India to remain patient on listing Masood Azhar a ‘global terrorist’ at UNSC

In an effort to build international pressure, is talking to its major partners to ensure Jaish chief Masood Azhar is included in their national lists of terrorists and JeM on their terrorist groups' list.

Despite China’s veto, India is still working with the United Nations Security Council to list Jaish-e-Mohammad chief Masood Azhar as a global terrorist, sources said. India is keen to remain patient and let action take its course regarding sanction against Azhar. With China’s block, the proposal is on hold for six months after which it can be extended by another three months.

It was reported in an effort to build international pressure, is talking to its major partners to ensure Azhar is included in their national lists of terrorists and JeM on their terrorist groups’ list.

For the fourth time in 10 years, China on Wednesday blocked a proposal in the UNSC, at the behest of Pakistan, to list the Jaish chief as a global terrorist. Moved by the US, UK, France and Germany, the proposal had been co-sponsored by a record 13 countries — Poland, Belgium, Italy, Bangladesh, Maldives, Bhutan, Equatorial Guinea, Japan and Australia.

New Delhi has been trying to designate Azhar a global terrorist. The Jaish as carried out several terror attacks on Indian soil, including the most recent Pulwama attack on February 14, the Pathankot airbase attack in 2016 and the attack on Parliament House in 2001.

Minister of External Affairs Sushma Swaraj had iterated on Friday that China’s veto on the proposal was not India’s diplomatic failure as the country “secured unprecedented support from the international community” for a listing of Azhar.

Swaraj had tweeted: “I have shared these facts with you so that leaders who describe this as our diplomatic failure may see for themselves that in 2009, India was alone. In 2019, India has worldwide support.”

A variety of counter trends seem to call the idea of a linear process of media globalization into question. Many of the arguments against it have concentrated on the growth on national media markets throughout the world or on the information gap between developed and developing countries. Amazingly, though, the topic of foreign reporting has not attained a very prominent place in the globalization debate, although numerous content analyses of international news show that national reporting in all media systems is usually heavily influenced by particularist views.

Alternative media are media that differ from established or dominant types of media in terms of their content, production, or distribution. Alternative media take many forms including print, audio, video, Internet and street art. While mainstream mass media, on the whole, "represent government and corporate interests", alternative media tend to be "non-commercial projects that advocate the interests of those excluded from the mainstream", for example, the poor, political and ethnic minorities, labour groups, and LGBT identities. These media disseminate marginalized viewpoints, such as those heard in the progressive news program Democracy Now! and create communities of identity.

Alternative media challenge the dominant beliefs and values of a culture and have been described as "counter-hegemonic" by adherents of Antonio Gramsci's theory of cultural hegemony. However, since the definition of alternative media as merely counter to the mainstream is limiting, some approaches to the study of alternative media also address the question of how and where these media are created, as well as the dynamic relationship between the media and the participants that create and use them.