Ayub Khan Appointing Bhutto as his minister of commerce. Pakistan’s first Chief Martial Law Administrator cabinet swearing-in ceremony. 📍Karachi — 1958 🇵🇰

This week, I was blessed to join Hindu New Yorkers in Queens celebrating Navratri, Durga Puja, Dashain, and Vijayadashami.  We danced garba, performed aarti, witnessed Sindoor Khela, and honored the Goddess Durga. It was an honor to come together in joy, faith, and community in temples across our city — especially after the attempted mass shooting at a Hindu temple in Illinois last week. May we all join together in our shared responsibility to stand against hate and care for one another. Jai Mata Ki.

My column in today’s @FT: A democracy that once went looking for voters is increasingly demanding that voters prove they belong giftarticle.ft.com/giftartic…

I am Chinese, and of course I speak from a Chinese perspective—what is there to reproach me for? Are Indian researchers supposed to interpret the border issue from a Chinese perspective? Moreover, even if I made a neutral and objective statement, would Indians believe it? You would still say I am not neutral or objective. As long as I am Chinese, Indians will never believe me. Take Neville Maxwell of Australia—his research was neutral and objective enough, was it not? He worked as a journalist in Delhi for several years. He was once pro-India and unfriendly toward China, but when his India’s China War was published, India banned it. Why? Because the historical facts it described were regarded by the Indian government as anti-India. Indians may say within India that the war with China was Nehru’s fault, or the product of Kaul’s arrogance, and so on—but in external propaganda, it must always be China’s fault. That is no longer serious research. I have carefully studied the Sino-Indian border dispute of 1962, including primary sources from both China and India, and I have tried to conduct my research from as neutral and objective a standpoint as possible. My research is more thorough than Maxwell’s, because I have access to abundant Chinese-language materials, yet my conclusions are almost identical to his. By both reason and justice, the party responsible for the 1962 war—and the greatest obstacle to resolving the current border situation—is India. India’s current China studies are very poor. The core reason is the lack of Chinese perspectives and sources, which leads to interpretations of China that are almost entirely wrong, even laughable. If Indians wish to learn from historical experience, the right approach is to engage seriously with Chinese people, to discover the truths and facts that India failed to notice at the time, and thereby avoid repeating such a tragedy—not to treat an excellent Chinese scholar of India with a condescending sense of superiority. Saying this will certainly be hard for many Indians to accept. OK, I understand the pain of Indians—who does not want their country to stand on the moral high ground? If you wish to refute me, then please present your research.

“Not getting more H-1B visas is absolutely good for the Indian economy. Some of our best talent has gone to America. When I see Indian-origin billionaires in literally every street, I wonder what would have happened if they had built their business in India,” says Minister Goyal

Dear Prime Minister Ambani, Please accept my humble apologies for not realizing that you are the real boss of India. Naturally, you would prefer to maintain your monopolistic exploitation of the great people of India, but would you nonetheless consider allowing Starlink to compete? There are many areas of India, as there are in all countries, with no Internet access, which denies children the opportunity for education and for small businesses the opportunity to sell their goods to a global market. Starlink would change their lives for the better. Thank you 🙏