of Pelosi’s integrity and also causing more speculations on the so-called American security commitments to Taiwan," says the scholar. "If the Speaker herself has no full confidence of security during her presence in Taiwan, how can people in Taiwan trust the United States is capable of supportive while Taiwan is in danger?",According to Dr. Chang, China has long been very clear about its "red lines" with regard to Taiwan. Therefore, "certain serious consequences can be expected," he notes, ruling out, however, a "full scale invasion or other form of armed conflict.",The scholar points out that there are many measures available in Beijing's toolbox towards Taiwan for conditioning Taipei’s political maneuvers. What's more, the Taipei leadership is "well aware of how damaging [Pelosi's] visit can be" for the island, he adds.,"What can the possible consequences be? It all depends on how Taipei will react to those measures towards Taiwan," says Dr. Chang. "After all, it is literally an interactive process. It takes two to tango. Whether it will turn into a negative spiral or on the contrary to a positive spiral is not merely decided by Beijing. Taipei’s reactions are also important. Also, Beijing will not only try to condition Taipei like many western media [outlets] expected but also press Washington at the same time. The possibility of any mutual cooperation between Beijing and Washington on any global issues has basically vanished in the near future. The difficulties of reconciliation by these two powers will also increase dramatically.",All the aforementioned negative consequences will be unquestionably associated with Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her ill-fated decision to visit Taiwan, according to the scholar.。 New Delhi, Oct 13 (UNI) A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court on Thursday delivered a split verdict in the Hijab ban case, and referred the matter to the Chief Justice's (CJI) court for his direction to constitute a larger bench to decide the issue.
The bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia delivered the verdict on a batch of appeals against the Karnataka High Court judgment upholding the hijab ban in educational institutions.
"We have divergent of opinion, I have framed 11 questions on the issue," Justice Hemant Gupta who led the bench said in hiss verdict.
While dismissing the batch of appeals filed by many students, Justice Gupta affirmed the high court's order on the hijab ban and said, "the matter be sent to the CJI for constituting a larger bench to hear the case."
The two-judge bench on September 26, had reserved its order, after hearing from all the parties -- 23 petitioners, their lawyers, and the Karnataka government for a marathon 10 days.
The apex court pronounced the verdict on 23 petitions, including that of, Aishat Shifa, and others.
The state government has argued in the Supreme Court that it had the authority to issue an order to educational institutions to follow the discipline of wearing the prescribed school uniforms.
Senior advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing for the students/ petitioners, argued that fundamental rights, freedom to choose to what to wear and freedom of faith would not diminish inside a classroom.
The lawyers for the students -- Devadatt Kamat, Dr Rajeev Dhavan amd Dishyant Dave -- submitted in the top court that the Karnataka State government had not presented even a single shred of evidence to support their claim that a few students wearing hijab to their classrooms in addition to their respective uniforms violated public order, health and morality.
The lawyers further said that the Karnataka government had not provide any material to support their claim that wearing hijab infringed on the fundamental rights of other students.
A Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court comprising Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna Dixit and Justice J M Khazi, in their judgement on March 15, this year, held that wearing of hijab by women was not an essential religious practice of Islam.
The high courts's three-judge bench, had dismissed the petitions filed by a group of Muslim girl students against PU government college for denying them entry while wearing Hijab.
The led by Chief Justice Awasthi dismissed the petition stating that the practice of hijab is not an essential practice under islam and thus does not fall within the ambit of Article 25 of the Constitution of India.
The High court had also held that prescription of school uniform is only a reasonable restriction which is constitutionally permissible which the students cannot object to and stated that the government had the power to issue such notification and that no case was made out against the government notification.
UNI SM ING。
Current article:http://ejro2f.chuojianmeniaoyoshangshuang.shop/5ipft/20260826/839786.html
Published on:05:10:23
