作者： bharat.cn

Google intervened on Tuesday after millions of Indians rushed to download a service that promised to help them rid their smartphones of Chinese apps.

Remove China Apps, from the Indian developer OneTouch AppLabs, was downloaded 4.7m times in India between May 27 and June 1, according to Sensor Tower data.

The app was briefly the most popular on India’s Google Play Store before the Silicon Valley company removed it on Tuesday, according to App Annie, another app data provider. Google’s policies forbid Android apps that help people to delete or disable other apps.

The popularity of Remove China Apps, which promised to alert users to any Chinese-made apps on their phones, comes after unease over the influx of Chinese tech companies and a move by New Delhi to tighten foreign direct investment rules for Chinese firms.

It also coincided with the rise in tensions on the India-China border, noted Parv Sharma, an analyst at Counterpoint Research.

In response, Indian engineer and reformer Sonam Wangchuk called for a boycott of Chinese products. In his tweets and videos, Mr Wangchuk said that Indians should “USE [their] WALLET POWER” rather than rely solely on military force to beat Beijing.

Indian prime minister Narendra Modi had also spoken about the importance of self-reliance, said Mr Sharma. Both Mr Wangchuk and Mr Modi were mentioned by the developers behind Remove China Apps.

As of the first quarter of 2020, Chinese smartphone makers made up over 70 per cent of the Indian market, according to Counterpoint Research. Chinese apps have also made major inroads in the country.

SensorTower estimated that TikTok had 636m downloads in India, excluding third-party Android stores. That compares to 277m downloads for Instagram and 99m for Snapchat from 1 January 2014 to the present.

Hannah Bailey, a researcher at the Oxford Internet Institute, said the three biggest concerns around the spread of such apps were censorship, data security and the potential for computational propaganda and dissemination of a pro-Beijing agenda.

While it had a rating of 4.9 stars on the Google store, comments before it was taken down showed that Remove Chinese Apps did not pick up apps with well-known Chinese connections, such as Shenzhen-based internet giant Tencent’s battle-royale PUBG mobile, as well as pre-installed apps on Chinese smartphones.

OneTouch’s website only said that the country of origin was discovered “based on the market research” but did not guarantee accuracy.

OneTouch did not respond to requests for comment.

Mr Sharma also said that some apps would be difficult to replace. Mitron, a TikTok rival that reached 10m downloads in India in a month and a half, was removed this week from the Google Play Store amid accusations in the Indian media about security flaws and recycled code. “Developing an app that is secure, with a focus on privacy and an interactive user interface, takes a lot of effort and testing,” said Mr Sharma.

The Delhi borders will be shut for a week, said chief minister Arvind Kejriwal on Monday, adding that essential services will be allowed. The CM added that people having passes will be allowed to enter the national capital. 

“Delhi borders to be sealed for the next one week. Essential services are exempted. We will take a decision again in one week to open borders after suggestions from citizens,” said the CM. 

The constituent assembly adopted two names, India and Bharat for the country after Independence. Many members favoured Bharat as the primary name. A petition is in the Supreme Court now seeking to drop “India” from the Constitution and keep “Bharat” as the only name.

“What’s in a name,” celebrated playwright William Shakespeare had his most famous heroine Juliet say in his Romeo and Juliet play. “That which we call a rose. By any other name would smell as sweet.”

But most people wouldn’t agree with Shakespeare in their daily lives. For, a name is the most prominent identity of a person, a family, a caste, a religion or a country. Every name has a history.

This was hotly debated in the constituent assembly when India got Independence from British rule. The British called India “India”. Before them, the Mughals, the biggest empire in India, called it Hindustan.

After an intense debate, the Constitution adopted two names for the country, India and Bharat. Now, a petition has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking removal of ‘India’ as the name of the country and keeping just Bharat as the solitary identity of the nation.

The petitioner, Namah – a resident of Delhi, has sought to amend Article 1 of the Constitution, which names the country and defines its territories.

Article 1 (1) of the Constitution reads, India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States. The petitioner says the name “India” is a “symbol of slavery” while seeking to recognise “Bharat” or “Hindustan” as the only name for the country.

The petitioner has quoted from the constituent assembly debates to support his arguments in favour of the name change. He has also referred to places whose names were changed over the years.

The constituent assembly debated Article 1 of the then draft constitution prepared under the chairmanship of BR Ambedkar. It was a heated debate that saw sharp exchanges among the members on November 18, 1949 – just eight days before the Constitution was adopted by “We, the people”.

The debate opened with HV Kamath, a constituent assembly member from the Central Province and Berar. Kamath objected to the Ambedkar committee’s draft that had two names – India and Bharat.

Kamath proposed amendments to Article 1 putting Bharat or alternatively Hind as the primary name for the country and pronouncing India only as the name in the English language.

He went on at length in the constituent assembly to assert that the Namakaran (the naming ceremony) should be taken up more seriously. He enlisted names such as “Hindustan, Hind and Bharatbhumi or Bharatvarsh” to have been suggested by people.

When Kamath began elaborating the origin of the name of Bharat, Brharatbhumi or Bharatvarsh dating it to ancient times, Ambedkar interjected for cutting short his speech.

Kamath snapped back at Ambedkar telling him to let the chairman, Rajendra Prasad run the house. An exchange took place between Prasad and Kamath following which he moved “Bharat” as the amended name for India. Kamath was strongly opposed to the language of Article 1(1) that says, “India that is Bharat”.

Another prominent name to oppose the language was Seth Govind Das, who said, “India, that is, Bharat” are not beautiful words for the name of a country. We should have put the words “Bharat known as India also in foreign countries.”

Das cited the Vedas, the Mahabharat, couple of Puranas and the writings of Chinese traveller Hiuen-Tsang to say that Bharat was the original name of the country, hence India should not be put as the primary name in the constitution post-independence.

He also invoked Mahatma Gandhi saying that the country fought the battle of freedom raising the slogan of “Bharat Mata Ki Jai” asserting that Bharat could be the only plausible name for the country.

The petitioner cites MA Ayyangar of Madras province as proposing names of Bharat, Bharat Varsha and Hindustan as substitutes for India in Article 1.

Among others who supported India being named only as Bharat included KV Rao from Andhra Pradesh. Rao went to the extent of suggesting that on the basis of historical nomenclature, Pakistan could be named as Hindustan.

He said, “we can now call ‘Pakistan as Hindustan because the Indus river is there. Sind has become Hind : as (‘sa)’ in Sanskrit is pronounced as (Ha) in Prakrit. Greeks pronounced Hind as Ind. Hereafter it is good and proper that we should refer to India as Bharat.”

BM Gupta, Sriram Sahai, Kamalapati Tripathi and Har Govind Pant were among other constituent assembly members who vociferously supported India be named only as Bharat. In fact, Tripathi and Ambedkar had some heated exchanges during the debate on naming of the country that day.

Tripathi was going at length to reinforce his point for “Bharat” saying the country was “in bondage for a thousand years, this free country will regain its name” prompting an interjection from Ambedkar asking, “Is this all necessary, Sir?”