The world’s biggest selling newspapers

The internet is said to be taking its toll on newspapers, but circulation is still healthy in highly wired countries like Japan and South Korea. Tokyo seems to be the newspaper capital, boasting the two most widely circulated newspapers in the world: Yomiuri Shimbun and Asahi Shimbun.

Tokyo has, in all, four of the 10 most widely circulated newspapers in the world. Two are published from London: the News of the World and the Sun. One is German: the Bild. Two are in China. And the other one is the Times of India.

So why aren't any American newspapers on the top 10 list? It can't be because of the internet. The internet is as widely used in Britain, Japan and South Korea as in America.

Continue Reading

Foreign-born Singapore resident population up from 18% to 23%

Singapore Population (Figures in Thousands)

Singapore now has 5.07 million people. But the population is growing more slowly – by 1.8 per cent this year, down from 3.1 per cent last year – with fewer new permanent residents and a lower intake of other foreigners. Several Asian countries have even lower growth rates, including China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Thailand and India.

The number of Singapore permanent residents has gone up by just 1.5 per cent to 541,000 this year, after an 11.5 per cent increase last year.  There are now 1.3 million non-resident foreigners, up 4.1 per cent this year after a 4.8 per cent increase last year and an astounding 19 per cent jump in 2007.

The Singaporean population has grown only 0.9 per cent to 3.23 million after a 1.1 per cent rise last year. China's  population (1.33 billion) has an even lower growth rate (0.5 per cent in 2008 and 2009 ) and so does Hong Kong (population 7 million after 0.4 per cent growth in 2008 and 0.7 per cent in 2009). Taiwan's population (23.8 million) increased only 0.4 per cent and South Korea's (48.7 million) just 0.3 per cent in both 2008 and 2009 while Thailand's (63.9 million) went up by merely 0.7 per cent in 2008 and 0.6 per cent in 2009.

Continue Reading

Gunmen attack Sri Lankan cricketers in Pakistan

I feel sorry for the people of Pakistan. It has become a breeding ground for terrorists who will stop at nothing. Now they have set a new record by attacking innocent visiting Sri Lankan cricketers. Twelve gunmen armed with grenades and rocket launchers attacked the cricketers travelling on a bus in Lahore, says the BBC. This is unprecedented.

Five policemen were killed and seven cricketers injured along with an assistant coach and an umpire. Comparisons are being made with the terrorist attack on Mumbai in Mumbai last year.  But the death and destruction there was far greater. Still, it’s terrible what happened in Lahore. The terrorists struck and melted away with impunity.

One feels sorry for the cricketers and the policemen as well as the people of Pakistan. This is the fruit of years of training and arming terrorists to fight in Kashmir and Afghanistan and spread terror in India. Now Pakistan itself is at the mercy of terrorists. No one is safe. Even President Asif Ali Zardari has known tragedy, his wife, Benazir Bhutto, assassinated at a political rally in December 2007.

Here’s what people are saying about Lahore on Twitter.  Here’s the Google News feed and what’s appearing on Google Blog Search. And this is the feed from Technorati. Why not also check the stories on Yahoo News?

The Times reports the injured Sri Lankan cricketers injured are:

Continue Reading

Captured terrorist from Pakistan: DNA

The only terrorist captured by the police has given details of his deadly mission. Azam Amir Qasab, 21,  has identified himself as a resident of Faridkot in Punjab, Pakistan, says DNA, a Mumbai newspaper.

“I was trained by militants of the Lashkar-e-Tayiba (LeT) in Pakistan for three months and asked to cause maximum casualties in Mumbai,” he said in a police statement.

Qasab said he was one of two gunmen involved in a shootout in which Mumbai’s Anti-Terrorist Squad chief Hemant Karkare and two other police officers were killed.

He said he was one of a group of 15 men trained by the Lashkar militants, says DNA. It adds:

The group was trained for three months followed by a month’s break. This was followed by another month’s training when they were taught how to hijack vessels at sea.

Came by sea from Karachi

Armed with sophisticated weapons, explosives, and inflatable rafts, they then boarded a boat in Karachi with a few associates and headed for India.

Hijacked Indian trawler

At Porbandar, Gujarat, they hijacked an Indian trawler carrying five Indian fishermen. They forced four of the Indians into the boat in which they had come from Karachi. The terrorists then boarded the Indian trawler, took one Indian captive, and sailed to Mumbai, said the police report.

They allegedly killed the hostage fisherman identified as Amar Singh Nazan, resident of Gujarat, by slitting his throat when they were close to Mumbai. They then came ashore on their inflatable rafts at around 8.30pm on November 26, the report said.

Shootout

Qasab told the police: “We then dispersed and left for our mission ahead. I along with my associate Abu Ismail Dera Ismail Khan, 25, also a resident of Punjab in Pakistan, left for CST railway station.” The police report said that after firing at the railway station, the duo went towards Cama Hospital.

Karkare was in a police vehicle on which they opened fire. All three officers in the vehicle were shot dead by the terrorists.

Qasab and Khan then assaulted a couple and hijacked their car.

Shooting broke out when they approached a police checkpoint.

Qasab was injured while Khan was killed.

India uneasy, militants happy, at Musharraf’s exit

India is uneasy and militant Islamists happy at the resignation of Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf. It is a blow to the war on terror, says the Times, and also likely to increase tension in Kashmir.

Continue Reading

Pakistan’s President Musharraf resigns

Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf resigns after nine years in office. The BBC is showing a videoclip where he announces his resignation.

The New York Times says: Under pressure over impending impeachment charges, President Musharraf
announced he would resign Monday, ending nearly nine years as the head
of one of the United States’ most important allies in the campaign
against terror.

Speaking on television from his presidential office here at 1 p.m.,
Mr. Musharraf, dressed in a gray suit and tie, said that after
consulting with his aides, “I have decided to resign today.” He said he
was putting national interest above “personal bravado.” “Whether
I win or lose the impeachment, the nation will lose,” he said, adding
that he was not prepared to put the office of the presidency through
the impeachment process.

The Guardian recalls: Musharraf, who seized power in a 1999 coup but has been largely
sidelined since his rivals won parliamentary elections in February, had
for months resisted calls on him to resign.

Here are reports from Indian media: Rediff News, The Times of India and the Indian Express. The Times of India also has highlights from his speech, facts about him, and a chronology of his rule. The Indian Express has an assessment of his rule.

Benazir and the fire of religion

Bhutto2_2

(AFP photo at the rally in Rawalpindi where she was killed.)

Why is South Asia such a hotbed of violence? Pakistan’s former prime minister Benazir Bhutto’s shocking assassination yesterday is being blamed on terrorists as well as President Musharraf at whom accusing fingers are being pointed by her Pakistan People’s Party supporters. But it is not an isolated incident. I was reminded of:

  • The assassination of Indian prime minister Indira Gandhi by her bodyguards in 1984.
  • The assassination of her son, Rajiv Gandhi, by a Tamil Tiger suicide bomber at an election rally near Chennai in 1991.
  • The assassination of Bangladesh’s first prime minister, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, by a group of army officers in 1975.
  • The assassination of Sri Lankan prime minister Solomon Bandaranaike by a Buddhist monk in 1959.
  • The assassination of King Birendra of Nepal by his son, Crown Prince Dipendra, who then committed suicide, in 2001.
  • The assassination of Mahatma Gandhi by a Hindu zealot in 1948.

Somehow South Asian leaders seem more vulnerable than their European counterparts. Spencer Perceval was the only British prime minister assassinated, far back in 1812.

Volatile Pakistan

Pakistani leaders perhaps face the greatest threat.

Benazir’s father, former prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, was hanged in 1979 after a coup led by General Zia-ul-Haq. Bhutto was accused of killing a political opponent. Zia himself died in a mysterious plane crash in 1988.

Musharraf has escaped several attempts on his life. Maybe that’s why he was unwilling to step down as army chief. In Pakistan, power does flow from the barrel of a gun. Like Zia, Musharraf captured power in a coup, ousting prime minister Nawaz Sharif in 1999. Coups have become routine in Pakistan, starting with Field Marshal Ayub Khan who seized power in 1958 and ruled till 1969.

Indeed, Pakistan seems a throwback to the Muslim era in Indian history when military power decided who should be king. The country is now racked by terrorism. But Pakistani governments have earlier been accused of abetting terrorists. Musharaff seized power from Nawaz Sharif after Pakistani forces were forced to retreat in a border conflict with India. And the conflict was over Kashmir, which Pakistan wanted to "liberate" from India because Kashmir has a Muslim majority.

Religious and ethnic divisions are to blame for the violence in India and Sri Lanka as well. Indira Gandhi was killed by her Sikh bodyguards because she ordered an attack on the Golden Temple in Amritsar to flush out Sikh separatists. Rajiv Gandhi was killed by a Tamil separatist from Sri Lanka.  Gandhi was killed by a Hindu fanatic for protecting Muslims in India while Hindus and Sikhs were being killed in Pakistan after the partition of the two countries in 1947.

Benazir’s death is a tragedy. But if Islamic extremists are to blame, Pakistan did little to discourage them in the past.

Blame the Brits for the Iraq war?

The White House and the rest of America seem to be divided on whether Iraq could become — or already is — another Vietnam. But they are reaping the whirlwind; the wind was sown by their friends who want to get out of the war: the Brits. The Iraq war may have been unpopular in Britain from the start. But it may be the result of their own divide-and-rule policy, writes Pankaj Mishra in the New Yorker.

Reviewing Indian Summer: The Secret History Of The End Of An Empire by Alex von Tunzelmann, he blames British colonial policy for exploiting religion to keep people divided.

That was the policy of Winston Churchill, according to the book. He encouraged Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the Muslim League leader in India. Jinnah opposed Gandhi and Nehru and their freedom movement which he claimed would lead to Muslims living under Hindu rule. He cooperated with the British. As a result, Churchill became “instrumental in creating the world’s first modern Islamic state”, according to the book. Jinnah got his Pakistan from the Partition of India.

Reviewing the book, Pankaj Mishra writes:

Little did Churchill know that his expedient boosting of
political Islam would eventually unleash a global jihad engulfing even distant
New York and London. The rival nationalisms and politicised religions the
British Empire brought into being now clash in an enlarged geopolitical arena…

The review doesn’t go into the Shia-Sunni clashes threatening to tear
Iraq apart — after all, the book is about India — but that’s the result
of the power structure the British left behind. Iraq, like most of the
Gulf, was once controlled by them. And there are similar tensions in
other Gulf states too.

Britain and Pakistan

The Shadow Of The Great Game: The Untold Story Of India’s Partition by Narendra Singh Sarila

Tony Blair had to go because his Iraq policy proved deeply unpopular. We have read how Britons disapprove of their military presence in Iraq. But he was only pursuing traditional British policy. The Middle East matters so much to Britain that it even helped to create Muslim states — and not just in the Middle East. We are talking of Pakistan.

Everybody knows India was partitioned because the Muslims wanted a separate state. What’s less known is that a separate Muslim state also seemed to be in the interest of the British, who lent a hand in its creation. Take Kashmir, for instance. Its Hindu maharaja opted for India; Pakistan tried to seize the country by sending raiders across the border; Indian troops fought back; and Kashmir got divided into an Indian and a Pakistani zone. Few people know, however, that it was British military officers who put Gilgit, Chitral and other remote areas in the north under Pakistani control. They were serving with the Gilgit Scouts, part of the Pakistani forces. I read that in The Shadow Of The Great Game: The Untold Story Of India’s Partition.

British officers at the time were still serving on the Indian subcontinent, mostly in Pakistan, and their presence restored an uneasy peace in Kashmir in 1948, it’s said. That’s not the full story, according to the author, Narendra Singh Sarila. The British commander of the Indian army prevented his soldiers from going ahead with the plans drawn up by his Indian subordinates. And he was supported by the British Labour government of the time, headed by Clement Attlee. The Indian prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, could do nothing.

This might seem strange. But Narila should know. He was aide de camp to Mountbatten, the last Briton to govern India.

Now why did Britain help Pakistan? Look at the map. Karachi is the subcontinent’s nearest port to the Gulf. Peshawar is close to Afghanistan. Kashmir extends all the way up to to Sinkiang in China. Hence the strategic importance of Pakistan. Britain needed Gulf oil and wanted to keep out the Soviets, who lay just across the border from Afghanistan.

Britain wanted to retain a military presence in this corner of the subcontinent even if it had to pull out from the rest of India. And Jinnah, the Muslim League leader, was ready to make such a deal in exchange for Pakistan. He collaborated with the British during World War II when Gandhi and Nehru instead of cooperating with the British started the Quit India movement because Britain refused to promise them independence.

The Indian nationalists made a mistake by starting the Quit India movement, says Sarila; Jinnah got what he wanted by cooperating with the British. But he didn’t have a choice. Not even all Muslims wanted Pakistan. The North West Frontier Province — now a part of Pakistan — supported the nationalists. There were divisions even in Jinnah’s own Muslim League. But successive British rulers in India — Linlithgow and Wavell — supported him as a counterfoil to the nationalists who wanted to get rid of them.

Why Jinnah wanted Pakistan has been extensively written about. So I won’t go into that here even though that’s part of the story.

But reading this book, it becomes clear that the British saw the founding father of Pakistan as a willing tool for their colonial interests.

Winston Churchill hated Gandhi and called him a naked fakir. Jinnah, on the contrary, was a brown sahib. He wore three-piece suits, gave speeches in English, smoked and drank and did not follow Muslim religious practices.

Above all, he was not a Hindu. Sarila writes that "an overwhelming majority of Englishmen in India by this time considered the Congress party and the Hindus generally their enemy and the Muslims their friend". Then he quotes from Wavell’s diary: "The immense gulf between the Hindu religion and mentality and ours and the Moslem is the real core of our troubles in India."

Poor Wavell, I wonder if he would have felt a similar kinship to the Taleban.

It’s just as well Jinnah got his Pakistan. India has enough problems of its own.

India blocks BlogSpot, TypePad blogs

I was surprised to read India is blocking BlogSpot and TypePad blogs. Apparently, it started at the weekend. When I first read about it on the Desi Pundit forum of Indian bloggers, I thought it was just a technical glitch. But a report by the India Uncut blogger Amit Verma on the Guardian website in the Comment Is Free section was an eye-opener. The Indian government is deliberately blocking some sites.

"Suspecting that terrorists might be using Internet blogs to exchange messages, the Indian government has jammed at least 20 blog sites over the weekend in the wake of the July 11 Mumbai blasts," reported India eNews.

But it’s like using a sledgehammer to crush a fly. Overseas readers can still access those sites, said India eNews, while bloggers in India who write about nothing more incendiary than their daily life can’t post their thoughts.

And the Indian Internet watchdog supremo couldn’t care less about violating their right to freedom of expression. Indian blogger Shivam Vij managed to contact the official on the phone only to be brusquely brushed off. "A few sites have been blocked. What’s your problem?" said the big man. "He was downright rude," says the blogger.

India does not have a history of Internet censorship, writes Verma. But now it seems to have followed the example of neighbouring China and Pakistan.

Some Indian bloggers, however, are proving just as resourceful as their Chinese counterparts. Desi Pundit reports Indians can still access their blogs using the pkblogs site. It bills itself as a free gateway for bloggers whose sites are blocked in India, Pakistan, Iran and China. It’s a shame that India is ranked with those three countries, but they are all in the same region. Indian blogger Amit Agarwal on Digital Inspiration suggests a few other ways to access the sites.   

Verma comments on the silliness of the official action. Those who want to will still be able to access the blocked sites, he says. Instead of directly going to those sites, they will use newsreaders and RSS feeds. He is absolutely right.

Global Voices Online has a roundup of reactions and the news has also been picked up by Boing Boing, OneWorld, Blog Herald and several other sites. Shame on India.

%d bloggers like this: