Politicising cricket

Apropos of ‘Silence of an India-Pak handshake’; the decision of the Indian cricket team to refuse the customary handshake with Pakistan at the Asia Cup match in Dubai smacks of hypocrisy. If the intention was to register a protest against cross-border tensions, the appropriate course would have been not to play the match at all. Once the team chose to participate, avoiding a simple gesture of sportsmanship seemed unnecessary and sent confusing signals. A handshake would not have diminished our national stand; rather, it would have upheld the dignity of the sport and reflected maturity even in difficult times. True resolve should be demonstrated through clear policy decisions, not symbolic acts that risk being misunderstood. Respect on the field does not mean compromising firmness off it.

BS Kakkar, Jalandhar

A symbol of appreciation

Apropos of ‘Silence of an India-Pak handshake’; players the world over do not meddle in politics or hold any kind of bias based on race, religion, nationality, etc on or off the field. They exhibit exemplary courtesy and possess a feeling of belongingness towards the game. A victory is not everything in sports. On the contrary, the winning team or individual goes all out to extend a hand of friendship and express words of admiration for the opposing team or player for having played well as a gesture of goodwill. The BCCI should have boycotted the game if the players harboured bitterness against the rival team.

BM Singh, Amritsar

Course correction to save hills

The government’s decision to review certain road projects in Uttarakhand must mark the beginning of a broader course correction in the fragile Himalayan region. Unchecked road widening, tunnelling and deforestation have destabilised slopes, worsened landslide risks and aggravated the impact of extreme weather events. Roads are vital for connectivity, security and livelihoods, but they must be built with ecological sensitivity and scientific planning. The review of road projects should therefore not be an isolated exercise but the start of a sustained commitment to balance development with conservation.

Vandana, Chandigarh

Facilitate religious journeys

Apropos of ‘double standards’; in the ardas, devotees pray to the benevolent God to bestow unobstructed visits to Sri Nankana Sahib and other gurdwaras. So, instead of blocking such visits, the Centre should facilitate the Sikh jathas’ visit to Guru Nanak’s birthplace and Kartarpur Sahib. Religious activities should not be viewed through a political lens but allowed keeping in view the sanctity of the faith. Whatever obstruction there is must be cleared at the earliest and such visits should be organised smoothly.

Subhash Vaid, New Delhi

Selective security concerns

With reference to ‘Double standards’; the denial of a visit of Sikh jathas to Sri Nankana Sahib has hurt religious sentiments. Pilgrimage to Guru Nanak’s birthplace is not leisure but a spiritual necessity for millions of Sikhs worldwide. Selective application of “security concerns” while allowing sporting events reflects double standards. Faith must not be held hostage to politics. The Centre should urgently permit Sikh pilgrims and reopen the Kartarpur Corridor. The need of the hour is to respect sentiments of the Sikhs and Punjabis to send a positive message of communal harmony.

Parvinder Singh, Mohali

Same yardstick for all Waqf cases

Refer to ‘Balancing act’; when a government makes laws without consensus and discussions with stakeholders, the courts have to intervene. The apex court has maintained equilibrium between unreasoned religious autonomy and abuse of state regulation. There may be various disputed properties acquired by the Waqf boards or illegally occupied properties but the same yardstick cannot be used while considering different cases. There is still time to talk and build consensus.

Wg Cdr JS Minhas (retd), Mohali