Trump charged over classified documents in first federal indictment of an ex-president

Trump charged over classified documents in first federal indictment of an ex-president
1 / 2
Former US president Donald Trump has been indicted in the federal probe over his handling of classified documents after leaving office. (AFP)
Trump charged over classified documents in first federal indictment of an ex-president
2 / 2
A January 20, 2021 photo shows aides carrying boxes to Marine One before US president Donald Trump and wife Melania Trump departed from the White House on Trump's final day in office, in Washington, DC. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 09 June 2023
Follow

Trump charged over classified documents in first federal indictment of an ex-president

Trump charged over classified documents in first federal indictment of an ex-president
  • The controversial former president said he was due in court Tuesday in Miami, calls it a "DARK DAY for the United States of America"
  • Trump has already been indicted in New York and faces additional investigations in Washington and Atlanta that also could lead to criminal charges

MIAMI: Donald Trump said Thursday that he was indicted for mishandling classified documents at his Florida estate, a remarkable development that makes him the first former president in US history to face criminal charges by the federal government that he once oversaw.
The indictment carries unmistakably grave legal consequences, including the possibility of prison if he’s convicted.
But it also has enormous political implications, potentially upending a Republican presidential primary that Trump had been dominating and testing anew the willingness of GOP voters and party leaders to stick with a now twice-indicted candidate who could face still more charges. And it sets the stage for a sensational trial centered on claims that a man once entrusted to safeguard the nation’s most closely guarded secrets willfully, and illegally, hoarded sensitive national security information.
The Justice Department did not immediately confirm the indictment publicly. But two people familiar with the situation who were not authorized to discuss it publicly said the indictment included seven criminal counts. One of those people said Trump’s lawyers were contacted by prosecutors shortly before he announced on his Truth Social platform that he had been indicted.
Within 20 minutes of his announcement, Trump began fundraising off it for his 2024 presidential campaign. He declared his innocence in a video and repeated his familiar refrain that the investigation is a “witch hunt.” He said he planned to be in court Tuesday afternoon in Miami, where a grand jury had been meeting to hear evidence as recently as this week.
The case adds to deepening legal jeopardy for Trump, who has already been indicted in New York and faces additional investigations in Washington and Atlanta that also could lead to criminal charges. But among the various investigations he faces, legal experts — as well as Trump’s own aides — had long seen the Mar-a-Lago probe as the most perilous threat and the one most ripe for prosecution. Campaign aides had been bracing for the fallout since Trump’s attorneys were notified that he was the target of the investigation, assuming it was not a matter of if charges would be brought, but when.
Appearing Thursday night on CNN, Trump attorney James Trusty said the indictment includes charges of willful retention of national defense information — a crime under the Espionage Act, which polices the handling of government secrets — obstruction, false statements and conspiracy.
The case is a milestone for a Justice Department that had investigated Trump for years — as president and private citizen — but had never before charged him with a crime. The most notable investigation was an earlier special counsel probe into ties between his 2016 campaign and Russia, but prosecutors in that probe cited Justice Department policy against indicting a sitting president. Once he left office, though, he lost that protection.
The inquiry took a major step forward last November when Attorney General Merrick Garland, a soft-spoken former federal judge who has long stated that no person should be regarded as above the law, appointed Jack Smith, a war crimes prosecutor with an aggressive, hard-charging reputation to lead both the documents probe as well as a separate investigation into efforts to subvert the 2020 election.
The indictment arises from a monthslong investigation into whether Trump broke the law by holding onto hundreds of documents marked classified at his Palm Beach property, Mar-a-Lago, and whether he took steps to obstruct the government’s efforts to recover the records.
Prosecutors have said that Trump took roughly 300 classified documents to Mar-a-Lago after leaving the White House, including some 100 that were seized by the FBI last August in a search of the home that underscored the gravity of the Justice Department’s investigation. Trump has repeatedly insisted that he was entitled to keep the classified documents when he left the White House, and has also claimed without evidence that he had declassified them.
Court records unsealed last year showed federal investigators believed they had probable cause that multiple crimes had been committed, including the retention of national defense information, destruction of government records and obstruction.
Since then, the Justice Department has amassed additional evidence and secured grand jury testimony from people close to Trump, including his own lawyers. The statutes governing the handling of classified records and obstruction are felonies that could carry years in prison in the event of a conviction.
It remains unclear how much it will damage Trump’s standing given that his first indictment generated millions of dollars in contributions from angry supporters and didn’t weaken him in the polls. But no matter what, the indictment — and legal fight that follows — will throw Trump back into the spotlight, sucking attention away from the other candidates who are trying to build momentum in the race.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Trump opponent in the primary, condemned the indictment on Twitter, saying it represented “the weaponization of federal law enforcement.”
The former president has long sought to use his legal troubles to his political advantage, complaining on social media and at public events that the cases are being driven by Democratic prosecutors out to hurt his 2024 election campaign. He is likely to rely on that playbook again, reviving his longstanding claims that the Justice Department — which, during his presidency, investigated whether his 2016 campaign had colluded with Russia — is somehow weaponized against him.
Trump’s legal troubles extend beyond the New York indictment and classified documents case.
Smith is separately investigating efforts by Trump and his allies to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. And the district attorney in Georgia’s Fulton County is investigating Trump over alleged efforts to subvert the 2020 election in that state.
Signs had mounted for weeks that an indictment was near, including a Monday meeting between Trump’s lawyers and Justice Department officials. His lawyers had also recently been notified that he was the target of the investigation, the clearest sign yet that an indictment was looming.
Though the bulk of the investigative work had been handled in Washington, with a grand jury meeting there for months, it recently emerged that prosecutors were presenting evidence before a separate panel in Florida, where many of the alleged acts of obstruction scrutinized by prosecutors took place.
The Justice Department has said Trump and his lawyers repeatedly resisted efforts by the National Archives and Records Administration to get the documents back. After months of back-and-forth, Trump representatives returned 15 boxes of records in January 2022, including about 184 documents that officials said had classified markings on them.
FBI and Justice Department investigators issued a subpoena in May 2022 for classified documents that remained in Trump’s possession. But after a Trump lawyer provided three dozen records and asserted that a diligent search of the property had been done, officials came to suspect even more documents remained.
The investigation had simmered quietly for months until last August, when FBI agents served a search warrant on Mar-a-Lago and removed 33 boxes containing classified records, including top-secret documents stashed in a storage room and desk drawer and commingled with personal belongings. Some records were so sensitive that investigators needed upgraded security clearances to review them, the Justice Department has said.
The investigation into Trump had appeared complicated — politically, if not legally — by the discovery of documents with classified markings in the Delaware home and former Washington office of President Joe Biden, as well as in the Indiana home of former Vice President Mike Pence. The Justice Department recently informed Pence that he would not face charges, while a second special counsel continues to investigate Biden’s handling of classified documents.
But compared with Trump, there are key differences in the facts and legal issues surrounding Biden’s and Pence’s handling of documents, including that representatives for both men say the documents were voluntarily turned over to investigators as soon as they were found. In contrast, investigators quickly zeroed on whether Trump, who for four years as president expressed disdain for the FBI and Justice Department, had sought to obstruct the inquiry by refusing to turn over all the requested documents.


UN Security Council urged to classify Taliban oppression of women as ‘gender apartheid’

UN Security Council urged to classify Taliban oppression of women as ‘gender apartheid’
Updated 9 sec ago
Follow

UN Security Council urged to classify Taliban oppression of women as ‘gender apartheid’

UN Security Council urged to classify Taliban oppression of women as ‘gender apartheid’
  • ‘The Taliban are not simply failing to uphold women’s rights, this oppression of women is central to their system of governance,’ says lawyer and campaigner Karima Bennoune
  • Council members unanimously condemn the treatment of women and girls in Afghanistan but stop short of using the word ‘apartheid’ to describe it

NEW YORK CITY: Experts on Tuesday urged the international community to officially recognize the “gender apartheid” in Afghanistan amid the escalating restrictions imposed on women and girls by the Taliban regime in the country.

During a media event on the sidelines of the 78th session of the UN General Assembly, shortly before a special meeting of the UN Security Council to discuss the situation in Afghanistan, international lawyer and civil society representative Karima Bennoune said the “drastic restrictions” on 50 percent of the population were “unparalleled” in the world.

“I believe the ‘gender apartheid’ approach is the most promising way forward as the Taliban are not simply failing to uphold women’s rights, this oppression of women is central to their system of governance,” she added.

“Deeming the situation to be gender apartheid not only implicates the perpetrators of the apartheid but, as was the case with racial apartheid in South Africa, it means that no member state can be complicit in or normalize the Taliban’s illegal actions.”

The International Criminal Court defines the crime of apartheid perpetrated by a regime as the systematic oppression and domination by one racial group of one or more other racial groups with the aim of maintaining that regime.

During the Security Council meeting, Bennoune noted that UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and a number of governments have already labeled the Taliban’s actions against women and girls as a form of apartheid, and called on the UN to officially codify this approach under international law by adding the word “gender” to the existing definition.

“The apartheid framework recognizes that the ordinary human rights approach, centering the state as the actor to implement human rights, cannot work here,” she said.

“Positive change will only be possible with a consistent, principled international response led by this council, mandated by its 10 Women, Peace and Security resolutions, and supported by states from all regions.”

Sima Sami Bahous, the executive director of UN Women, echoed Bennoune’s views during her comments at the meeting.

The members of the council unanimously condemned the treatment of women and girls in Afghanistan but stopped short of using the word “apartheid” to describe it.

Albania’s permanent representative to the UN, Ferit Hoxha, whose country holds the presidency of the council this month, said of the Taliban: “This regime and its rules are medieval and retrograde, with extrajudicial killings and arbitrary arrests simply unacceptable.

“Two years on from the Western withdrawal from Afghanistan, the situation remains dire, with the international community struggling to balance its support for the Afghan people without rewarding the de facto authorities.”

Representatives from several states, including China, Japan, Mozambique, the UK and the US, all called for a reversal of the Taliban restrictions on women and girls.

Speaking on behalf of Gabon, Ghana and Mozambique, the three current African non-permanent members of the Security Council, Mozambique’s representative to the UN, Pedro Comissario Afonso, said: “The lack of representation of the diversity of the Afghan people at the ethnic and social level in the political sphere is both apparent and deplorable.”

With winter approaching, council members expressed concern that the continued failure to reintegrate women into the positions they held before the Taliban takeover will serve only to exacerbate people’s

suffering amid a shortfall in funding for international aid, and the reluctance of many countries to engage with the regime.

Citing a recent UN Development Program report that said gross domestic product in Afghanistan fell by 3.6 percent in 2022, following a 20.7 percent contraction in 2021, China’s representative, Zhang Jun, attributed the decline to a “sharp drop” in humanitarian funding.

“The report claims two thirds of Afghanistan will need humanitarian assistance next year, with 41 million Afghans in a state of food insecurity, and yet the humanitarian assistance program is just 27 percent funded at present,” he said.

“This is a clear demonstration that the cutback in funding is of an ideological and political nature that only stands in the way of the Afghan people; winter is coming.”

Both India and Iran, who share borders with Afghanistan, expressed concern about the “potential consequences for regional insecurity” caused by the situation in the country. However, the Chinese envoy suggested that “on the whole,” the security situation had improved since the Taliban took control.

The Taliban’s choice of representative to the UN is not recognized by the international organization. Naseer Faiq, the representative of the former Afghan government that was toppled by the Taliban, strongly rejected the Chinese representative’s suggestion.

“Taliban assertions of counterterrorism and counternarcotics efforts ring hollow as they are leaders, are deeply involved in narcotics production and smuggling within the Taliban centers of power and resources distribution,” he told the council.

“Tragically, two years since the Taliban seized control, the situation of Afghanistan has not improved … the Afghan people continue to suffer.”

Describing Afghanistan under the Taliban as a “hub for terrorism,” Faiq said that despite the challenges, the Afghan people are nonetheless “resolute” in their diversity and would continue to “work tirelessly” to defend their rights.

Echoing calls by Afghan community organizations, he urged the council and international partners to maintain the pressure on the Taliban and demand the reversal of policies that deny women their rights.

“We also call on the UN to recognize and classify the plight of woman and girls as gender apartheid, and emphasize the necessity of ongoing humanitarian assistance for the people of Afghanistan, subject to rigorous monitoring and supervision of aid delivery,” Faiq said.

“We can help shape a better future for the Afghan people and prevent the country from once again becoming a breeding ground for extremism.”


World must ‘profoundly rethink’ global order, Holy See tells UN

World must ‘profoundly rethink’ global order, Holy See tells UN
Updated 48 min 36 sec ago
Follow

World must ‘profoundly rethink’ global order, Holy See tells UN

World must ‘profoundly rethink’ global order, Holy See tells UN
  • Catholic Church’s governing body expresses concern over events in Syria, Sudan, Palestine
  • Increase in conflict ‘clear evidence of crumbling trust among nations’: Archbishop Paul Gallagher

NEW YORK: A “profound rethink” of the multilateral system is needed to respond to the world’s growing challenges, the Catholic Church’s central governing body told the UN General Assembly on Tuesday.
The Holy See was represented by Archbishop Paul Richard Gallagher, secretary of relations with states, who said: “We’re living at a crucial moment for humanity, in which peace seems to give way to war. Conflicts are growing and stability is increasingly put at risk.”
He lauded the UN’s historical efforts to reduce poverty, help migrants and promote nuclear disarmament, but he warned: “In these last years we’ve seen crumbling trust among nations, clear evidence of which is the increase in number and gravity of conflicts and wars.”
This has resulted in an “inevitable and equally significant increase in the number of meetings held at different levels, though not always in direct proportion to the effectiveness required in pursuing the proposed goals.”
And though “rivers of words” are spent by delegations at international forums, “one doesn’t always find … the same willingness to listen,” Gallagher said.
He relayed a message from Pope Francis decrying “ideological colonization,” which he defined as richer, more powerful countries “attempting to impose their worldview on poorer countries.” The rule of law “seems sometimes to be replaced by the law of the strongest,” Gallagher added.
He called for a return to listening and dialogue in the international arena, in an effort to avoid further conflicts and lessen the suffering of humanity.
He added: “All states must rediscover a spirit of service with the intention of building a global solidarity that expresses itself concretely in helping those who suffer.
“As part of this shared commitment, rulers must put aside their own needs, expectations and desires for sovereignty or omnipotence before the concrete gaze of the most fragile.”
Gallagher said the conflict in Ukraine “has been instrumental to bringing back the elevated threat of nuclear escalation into the discussion.”
He described the use of nuclear energy in warfare as a crime “not only against the dignity of human beings, but against any possible future for our common home.”
Another pressing concern for the Holy See is the proliferation of artificial intelligence, Gallagher said. The “expanding digital galaxy we inhabit … touches every aspect of our lives and community,” he added.
As a result, there is an “urgent need” to engage in ethical debate on the use and integration of AI in daily life around the world, Gallagher said.
He relayed a message from Pope Francis: “We must be vigilant and work to ensure that the discriminatory use of these instruments doesn’t take root at the expense of the most fragile and excluded.
“It isn’t acceptable that the decision about someone’s life and future be entrusted to an algorithm.”
The Holy See’s concern over AI extends to the use of autonomous weapons systems in conflicts, with “only humans” being “truly capable of seeing and judging the ethical impact of their actions.”
The Catholic governing body called for the creation of a global organization to oversee the use of AI.
But technological developments can offer hope to the global fight against climate change, Gallagher said, adding that the international community “needs to focus on a positive outcome” at the upcoming UN Climate Change Conference in the UAE.
Turning to the issue of human rights, he said: “Let us never forget that the true litmus test to see if human rights are being protected is the degree to which people have freedom of religion or belief in a country.”
Gallagher added: “Disturbingly, we continue to live in a world where people are persecuted simply for professing their faith in public.”
He also noted the Holy See’s concern at the subjective use of the terms “hate crime” and “hate speech,” adding that they are being used to keep people from expressing their religious beliefs. “Religious freedom is one of the absolute minimum requirements necessary to live in dignity,” Gallagher said.
The Holy See is also concerned by the humanitarian situation in Syria, with people in the country “plagued by 12 years of war, earthquakes and great poverty,” he added. The Church is encouraging the resumption of a political process of reconciliation in Syria.
Sudan is also of great concern to the Holy See, Gallagher said, adding that the governing body “makes a heartfelt appeal for the laying down of arms so that dialogue can prevail and the suffering of the population can be alleviated.”
Frequent violence as a result of coups in sub-Saharan Africa has “disrupted the democratic process, caused death and destruction, and caused humanitarian and migration crises,” Gallagher said.
“Behind episodes of terrorism and violence are also international economic interests that encourage the unjust dynamics of colonialism,” he added.
The Holy See expressed “serious concern” over events in Jerusalem and its status as a holy city.
Gallagher said: “I renew my appeal not only to the Israelis and Palestinians to open to sincere dialogue, but also to the entire international community.”
He ended is address by urging the world to move away from “the logic of the legitimacy of war,” adding: “The battlefield has become practically unlimited and the effects potentially catastrophic. Peace is possible if it’s truly willed, and if peace is possible it’s a duty.”


AI needs ‘guardrails’: UN deputy secretary-general

AI needs ‘guardrails’: UN deputy secretary-general
Updated 51 min 14 sec ago
Follow

AI needs ‘guardrails’: UN deputy secretary-general

AI needs ‘guardrails’: UN deputy secretary-general
  • 78th UN General Assembly, attended by 88 heads of state, draws to close
  • UN deputy secretary-general warns while AI had potential it needed ‘guardrails’

NEW YORK CITY: While artificial intelligence had great potential benefits, it must have safeguards, the UN Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed said on Tuesday.

Speaking at a press briefing on the sidelines of the 78th UN General Assembly in New York, Mohammed told Arab News: “The new era of technology is of great concern to us.

“It has massive potential for the SDGs (sustainable development goals) — whether it’s health, or it’s industry, cities, education — but they have to have guardrails.”

She pointed out that this year’s UNGA was the first time that AI had been mentioned during the general debate, and that 14 speakers discussed the topic.

“We had huge engagement with that. There were a number of side meetings, some outside of the UN, but they did gather huge numbers of experts and stakeholders.

“Everyone’s saying that really, the place for us to be discussing those guardrails and protection of the potentials, I would say, is the UN, and I think that was good news for us,” she said.

Mohammed told journalists that having only one head of state – US President Joe Biden – from the five countries of the UN Security Council present at the UNGA was “disappointing.”

“Certainly, we might have had more commitments that would have been tangible, had they been here, on many of the SDGs but also the more general agenda that was discussed at the debate,” she added.

But she noted that 88 heads of state were in attendance this year.

On Afghanistan, Mohammed said she was profoundly disappointed at the state of women’s rights in the country, which was taken over by the Taliban in 2021.

“Just when you think it’s getting bad for women in Afghanistan, it gets worse. I think that here, we have to continue to keep the voice and engagement loud. It was good to have that discussion in the Security Council today and to see Afghan women speak. We will continue to keep that voice alive,” she added.

Mohammed also condemned the underrepresentation of women at the assembly, despite the fifth SDG being gender equality.

“We have no apologies to say, ‘it is wrong for you to present all male delegations in this day and age.’ What we did here is to show the UN itself presents women at the table.

“It’s always been time for a female (secretary-general), and we are not short of women leaders in the world to take that position.”

Mohammed praised the increased presence of member states’ finance ministers at the UNGA.

She said: “There were finance ministers in this building. That’s really important. This has not been a domain where the finance constituency thinks they should come and have a conversation on finance. And they were here, and there were many heads of state and government who wanted to speak on the financing for development meetings.”

The “next bus stop” on the path to meeting SDGs, Mohammed noted, would be the annual World Bank and International Monetary Fund meetings, to be held in Marrakesh, Morocco in October.

She pointed out that the SDG summit, on the sidelines of the UNGA, saw “an impressive increase” in involvement and awareness of development goals, adding that this year’s summit featured 165 speakers as opposed to the 100 which spoke in 2019.

UN Under Secretary-General for General Assembly and Conference Management Movses Abelian said more than 2,000 bilateral meetings had been held on the sidelines of the General Assembly, which was attended by at least 13,000 diplomats, over 2,500 journalists, and 40,000 other guests.


Mafia boss Messina Denaro’s body returns to Sicily: report

Mafia boss Messina Denaro’s body returns to Sicily: report
Updated 26 September 2023
Follow

Mafia boss Messina Denaro’s body returns to Sicily: report

Mafia boss Messina Denaro’s body returns to Sicily: report
  • Messina Denaro, captured in January after three decades on the run, died on Monday in hospital in central Italy
  • He was one of the most ruthless bosses in Cosa Nostra, the real-life Sicilian crime syndicate depicted in the “Godfather” movies

ROME: Italian police escorted the body of Sicilian Mafia boss Matteo Messina Denaro back to his hometown Tuesday, media reports said, where he is expected to be buried quickly and with little ceremony.
Messina Denaro, captured in January after three decades on the run, died on Monday in hospital in central Italy, taking to the grave the secrets of his brutal reign.
His coffin was driven in a hearse out of the hospital in L’Aquila and is expected to arrive in his hometown of Castelvetrano in Sicily in the early hours of Wednesday, according to the ANSA news agency.
Police normally ban funerals for mafia bosses, and only a few family members — including two sisters and a brother — are expected to be present at his burial in the town’s cemetery, the agency said.
Messina Denaro was one of the most ruthless bosses in Cosa Nostra, the real-life Sicilian crime syndicate depicted in the “Godfather” movies.
The 61-year-old was convicted of involvement in the murder of anti-Mafia judges Giovanni Falcone and Paolo Borsellino in 1992 and in deadly bombings in Rome, Florence and Milan in 1993.
One of his six life sentences was for the kidnapping and murder of the 12-year-old son of a witness in the Falcone case.
Messina Denaro disappeared in the summer of 1993 and spent the next 30 years on the run as the Italian state cracked down on the Sicilian mob.
But he remained at the top of Italy’s most-wanted list and increasingly became a figure of legend.
It was his decision to seek treatment for colon cancer that led to his arrest on January 16, 2023, when he visited a health clinic in Palermo.


India, at UN, is mum about dispute with Canada over Sikh separatist leader’s killing

India, at UN, is mum about dispute with Canada over Sikh separatist leader’s killing
Updated 26 September 2023
Follow

India, at UN, is mum about dispute with Canada over Sikh separatist leader’s killing

India, at UN, is mum about dispute with Canada over Sikh separatist leader’s killing
  • India’s FM uses speech to champion country’s growing global stature, leadership ambitions
  • Killing of prominent Sikh leader in Vancouver escalated tensions between India and Canada

UNITED NATIONS: India’s top diplomat steered clear of his country’s row with Canada over the killing of a Sikh separatist leader but made an oblique swipe at how other countries respond to “terrorism” as he addressed world leaders at the UN General Assembly on Tuesday.
Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar mainly used his speech to champion India’s growing global stature and leadership ambitions, highlight its recent turn chairing the Group of 20 industrialized nations and steering a meaty summit meeting earlier this month.
But he also said that the world must not “countenance that political convenience determines responses to terrorism, extremism and violence.”
India has often lashed out at Pakistan over what New Delhi sees as sponsoring terrorism, accusing its neighbor of arming and training insurgents fighting for the independence of Indian-controlled Kashmir or for its integration into Pakistan — a charge that Islamabad denies. But this time, the comment could also be seen as a swipe at Canada, whose representative is scheduled to speak later Tuesday at the UN
Ties between the two countries have plunged to their lowest point in years after Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said last week that India may have been involved in the June killing of a Canadian citizen in a Vancouver suburb.
Canada has yet to provide any public evidence of Indian involvement in the slaying of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, 45, who was killed by masked gunmen. He was a leader in what remains of a once-strong movement to create an independent Sikh homeland, known as Khalistan, and India had designated him a terrorist.
India’s foreign ministry dismissed the allegation as “absurd” and accused Canada of harboring “terrorists and extremists.” It also said the claims were motivated, implying that Trudeau was trying to drum up domestic support among the Sikh diaspora.
“Such unsubstantiated allegations seek to shift the focus from Khalistani terrorists and extremists, who have been provided shelter in Canada and continue to threaten India’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,” the ministry said in a statement last week.
But India has accused Canada for years of giving free rein to Sikh separatists, including Nijjar.
While the active insurgency ended decades ago, the Modi government has warned that Sikh separatists were trying to stage a comeback. New Delhi has pressed countries like Canada, where Sikhs make up more than 2 percent of the population, to do more to stop a separatist resurgence.
It’s not unusual for India to make veiled references to other countries — in fact, it has a habit at the UN of not directly targeting criticism at such rivals like Pakistan and China.
Observers were watching to see whether Jaishankar would take direct aim at Canada, but doing so on a global platform could have widened a rift that already has dominated headlines internationally. Experts have said India wouldn’t like to draw more attention to the dispute with Canada at a forum such as the UN, preferring instead to treat it as an issue just between the two countries involved.
Canada’s allegation clouded India’s moment in the diplomatic sun after the G20 summit. Jaishankar sought to turn the spotlight back on his country’s aspirations on the world stage. The world’s most populous nation and an increasingly muscular economic power, India has held itself out as “the voice of the Global South” and of developing countries’ frustrations with a lopsided international order.
“When we aspire to be a leading power, this is not for self-aggrandizement, but to take on greater responsibility and make more contributions,” he said. “The goals we have set for ourselves will make us different from all those whose rise preceded ours.”