B.RAMAN
Despite the heavy use of force by the Basij militia and the Revolutionary Guards to disperse a procession of protesters in Teheran on the afternoon of June 20,2009, the protesters, who have been forced to disperse into small groups, continue to be defiant. They are now calling their protest as a fight against Fascism and have called upon the people to join the fight to liberate the country from the control of the Fascists. It is not clear whether Mir Housain Mousavi, whose defeat by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the Presidential elections on June 12, triggered off the mass protests, is participating in the demonstrations or has gone underground. Some Tweets say he is with the protesters; others allege he has been "silenced". It is not clear what is meant by that.
2. Some of the latest Tweets from Iran are given below. The time of origin is not clear:
Tonight to the streets - for freedom.
Today the world can see why we want our freedom from fascists.
Dawn is upon us - Allah Akbar - Let us pray together today.
The world must not watch us - you must all join us wherever you are.
Confirmed - Mousavi - SATURDAY is a big day for fighting fascists.
Confirmed - Mousavi - SATURDAY 4pm Enghelab Sq - HISTORY will be watching us.
People of the world - Today Saturday 20 June 2009 - Iran will again make HISTORY.
Khatami - It is the time of Twilight - but I LOVE THE DAWN - Sea of Green.
EU condemns threats of Ayatollah Khamenei.
Shirin Ebadi - Iranian Nobel Peace Laureate - condemns harsh treatment of protesters in Iran.
Iranian scholars and uni Professors write joint letter to Secretary General of UN condemning violation of Iran Human Rights.
Karoubi - Recognize the will of the nation and void the 10th Presidential Elections to return order to the country.
Karoubi - As a former political prisoner who was tortured I know that insulting a nation will turn them into a raging fire.
Advice - remove sim and use mobile to film ANY violence or attak against Sea of Green.
Advice - your location can be identified from mobile signal - delete all sms after sending in case u are arrested.
58 scholars & lawyers condemn the recent killings & arrests in Iran as illegal.
Of course Mousavi has been silenced - but he has not yet been arrested - today everybody was silenced!
Confirmed - sms text messaging is working again in Iran after 1 week of disconnection.
Mir Hossein Mousavi is safe and well - preparing for tomorrow - Sea of Green.
Tehran is alive with the Sea of Green.
Confirmed - IRIB.ir - HACKED - Dos Dos Dos Dos.
Please join Mousavi, Khatami and Karoubi Sat 4pm Enghelab Sq. to Azadi Sq. Tehran for a crucial green protest.
Mousavi - confirmed - show support for Sea of Green from balcony starting 9pm to midnight tonight .
Mousavi - Confirmed - calls for ALL the nation to stand on balconys TONIGHT and show support with 'Allah Akbar'.
Confirmed - 2 student activist arrested - Alirezah Khshbakht & Zahra Toheedi .
Mehdi Karoubi letter to National Security Council.
Confirmed - Shahab Talebani has been arrested . (20-6-09)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
June 20, 2009
"I AM PREPARED FOR MARTYRDOM"----MOUSAVI
B.RAMAN
"Be prepared for martyrdom"
That is the message Mir Housain Mousavi, the leader of the Iranian protesters, has tweeted to his followers after the heavy use of force by the Basij militia and the Revolutionary Guards on peaceful protesters in Tehran on the afternoon of June 20. Latest Tweets from Iran claim there have been many casualties and that the hospitals are finding it difficult to cope with them. Some of the latest Tweets are given below:
Sodium metabisulfite Na2S2O5 mixed with water (5% solution) cures CS tear gas. Wash eyes with solution
Hospital source - Tehran hospitals report hundreds of casualties.
Advice - Tear Gas - cover mouth/nose - remove gased clothes immedietly - wash face and inside mouth/eyes/nose with water fast.
Unconfirmed - The Army will not follow orders to kill the people -
People of Iran - be ready to take people from the streets tonight and give protection -
Tehran is burning with the blood of our Martyrs - The streets are full of dead -
Mousavi speaking to supporters in the street NOW -
Mousavi - declares results of 10th Presidential Election null and void -
Today is the day of rekoning - the day of GHIAMAAT - Allah Akbar -
Helicopters pouring acid on people from the sky -
Mousavi - Confirmed - I have prepared for martyrdom -
Tonight to the streets - for freedom - ( 20-6-09)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
"Be prepared for martyrdom"
That is the message Mir Housain Mousavi, the leader of the Iranian protesters, has tweeted to his followers after the heavy use of force by the Basij militia and the Revolutionary Guards on peaceful protesters in Tehran on the afternoon of June 20. Latest Tweets from Iran claim there have been many casualties and that the hospitals are finding it difficult to cope with them. Some of the latest Tweets are given below:
Sodium metabisulfite Na2S2O5 mixed with water (5% solution) cures CS tear gas. Wash eyes with solution
Hospital source - Tehran hospitals report hundreds of casualties.
Advice - Tear Gas - cover mouth/nose - remove gased clothes immedietly - wash face and inside mouth/eyes/nose with water fast.
Unconfirmed - The Army will not follow orders to kill the people -
People of Iran - be ready to take people from the streets tonight and give protection -
Tehran is burning with the blood of our Martyrs - The streets are full of dead -
Mousavi speaking to supporters in the street NOW -
Mousavi - declares results of 10th Presidential Election null and void -
Today is the day of rekoning - the day of GHIAMAAT - Allah Akbar -
Helicopters pouring acid on people from the sky -
Mousavi - Confirmed - I have prepared for martyrdom -
Tonight to the streets - for freedom - ( 20-6-09)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
WILL IRANIAN DISSIDENTS DEFY AYATOLLAH KHAMENEI?
B.RAMAN
In an address to a Friday congregation at the Tehran University on June 19,2009, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader, again changed his position on the legality of the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the President of Iran at the elections held on June 12,2009.
2. After having endorsed the re-election in the initial days of the protest against it, he then gave the impression of taking a neutral stance by suggesting that as laid down in the Constitution, the matter should be left to the Guardian Council to decide as per the procedures laid down by the law.
3. As this did not have any impact on the anti-Ahmadinejad demonstrations all over the country, he has reiterated his original endorsement of the validity of the re-election without waiting for the report of the Guardian Council, which is enquiring into over 600 complaints received against the election and is to examine the defeated candidates on June 20, 2009. He has thus sought to pre-empt any adverse ruling by the Guardian Council. Khamenei also expressed his support to the foreign policy and pro-poor economic policies followed by Ahmadinejad.
4.He has rejected indirectly, but definitively the demands of the protesters for the annulment of the election results and for a fresh poll and expressed his strong support for the continuance of Ahmadinejad as the President. He has warned against the continuance of the street protests, which, according to him, could be manipulated by outsiders and could lead to violence.
5. His speech was an indication of his belief that any seeming neutral stand of his could aggravate the situation and that the time had come to remove any impression of softness which might encourage more demonstrations. It was also a green signal to the Basij militia and the security agencies to start dealing with the protests more firmly even at the risk of some adverse external reactions. His message was clear: Thus far and no further.
6. The clear-cut stand taken by the Ayatollah in support of Ahmadinejad and in endorsement of the validity of his re-election creates a dilemma for Mir Hossein Mousavi, the defeated reformist candidate, and his supporters who have been demonstrating in their thousands.Till now, they have been projecting their protests as directed against Ahmadinejad and against what they allege to be his rigged victory. They have taken care not to give the impression of their protests being also against the Ayatollah and the Islamic system.
7. The continuance of the protest movement after ignoring the intervention of the Ayatollah could bring them into an undesired confrontation with him and the Islamic system. The Islamic revolutionaries, who came out into the streets in their thousands in 1978-79, were protesting against the arbitrary rule of the Shah of Iran, who was viewed by them as a stooge of the US. By continuing with their demonstrations in spite of the appeal for restraint from the Ayatollah, the present protesters would be unwittingly projecting themselves as opponents of someone (Ahmadinejad), who is widely viewed as standing in the way of a re-imposition of the US hegemony in the region and over Iran.
8. How to keep the protests focussed against the rigged elections without making it appear as directed against the post-1979 Islamic rule in Iran?That is the dilemma facing Mousavi and the protesters. Mousavi was himself a product of the Islamic revolution and had held office as Prime Minister in the initial difficult years of the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s. He was in the forefront of the war effort which frustrated the efforts of Saddam Hussein's Army to have the Islamic Government overthrown, with the tacit backing of the US . How can he now be seen as weakening the foundation of the Islamic system, which could play into the hands of the Americans?
9. The answers to these questions will decide the future course of the protest movement. The immediate reaction of the protesters after the address of the Ayatollah was not to relent in their protest movement and to keep it going till they have achieved their objective of a fresh election.
10.For the present, Mousavi and his supporters are going ahead with their plans for two demonstrations on Saturday and Sunday despite the refusal of permission by the Government, which is planning to suppress them. They have also appealed to the international community to demonstrate in their support on Sunday. If the Government with the help of the Revolutionary Guards and the Basij militia succeeds in suppressing the demonstrations without many casualties----the situation could take an unpredictable turn---more violence or a collapse of the movement.
11. The Revolutionary Guards and the Basij seem to be confident that once they get the green signal for action from the Ayatollah, they should be able to put down the protest movement. Some more Tweets which have come out of Iran after the Ayatollah's speech are given below. An examination of these Tweets would indicate that the protesters are concerned that the Ayatollah's public intervention in support of Ahmadinejad has made the situation very complex calling for a careful handling of it.
Mousavi - confirmed - show support for Sea of Green from balcony starting 9pm to midnight tonight -
Mousavi - Confirmed - calls for ALL the nation to stand on balconys TONIGHT and show support with 'Allah Akbar'.
Ebrahim Yazdi has been released by Gov due to poor health.
Shahab Talebani has been arrested today.
Unconfirmed reports - Revolutionary Guard has been mobilised to secure Tehran.
The situation in Iran is now CRITICAL - the nation is heartbroken - suppression is imminent.
The Gov has refused to issue a permit for Sea of Green march at 4pm on Saturday in Tehran.
Confirmed - Mousavi calls on people of the world to march on SUNDAY in support of Sea of Green.
Confirmed - Saturday Sea of Green rally - Enghelab Sq - 4pm - Mousavi, Karoubi and Khatami will attend -
Now is dawn - we must go - location not safe - thank u for supporting Sea of Green.
NEVER log on to any proxy posted on twitter - u will be traced .
Advice - travel in groups - always tell someone where u are going - dont go out unless needed .
Political situ in Iran is v/complex - for every decision there are reasons - some we cannot mention here. (20-6-09)
(The writer is Additional Secretary(retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
In an address to a Friday congregation at the Tehran University on June 19,2009, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader, again changed his position on the legality of the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the President of Iran at the elections held on June 12,2009.
2. After having endorsed the re-election in the initial days of the protest against it, he then gave the impression of taking a neutral stance by suggesting that as laid down in the Constitution, the matter should be left to the Guardian Council to decide as per the procedures laid down by the law.
3. As this did not have any impact on the anti-Ahmadinejad demonstrations all over the country, he has reiterated his original endorsement of the validity of the re-election without waiting for the report of the Guardian Council, which is enquiring into over 600 complaints received against the election and is to examine the defeated candidates on June 20, 2009. He has thus sought to pre-empt any adverse ruling by the Guardian Council. Khamenei also expressed his support to the foreign policy and pro-poor economic policies followed by Ahmadinejad.
4.He has rejected indirectly, but definitively the demands of the protesters for the annulment of the election results and for a fresh poll and expressed his strong support for the continuance of Ahmadinejad as the President. He has warned against the continuance of the street protests, which, according to him, could be manipulated by outsiders and could lead to violence.
5. His speech was an indication of his belief that any seeming neutral stand of his could aggravate the situation and that the time had come to remove any impression of softness which might encourage more demonstrations. It was also a green signal to the Basij militia and the security agencies to start dealing with the protests more firmly even at the risk of some adverse external reactions. His message was clear: Thus far and no further.
6. The clear-cut stand taken by the Ayatollah in support of Ahmadinejad and in endorsement of the validity of his re-election creates a dilemma for Mir Hossein Mousavi, the defeated reformist candidate, and his supporters who have been demonstrating in their thousands.Till now, they have been projecting their protests as directed against Ahmadinejad and against what they allege to be his rigged victory. They have taken care not to give the impression of their protests being also against the Ayatollah and the Islamic system.
7. The continuance of the protest movement after ignoring the intervention of the Ayatollah could bring them into an undesired confrontation with him and the Islamic system. The Islamic revolutionaries, who came out into the streets in their thousands in 1978-79, were protesting against the arbitrary rule of the Shah of Iran, who was viewed by them as a stooge of the US. By continuing with their demonstrations in spite of the appeal for restraint from the Ayatollah, the present protesters would be unwittingly projecting themselves as opponents of someone (Ahmadinejad), who is widely viewed as standing in the way of a re-imposition of the US hegemony in the region and over Iran.
8. How to keep the protests focussed against the rigged elections without making it appear as directed against the post-1979 Islamic rule in Iran?That is the dilemma facing Mousavi and the protesters. Mousavi was himself a product of the Islamic revolution and had held office as Prime Minister in the initial difficult years of the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s. He was in the forefront of the war effort which frustrated the efforts of Saddam Hussein's Army to have the Islamic Government overthrown, with the tacit backing of the US . How can he now be seen as weakening the foundation of the Islamic system, which could play into the hands of the Americans?
9. The answers to these questions will decide the future course of the protest movement. The immediate reaction of the protesters after the address of the Ayatollah was not to relent in their protest movement and to keep it going till they have achieved their objective of a fresh election.
10.For the present, Mousavi and his supporters are going ahead with their plans for two demonstrations on Saturday and Sunday despite the refusal of permission by the Government, which is planning to suppress them. They have also appealed to the international community to demonstrate in their support on Sunday. If the Government with the help of the Revolutionary Guards and the Basij militia succeeds in suppressing the demonstrations without many casualties----the situation could take an unpredictable turn---more violence or a collapse of the movement.
11. The Revolutionary Guards and the Basij seem to be confident that once they get the green signal for action from the Ayatollah, they should be able to put down the protest movement. Some more Tweets which have come out of Iran after the Ayatollah's speech are given below. An examination of these Tweets would indicate that the protesters are concerned that the Ayatollah's public intervention in support of Ahmadinejad has made the situation very complex calling for a careful handling of it.
Mousavi - confirmed - show support for Sea of Green from balcony starting 9pm to midnight tonight -
Mousavi - Confirmed - calls for ALL the nation to stand on balconys TONIGHT and show support with 'Allah Akbar'.
Ebrahim Yazdi has been released by Gov due to poor health.
Shahab Talebani has been arrested today.
Unconfirmed reports - Revolutionary Guard has been mobilised to secure Tehran.
The situation in Iran is now CRITICAL - the nation is heartbroken - suppression is imminent.
The Gov has refused to issue a permit for Sea of Green march at 4pm on Saturday in Tehran.
Confirmed - Mousavi calls on people of the world to march on SUNDAY in support of Sea of Green.
Confirmed - Saturday Sea of Green rally - Enghelab Sq - 4pm - Mousavi, Karoubi and Khatami will attend -
Now is dawn - we must go - location not safe - thank u for supporting Sea of Green.
NEVER log on to any proxy posted on twitter - u will be traced .
Advice - travel in groups - always tell someone where u are going - dont go out unless needed .
Political situ in Iran is v/complex - for every decision there are reasons - some we cannot mention here. (20-6-09)
(The writer is Additional Secretary(retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
IIPM :Indian Students Beware - BEST ONLY IN CLAIMS?
A superior course, global exposure, international faculty and dollar salaries, so claims IIPM. Careers360 investigates
by B Mahesh Sarma
This started off as a normal investigation, into the malaise affecting the education system and the checks and balances that need to be brought in. After all, we all know that the government cannot be a sole participant in making the youth employable and the country a prosperous one.
Everyone that we spoke to was of the unanimous opinion - while a systemic overhaul is essential to improve the quality of many bad institutions in the country, the least we could do is to protect students and parents from being misguided and misled by willful wrong-doers. There are institutes where students walk in with their eyes open and know what to expect. And there are those where they walk in, blinded - misled, misguided and misinformed, by a campaign where media, regulatory agencies and academia become willing accomplices. While we can't do much about the informed decisions, we have to take up the cause of those who were cheated, an act that robs students of their career and in a way, their life.
As we scanned the ads, spoke to experts, affected parties and counselors, we realised that one name cropped up the most - IIPM. We decided to investigate. We sent mails to all those, that IIPM draws upon to validate its claims in its advertisements, namely - journalists, editors, foreign universities, employers. We spoke to current and former students and their parents. What our investigation unravelled left us cold. Here is an institution that enjoys all the privileges of an academic institution (according to IT authorities, it claimed exemptions citing Section 10(23C) (VI) of the Income Tax act, 1961) with zero responsibility and accountability. Here is an institution that brazenly uses its power and reach to make unsubstantiated claims that play with the lives of students and parents alike. We know we are opening a Pandora's Box, but are prepared for the repercussions, knowing fully well that you, our readers are with us. We were shocked by our findings, and what you are reading is just a part of it. We await your verdict.
BBA/MBA degrees
IIPM CLAIMS to award PG/UG degrees from IMI Belgium. We checked with NVAO, the accreditation organization of Netherlands and Flanders(Belgium) about IMI Belgium. The response from them is given below. This implies that the degree that students earn would be useless for higher education or employment anywhere in the world, where formal degrees are required.
-----Original Message-----
From: XXXXXXXXX@nvao.net]
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 8:14 PM
To: XXXXXXXX info@nvao.net
Subject: RE: Kind attn: XXXXXXXX,as per telecon yesterday
Dear XXXXXX
To answer your first question, I would refer to our official register of recognised institutions and degrees: http://www.highereducation.be . Please read two items in our section FAQ:- http://www.hogeronderwijsregister.be/faq/117/48 - http://www.hogeronderwijsregister.be/faq/117/49 IMI Belgium is not a recognised higher education institution (neither in the Dutch nor the French speaking part of Belgium). Since it is not recognised it cannot award recognised degrees.
In our position it is difficult to answer your second question. For us only registered institutions with accredited programmes are considered credible.
Best regards
Campus placement- BASED ON some of the claims about MNC employers participating in the campus recruitments at IIPM, we checked with a few of them. We are listing a few responses, of employers, who have denied having recruited from the IIPM campus from the class of 2008, though IIPM claims otherwise. There have been a few more, who did not respond and we did not pursue, as we already got a sample of what is in store. Some gave us information but refused to come on record.
STANDARD CHARTERED BANK, says
We have hired 9 students from IIPM this year, though this was not through the campus recruitment process. These are all freshers.
BARCLAYS, DUBAI
I have looked into the below and we at Barclays, UAE Dubai have not done any campus placement with this institute.
DEUTSCHE BANK ( sms response)
Deutsche bank has no association with IIPM in terms of campus placements. We may have one or two employees from IIPM at the junior level but that's about it
-
Un(en)viable International Placements - ANY B-SCHOOL that claims to have the interest of students at heart should ensure that only companies that would treat students with respect, dignity and care would be allowed in the placement process. We are listing out some of the placements facilitated by IIPM. Look at the offer details and make your own judgement.
Saud Bahwan Group
Position: Senior sales officer
Salary: 275 Omani Rials or Rs.34,000 P.M plus 23 rials as food allowance
Job: It is a two year contract and not a job offer
Conditions: Passport to be surrendered and Termination at employer's discretion during probation with 48 hours notice.
Khimji Ramdas
Position: Section Sales.
Salary: 250 Omani Riyals or Rs.31,000 P.M or 3.7 lakhs P.A
Job: It is a two year contract
Conditions: If you leave before 24 months, you pay the company recruitment, visa, air ticket and other expenses. Even if you have to temporarily leave for an emergency, deposit the same amount with the employer.Al Sharawi Group
Position: Executive Trainee
Salary: 2300 AED in the first year progressively reaching 3000 AED in the 4th year (27600 P.M in the first year going up to Rs.36000 P.M in the 4th year).
Conditions: If you resign during the contract, you can not take up employment in competing companies, and pay the company two months salary.
Frequency Advertising LLC
Position: Marketing Executive
Salary: 3500 AED(incl HRA) or Rs.42,000 P.M.or 5 lacs P.A Conditions: Office hours 8.30 am to 6.30 pm, 6 months probation, No leave entitlement during probation.Ceramin FZC
Position: Management Trainee - Sales & Marketing
Salary: 3000 AED (incl HRA) or Rs.36,000 P.M or 4.4 lacs P.A
Conditions: 12 months training period, Valid Passport to be submitted at the time of joining.Note: All the jobs excluding Frequency LLC provides single accomodation
- International collaborations
- IIPM claims to award a global certification in management for all its students from one of the leading universities of the world. Every advertisement carries the logo of institutions like Darden, Haas, Judge etc as partnering institutions. Some ads even say the certification is from one of these universities. We wrote to each of the institution to check the veracity of IIPM's Claims. Here is what they have to say.
- McCombs Business School, University of Austin,Texas
From: XXXXXXXX
To: XXXXXXXX
Cc:XXXXXXXX
Subject: RE: Query regarding your Institute's association with IIPM,DelhiI'm sorry, but I am unaware of any association between the McCombs School of Business and IIPM. It is possible that they have a connection I am unaware of with a particular professor, but in any case they are not an official partner school.
I should caution that I am only responding for the McCombs School of Business. While McCombs is the only business school at the University of Texas at Austin, it is possible that they have a relationship with another college at UT-Austin. If that were the case I would not be aware of it.
Best regards,
David E. Platt, Ph.D., Director,CIBER, McCombs School of Business
- Judge B School, University of Cambridge
- Hello XXXXXX
Thanks for your enquiry about the programme Judge Business School is delivering to IIPM participants.
This is a five day non-degree executive education programme delivered in Cambridge by Judge Business School.
IIPM have engaged us to deliver and the first group will commence in July 2009. There are no university qualifications awarded from Cambridge University or Judge Business School. The only certificate is a certificate of attendance which is what we provide to participants on all our programmes.
Very best
Aislinn Ryan,Communications Manager, Judge Business School
- Darden B School, Univesity of Virginia
- Dear XXXXXXX
Thanks again for your e-mail. The University of Virginia's Darden School of Business has agreed to provide a series of week-long Executive Education programs (i.e., a contracted teaching arrangement) for IIPM. Darden has no partnership agreement or tie-up with IIPM.
Along with Cambridge (Judge) and UC Berkeley (Haas), Darden will host IIPM's Executive Education program participants and deliver to them a high-quality mix of general business class sessions. No course credits at Darden or UVA are associated with this program, as IIPM is not a partner school and their participants are not taking Darden courses.
Best regards,
Juliet Daum, Director of Communication, Darden School of Business, University of Virginia
- For a few dollars more - The changing colours of UCB
- Haas B School, University of California, Berkeley (UCB)
THE SLOWDOWN may have hit the revenues of the international B-schools! The desperation with which they are getting into arrangements with Indian B-Schools to lend their name as 'participating,' 'partner', 'affiliating' B -School - all to earn a few dollars more, while compromising on their ethics and professionalism left us flummoxed. And when no less than the University of Berkeley tries to wriggle out of a situation through three different mails, each a reaction to a correspondence by us and possibly IIPM as well, we are bewildered. The first said no connection what so ever, second acknowledged a client relationship and the third announced CEE sending faculty to IIPM programme (which programme?). We cannot understand what is the truth and why this progressive grovelling? (Read the mails below and form your own opinion).
Ist Response 27th February 2009
From: Pamela Tom [mailto:ptom@haas.berkeley.edu]
Sent: 27 February 2009 01:51
To: XXXX
Cc: UTE FREY
Subject: RE: query regarding your Institute's association with IIPM,Delhi
XXXXX UC Berkeley's Haas School of Business is in no way affiliated or connected with IIPM.I am told this institution has been known to claim associations with top universities without any basis. One of the ways they do this is that they invite faculty to do some executive education stint and then use the university name for ever. It is possible that some Haas faculty has done work for them but the Berkeley and/or Haas name should not be associated with IIPM.
Pamela Tom
Media Relations, Haas School of Business2nd Response
XXXXX, On February 26, you wrote to verify the "association" between the Indian Institute of Planning and Management (IIPM) and the University of California. While the statement that the two are not "affiliated" is accurate, at the time, we were unaware of a new client relationship between IIPM and the Haas School's Center for Executive Education. CEE and IIPM have a contract, the first program will begin in June and the agreement permits client institutions to say that they are "participating" with the Haas School of Business.
3rd Response
From: Pamela Tom [mailto:ptom@haas.berkeley.edu]
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 4:45 AM
To: XXXXX
Subject: RE: In continuation of your correspondence with XXXXXXIn response to your inquiries about the Center for Executive Education's contract with the Indian Institute of Planning and Management (IIPM): During the duration of the agreement, IIPM, the client, may represent itself as a business school "participating" with the Haas School of Business. Participation means IIPM has contracted with CEE to provide Haas faculty to teach courses in the IIPM program. A five-day program scheduled for January 2009 was cancelled. A five-day program is now scheduled for June 2009.
Pamela Tom
- For a few dollars more - The changing colours of UCB
- First Person
- "IT IS VERY EASY FOR YOU TO ASK WHY I DON'T SPEAK UP"
- Sir, I have a mom, who is a heart patient, a father who is a teacher in a school, and a village which looks up to me. It is very easy for you to ask why I don't speak up. If I do, my people would come to know I did a degree which is useless, my company will sack me, and the bank would strangulate my dad for the loan instalment." says Ramesh*, a pass out from IIPM. Ramesh like most of us comes from one of the tier 3 towns of our country. He completed his BSc and sought salvation in an MBA. But he chose IIPM, thanks in no small measure to the full page multicolour advertisements he and his parents frequently saw, in publications they trusted for ages. He adds ruefully, "Sir, I got a good percentile in MAT (above 90 percentile), and had offers from the best colleges. At least I would have got a recognized degree."
"What did you learn?" I ask. "We are frequently taught by students who passed out from the last batch and work for Planman Consulting," said Ramesh. He fought bitterly and got placed through campus in a company based in south India. The institute promised him Delhi, the company told him that they had specifically informed the placement office of IIPM about their need for people in the south. So he was on his own again. Ramesh smiles at a thought. "I am much better off than some of my friends who got a campus placement in companies where you are paid Rs.200 as commission for every card you sell, and no salary at all." His bitterness creeps through. He goes on. "Sir, 10% of MBAs secure jobs, because we are well-groomed, speak good English, and are well-connected. 50% of us are not connected but have the rest of the qualities, and struggle a bit. The remaining 40% who has neither are already in s***. So the least they can do is to keep quiet."
Ramesh pays more than 2/3rd of his meagre salary to service his loans, lives in a cramped shanty, puts up a brave face to his doting parents, hopes for the best and keeps quiet. While relating events, the brave boy, briefly wavers and with a lump in his throat says. "Maine yeah soch ke ayaa, yeah ek formal interaction hai. Baat karthe karthe bahout kuch bol diya." (I came to meet you, telling myself it is a formal interaction. But as I got talking I spoke quite a lot). All of us look in different directions, and let that moment pass. - * Name changed to protect identity
- First Person
- "WE WERE TAKEN FOR A RIDE"
- "The IIPM had indulged in heavy advertising promising the sky and claiming to be the best management institute in the country. It was very clear in its advertisements that it will give MBA degrees from a University. We got lured by the fake ads coupled with newspaper news praising IIPM institute," says Shiv Prasad.*
"It is only after the UGC blacklisted it that the cat came out of the bag. Now it started giving advertisements that it prepares students for BBA and MBA degrees and does not give degrees by itself. This is a clear case of cheating as we have the copy of the earlier advertisements claiming that they give degrees. Parents from Bihar, MP, Rajasthan, Punjab, Himachal, Haryana and UP are still falling prey and the institute is flourishing!
The institute has never given full receipts for the amount we paid and if given, it was under a different head. Recognition was never a concern for us, because the ad blitz was so strong we got carried away and the UGC also acted very late. Most of the parents are still not aware about the UGC controversy as the matter appeared in Delhi newspapers only.
Regarding placements, this year (2009) all students have been clearly told that the institute does not guarantee placement. Students have to look for positions on their own. Many students with campus jobs could not join as HR divisions of companies are avoiding IIPM students. Most of the students are coming back with their useless training certificates. The institute has hardly any campus placements and it does not help students find jobs elsewhere as well. Having taken a bank loan between 4 lakhs to 10 lakhs, we are ruined, and actually don't know which way to turn." * Name changed to protect identity NOTE: Readers may look for the counter view of IIPM in the next issue, if received
Print
Add a Comment
Skip to TopAdd a comment
Top of Form
Name
Email Address
URL
Remember personal info?
Comments (You may use HTML tags for style)
Bottom of Form
63 Comments
All u guys are missing the point.
I or my dad never said that IIPM is the best school. Everybody has different reasons to choose the school they want to attend and it his/her personal choice. For a girl or his father her fdamily happiness is most important. My sister went to IIPM in 2003, before all these rankings came out and even after the rankings are out nobody repents the decision. Decision to go to a school depends on motivations, career choices, life choices, and vision for the future in five years and ten years and so on. My choice is different. I have decided to join one of the top law colleges for my 5 year law course, that is my choice.
The point I have been trying to make is why are not we holding the media responsible for selling these ads and cheating their loyal readers. Why is IIPM being singled out.
The students who read ads and beleive them and make their life's decions based on that at the mature age of 21 do not deserve to be a manager in any industry.
sasikiran June 20, 2009 7:44 AM
Oops! i just realized i did a multiplication mistake in my previous post
5000QR = 65,000 INR
I hope not to do such mistakes in my CAT! sry guyssasikiran June 20, 2009 3:00 AM
ok let me clear the dust about the jobs in middle east as a resident of Qatar.
I'm BITS Pilani, Goa student residing in qatar. I was offered a summer intership of 5000QR(1.65lakhs INR) per month here in qatar for working in a construction company. Which i rejected.. thats a different issue though.
So, a student with even a complete degree just with institute affiation can earn a 1.65 lakhs per month and you guys are talking about 4-6lakhs INR per year!!! for an mba grad?
life in not possible here with such low salaries.
Advice for everyone: Never join a foreign company for low pays. Join only if salary is more than 3 fold your present pay in India or ur expected salaryVenkatesh Varalu June 20, 2009 2:18 AM
More here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Indian_Institute_of_Planning_and_Management_(IIPM)_advertising_controversy
vivek June 20, 2009 12:30 AM
@nikita..
well no offence 2 ur dad's research..but i really cnt belive that argument regarding not sending ur sis 2 IIM's!!!it seems the reasoning employed is well beyond the grasp of a common reader...u started off ur note brilliantly..yes MBAs r overrated n yes no other professional degree gives such a huge variance of packages...but u temme which side of the range(1.5-100 lacs..) wud u ideally wish 2 b???as for me...it really doesnt make any sense 2 spend Rs. 10 lacs+(mayb loans or mayb ur rich dad's booty...) n get a degree(rather a namesake one..) which cant fetch me returns so as 2 breakevn on th investment!!!..ny indian whu dreams of the big bucks(dat a MBA grad makes..) definitely sits for CAT,XAT,MAT n GMAT..there r a plethora of institutes from the world famous IIMs to other lesser known but reputable collegs...which for an equal amount offer a respectable degree n a breakeven period of max 4-5 yrs(for a bank loan)....u r ryte in ur own opinion...n ur preference for the pony-tail..but as for the rest of the country i guess...for dem this article is a much-awaited eye-opener..mos of the tier-1 n many tier-2 city chaps already doubted the tall claims ala IIPM...(i mean cn yu believ the height of ludicrousity!!!...the pony-tail sez dare 2 think beyond the IIMs:IIPM????....roflmao!!)...but still a large no. of the uniformed credulous youth fall prey 2 the misconstrued facts...
n as for comaprin wid ur local colleges....c the point babe....they dnt come up wid loads of garbage claiming high placements n all the oder bullshit...
the bottomline here is IIPM has actively indulged in swindling innocent youth(deir only crime i guess is dreaming high...but at the same time nt doin enuf research on the institute)...n i guess its high time UGC comes down heavily on these frauds...they sud do more than issue some ads in delhi papers....become more aggressive in their endevaour 2 shut down these scamsters...P.S.(the pony-tail): the a** hit his purple patch swindling innocent youngsters...it wud serve him right 2 b taken on an PaN-india A** ride....
cheers!Mallik June 19, 2009 9:55 PM
Pooja,
If IIPM is amonst even the top 100, we are happy. Basically, it is about peddling lies and taking students. The worst college that you talk about may not be peddling lies as the Pony Tail does. I am sure Amity, ICFAI all have problems. But they dont peddle lies. We are not talking FOR people like you, who can take a bit of corruption with a smile, because you can afford it. This is for thos, who cant afford, but because they have dreams joing IIPM because of the promises to ealize 10 lacs and their career and life gone down the drain. And you are right. The tier 2 and Tier 3 students get taken in and come here with dreams. What IIPM offers, even a 6 month diploma in YMCA can offer. So why charge 12 lacs, make promises of high salary and placement? Please understand the context. The Pony Tail has bought a few Bentleys robbing poor people from the smaller towns. And he needs to be thrashed publicly for that.Pooja June 19, 2009 8:45 PM
A good researched article but the comments seem to be v.biased. People who are putting up views against the article are thrashed :).
Even I am against this marketing make-up of IIPM and their way of branding and false promotions. It has always targeted the Tier- 2 and 3 cities as its potential consumers and they are lured by the gimmicks. If it was such a fraud it wouldn't have survived but it is still strong on its student intakes.
This essentially means two things: a)People are just plain dumb and are lured into this. b) This school is serving at least some purpose for the students who have no knowledge or influence to break into a decent job.
At the end of it, if one is good and learns to utilize the time in a b-school he is bound to get good shot at an interview and convert it. The brand name does matter and the top 25 b-schools are definitely niche. There is no comparison between IIPM and IIMs for sure.Why are all u comparing IIPM with IIM etc. Just comapare it with all the MBA schools in your local area and the fees they charge and the education they impart. Only a very few handful of students get into IIM and these ones do not thnik of going to IIPM. So be real and compare reality of life not idealistic situation that should be.
jazzy June 19, 2009 6:30 PM
I remember a big add in newspaper in which a guy with a pony tail commented "I have researched bollywood audience and my movie will sureshot be supehit" the movie was "rok sako to rok lo"
Nikita, Your mail seeths of ignorance of the larger issues that the article drives at. It is not meant for you, a rich, spoiled, care a damn girl who doesnt mind being submissive, to an instituution or a husband. The article is an alert to all those who are like Ramesh, in the artcle and the father, in the article. It is for those, who believed in the Con Man's lies, trusted their money and time and came up with nothing. They would be happy if IIPM is in the top 100, bit it is in the bottom 10. that is the problem. I know a few people who have offered to be direct sales people at a commission of Rs.150 per sale, and they end up making Rs.6000 a month.
Instead of talking about the larger issues, you should dispute the facts, mails, stories in the article. All of them are irrefutable evidence of IIPM's misdeeds. As far as the rankings are concerned, we all know that OUTLOOK threw them out when they got to know the lies of IIPM, way back in 2005. It is Outlook that threw them out.
I wish every one is as fortunate as you, but if your father has come up with IIPM after research to have your sister study, I can only laugh at his research.
BTW, just have a glance at the international placements and tell me whether IIPM doesnt qualify to be called a sweatshop?Rahul S June 19, 2009 4:43 PM
@ nikita
girl.. when u say
"He did not want her to be a IIM graduate so either she will neglect her career for family or neglect family for her career. She can support her husband in anything he does"
i am really surprised by this coming from a girl.
Nyways, you cannot compare what your sister is doing with the fate of several others who were mislead through wrong information. Not everyone has so little ambition in life and not everyone is supported by a wharton MBA spouse. They want best education, so that they can find a good job and get a handsome money.
The issue is not why this check was not done for other institutes, the issue is it was done for IIPM, and it stands true.This article appears to be written with some malice towards IIPM.
MBA degree is one of the most overrated degree amongst all the professional degrees, i.e. Medicine, Engineering, Architect, Attorney, etc. In the world of science 2+2 will always be 4, but in decision-making process grey can be 90% black & 10% white as well as 10% black & 90% white. MBA allows one to understand the logic behind the decision making and then to put that in a mathematical form so it can be shown why a particular decision was made. And even then we have the outcomes like that of 2008 in the financial world, remember most of the top people in these companies were MBA.
Other than the tools, MBA gives a student self confidence, ability to say/present what he/she wants to say in clear words, suppliment rest of the education, and exposure to the real non scientific world. Salaries of a fresh MBA graduate range from 1.5 lacs to 100 lacs. Does any other degree have such a big difference in salaries. This difference is true in US as well.
Now let us come to IIPM. If any student beleives that IIPM is a better school than any of the top ranked tier 1 schools in India (about twelve of them and all the aspiring MBAs cannot go there), then he/she does not even deserve the MBA degree, no matter what the rankings of these magazines say (remember OUTLOOK magazine had rated IIPM as 4th at one time). But if we compare IIPM to the rest of the colleges it will be ranked in the top 5 in this group. IIPM gives student the tools he/she can use (full/part time or visiting faculty is good enough, even Mr. Lalu Yadav gave a lecture at Harvard), self confidence in speaking, exposure with some of the middle rung industries, world exposure etc. and an opportunity for the small to medium scale business/industries to hire people they otherwise cannot afford. Are we forgetting that 85-90% job creation in India is in these industries and still they are unable to hire talent. My father did an extensive research in all these colleges before he sent my sister to IIPM and feels she has gotten the qualification she wanted. He did not want her to be a IIM graduate so either she will neglect her career for family or neglect family for her career. She can support her husband in anything he does, and he is a Wharton MBA. IIPM also gives prospective enterpreneus the tools they need for a successful businessman. She just topped the course she was auditing in one of the top fashion institute in NY.
My question is with all the private colleges, universities and tutorial institutes placing big ads, why Outlook only singled out IIPM. Is it because they did not get the Advertisement. And finally remember it is the media that is earning the revenue from these ads and thus allowing all these instituions to cheat their own loyal readers.
Hi. I am a Btech grad from a deemed university. One of the premium National Institute of Technology institutes. I am an engineer and am currently looking forward to getting into a college for an MBA degree. As i see it an MBA degree carries a lot of value in todays market. Everyday i open the newspaper to find an ad from IIPM's. I mean seriously! its a joke rite. Well, if we think of ourselves writing exams like CAT, GMAT etc...we do have some institutions in mind...IIM's, SIMB, XLRI etc...which we know are recognized govt/private insti's which provide recognized degrees with value in the market. Now i haven seen any of these institutions marketing their college brand in any of the papers of boasting about the placement rec. We know because it is well known. People with good positions in business are from these insti's. Providing a bait like a laptop for free is hilarious. Nowadays u can blink and get a premium laptop for an bare amount. And abt the statement... DARE TO THINK BEYOND THE IIM's???? ROFL...lol...i mean seriously...being an grad from an insti which ranked 9th in Engg Insti's among India...i must say...Sorry I cannot think beyond the IIM's.
Full_Metal_Jackass June 19, 2009 10:24 AM
@ Priyanka - Oh Yeah ???
I have friends from IIM and IIT's (IIT's and IIM's never promised a Foreign tour - These guys got it automatically as they are from IIM)
I also have friends from IIPM - 1 is doing good after 4 years and 3 job changes (One of them was for Planman - Where he said he didn't get salary on time)
I agree advertising is a Buyers beware factor...May they do not lie at all - They said Ex RBI and Ex TCS - Yeah quite possible - Benched from TCS - Fired from RBI - Possible - and they are not exaggerating...
They give a good branded Laptop like HP or Dell - Hahahahaha - What were you expecting ???
(I was with Dell till 2006 and am presently in HP - I better not say any damn thing about them)About that 200 INR per card one sells - Ummm I think that was a little hard to believe (It is posted as an Ex Student's version - not the research Outcome).
About Zee awards and other crap - HP has been awarded #1 in Customer service in "Consumer Electronics" and #8 in"Any Business" http://bwnt.businessweek.com/interactive_reports/customer_service_2009
I work for HP - Our Customer Service teams never meet their goals - But still they are at the TOP - I was wondering "Wow - What the F$%& are others doing ???I know as a alumni - You hold quite good respect for your own college - I studied from a Shitty school myself - But I still like it becoz - I studied there - I respect your feelings for your institution...
About foreign placements - I have friends in Oman(Muscat) - One of my Cameras was bought from Muscat in 1999(Khimji Ramdas - Who hires Senior sales officers from IIPM).
Maybe - when I visit again - I might see your senior replacing that old man who suggested me that camera when i asked for help regarding a suggestion. Maybe do a Google search on Muscat Oman Home rents(I shall provide you that Info too - 400 Rials for a 2BHK room Unfurnished with attched bath and Electricity+Water Tax extra)...You'd understand where these people need to stay with the 250-300 Rials that they get. A lot of people from India/Bangladesh/Pakistan stay there...Mostly people who were not lucky enough to have got their higher education. After a 2 Year PG (I am not calling it a Degree/MBA) and spending 5-10 Lacs INR...It is not worth it...Oh yes - This report / case study / investigation / Whatsoever was done to bring done IIPM's image - Maybe by someone who passed out of it and didn't get placed well.
Life's not like your stuffed toy teddy bear - There are things that you just might not know under your nose...
Get used to it.
Great Work@ careers360
The veracity of your findings wrt. IIPM might still be disputed by some but it brings to light a more pressing issue. The impunity with which purely commercial establishments are posing as 'educational institutions' is truly alarming.
UGC has a important link which it updates regularly http://www.ugc.ac.in/inside/fakealerts.html
but still more needs to be done to disseminate such information to the students.btw,waiting for the IIPM answer to this.
Could you please let me know whether any action has been taken against such misleading information? As in if a institute say that they are not associated with IIPM, arent they worried that their names are neing used for misleading prospective students?
praveen June 18, 2009 8:04 PM
Priyanka,
Thanks for quitting these posts. You dont seem to understand the plight of the student or the parent mentioned in the article. Neither do you seem to understand the 'sweat shop' placements that IIPM does in dubai and Oman for 4 lacs p.a( it is a real serious issue) with the pass posrt surrender and other termsjust to jack up their international placements. I farther we are from people like you, who defend the indefensible, we are better off.and now the pony tail is brandishing Shah Rukh Khan on the unsuspecting students. I hate Shah Rukh etc. He may as well be a 'Dalal' if everything should be to earn money.
Appila June 18, 2009 7:20 PM
Why cant I add comments?
Priyanka June 18, 2009 6:53 PM
@Ahmad
There always is a provision for all those who don't want to take the trip and the laptop in that case the fees is lower around 5L. The price range varies after that so its your choice as to what u want to take.@Manjit/ Shameek
I never said that IIMs manipulate, I said " As commented by one of the people here, IIMs also manipulate the figures for placements" and the guy was IIPM_IIM June 16, 2009 11:07 PM. I just made a reference to it. I am not trying to compare IIPM with IIM or IIT. I just was giving my view on the false allegations being imposed.@DevD
For your information I am no representative from IIPM. My name is Priyanka, u want to belive it then do else don't try to give special/ unnecessary comments.@Arjun
I agree that their are some mistakes as I was working on too many things, but that doesn't give anyone the right to undermine my degrees and no one has the right to point finger at me. I already said no personal allegations please!!!!!!!Anyway to everyone, I don't think I want to take this nonsense any further. I never in my entire comment tried to convince anyone to take admission in IIPM nor did I say the its the best, I just expressed my opinion and its at the end of the day always a personal decision of which institute one would like to taken up.
Appila June 18, 2009 6:49 PM
See what is happening (below). B Mahesh Sarma / people do something about it. IIPM is fraud. Save innocent student's lives.
IIPM is organizing an international B-School quiz, the grand finale of which will be hosted by Shahrukh Khan & winning team will get a cash prize of Rs. 2,50,000
Please find attached the official invite for the same.
Warm regards,
Rohit SinghInternational Institute of Planning and Management
New Delhi- 110074
Tel: +91-11-42789802
dheeraj June 18, 2009 3:17 PM
partly we all r responsible for such frauds.....
Arjun June 18, 2009 1:19 PM
@Careers360
Atlast the news is out now. Thanks for the effort.@Priyanka's msg
Irrespective of what she wrote i see a lot of spelling mistakes that are not typographical errors. Engineer, MBA with foreign exposure ?? Either you are bluffing about yourself and trying to defend IIPM or you must be one among the clan who still believe in IIPM because u cant think any further.Happy June 18, 2009 12:37 PM
This man is a big fraud
Heard someone with firsthand info that the students graduating didnt get any jobs...The only job they got was in his production company as PAs:)
Common sense tells that why would a reputed school advertise so much and be so loud:)sasikiran June 18, 2009 12:27 PM
Thanks a lot! for taking all the pain behind this research.
Let's stop arguing about this and spread this news. Let's save the innocent.
Even most of us are innocent before this research. I hope this news spread faster than a wildfire.Aman Gupta June 18, 2009 12:21 PM
Just for fun, I emailed on a couple of addresses listed on IIPM's contact page, for comments on this article. Not surprisingly, got a mail delivery notice for one of the addresses.
If I get a reply, I'll surely post it here.
Shameek June 18, 2009 3:25 AM
I must congratulate everyone upon the successful uncovering of this IIPM scam. Its being suspicious was too obvious from the very start as can be clearly seen from the general comments of those who have posted prior to me. But it is not really a complete surprise to me that such (this is just the tip of an iceberg..) institutions of fake and self-acclaimed repute are a creation of our own society and each single one of us should feel responsible for this situation if we are truly to improve the scenario. Here is what i mean:
1) Who is responsible for such institutions cropping up?
Ans: Failure of the goverment to provide 'something' for those millions of students who are fall behind in the race for iim's and iit's.2)Who is responsible for ignorant (and several willing) students taking admission into these fake institutions?
Ans: When there is no alternative left, even a piece of bread coated with hone can seem like a golden meal.3)Should we be blaming only the sytem for everything?
Ans: Not ofcourse! Our parents expect of us to be able to beat the rest in the competetion and secure a good future for both ourselves and themselves..even if it comes at a very high risk. And of course, they are not really in the wrong shoes either since it is a do-or-die situation for them as well.4) What is the solution?
Ans: Most of it lies in the hands of the government ofcourse. But a lot of it lies in the hands of active members of our student community like ourselves as well.. I am not the type of person who believes in saying that "We should elect people who are worthy" or "If we really want to change the system, we should be in the political system" or crap like that. We can change the system from outside as well.
a) We must spread the word as far as possible about such fake organizations.
b) When such organizations come up, use the RTI act to actually get some info. There is no need for legal procedures after that. Simply, spread the fire on the internet and see the eyeballs popping up by themselves.
c) Better career counselling is almost necessary and sufficient for putting people in the right tracks. If am not mistaken, the ad for IIPM came out in TOI several times. But we are forgetting that TOI also publishes the Education times which contributes to such counselling activities. Be a good citizen by sharing your knowledge and experience with other prospective students. After all, it is only students who can better guide prospective students. If necessary, we can come up with an online portal for career counselling for prospective students. I dont think it makes a serious dent in our time.
4) Finally, but certainly not with the least of weightage, participate in campaogns like Teach India so that you can prevent such institutions from ever coming up in the future by eliminating the problem at the very root of our country's ignorance.@ the last few posts: its a pity to see you guys fighting over something so trivial. There is no point in blaming and bitching amongst each other. Irrespective of her views of IIPM, Priyanka did not found IIPM. So why attack her so vehemently??
@Priyanka
Your personal opinion counts as an alumni of the institute. But I need to ask you two questions:
1) Can you prove in anyway that IIM's fake their placements? I shall gladly acknowledge any answer to this question. Please do not reply something trivial like the one of the last comments say so..
Also, unfortunately, you have already acknowledged the fact IIPM DOES vehemently fake their their own placements irrespective of whether that is a practice or not in the IIM's.2) Being an ex-student and having known about the flaws of the institution, you are even more responsible for making sure that no more students get caught in such traps than any of us out here. Hope you realise that.
In general:
IIT's and IIM's have set a standard that is almost impossible for any newbie institute to behold. Very true.. But I personally believe that the Indian student community has had to pay a very high price for this EXTREME competetiveness and I know of many students who have fallen victim to the disaster.. The system needs to be changed. It can only be changed by us, the students who have face this s***.My affiliation is with IIT Guwahati
2)
Neeraj Shukla June 18, 2009 1:04 AM
Nice research done by Careers 360.
I have always found it unconvincing that an educational institute can give full page advertisement in every national newspaper almost every-week. I mean how will they provide facilities to the students, because it is ultimately the students' money which will be used for advertisement.Such a waste of money of students' parents!!!And see their claims...IIT,IIMs,Harvard,Yale...whatever institute their chief(the self styled and self-acclaimed pony-rich and value-less Arindham Chaudhry)knows the name of!!
I am a student of National Institute of Technology and i know how funds have to be carefully managed by an institute so as to provide maximum facilities to a student at minimum cost. Institutes like IIPM which use so much of their money in advertisements have obviously the focus of cashing in on more and more money rather than teaching the students and building the nation strong by providing us with good trained manpower.
We should ban such institutes....and put the 'Pony-Man' behind bars for fraud.
even though B-schools in india don't cook the placement figures and are not doing anything illegal.
Still there are many legal but immoral ways of doing manipulations.
A few:
1. median salary is not salary of (n/2)th student arranged in order but (m/2)th salary when salaries arranged in order. (consider multiple offers to top students)
2. average salary is (sum of all offers)/(no. of students) irrespective of accepted or rejected offers.there are many other similar possibilities, which no college 'd like to mention in their presentations, prospectus or website.
So take every info with a pinch of salt.
good luck!!!!
I am an IIPM(Mumbai) alumnus from the batch 2003-2005… I have to agree that IIPM claims big in ads… It may definitely not be better than the likes of IIMs, but my experience with the institute wasn't bad… My comment is not in defense of IIPM, but its just my personal view from my first-hand experience with the institute.
Currently I am working in US as a consultant… For my work-visa I had to send my degrees (bachelor's and master's) for educational evaluation to the authorized government agency in US, since I had no degrees from here.. My degrees were evaluated at Master's equivalent of US..So, this makes it clear that the PGDPM/MBA degrees awarded by IIPM are valid here in the States (I had my own doubts about the validity of this degree as I had heard/read a lot about this issue on blogs earlier)..
As for the curriculum: 72 subjects/courses in 4 trimesters (tri semesters), 3rd trisem – internship, 6th trisem – thesis… was a whole lot for a 2 year programme.. as you may have guessed, these courses werent covered in detail, but they taught enough for all of us to take back some knowledge..insightful!... lots of projects/assignments which prepared us to handle pressure eventually in the professional world… they stressed on getting live(real-time) projects so we could network with people from different companies, and also get exposure to the policies/practices/strategies of the companies… which I thought was a great learning…
Faculty: I can speak only of the Mumbai branch and of year 2003-2005.. the professors were truly good… all were very experienced and were at top positions at the companies they worked for… the classes were interactive and some of the professors were exceptionally good! On the other hand, we also had some professors who were ex-IIPM students (mostly freshers), but they covered subjects like Executive Communication & Mass Communication, which don't require much teaching anyway.. so I wasn't bothered…
General Aministration: Most of the immature staff mentioned by someone here, were a part of the admininstration dept of the institute. As a student I didn't have to interact much with them… I was only concerned about the faculty, and was happy with what we got…
IIPM at that time did arrange some seminars with the Management bigwigs like Philip Kotler, Azeem Premji and a few more.. they took an hr to 2 hr session with the students… was a good experience….
As far as the placements go… even back in 2004-05 period, when the economy was doing rather well, not many companies showed up for campus recruitments.. Few big names like Asian Paints, Oracle and Shopper's Stop did turn up for campus placements and projects, and also a few mid-size/small companies.. but not as many as we expected… I would like to agree with someone here who mentioned about IIPM claiming to have placed students, even when those students found jobs on their own.. I myself was surprised to see my name appear in the list of placed students, when I had found the job on my own... It did bother me at the time, I was angry!
Once I started working, I realized that its all about your personal abilities.. it doesn't matter which institute you come from..what matters is how good or bad you perform at work…
There is no denying that I learned a lot in those 2 years at IIPM…
My overall experience with the institute wasn't bad… that's all I can say…
I leave it upto the readers what to make of this…. Peace!
I have a feeling this so called "Priyanka" is not someone who has studied at this shit place, but one among the marketing dept of this iipm. Some dude who is trying to cover their A** with a cute girly name like Priyanka and coming up with plain blatant lies like the ones which we get to see in the newspapers.
Manjit June 17, 2009 9:52 PM
@ Priya you said that IIMs also manipulate placement figure. Do you have any evidence of it. It is a punishable offence to make false claim, like the one made by IIPM. I am a student of IIM and I can give full prove that IIMs never manipulate in placement.. & IIMs do not boast of placement...
The matter might have been told to you by Arindam Choudury.Ahmad June 17, 2009 6:55 PM
@ Priyanka
What kind of weird defense is this for this dubious institution?
I won't call it stupid but heights of. Stupidity
You say…"They promise that they will take you for a foreign exposure program for which students do not have pay anything, it is included in the fees and they fulfill their promise. I swear the experience is really good and makes you learn a lot. Apart from that they promise of giving a laptop and they do give!! And that too of good companies like HP, Dell etc."
How is foreign trip free when it is actually paid from students fees?.
And isn't it a cruel joke that IIPM fulfills student's promise of 40k laptop but dupes them Rs 8-10 lakh which they pay...
Not everyone is a millionaire.
I have my wife cousin who has joined IIPM. I don't know how will his parents, who have spend all their hard earned earnings for getting him to this institution, react.
They will be broken if they happen to read this article
..... I won't be telling them and I hope they dot get a copy of this article.
But why is government silent. Is HRD ministry listening?
Praveen June 17, 2009 6:37 PM
agreed Priyanka. Let us keep this objective. I have a few questions
1. The average salary that an Indian laborer draws in Dubai, who serves as a peon is Rs.20000. What IIPM gets is 25000 for an MBA after 3 yeasr of study and 12 lacs as fees.
2. What dio you call an institution that lies to students about 16.5 lacs salary while getting 3.60 lacs as salary on international placements.
3. What do you say about an institution that talks about giving out MBA from IMI when this expose suggests that even that degree is invalid.
If IIPM has ethics, they will not use the words MBA, BBA, wrong placements etc. and still go by their own standing, the way IIM's, IIT's, IIFT and ISB do. They at least dont take ads claiming all these lies.Priyanka June 17, 2009 6:11 PM
Excuse me!!!!! This was in no way a defence in 1st place, n that too a stupid one. I just shared my experience as you shared yours. So it would be good if their are no personal allegations made!
N ya I do agree about the foreign placements part but that doesn't mean that whatever I said in my previous comment was wrong or misleading.
It would be really gr8 if this is not taken personally and the discussion is kept objective.
Mathew June 17, 2009 5:38 PM
I belong to the batch of 2005-2007,I can assure all the readers one thing abt this institution that its a JOKE and an absolute disater.They have LIED just like ENRON did to its satke holders.Made promises they could never deliver.Managed by probably the most icompetent induviduals.
All this is expected because it is run by India's only self proclaimed managemnt GURU.
Maniam June 17, 2009 5:10 PM
A really stupid defence.
Zee ranked them No.1 in global exposure based on I think the information provided by IIPM. Careers360 has nailed each of those lies, especially on the International placements, International degrees and international B schools. Zee should be ashamed that it ranked them on global exposure and review their ranking after this expose.
You should speak to people like us who have tasted IIPM, Idiot.Priyanka June 17, 2009 3:36 PM
Hello All,
I am a part of the Alumni of IIPM with Engineering as my bachelors degree and a proactive student of the year 2007-2009 batch at IIPM, Mumbai.
About your research: Firstly I would like to appretiate the efforts that have been taken for the research conducted. But I am sorry to say, the report doesn't seam to have been for the purpose of informing people and students but has been drafted just to put down IIPM as an institute.
People here are saying that IIPM is a fraud concept...... I dont think so!!! If it is? How does it still exist in such a competitive world. But yes you can say their ideologies are different (out of the box). They do not want to go with the wave, they want to do things differently, which may not be right always.
Talking of the alligations put on them, if they advertise it is a their way of maintaining the top of the mind recall. I do not believe that they give any completely false information. As comented by one of the students here, IIM's also manupulate the figures for placements, so that should not be a big deal.
Talking of placements this year the scenario has been anyway bad everywhere, so you can't blame an institute for the same. All the alligations that have been put up like the salary of Rs. 200 as comission and all of that is all utter crap. There are companies like these approaching institutes but that doesn't mean that the institute goes ahead with such profiles, they obviously dump it and so does IIPM. No institute can survive for such long years if they were doing something like that. The report says that companies like DEUTSCHE BANK have picked up students in low numbers is not true, as per my updates in 2008-2009 they have picked up approximately 10-15 students.
Eveyone here has been trying to put IIPM down saying that all that they advertise is false and that they are a fraud institue, but I would like to tell u that all whatever they promise they give you. They promise that they will take you for a foreign exposure program for which students do not have pay anything, it is included in the fees and they fulfill their promise. I swear the experience is really good and makes you learn alot. Apart from that they promise of giving a laptop and they do give!! And that too of good companies like HP, Dell etc.
The claim that they made about being ranked 1st in Global exposure and 6th over all is a fact which they used to publisise. They were given these awards by the Zee TV awards. I dont believe that their is anyting wrong in using this information in their ads. Everyone does it!!!!!!!!!! So wat wrong have they done in doing this.
Also one more important thing the faculties are anytime better that other institutes. We have faculties who are ex-RBI and people who have worked with companies like Mahindra n Manindra, TCS and many more. We have faculties who are PHD's in their respective fields. The kind of information that they give is realtime. I feel every institute has a mix of students, a category who wants to study other who dont want to so it is a students decisions as to what he/ she wants to choose for himself.
Sandeep June 17, 2009 3:25 PM
This fraud is going on in the entire ad industry. Soaps says they tested on 2000 families, health drinks mention some institute, and many more. There is no verification/standard for the claims made in ads.
Sasidhar June 17, 2009 1:37 PM
When my father wanted me to go for a higher degree and when I couldnt end up clearing CAT. Parents' first consideration was IIPM. But I never gave a S**T about it and immediately ruled it out of their minds saying another fraud in a commercial education system. First thing SCREW HINDU NEWS PAPER for printing such fraud ads (ofcourse unknowingly, but responsibly should have inquired before printing such) DAILY, day by day, with some idiot's photo to stare at with all the envy (:P)
My regards and thanks to the team who did this investigation. You did a remarkable job of bringing the IIPM scam into light.
I have always had a doubt on the claims of this institute, particularly about the placements which they claim to be high even in these tough hours of recession.(As even IIM's feel cold in their placements)
Its high time, the concerned authorities act and take necessary steps against the institute. Else many students would get fascinated by the claims and would land in trouble. I personally feel for the students who were ruined by the institute in their career.
I wish this news to be widespread and the student community be informed.
Sandeep June 17, 2009 12:47 PM
Why are we so surprised at the expose? And why only IIPM, there are new institutes cropping up everyday that offer B-tech and MBA. In fact I think there are more enginering and management colleges in some palces that there are primary schools. The worst thing is that they still manage to find students to fill up seats. Some of them get accredition from local universities by fair or unfair means while other like IIPM just mislead students into beleiving that the give out recognised degrees. A 1960 batch electrical engineer from my engg college who retired from a senior post in a state electricity board was once contracted by a university to do inspections of these colleges. He went into a college and asked them to show their elec engg lab. What they showed him was an empty room with a disassembled table fan for equipment. Thats it, nothing else. Education in india had become an industry now, with local businessmen and even old tution coaches opening engg and mgt colleges just because its good business. We as consumers do as much research we can before we buy a cell phone or a car. Why not put in some time before paying tuition to these new colleges, just to make sure they are not thugs like IIPM?
Nausheel June 17, 2009 11:34 AM
Well I always knew that IIPM is a Scam. I had been to the bangalore branch of the institute around a year back with my cousin, who was looking to get admitted in some good college for his Business Administration course.
I was not too impressed with the info which they gave us and once these guys came to know that we were not too interested in taking the seat in their college, they offered us a "unique" deal.They told us that they have a special degree where in a student can complete both his BBA and MBA in 3 years flat!
I was astonished at their claims, and not to left behind they even suggested that there is no need for the student to come to the college regularly as everything will be taken care of by them.I'm glad that I did not get my cousin admitted to that college and also alerted all my colleagues and my friends regarding the college.
I truly appreciate you guys for bringing the Cat out of the Bag..!!!
And seriously hope that serious action will be taken against them for misleading the people..Suchithra June 17, 2009 9:53 AM
I would echo Vivek Gupta. Most of us who know the value of IITs n IIMs kno that IIPM is a fraud. Stil, its disgusting. N its bad for the ppl in the villages n remote towns who may end up believing the ads.. We shud all try to spread the word as much as we can.
N kudos! Good work!
lalit sharma June 17, 2009 5:02 AM
Howsoever disgusting it may be, this is not at all surprising that a mediocre media joker pulls off running a con-business in broad daylight.
IIPM epitomizes everything that is wrong with our system today. The rule is simple, if you can hype it big; you can make a million bucks, selling crap. People like Arindam Chaudhary who should be behind bars in the first place, are not only accepted into the society but allowed to ruin careers of unsuspecting students.
I never saw even a tiny ad for IIMs or IITs, nor did these institutes ever respond to IIPM making a mockery out of them in the newspapers. These institutes are too big, and too smug to pay any heed to the circus that IIPM is putting up. Unbothered and unchecked, the shameless Chaudhary doesn't shy away from lying on the top of his voice in page wide ads. IIPM's only valid claim is its pulling off the biggest scam ever in the education sector.
A lot of people got cheated. I admit that to some extent this has been a result of their own misjudgment. Screaming ads in newspaper, which look like a cheap flea market sign board "Education on sale" show nothing but sheer desperation and greed of IIPM.
Any student who has worked hard for IIM can never believe in IIPM's false claims. But what about the ones who didn't have any hope of clearing the CAT? These students fall easy prey to such loud ads. The IIPM brazenly targets this group of students, who are already in a state of self-insecurity and IIPM offers a glorious mirage of something even better than IIM.
People behind IIPM should be put where they belong: behind bars, or even better: jobless on streets. Not only should IIPM be made to pay back the monstrous fee that they charge to its students, it also owes big compensation to them for trying to ruin their career.
I don't know law; I don't know how it can be taken up legally (if at all), but I know that a thief is thief is thief.pony tailed ass June 17, 2009 2:27 AM
more information than this was uncovered by blogs few years back. There is nothing new in this investigation!!
sushant bhatia June 17, 2009 12:16 AM
dere shud b a proper trial for arindham chaudhary n ppl.
n i think press shud also act with little more responsibility in publishing dese advts.
neways ppl were always doubtful bout iipm...n here s d pruf 4 dem..
thnxAakash Goel June 16, 2009 11:58 PM
amazing post! and an amazing investigation!
me always suspected them, nice that now everyone knows the truth.
Aakash Goel June 16, 2009 11:52 PM
amazing post! and an amazing investigation!
me always suspected them, nice that now everyone knows the truth.
I used to come across advertisements for this 'institute' quite often. I always felt they are kind of suspicious. Their claims were too much. And all I heard about this institute was from themselves. Nobody else seemed to be talking about this allegedly world famous institute. I felt quite strange. But I never saw any investigation from any of the media. May be they were too busy covering Bollywood starlets, or worried more about lose of advertisements from IIPM. Difficult to tell.IIPM_IIM June 16, 2009 11:07 PM
Even the IIMs fudge placement figures and put out misleading data - somehow they get away with it because of the brand name and their alumni strength. In this regard, IIPM's claims of being better than the IIMs is absolutely true. IIPM does on a much larger scale what the IIMs do on a smaller scale. Atleast IIMs resort only to distorting info, not falsifying it altogether. It would be good if a formal enquiry is conducted into IIPM's claims.
Ankur Chakraborty June 16, 2009 11:00 PM
The institute's claims are somewhat engineered. It claims that it has more foreign placements than any IIM. while doing so, they count every IIM as a separate institution but all 17 IIPMs as a single institute. What a joke!! Also they claim about numbers in placement (eg, 1200 students placed till now) but not the percentage. There are many more examples. But yes, the common men forgot to look between the prints.
Prashanth June 16, 2009 9:25 PM
The Berkeley B school is called "Haas" not "Hass".
Ranjna June 16, 2009 8:54 PM
Thanks 4 clearing all my doubts.I always doubted this institute as it claimed to be better than the IIMs.Its very sad to know that people are being cheated in this manner.Its sader that our govt is not acting against such institutions.
They claim that they are Better than IIM'S - WHAT A JOKE. These People who play with Life of Students should be Put behind Bars.
Kartik Gupta June 16, 2009 6:28 PM
Hi,
Nice investigation. Iread about the same institution about 1 year back. There was another report showing bare lies given in the advertisment. That report was mainly focussed on the infrastructure (the campus, library, facilities etc) claimed by IIPM for its various different campuses.
Throwing some more light on these aspects can make the report much much better!!
In any case. Great job done !
rajeev June 16, 2009 4:19 PM
Why the email sinppets are like XXXX?
To:XXX
From:XXXX
why those names and full email id's are not mentioned? I know IIPM has something fishy, but I seriously doubt the anonymity of the investigation.Vivek Gupta June 13, 2009 7:02 PM
I was also always doubtful about this institute. They used to tell themselves better option than IITs and IIMs. According to them, their quality of education and placements used to be far better than IIMs. Such a big fraud and such an attempt to mislead the people. Its disgusting.
It is not fair to leave IIPM do its business as usual. It must pay back money to the students whose life it has taken away.
Bharat Chandra June 11, 2009 3:12 PM
It was indeed a great investigation. 'Hats off' for the work. I really liked the fact that this article had been a responsible one at a time when we see lot of newspapers and articles being partial to a particular party, group etc.... Keep going....!!
I would do my part to spread the news across about IIPM and save a lot of people.Maniam June 9, 2009 8:08 AM
This institution is very bad and tells lies always. I had a friend who studied here. He could not be placed. He worked hard and found a job on his own. To his surprise, the institution claims that it has placed him, after he found a job on his own.
May be, the IIPM expects its stuidents to be unemployed and everyone who hasnt been placed means unemployable.
Dev from bangalore June 7, 2009 12:27 AM
reallt great investigation... what more can be demanded from a person who himself calls himself Management guru.... thank god i m nt into their money sucking trap.. and i will beware some friends who are thinking of joining this institution...
I always had a doubt about this institution because it spends too much time and money in advertising itself and trying to put it self in a league of IIMs by throwing some big university names. I am very thankful to you that you could expose the truth behind this fraudulent organization.
Lappi June 2, 2009 9:57 AM
Great investigation
US War Funding: Lessons Not Learned
19 Jun 2009
A US commission provides insights into the fundamental failure to address corruption and waste in Iraq and Afghanistan reconstruction and security funding writes Dr Dominic Moran for ISN Security Watch.
By Dominic Moran for ISN Security Watch
In its interim report, the independent Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan (CWC) has identified deep-seated dysfunction in the US government's handling and oversight of reconstruction and service contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Reporting to Congress on 10 June, CWC commissioners noted that Defense Department auditors had identified a staggering US$13 billion in "questioned and unsupported" costs through the 2008 fiscal year.
Such failures have been the subject of numerous reports and were covered extensively in a study released by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) in December. This charted a history of ad hoc planning and constantly shifting priorities that has contributed to mass misappropriations, waste and inappropriate and failed development.
In the CWC report, ongoing problems are confirmed in the planning, management and auditing of contracts with a lack of provisions for accountability; the poor definition and execution of contracts; unnecessary and expensive rework; and a dearth of federal acquisitions staff identified as key issues.
Institute for Policy Studies Fellow Phyllis Bennis told ISN Security Watch, "Corruption has been a huge problem." She noted that in "the very beginning both the military and contractors were given literally truckloads of cash in brick-sized packages of dollars to distribute with no accountability, no record keeping, nothing."
The CWC found that the process of designating and training those directly responsible for monitoring project work was "essentially broken," with a severe shortage of trained officers, inadequate training and impossible workloads undermining effective contract monitoring.
Ofra Bengio, Iraq specialist at Tel Aviv's Moshe Dayan Center, told ISN Security Watch that the dearth of trained staff is, in part, a function of the lack of business experience in the military.
The impact of these inbuilt inadequacies on Iraq and Afghan reconstruction has been profound, establishing the environment for system abuses that have affected the disbursement of a significant percentage of the US$830 billion earmarked by Congress to date for US operations.
The CWC revelations have had little apparent political impact. Under intense White House pressure, Congress gave its backing Thursday to a bill mandating US$80 billion in further security disbursements in Iraq and Afghanistan, with US$10.4 billion slated for economic development. The bill had been held up by the insertion of IMF and flu spending and not by extant concern at the failure to address systemic dysfunction in Iraq and Afghan funding.
Noting the opportunity for a shift in US spending priorities inherent in the current economic crisis, Bennis cautioned: "There is not the same willingness among some of these [Democratic] members of Congress to challenge their own party, their own president even though he has said that he supports a very different approach."
Shareholder revolt
Despite a long history of contractor malfeasances, the CWC found that little has been done to address issues identified in the past, with 50 percent of contractor billing systems and 42 percent of those used to provide project estimates showing "serious deficiencies."
In May, the Policemen and Firemen Retirement System of Detroit, an institutional investor in Halliburton and former subsidiary KBR (the largest services contractor in Iraq), announced it was suing the companies over a string of alleged malfeasances that includes the purported over-billing of services provided to US forces in Iraq.
According to the plaintiffs, 32 former and current members of the Halliburton and KBR boards, including former vice president Dick Cheney, should be held accountable for purported breaches of fiduciary duty in failing to rein in faulty business practices in the Middle East and elsewhere.
The two companies have already reportedly chalked up over US$650 million in fines, settlements and penalties paid to the federal authorities.
KBR was again singled out in the CWC report as having an inadequate purchasing system. As with other companies, this prevents the precise monitoring of subcontractor work, increasing the chances for "waste, fraud and abuse." This is crucial as around 70 percent of work overall is conducted by subcontractors.
KBR has defended its record against the CWC charge, accusing the commission of bias. The company also denies fault in the electrocution deaths of four US servicemen, covered in a New York Times editorial in May.
Asked why the US had persisted in rehiring companies with a poor track record, Bennis said, "Some of them clearly had longstanding ties with high-ranking officials of the Bush administration."
"The other problem is one of scale," she explained. "Once you decide that you are not going to allow Iraqis to rebuild their own country […] there are very few companies that have the capacity to operate on the scale of the US military.
High stakes
The commissioners found that billions in "wasteful spending" may still be occurring in the transition between two massive logistics contracts, LOGCAP III (KBR, 2001) and LOGCAP IV (KBR, DynCorp, Fluor, 2008).
The CWC established that the slow pace of transition from LOGCAP III meant that the full benefits of competition were yet to be realized. This is highly problematic given that they determined that numerous fraud referrals under KBR's LOGCAP III had yet to be dealt with.
The stakes are high. LOGCAP contracts could be worth up to US$150 billion over the next 10 years with over US$31 billion already spent.
Transferring problems
With the US turning its attention to Afghanistan, few impediments appear to exist to the parallel development of the endemic problems staggering the Iraq contracting and reconstruction effort. This despite repeated legislative attempts to address these issues, including the establishment of the CWC last year.
Tellingly, the commissioners found that "the effectiveness of contractor support to expanded US operations in Afghanistan is compromised by the failure to extract and apply lessons learned from Iraq." Here interagency coordination was again identified as a primary concern.
With the reinforcement of US forces in Afghanistan already under way, the report found that "massive confusion and loss" are set to take place given a lack of documentation and knowledge of billions of dollars worth of materiel and properties on Iraqi bases that must be dealt with in the transfer.
According to SIGIR, $32 billion had been spent on Afghan reconstruction by March with little to no oversight.
Asked if parallel systems of corruption and mismanagement mirroring the Iraq experience are likely to be elaborated in Afghanistan, Bennis said, "If it proceeds without challenge, absolutely. Having good intentions among a few high-ranking officials is simply not enough to overcome that."
Dr Dominic Moran, based in Tel Aviv, is ISN Security Watch's senior correspondent in the Middle East and the Director of Operations of ISA Consulting.
A US commission provides insights into the fundamental failure to address corruption and waste in Iraq and Afghanistan reconstruction and security funding writes Dr Dominic Moran for ISN Security Watch.
By Dominic Moran for ISN Security Watch
In its interim report, the independent Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan (CWC) has identified deep-seated dysfunction in the US government's handling and oversight of reconstruction and service contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Reporting to Congress on 10 June, CWC commissioners noted that Defense Department auditors had identified a staggering US$13 billion in "questioned and unsupported" costs through the 2008 fiscal year.
Such failures have been the subject of numerous reports and were covered extensively in a study released by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) in December. This charted a history of ad hoc planning and constantly shifting priorities that has contributed to mass misappropriations, waste and inappropriate and failed development.
In the CWC report, ongoing problems are confirmed in the planning, management and auditing of contracts with a lack of provisions for accountability; the poor definition and execution of contracts; unnecessary and expensive rework; and a dearth of federal acquisitions staff identified as key issues.
Institute for Policy Studies Fellow Phyllis Bennis told ISN Security Watch, "Corruption has been a huge problem." She noted that in "the very beginning both the military and contractors were given literally truckloads of cash in brick-sized packages of dollars to distribute with no accountability, no record keeping, nothing."
The CWC found that the process of designating and training those directly responsible for monitoring project work was "essentially broken," with a severe shortage of trained officers, inadequate training and impossible workloads undermining effective contract monitoring.
Ofra Bengio, Iraq specialist at Tel Aviv's Moshe Dayan Center, told ISN Security Watch that the dearth of trained staff is, in part, a function of the lack of business experience in the military.
The impact of these inbuilt inadequacies on Iraq and Afghan reconstruction has been profound, establishing the environment for system abuses that have affected the disbursement of a significant percentage of the US$830 billion earmarked by Congress to date for US operations.
The CWC revelations have had little apparent political impact. Under intense White House pressure, Congress gave its backing Thursday to a bill mandating US$80 billion in further security disbursements in Iraq and Afghanistan, with US$10.4 billion slated for economic development. The bill had been held up by the insertion of IMF and flu spending and not by extant concern at the failure to address systemic dysfunction in Iraq and Afghan funding.
Noting the opportunity for a shift in US spending priorities inherent in the current economic crisis, Bennis cautioned: "There is not the same willingness among some of these [Democratic] members of Congress to challenge their own party, their own president even though he has said that he supports a very different approach."
Shareholder revolt
Despite a long history of contractor malfeasances, the CWC found that little has been done to address issues identified in the past, with 50 percent of contractor billing systems and 42 percent of those used to provide project estimates showing "serious deficiencies."
In May, the Policemen and Firemen Retirement System of Detroit, an institutional investor in Halliburton and former subsidiary KBR (the largest services contractor in Iraq), announced it was suing the companies over a string of alleged malfeasances that includes the purported over-billing of services provided to US forces in Iraq.
According to the plaintiffs, 32 former and current members of the Halliburton and KBR boards, including former vice president Dick Cheney, should be held accountable for purported breaches of fiduciary duty in failing to rein in faulty business practices in the Middle East and elsewhere.
The two companies have already reportedly chalked up over US$650 million in fines, settlements and penalties paid to the federal authorities.
KBR was again singled out in the CWC report as having an inadequate purchasing system. As with other companies, this prevents the precise monitoring of subcontractor work, increasing the chances for "waste, fraud and abuse." This is crucial as around 70 percent of work overall is conducted by subcontractors.
KBR has defended its record against the CWC charge, accusing the commission of bias. The company also denies fault in the electrocution deaths of four US servicemen, covered in a New York Times editorial in May.
Asked why the US had persisted in rehiring companies with a poor track record, Bennis said, "Some of them clearly had longstanding ties with high-ranking officials of the Bush administration."
"The other problem is one of scale," she explained. "Once you decide that you are not going to allow Iraqis to rebuild their own country […] there are very few companies that have the capacity to operate on the scale of the US military.
High stakes
The commissioners found that billions in "wasteful spending" may still be occurring in the transition between two massive logistics contracts, LOGCAP III (KBR, 2001) and LOGCAP IV (KBR, DynCorp, Fluor, 2008).
The CWC established that the slow pace of transition from LOGCAP III meant that the full benefits of competition were yet to be realized. This is highly problematic given that they determined that numerous fraud referrals under KBR's LOGCAP III had yet to be dealt with.
The stakes are high. LOGCAP contracts could be worth up to US$150 billion over the next 10 years with over US$31 billion already spent.
Transferring problems
With the US turning its attention to Afghanistan, few impediments appear to exist to the parallel development of the endemic problems staggering the Iraq contracting and reconstruction effort. This despite repeated legislative attempts to address these issues, including the establishment of the CWC last year.
Tellingly, the commissioners found that "the effectiveness of contractor support to expanded US operations in Afghanistan is compromised by the failure to extract and apply lessons learned from Iraq." Here interagency coordination was again identified as a primary concern.
With the reinforcement of US forces in Afghanistan already under way, the report found that "massive confusion and loss" are set to take place given a lack of documentation and knowledge of billions of dollars worth of materiel and properties on Iraqi bases that must be dealt with in the transfer.
According to SIGIR, $32 billion had been spent on Afghan reconstruction by March with little to no oversight.
Asked if parallel systems of corruption and mismanagement mirroring the Iraq experience are likely to be elaborated in Afghanistan, Bennis said, "If it proceeds without challenge, absolutely. Having good intentions among a few high-ranking officials is simply not enough to overcome that."
Dr Dominic Moran, based in Tel Aviv, is ISN Security Watch's senior correspondent in the Middle East and the Director of Operations of ISA Consulting.
Russian-Chinese relations hinge on delicate balance of interests
15:4818/06/2009
MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Andrei Fedyashin) – There is no denying that the Chinese are wonderfully decorous. President Hu Jintao, currently in Moscow on a state visit, was so tactful in reminding that the Chinese offshoot of the East Siberia – Pacific Ocean Coast oil pipeline should be completed on time that now there is no doubt that it will.
After holding extensive talks with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on June 17, President Hu Jintao called the planned pipeline “ours” and said Beijing and Moscow should more actively negotiate cooperation in the sphere of gas production and nuclear energy and to elevate such mutually beneficial energy cooperation to new levels.
In one sentence, President Hu Jintao set forth the objectives of his visit in the run-up to the 60th anniversary of establishing Chinese-Soviet diplomatic relations. The Chinese leader wants to negotiate economic and energy projects and joint measures for coping with the global financial crisis.
Hu Jintao had an opportunity to discuss political aspects of bilateral relations at the latest Shanghai Cooperation Organization and BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) summits in Yekaterinburg, on June 15-16.
He invited President Medvedev to visit China next year. Although the date of the visit has not yet been set, the Russian leader will probably go to China in December 2010 in order to attend the planned opening of the above-mentioned oil pipeline’s Chinese offshoot.
Beijing is looking forward to getting Russian oil and gas. The CEOs of Russian and Chinese gas companies also negotiated gas deliveries during Hu Jintao’s visit. On June 17, Gazprombank and the Export-Import Bank of China signed an agreement on financing the delivery of Chinese drilling, oil-pumping and gas equipment worth $300 million to Russia.
China, which is gradually starting to overcome the crisis, sorely needs the East Siberia – Pacific Ocean Coast pipeline, whose construction has been repeatedly delayed. The pipeline’s Chinese offshoot is expected to annually pump 15 million metric tons of oil.
Beijing’s decision to finance the construction project and to cover Gazprombank’s risks is a good answer to the project’s critics who claim that the entire politically motivated pipeline will never be filled to capacity. However, the far-sighted Chinese leaders will never finance construction of unprofitable pipelines.
Naturally, the global crisis has affected the scale of bilateral trade. In January-April, the Russian-Chinese trade turnover dwindled by 38.3% on the same period of 2008 and totaled $10.7 billion. The entire 2008 turnover was $55.9 billion.
The bilateral trade turnover does not match Russia’s vast size and the immense Chinese population. Last year, China was Russia’s third largest trade partner after Germany and the Netherlands.
Due to the crisis, rather than expanded trade relations, China surged ahead of both countries and became Russia’s No. 1 trade partner in January-March 2009.
In October 2009, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin will go to China and will prepare the visit of President Medvedev. The energetic Russian Prime Minister will also do his best to expand mutual trade and to facilitate Russian machinery and hi-tech exports to China.
Russia still posts a negative trade balance with China amounting to $13.5 billion.
Although Russian-Chinese foreign policy relations now resemble those between Moscow and Beijing in the first few years of Mao Zedong’s rule, they have become more pragmatic.
Importantly, during his Moscow visit, Hu Jintao did not once say that Beijing and Moscow were “allies,” resorting to the more cautious term “partners,” adding that cooperation between the two was strategic.
Despite this restrained and tactful diplomatic terminology, the West is baffled by the fact that Moscow and Beijing are moving closer together.
Commenting on Hu Jintao’s Russian visit, The Times of London remarked emotionally that Russia and China were “looking to the future without the West.” However, neither side concealed its striving to create a new multi-polar world.
Under a new multi-polar world concept, Moscow and Beijing want to act as the main magnets in their respective regions. Although this cannot be disputed, neither country can do without the West. Still it appears that neither Moscow, nor Beijing will cooperate with the West only to offset each other’s growing influence.
No matter what others may say and regardless of their reactions, China and Russia will continue to strengthen their role as major global players. However, their interests will inevitably clash in specific regions from time to time. But, most importantly, both huge nations should learn to live together in one boat. They should hold hands and coordinate all their movements because otherwise the boat will capsize.
The world found itself on the brink of nuclear conflict in the 1960s before the superpowers learned to live together in one boat.
Judging by Hu Jintao’s Moscow visit, both sides are successfully coordinating their efforts. Russian-Chinese partnership resembles relations between other former antagonists, namely, France and Germany in the European Union and Argentina and Brazil in Latin America.
Consequently, Beijing and Moscow have no alternative but to counterbalance each other. A search for real compromise and mutual self-discipline are the only way to maintain a delicate balance of interests.
Although both countries have failed to accomplish this objective in the past, they are successfully doing this today.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Andrei Fedyashin) – There is no denying that the Chinese are wonderfully decorous. President Hu Jintao, currently in Moscow on a state visit, was so tactful in reminding that the Chinese offshoot of the East Siberia – Pacific Ocean Coast oil pipeline should be completed on time that now there is no doubt that it will.
After holding extensive talks with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on June 17, President Hu Jintao called the planned pipeline “ours” and said Beijing and Moscow should more actively negotiate cooperation in the sphere of gas production and nuclear energy and to elevate such mutually beneficial energy cooperation to new levels.
In one sentence, President Hu Jintao set forth the objectives of his visit in the run-up to the 60th anniversary of establishing Chinese-Soviet diplomatic relations. The Chinese leader wants to negotiate economic and energy projects and joint measures for coping with the global financial crisis.
Hu Jintao had an opportunity to discuss political aspects of bilateral relations at the latest Shanghai Cooperation Organization and BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) summits in Yekaterinburg, on June 15-16.
He invited President Medvedev to visit China next year. Although the date of the visit has not yet been set, the Russian leader will probably go to China in December 2010 in order to attend the planned opening of the above-mentioned oil pipeline’s Chinese offshoot.
Beijing is looking forward to getting Russian oil and gas. The CEOs of Russian and Chinese gas companies also negotiated gas deliveries during Hu Jintao’s visit. On June 17, Gazprombank and the Export-Import Bank of China signed an agreement on financing the delivery of Chinese drilling, oil-pumping and gas equipment worth $300 million to Russia.
China, which is gradually starting to overcome the crisis, sorely needs the East Siberia – Pacific Ocean Coast pipeline, whose construction has been repeatedly delayed. The pipeline’s Chinese offshoot is expected to annually pump 15 million metric tons of oil.
Beijing’s decision to finance the construction project and to cover Gazprombank’s risks is a good answer to the project’s critics who claim that the entire politically motivated pipeline will never be filled to capacity. However, the far-sighted Chinese leaders will never finance construction of unprofitable pipelines.
Naturally, the global crisis has affected the scale of bilateral trade. In January-April, the Russian-Chinese trade turnover dwindled by 38.3% on the same period of 2008 and totaled $10.7 billion. The entire 2008 turnover was $55.9 billion.
The bilateral trade turnover does not match Russia’s vast size and the immense Chinese population. Last year, China was Russia’s third largest trade partner after Germany and the Netherlands.
Due to the crisis, rather than expanded trade relations, China surged ahead of both countries and became Russia’s No. 1 trade partner in January-March 2009.
In October 2009, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin will go to China and will prepare the visit of President Medvedev. The energetic Russian Prime Minister will also do his best to expand mutual trade and to facilitate Russian machinery and hi-tech exports to China.
Russia still posts a negative trade balance with China amounting to $13.5 billion.
Although Russian-Chinese foreign policy relations now resemble those between Moscow and Beijing in the first few years of Mao Zedong’s rule, they have become more pragmatic.
Importantly, during his Moscow visit, Hu Jintao did not once say that Beijing and Moscow were “allies,” resorting to the more cautious term “partners,” adding that cooperation between the two was strategic.
Despite this restrained and tactful diplomatic terminology, the West is baffled by the fact that Moscow and Beijing are moving closer together.
Commenting on Hu Jintao’s Russian visit, The Times of London remarked emotionally that Russia and China were “looking to the future without the West.” However, neither side concealed its striving to create a new multi-polar world.
Under a new multi-polar world concept, Moscow and Beijing want to act as the main magnets in their respective regions. Although this cannot be disputed, neither country can do without the West. Still it appears that neither Moscow, nor Beijing will cooperate with the West only to offset each other’s growing influence.
No matter what others may say and regardless of their reactions, China and Russia will continue to strengthen their role as major global players. However, their interests will inevitably clash in specific regions from time to time. But, most importantly, both huge nations should learn to live together in one boat. They should hold hands and coordinate all their movements because otherwise the boat will capsize.
The world found itself on the brink of nuclear conflict in the 1960s before the superpowers learned to live together in one boat.
Judging by Hu Jintao’s Moscow visit, both sides are successfully coordinating their efforts. Russian-Chinese partnership resembles relations between other former antagonists, namely, France and Germany in the European Union and Argentina and Brazil in Latin America.
Consequently, Beijing and Moscow have no alternative but to counterbalance each other. A search for real compromise and mutual self-discipline are the only way to maintain a delicate balance of interests.
Although both countries have failed to accomplish this objective in the past, they are successfully doing this today.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
After Peter the Great and Vladimir Putin, Dmitry Medvedev is off to the Netherlands
11:0518/06/2009
MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Andrei Fedyashin) – On June 19-20, President Dmitry Medvedev will pay an official visit to the Netherlands.
Our relations with a country, which we, along with Europe in general, have been erroneously and stubbornly calling Holland for a long time, have always been a bizarre mixture of love and sympathy with offense and criticism. These positive and negative feelings replace each other almost on a regular basis. The former are much more stable because they are applied to hard-working people and the culture of the country through which Peter the Great cut his “window to Europe.” The positive feelings are reciprocal – the Dutch have also always liked the Russians and all things Russian. However, in foreign policy these have been excessively rare.
The Russian president is going to the country of tulips, windmills and cheeses to discuss the new structure of European energy security (an alternative of the European Energy Charter, which we dislike) and new European architecture. In Amsterdam he is due to open a large-scale exhibition, the Hermitage at the Amstel (the main river in the Dutch capital), the title of which speaks for itself. Incidentally, the Dutch are still confident that all Russian painting, as well as the fleet, St Petersburg, cows, butter, and cheese, the national flag, flowers, vegetables, and tobacco originated in their country. This is largely true if we recall that it was the Netherlands that inspired Peter the Great for many of his undertakings after he went there in 1697.
Mr Medvedev will visit Peter’s house in Zaandam. This has been a ritual for every visit at top level. Thanks to Peter we started calling the Netherlands Holland, because he lived either in the province of North Holland, where Amsterdam is located, or South Holland where The Hague is. These are major parts of the country but its name is the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Even the Dutch language does not exist as such. The Dutch speak Netherlandish or Frisian, the name of which is derived from the province of Friesland.
It is most amazing that after Peter, Alexander II was the last Russian tsar to visit Amsterdam in 1874. For the next 130 years or so, the two countries did not exchange visits at top level. It was only in 2001 that Queen Beatrix (great granddaughter of Emperor Paul I on the maternal side) paid an official visit to Russia, and the then President Vladimir Putin reciprocated this visit by going to the Netherlands in 2005.
Amsterdam and The Hague are very convenient, and importantly, suitable places for discussing energy issues and European security. The abundance of Dutch flowers and cheese has eclipsed a simple fact that the Netherlands is fourth in the world in gas reserves, which exceed 2,500 billion cubic meters in the latest estimate. The Netherlands and Norway are the only exporters of gas to other European countries. Gas exports account for 20% of the Dutch budget, while 60% of all electricity is generated by gas.
Our cooperation in the gas industry has been long and steady. Last year, the leading Dutch concern N.V. Nederlandse Gasunie received nine percent of shares in Nord Stream AG. Last February, Mr Medvedev met the Dutch Minister of Economy Maria van der Hoeven during the opening of Russia’s first plant for the production of liquefied natural gas (LNG) in Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk. The Dutch are our partners in the Sakhalin 2 project. It transpired then that the British-Dutch Royal Dutch Shell was going to start consultations with Gazprom on building another LNG plant on Yamal.
The Dutch produce high quality gas processing equipment. They are even better at transporting and storing gas. They are the best in Europe in logistics, that is, in setting up port facilities and transport communications. It is no accident that Rotterdam is Europe’s biggest seaport. It was the world’s largest until China’s Shanghai surpassed it in 2004. Dutch expertise can substantially help Russia turn into the leading exporter of energy products to the markets of Europe and Asia. This is what Mr Medvedev spoke about in Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk. There is every reason to hope that relevant agreements will be signed on the sidelines of his visit.
The Dutch would like the Russian president to promise to cancel trade restrictions, ease monitoring procedures, particularly for agricultural produce, and do away with red tape. These measures are very important for the Netherlands, which is Russia’s second biggest trade partner after Germany, and first in the scope of direct investment. More than 800 offices of Dutch companies are registered in Russia. The Dutch are supplying us with machines, equipment and transportation vehicles (about 35% of all exports), food products, vegetables and flowers (about 33%), as well as chemicals, electronics, medical instruments, and electric hardware.
Being approximately the same size as the Moscow Region, the Netherlands is the world’s third biggest agricultural exporter after the United States and France. Incredibly, in value terms, the Dutch somehow contrive to produce three times more on a hectare than the EU on the average, and 1.5 times more than the United States. They have the world’s biggest hothouse economy, which occupies more than 10,000 hectares. They are also the world’s biggest exporters of firm cheeses (with us, these are Maasdam, Gouda, and Edam). It is from the Netherlands that Peter the Great brought the first cheese. The Dutch produce about 11 million tons of milk per year, and process 55% of it into cheese. In 2007 (the more recent data was not available), Russia received 32 million tons of milk. Any vet or livestock expert will tell you that Ostfriesian cows have started all European dairy and livestock breeding. Incidentally, we began buying Dutch cows in Peter’s time, and are still buying them. Out of exported Dutch cows, 80% land in Russia.
The Dutch are also supplying us with 80% of all flowers; however, only tulips, chrysanthemums, and small roses come from the Netherlands. All others are being re-exported, just as vegetables and fruit. The Netherlands, with its port of Rotterdam, the Rhine, channels, an intricate railroad network and its geographical location, is Europe’s main trade gates. They are handling incredible amounts of fruit and vegetables, charging eight percent for every transaction. When in 2004, the Russian consumer rights watchdog Rospotrebnadzor found a bug in imported flowers and subsequently banned imports of any plants for about half a year, the Netherlands was startled. But eventually the problem was resolved. Now the Dutch believe that such a thing will never happen again.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Andrei Fedyashin) – On June 19-20, President Dmitry Medvedev will pay an official visit to the Netherlands.
Our relations with a country, which we, along with Europe in general, have been erroneously and stubbornly calling Holland for a long time, have always been a bizarre mixture of love and sympathy with offense and criticism. These positive and negative feelings replace each other almost on a regular basis. The former are much more stable because they are applied to hard-working people and the culture of the country through which Peter the Great cut his “window to Europe.” The positive feelings are reciprocal – the Dutch have also always liked the Russians and all things Russian. However, in foreign policy these have been excessively rare.
The Russian president is going to the country of tulips, windmills and cheeses to discuss the new structure of European energy security (an alternative of the European Energy Charter, which we dislike) and new European architecture. In Amsterdam he is due to open a large-scale exhibition, the Hermitage at the Amstel (the main river in the Dutch capital), the title of which speaks for itself. Incidentally, the Dutch are still confident that all Russian painting, as well as the fleet, St Petersburg, cows, butter, and cheese, the national flag, flowers, vegetables, and tobacco originated in their country. This is largely true if we recall that it was the Netherlands that inspired Peter the Great for many of his undertakings after he went there in 1697.
Mr Medvedev will visit Peter’s house in Zaandam. This has been a ritual for every visit at top level. Thanks to Peter we started calling the Netherlands Holland, because he lived either in the province of North Holland, where Amsterdam is located, or South Holland where The Hague is. These are major parts of the country but its name is the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Even the Dutch language does not exist as such. The Dutch speak Netherlandish or Frisian, the name of which is derived from the province of Friesland.
It is most amazing that after Peter, Alexander II was the last Russian tsar to visit Amsterdam in 1874. For the next 130 years or so, the two countries did not exchange visits at top level. It was only in 2001 that Queen Beatrix (great granddaughter of Emperor Paul I on the maternal side) paid an official visit to Russia, and the then President Vladimir Putin reciprocated this visit by going to the Netherlands in 2005.
Amsterdam and The Hague are very convenient, and importantly, suitable places for discussing energy issues and European security. The abundance of Dutch flowers and cheese has eclipsed a simple fact that the Netherlands is fourth in the world in gas reserves, which exceed 2,500 billion cubic meters in the latest estimate. The Netherlands and Norway are the only exporters of gas to other European countries. Gas exports account for 20% of the Dutch budget, while 60% of all electricity is generated by gas.
Our cooperation in the gas industry has been long and steady. Last year, the leading Dutch concern N.V. Nederlandse Gasunie received nine percent of shares in Nord Stream AG. Last February, Mr Medvedev met the Dutch Minister of Economy Maria van der Hoeven during the opening of Russia’s first plant for the production of liquefied natural gas (LNG) in Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk. The Dutch are our partners in the Sakhalin 2 project. It transpired then that the British-Dutch Royal Dutch Shell was going to start consultations with Gazprom on building another LNG plant on Yamal.
The Dutch produce high quality gas processing equipment. They are even better at transporting and storing gas. They are the best in Europe in logistics, that is, in setting up port facilities and transport communications. It is no accident that Rotterdam is Europe’s biggest seaport. It was the world’s largest until China’s Shanghai surpassed it in 2004. Dutch expertise can substantially help Russia turn into the leading exporter of energy products to the markets of Europe and Asia. This is what Mr Medvedev spoke about in Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk. There is every reason to hope that relevant agreements will be signed on the sidelines of his visit.
The Dutch would like the Russian president to promise to cancel trade restrictions, ease monitoring procedures, particularly for agricultural produce, and do away with red tape. These measures are very important for the Netherlands, which is Russia’s second biggest trade partner after Germany, and first in the scope of direct investment. More than 800 offices of Dutch companies are registered in Russia. The Dutch are supplying us with machines, equipment and transportation vehicles (about 35% of all exports), food products, vegetables and flowers (about 33%), as well as chemicals, electronics, medical instruments, and electric hardware.
Being approximately the same size as the Moscow Region, the Netherlands is the world’s third biggest agricultural exporter after the United States and France. Incredibly, in value terms, the Dutch somehow contrive to produce three times more on a hectare than the EU on the average, and 1.5 times more than the United States. They have the world’s biggest hothouse economy, which occupies more than 10,000 hectares. They are also the world’s biggest exporters of firm cheeses (with us, these are Maasdam, Gouda, and Edam). It is from the Netherlands that Peter the Great brought the first cheese. The Dutch produce about 11 million tons of milk per year, and process 55% of it into cheese. In 2007 (the more recent data was not available), Russia received 32 million tons of milk. Any vet or livestock expert will tell you that Ostfriesian cows have started all European dairy and livestock breeding. Incidentally, we began buying Dutch cows in Peter’s time, and are still buying them. Out of exported Dutch cows, 80% land in Russia.
The Dutch are also supplying us with 80% of all flowers; however, only tulips, chrysanthemums, and small roses come from the Netherlands. All others are being re-exported, just as vegetables and fruit. The Netherlands, with its port of Rotterdam, the Rhine, channels, an intricate railroad network and its geographical location, is Europe’s main trade gates. They are handling incredible amounts of fruit and vegetables, charging eight percent for every transaction. When in 2004, the Russian consumer rights watchdog Rospotrebnadzor found a bug in imported flowers and subsequently banned imports of any plants for about half a year, the Netherlands was startled. But eventually the problem was resolved. Now the Dutch believe that such a thing will never happen again.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
June 19, 2009
Philipp Meyer's “American Rust”
New fiction
Apr 23rd 2009
From The Economist
Illustration by Daniel Pudles
SET in America’s crumbling industrial heartland, Philipp Meyer’s first novel, “American Rust”, is so timely that it makes painful as well as enjoyable reading. The novel is a paean to the end of empire.
Though his father Henry never told him, Isaac’s boyhood IQ was measured at 167—genius level. He is probably smarter than his older sister, who escaped her withering rural roots for Yale. Yet at 20 Isaac is still trapped in the small town of Buell, Pennsylvania, taking care of his father. Henry was disabled by an accident in one of the valley’s poorly maintained steel mills, nearly all now closed; indeed, some of the only remaining work in Buell is tearing down these redundant structures. After stealing $4,000 from his father, Isaac plans to make his own life at last in California.
On the eve of his departure, Isaac gets together with his best friend Billy Poe, a former high-school football star who has also failed to heed the edict that at 18 you should flee the rust belt altogether. Sheltering from a rainstorm in an abandoned factory, the boys encounter a trio of tramps. In a fateful confrontation, Isaac kills one of the vagrants to save his friend. Unaware that Poe will end up taking the rap for the murder, Isaac hightails it by rail. Meanwhile, Poe samples another of America’s decrepit institutions: its prison system.
Mr Meyer’s voice is assured, and the story crackles with narrative tension. He develops his characters with impressive psychological and sociological insight, observing astutely that “there was something particularly American” about “blaming yourself for bad luck—that resistance to seeing your life as affected by social forces, a tendency to attribute larger problems to individual behaviour.” Meyer himself sees these larger forces all too clearly, and it is his portrayal of America’s devastated industrial base that is likely to get this novel much attention: “You could not have a country, not this big, that didn’t make things for itself. There would be ramifications eventually.” The author delineates the inexorable welfare dependency, petty crime and drug and alcohol abuse that follow when the infrastructure of steady employment implodes. The picture is grim, but masterfully painted.
Source: http://bookchase.blogspot.com/2009/03/american-rust.html
American Rust, Philipp Meyer’s debut novel, is a hard story to forget. Beyond a doubt, it is one of the bleakest portrayals of small town America written since the Great Depression and its plot, for good reason, is a reminder of the fiction that came out of that era. Present day Buell, Pennsylvania, a steel town that is slowly rusting away because there is not even enough money left to tear down all the deserted steelworks in the area, is a throwback to 1930s America when high unemployment rates pushed so much of the country into despair.
Isaac English and his older sister, Lee, are two of the brightest students ever to come out of Buell High School. Isaac’s problem is that Lee escaped Buell for Yale, a husband, and a new life far from her depressed hometown, leaving him alone to deal with their invalid father. Isaac, though, has finally had enough and, with the $4000 he stole from their father, he plans to ride the rails to California to start his own new life.
Billy Poe, Isaac’s best friend, decides against going to California but does agree to walk with Isaac as far as where he will be able to hop his first train. A sudden thunderstorm that causes them to seek shelter inside an abandoned mill, though, will change their lives forever because of the three homeless men they meet there. That encounter ends with one of the homeless men dead from a crushed skull and Billy Poe charged with killing him. Isaac, unaware of what is happening to Billy back in Buell, continues on his hapless journey toward a new life, suffering more encounters with bullies and thieves along the way, and growing up more in a few days than he had since leaving high school.
American Rust does not require some spectacular plot to keep the reader turning pages. In fact, the all-but-accidental death of the homeless man, the focal point of the entire novel, could have easily been seen as just another case of self-defense. Rather, the real tragedy of their story is that the boys believe they will be charged with murder if tied to the incident in the old mill and that Billy, when he is arrested, refuses to defend himself for fear of implicating Isaac.
The killing and its cover-up especially have an impact on the people who care most about Billy Poe and Isaac English, and Meyer builds American Rust around alternating first-person chapters that give these voices weight equal to the words of Billy and Isaac themselves. We hear from Lee, Isaac’s guilt-ridden sister who finally realizes what her brother has been through since she abandoned him. We suffer with Grace, Billy Poe’s mother, as she grieves for him and comes to terms with the fact that, despite her willingness to do anything to save him from his fate, there is little she can do to help him. We hold our breaths as the town’s police chief, a man romantically involved with Grace, considers throwing his career away, and more, in order to save the woman he loves.
American Rust is about people and what happens to those people when the future they counted on is snatched from them. It is heavy on atmosphere and memorable characters and it is, I am certain, destined to be one of my favorites of 2009.
Apr 23rd 2009
From The Economist
Illustration by Daniel Pudles
SET in America’s crumbling industrial heartland, Philipp Meyer’s first novel, “American Rust”, is so timely that it makes painful as well as enjoyable reading. The novel is a paean to the end of empire.
Though his father Henry never told him, Isaac’s boyhood IQ was measured at 167—genius level. He is probably smarter than his older sister, who escaped her withering rural roots for Yale. Yet at 20 Isaac is still trapped in the small town of Buell, Pennsylvania, taking care of his father. Henry was disabled by an accident in one of the valley’s poorly maintained steel mills, nearly all now closed; indeed, some of the only remaining work in Buell is tearing down these redundant structures. After stealing $4,000 from his father, Isaac plans to make his own life at last in California.
On the eve of his departure, Isaac gets together with his best friend Billy Poe, a former high-school football star who has also failed to heed the edict that at 18 you should flee the rust belt altogether. Sheltering from a rainstorm in an abandoned factory, the boys encounter a trio of tramps. In a fateful confrontation, Isaac kills one of the vagrants to save his friend. Unaware that Poe will end up taking the rap for the murder, Isaac hightails it by rail. Meanwhile, Poe samples another of America’s decrepit institutions: its prison system.
Mr Meyer’s voice is assured, and the story crackles with narrative tension. He develops his characters with impressive psychological and sociological insight, observing astutely that “there was something particularly American” about “blaming yourself for bad luck—that resistance to seeing your life as affected by social forces, a tendency to attribute larger problems to individual behaviour.” Meyer himself sees these larger forces all too clearly, and it is his portrayal of America’s devastated industrial base that is likely to get this novel much attention: “You could not have a country, not this big, that didn’t make things for itself. There would be ramifications eventually.” The author delineates the inexorable welfare dependency, petty crime and drug and alcohol abuse that follow when the infrastructure of steady employment implodes. The picture is grim, but masterfully painted.
Source: http://bookchase.blogspot.com/2009/03/american-rust.html
American Rust, Philipp Meyer’s debut novel, is a hard story to forget. Beyond a doubt, it is one of the bleakest portrayals of small town America written since the Great Depression and its plot, for good reason, is a reminder of the fiction that came out of that era. Present day Buell, Pennsylvania, a steel town that is slowly rusting away because there is not even enough money left to tear down all the deserted steelworks in the area, is a throwback to 1930s America when high unemployment rates pushed so much of the country into despair.
Isaac English and his older sister, Lee, are two of the brightest students ever to come out of Buell High School. Isaac’s problem is that Lee escaped Buell for Yale, a husband, and a new life far from her depressed hometown, leaving him alone to deal with their invalid father. Isaac, though, has finally had enough and, with the $4000 he stole from their father, he plans to ride the rails to California to start his own new life.
Billy Poe, Isaac’s best friend, decides against going to California but does agree to walk with Isaac as far as where he will be able to hop his first train. A sudden thunderstorm that causes them to seek shelter inside an abandoned mill, though, will change their lives forever because of the three homeless men they meet there. That encounter ends with one of the homeless men dead from a crushed skull and Billy Poe charged with killing him. Isaac, unaware of what is happening to Billy back in Buell, continues on his hapless journey toward a new life, suffering more encounters with bullies and thieves along the way, and growing up more in a few days than he had since leaving high school.
American Rust does not require some spectacular plot to keep the reader turning pages. In fact, the all-but-accidental death of the homeless man, the focal point of the entire novel, could have easily been seen as just another case of self-defense. Rather, the real tragedy of their story is that the boys believe they will be charged with murder if tied to the incident in the old mill and that Billy, when he is arrested, refuses to defend himself for fear of implicating Isaac.
The killing and its cover-up especially have an impact on the people who care most about Billy Poe and Isaac English, and Meyer builds American Rust around alternating first-person chapters that give these voices weight equal to the words of Billy and Isaac themselves. We hear from Lee, Isaac’s guilt-ridden sister who finally realizes what her brother has been through since she abandoned him. We suffer with Grace, Billy Poe’s mother, as she grieves for him and comes to terms with the fact that, despite her willingness to do anything to save him from his fate, there is little she can do to help him. We hold our breaths as the town’s police chief, a man romantically involved with Grace, considers throwing his career away, and more, in order to save the woman he loves.
American Rust is about people and what happens to those people when the future they counted on is snatched from them. It is heavy on atmosphere and memorable characters and it is, I am certain, destined to be one of my favorites of 2009.
Why is India scared to take on Maoist rebels?
Source: Deccan Chronicle, India
June 19th, 2009
By Joginder Singh
Several states, like Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh, are facing terrible internal insurgency by Naxals and Maoists, which Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has described as the “biggest internal security challenge ever faced by our country”.
The Naxals and Maoists have gone on many killing sprees, targeting policemen, using bullets, landmines and bombs looted from the police itself in almost all the above mentioned states. In fact in the last two months, at least 112 security personnel have been killed in Naxal attacks in Chhattisgarh, Bihar, Jharkhand and Orissa.
About 162 security personnel were killed in 2009, till May 31, in attacks by Naxals. The toll in Naxal-related violence was 231 in 2008. Unfortunately, there does not appear to be a clear government strategy or policy to deal with the Naxal problem. Depending on the political exigencies, political parties sing different tunes. During elections, all parties woo everybody, including the devils, whether they be Maoists or Naxals, for the sake of votes.
In 1863, at the time of framing the present laws, nobody could foresee the grave problems posed by Naxals and Maoists in our country, or envision areas where the writ of the government would not run. The law requires that there should be independent witnesses to any Naxal or Maoist killings, even in thick forest areas and places where people are in mortal fear of losing their lives and won’t dare step outside their homes. Where then do you get intelligence or witnesses who would have the guts to come to court for years, depose and stand cross-examination? How can you gather any intelligence when even armed security personnel are killed in large numbers every week?
Our present laws are not only wholly inadequate to deal with this, but are also not enforceable. In fact, there is no law to deal with Naxals and Maoists, or the types of crimes committed by them.
There have been reports of Naxals trying to kill former chief minister of Andhra Pradesh N. Chandrababu Naidu and the present chief minister of West Bengal. A Maoist leader is reported to have said, “We wanted to give the death sentence to Buddhadeb Babu because the people of Bengal demanded he be hanged”. He was referring to a landmine blast near the chief minister’s convoy in November 2008.
The Lalgarh area in West Bengal reportedly looks like a “liberated zone” where the state government’s writ does not run. The Maoists and the tribals’ People’s Committee seem to be calling all the shots as police camps in Belatkri, Dharampur and Koima, and an outpost at Ramgarh, have been abandoned. Even a Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) contingent was forced by the tribals to return to base.
The argument that a law aimed at Naxals would not stop their activities is both outrageous and puerile. Laws exist against rapes, murders, dacoities, dowries and rash driving, but none of these crimes have stopped. So should we not have criminal laws against these crimes? Should the law ignore criminal elements who are playing hell with the country?
It would be good practice if those dealing with the drafting of laws in the law and home ministries are deputed, at least for one month, to live in Naxal and Maoist-infested areas so that they can have a clear perception of the ground situation. Naxalism and Maoism look different on paper in the safe and air-conditioned environment of New Delhi’s North and South Blocks.
Whenever there is talk of a tough law, a bogey of violation of human rights of the Maoists, Naxalites and other terrorists groups is raised. The result is that laws are not only diluted but are made outlandish. People who are out to kill innocent civilians and are ruthless cannot be controlled by sermons on human rights violations or be tackled with kid gloves.
The Central government says that fighting such elements is the responsibility of the states, but unfortunately the states have neither the money, the weaponry, a trained force, nor the wherewithal of electronic surveillance. States religiously and fanatically safeguard their turf and boundaries, whereas terrorists and insurgents groups do not respect boundaries.
A Maoist or a Naxalite is a guerrilla enemy. The Central government is setting up National Security Guards (NSG) hubs all over the country to promptly respond to terrorism, but no need for a strategy has been felt by it to fight the Maoist threat or even to train state police forces to deal with it.
Whenever there is any killing of policemen at the hands of terrorists or Maoists, not a tear is shed. The standard excuse given by the so-called intellectuals is that it was either due to the problem of unemployment, or poverty, or that it was an agrarian problem. They never call any problem by its simple, direct name. Nobody denies that there is dire poverty and unemployment in the country. But skewed movements like Naxalism and Maoism make it impossible for such problems to be solved.
Who will invest in an industry or any other enterprise, or build roads in an area where there is no safety or security. Whether we like it not, if we are to survive and thrive as a nation, we have to make war on all disruptive movements, including Naxalism, and Maoists, so that people may live in peace. The new Central government has its first-100-days plans in every area. If there is one to fight Naxals and Maoists, its impact is yet to be felt. Good intentions are not enough. They have to be translated into action on the ground. The government must act, and act quickly, before the situation goes from bad to worse and then completely out of hand. It is time to say goodbye to the policy of “willing to wound, but afraid to strike”.
* Joginder Singh is a former director of the Central Bureau of Investigation
June 19th, 2009
By Joginder Singh
Several states, like Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh, are facing terrible internal insurgency by Naxals and Maoists, which Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has described as the “biggest internal security challenge ever faced by our country”.
The Naxals and Maoists have gone on many killing sprees, targeting policemen, using bullets, landmines and bombs looted from the police itself in almost all the above mentioned states. In fact in the last two months, at least 112 security personnel have been killed in Naxal attacks in Chhattisgarh, Bihar, Jharkhand and Orissa.
About 162 security personnel were killed in 2009, till May 31, in attacks by Naxals. The toll in Naxal-related violence was 231 in 2008. Unfortunately, there does not appear to be a clear government strategy or policy to deal with the Naxal problem. Depending on the political exigencies, political parties sing different tunes. During elections, all parties woo everybody, including the devils, whether they be Maoists or Naxals, for the sake of votes.
In 1863, at the time of framing the present laws, nobody could foresee the grave problems posed by Naxals and Maoists in our country, or envision areas where the writ of the government would not run. The law requires that there should be independent witnesses to any Naxal or Maoist killings, even in thick forest areas and places where people are in mortal fear of losing their lives and won’t dare step outside their homes. Where then do you get intelligence or witnesses who would have the guts to come to court for years, depose and stand cross-examination? How can you gather any intelligence when even armed security personnel are killed in large numbers every week?
Our present laws are not only wholly inadequate to deal with this, but are also not enforceable. In fact, there is no law to deal with Naxals and Maoists, or the types of crimes committed by them.
There have been reports of Naxals trying to kill former chief minister of Andhra Pradesh N. Chandrababu Naidu and the present chief minister of West Bengal. A Maoist leader is reported to have said, “We wanted to give the death sentence to Buddhadeb Babu because the people of Bengal demanded he be hanged”. He was referring to a landmine blast near the chief minister’s convoy in November 2008.
The Lalgarh area in West Bengal reportedly looks like a “liberated zone” where the state government’s writ does not run. The Maoists and the tribals’ People’s Committee seem to be calling all the shots as police camps in Belatkri, Dharampur and Koima, and an outpost at Ramgarh, have been abandoned. Even a Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) contingent was forced by the tribals to return to base.
The argument that a law aimed at Naxals would not stop their activities is both outrageous and puerile. Laws exist against rapes, murders, dacoities, dowries and rash driving, but none of these crimes have stopped. So should we not have criminal laws against these crimes? Should the law ignore criminal elements who are playing hell with the country?
It would be good practice if those dealing with the drafting of laws in the law and home ministries are deputed, at least for one month, to live in Naxal and Maoist-infested areas so that they can have a clear perception of the ground situation. Naxalism and Maoism look different on paper in the safe and air-conditioned environment of New Delhi’s North and South Blocks.
Whenever there is talk of a tough law, a bogey of violation of human rights of the Maoists, Naxalites and other terrorists groups is raised. The result is that laws are not only diluted but are made outlandish. People who are out to kill innocent civilians and are ruthless cannot be controlled by sermons on human rights violations or be tackled with kid gloves.
The Central government says that fighting such elements is the responsibility of the states, but unfortunately the states have neither the money, the weaponry, a trained force, nor the wherewithal of electronic surveillance. States religiously and fanatically safeguard their turf and boundaries, whereas terrorists and insurgents groups do not respect boundaries.
A Maoist or a Naxalite is a guerrilla enemy. The Central government is setting up National Security Guards (NSG) hubs all over the country to promptly respond to terrorism, but no need for a strategy has been felt by it to fight the Maoist threat or even to train state police forces to deal with it.
Whenever there is any killing of policemen at the hands of terrorists or Maoists, not a tear is shed. The standard excuse given by the so-called intellectuals is that it was either due to the problem of unemployment, or poverty, or that it was an agrarian problem. They never call any problem by its simple, direct name. Nobody denies that there is dire poverty and unemployment in the country. But skewed movements like Naxalism and Maoism make it impossible for such problems to be solved.
Who will invest in an industry or any other enterprise, or build roads in an area where there is no safety or security. Whether we like it not, if we are to survive and thrive as a nation, we have to make war on all disruptive movements, including Naxalism, and Maoists, so that people may live in peace. The new Central government has its first-100-days plans in every area. If there is one to fight Naxals and Maoists, its impact is yet to be felt. Good intentions are not enough. They have to be translated into action on the ground. The government must act, and act quickly, before the situation goes from bad to worse and then completely out of hand. It is time to say goodbye to the policy of “willing to wound, but afraid to strike”.
* Joginder Singh is a former director of the Central Bureau of Investigation
BALOCHISTAN: BRP leader Murid Bugti killed along with his brother in Sikrind
http://baluchsarmachar.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/brp-leader-murid-bugti-killed-along-with-his-brother-in-sikrind/
The leader of Baloch Republican Party (BRP) Murid Bugti has been killed along with his brother in Sikrind. According to a private TV channel, miscreants cordoned off the house of BRP leader Murid Bugti located in the Sikrind area of Balochistan and killed the leader along with his brother in the attack. The spokesman of BRP Sher Muhammad Bugti has confirmed the murder of his party leader and alleges security forces and government Laskhar for his killing. In his statement he said on martyrdom of party leader party has announced three days mourning.
The leader of Baloch Republican Party (BRP) Murid Bugti has been killed along with his brother in Sikrind. According to a private TV channel, miscreants cordoned off the house of BRP leader Murid Bugti located in the Sikrind area of Balochistan and killed the leader along with his brother in the attack. The spokesman of BRP Sher Muhammad Bugti has confirmed the murder of his party leader and alleges security forces and government Laskhar for his killing. In his statement he said on martyrdom of party leader party has announced three days mourning.
INDO-PAK RELATIONS: THE ROLLER COASTER RIDE
B.RAMAN
Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh met President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan at Yekaterinburg in Russia on June 16,2009. The two were in Yekaterinburg as the heads of their respective delegations to attend the summit of the Shanghai Co-operation Organisation (SCO) of which India and Pakistan are observers and not full-fledged members. It was but natural that the two met bilaterally in the margins of the summit just as they met individually the heads of other delegations. If they had not met, there could have been a negative interpretation, which would not have been desirable.
2. The ground work for the meeting had been laid by the Foreign Offices of the two countries even before the two leaders went to Russia. India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) in particular had taken care not to give rise to undue expectations of any immediate resumption of the composite dialogue between the two countries on various bilateral issues. The dialogue has been in a state of suspension since the terrorist strike in Mumbai by the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) from November 26 to 28,2008.
3. While the terrorist strike led to a discontinuance of the composite dialogue at the instance of an angered India, it did not lead to a disruption of the diplomatic interactions between the two countries. These interactions continued, but their main focus was on India’s expectations of action by Pakistan against anti-India terrorists operating from Pakistani territory in general and against the LET and its political wing called the Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JUD) in particular.
4. The Indian expectations fell into three categories:
Firstly, mutual legal assistance in the investigation and prosecution of the Pakistan-based LET conspirators involved in the Mumbai terrorist strike.
Secondly, action against the main leaders of the JUD and the LET, whether they were directly involved in the terrorist strike or not. India was particularly keen that effective legal action should be taken against Prof.Hafeez Mohammad Sayeed, the Amir of the JUD
Thirdly, action against the anti-India terrorist infrastructure in Pakistani territory----particularly against that of the LET_-- in order to ensure that there would be no more terrorism in Indian territory emanating from Pakistan. An assurance in this regard had been given by Zardari’s predecessor Pervez Musharraf during his summit with Atal Behari Vajpayee, the then Prime Minister, at Islamabad in January 2004, but this assurance has remained unimplemented as seen in the terrorist attacks in some suburban trains of Mumbai in July,2006, and the Mumbai attack of November last.
5. Of these expectations, the only forward movement ---though halting and only partially satisfactory--- has been in respect of the mutual legal assistance. Pakistan has arrested five LET conspirators who, according to Indian investigators, were involved in planning the terrorist strike and having it carried out. They have not yet been prosecuted. While the trial in India in connection with the strike has already started, the Pakistani investigators are yet to complete their part of the investigation and start the prosecution of those under detention. They have been blaming their Indian counterparts for the delay. Only if and when the case is prosecuted and it ends in conviction can India be satisfied that there has been a genuine change for the better in Pakistan’s stand on the question of mutual legal assistance.
6. It has to be admitted that even the limited legal assistance that India had received now it had not received in respect of other past cases. In the past, Pakistan refrained from granting mutual legal assistance by questioning the credibility of the Indian evidence. It has not been able to do this now because a lot of independent evidence has come from the USA’s Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), which has been making its own investigation of the murder of some American nationals by the LET at Mumbai.
7. There was a seeming forward movement in respect of action against Prof.Sayeed. He was placed under house arrest immediately after the Mumbai attack. However, the case for his continued detention was not prepared and pursued in a vigorous manner---- as if the heart of the Pakistani investigators was not in his continued detention. The result: he has been ordered to be released by the Lahore High Court before which he had challenged the legality of his detention. No appeal has so far been filed against this order.
8. There has been no forward movement at all in respect of the third Indian expectation---namely, action against the anti-Indian terrorist infrastructure in Pakistani territory. Of all the pro-Al Qaeda jihadi terrorist organizations operating from Pakistani territory, the LET is the closest to the Pakistan Army and its Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), which look upon it as a strategic asset in their operations against India. In the past, they had always avoided taking action against the LET under some pretext or the other and there has been no change in this policy.
9. Even though the US and the European nations are increasingly concerned over the links of the LET with Al Qaeda, its capability for acts of terrorism, which is second only to that of Al Qaeda and the presence of its sleeper cells among the Pakistani-origin diaspora in many countries, they still look upon it as a looming and not an imminent threat to their nationals and interests. For them, the imminent threat is from Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Their present efforts are focused on making Pakistan act against the imminent threats while exercising only proforma pressure---- to reassure India of their solidarity--- on Pakistan to act against the LET. As a result, Pakistan’s inaction against the LET tends to be overlooked by the West so long as it is acting against the Taliban and helping the US in its actions against Al Qaeda.
10. Thus, India finds itself in an unenviable position. It is not in a position to make the US and the rest of the Western world act against Pakistan for its inaction against the LET. At the same time, it is not in a position to act by itself because it has denied to itself a deniable retaliatory capability ever since the fatal decision taken by Inder Gujral, the then Prime Minister, in 1997 to wind up any retaliatory capability as a mark of unilateral gesture to Pakistan---despite remonstrations by senior officers of our security bureaucracy that Pakistan has never been known to appreciate and reciprocate such unilateral gestures.
11. The Pakistani leaders----political or military--- know the constraints on India and are taking full advantage of them to persist with their present policy of seeming to act against the LET without actually acting against it.
12. There is a need for a comprehensive thinking on the options available to India. Any plans for the future have to provide for the following:
Effective physical security in our territory to prevent any more attacks of the Mumbai kind by the LET and its associates. Every major terrorist strike indicates a serious gap in physical security.
Effective intelligence capability to disrupt plans for a terrorist strike by identifying and neutralizing in time LET sleeper cells in our territory.
Revival of a retaliatory self-defence capability.
13. One of the major problems faced by us in dealing with the LET’s acts of terrorism in different parts of the country has been due to the failure of our political leadership and the MEA to make it clear to the world through facts and figures ---- and not through rhetoric--- that the LET’s acts have a much larger agenda and have no longer much to do with the Kashmir issue. Unfortunately, Pakistan has once again almost succeeded in making the US and the UK look at the LET activities through the Kashmir prism.
14. The Mumbai terrorist strike---the attacks on Israelis and other Jewish people, the targeted killings of nationals of countries having troops in Afghanistan, attacks on Western businessmen etc--- clearly illustrated the global agenda of the LET, but our political leadership and diplomacy failed to clearly draw attention to the much larger agenda. As a result, we are once again seeing references to the so-called linkages between the Kashmir issue and the LET’s acts of terrorism. Pakistan has profited from our inaction or inept action.
15. The meeting between Manmohan Singh and Zardari did not lead to a decision to resume the composite dialogue. It merely led to an agreement for a meeting between the Foreign Secretaries of the two countries to discuss the action taken by Pakistan after the Mumbai attack. Any decision on the resumption of the composite dialogue would depend on the outcome of this meeting.
16. Manmohan Singh is not a man of confrontation. He took the decision to freeze the composite dialogue mainly because of the fears of a likely adverse impact on the voting in the recently-held elections to the Parliament if he did not take a seemingly hard line against Pakistan. Now that the Congress (I)-led coalition has come back to power----with the Congress (I) improving its own individual position in the Lok Sabha, the lower House of the Parliament--- he is unlikely to feel the need for maintaining the present hardline position on the composite dialogue.
17. In the meanwhile, there has been a window of respite in acts of Pakistan-origin jihadi terrorism in the Indian territory. There has been no act of terrorism by the so-called Indian Mujahideen since September last. There has been no major act of terrorism by the LET in the Indian territory outside J&K since November last.
18. If this respite continues, it is quite likely that Manmohan Singh will agree to a resumption of the composite dialogue in some form or the other even if the forthcoming meeting of the two Foreign Secretaries does not give satisfaction to the Indian investigators.
19. The US is equally interested in a resumption of the dialogue even if Pakistan does not act against the anti-Indian terrorist infrastructure in its territory. At the same time, in due regard to Indian sensitivities, it will continue to exercise pressure on Pakistan to improve the quality of its mutual legal assistance to India and to ensure that the present respite continues. This is an issue, which is likely to figure prominently in the discussions of Mrs.Hilary Clinton, US Secretary of State, with the Indian leaders in New Delhi during her forthcoming visit in July.
20. There have once again been warm references to India in the pronouncements of US leaders. We noticed it for the first time in the address delivered by Robert Gates, the US Defence Secretary, at the recent meeting of Defence Ministers at Singapore organized by the International Institute of Strategic Studies of London, and in the interactions of his officials with Indian journalists who had gone to Singapore to cover the meeting. One of the officials was reported to have referred to Indo-US relations as a three-stage rocket. According to him, the first stage was fired when Bill Clinton was the President and the second stage under George Bush. He spoke tantalizingly of the coming firing of the third stage under the Obama Administration. They sought to project the Indo-US relations as enjoying broad bi-partisan support and hence unlikely to be affected by the change of incumbency in the White House. Mrs. Clinton has now given some idea of the third stage the Obama Administration has in mind in her address earlier this week to a gathering of businessmen in Washington DC.
21. The earlier coming closer together of the US and China as seen during the visit of Mrs.Clinton to Beijing in February last was partly warranted by the economic difficulties inherited by the Obama Administration from its predecessor. There are already some indications of the beginning of a possible recovery. If the recovery is maintained and strengthened, the USA’s opportunistic dependence on China for sorting out its economic ills would weaken and this could be to the benefit of India.
22. At this time, when winds of some change for the better seem to be blowing towards India from Washington DC, Manmohan Singh would find it difficult to reject suggestions from the US for a political gesture to the Government in Islamabad by way of a resumption of the composite dialogue.
23. The question is no longer whether it will be resumed, but when and how it will be projected to save the faces of both India and Pakistan. The relevant question should no longer be whether we should agree to a resumption of the composite dialogue, but how to keep up the pressure on Pakistan on the issue of anti-Indian terrorism even if the dialogue is resumed. This needs some thought by our policy-makers.
24. Indo-Pakistan relations do not have an over-all strategy. We keep zigging and zagging and riding a rollercoaster depending on the anger, pressures and compulsions of the moment. The time has come to work out a strategy, which is transparent to our people, to the people of Pakistan and to the rest of the world. (19-6-09)
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh met President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan at Yekaterinburg in Russia on June 16,2009. The two were in Yekaterinburg as the heads of their respective delegations to attend the summit of the Shanghai Co-operation Organisation (SCO) of which India and Pakistan are observers and not full-fledged members. It was but natural that the two met bilaterally in the margins of the summit just as they met individually the heads of other delegations. If they had not met, there could have been a negative interpretation, which would not have been desirable.
2. The ground work for the meeting had been laid by the Foreign Offices of the two countries even before the two leaders went to Russia. India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) in particular had taken care not to give rise to undue expectations of any immediate resumption of the composite dialogue between the two countries on various bilateral issues. The dialogue has been in a state of suspension since the terrorist strike in Mumbai by the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) from November 26 to 28,2008.
3. While the terrorist strike led to a discontinuance of the composite dialogue at the instance of an angered India, it did not lead to a disruption of the diplomatic interactions between the two countries. These interactions continued, but their main focus was on India’s expectations of action by Pakistan against anti-India terrorists operating from Pakistani territory in general and against the LET and its political wing called the Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JUD) in particular.
4. The Indian expectations fell into three categories:
Firstly, mutual legal assistance in the investigation and prosecution of the Pakistan-based LET conspirators involved in the Mumbai terrorist strike.
Secondly, action against the main leaders of the JUD and the LET, whether they were directly involved in the terrorist strike or not. India was particularly keen that effective legal action should be taken against Prof.Hafeez Mohammad Sayeed, the Amir of the JUD
Thirdly, action against the anti-India terrorist infrastructure in Pakistani territory----particularly against that of the LET_-- in order to ensure that there would be no more terrorism in Indian territory emanating from Pakistan. An assurance in this regard had been given by Zardari’s predecessor Pervez Musharraf during his summit with Atal Behari Vajpayee, the then Prime Minister, at Islamabad in January 2004, but this assurance has remained unimplemented as seen in the terrorist attacks in some suburban trains of Mumbai in July,2006, and the Mumbai attack of November last.
5. Of these expectations, the only forward movement ---though halting and only partially satisfactory--- has been in respect of the mutual legal assistance. Pakistan has arrested five LET conspirators who, according to Indian investigators, were involved in planning the terrorist strike and having it carried out. They have not yet been prosecuted. While the trial in India in connection with the strike has already started, the Pakistani investigators are yet to complete their part of the investigation and start the prosecution of those under detention. They have been blaming their Indian counterparts for the delay. Only if and when the case is prosecuted and it ends in conviction can India be satisfied that there has been a genuine change for the better in Pakistan’s stand on the question of mutual legal assistance.
6. It has to be admitted that even the limited legal assistance that India had received now it had not received in respect of other past cases. In the past, Pakistan refrained from granting mutual legal assistance by questioning the credibility of the Indian evidence. It has not been able to do this now because a lot of independent evidence has come from the USA’s Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), which has been making its own investigation of the murder of some American nationals by the LET at Mumbai.
7. There was a seeming forward movement in respect of action against Prof.Sayeed. He was placed under house arrest immediately after the Mumbai attack. However, the case for his continued detention was not prepared and pursued in a vigorous manner---- as if the heart of the Pakistani investigators was not in his continued detention. The result: he has been ordered to be released by the Lahore High Court before which he had challenged the legality of his detention. No appeal has so far been filed against this order.
8. There has been no forward movement at all in respect of the third Indian expectation---namely, action against the anti-Indian terrorist infrastructure in Pakistani territory. Of all the pro-Al Qaeda jihadi terrorist organizations operating from Pakistani territory, the LET is the closest to the Pakistan Army and its Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), which look upon it as a strategic asset in their operations against India. In the past, they had always avoided taking action against the LET under some pretext or the other and there has been no change in this policy.
9. Even though the US and the European nations are increasingly concerned over the links of the LET with Al Qaeda, its capability for acts of terrorism, which is second only to that of Al Qaeda and the presence of its sleeper cells among the Pakistani-origin diaspora in many countries, they still look upon it as a looming and not an imminent threat to their nationals and interests. For them, the imminent threat is from Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Their present efforts are focused on making Pakistan act against the imminent threats while exercising only proforma pressure---- to reassure India of their solidarity--- on Pakistan to act against the LET. As a result, Pakistan’s inaction against the LET tends to be overlooked by the West so long as it is acting against the Taliban and helping the US in its actions against Al Qaeda.
10. Thus, India finds itself in an unenviable position. It is not in a position to make the US and the rest of the Western world act against Pakistan for its inaction against the LET. At the same time, it is not in a position to act by itself because it has denied to itself a deniable retaliatory capability ever since the fatal decision taken by Inder Gujral, the then Prime Minister, in 1997 to wind up any retaliatory capability as a mark of unilateral gesture to Pakistan---despite remonstrations by senior officers of our security bureaucracy that Pakistan has never been known to appreciate and reciprocate such unilateral gestures.
11. The Pakistani leaders----political or military--- know the constraints on India and are taking full advantage of them to persist with their present policy of seeming to act against the LET without actually acting against it.
12. There is a need for a comprehensive thinking on the options available to India. Any plans for the future have to provide for the following:
Effective physical security in our territory to prevent any more attacks of the Mumbai kind by the LET and its associates. Every major terrorist strike indicates a serious gap in physical security.
Effective intelligence capability to disrupt plans for a terrorist strike by identifying and neutralizing in time LET sleeper cells in our territory.
Revival of a retaliatory self-defence capability.
13. One of the major problems faced by us in dealing with the LET’s acts of terrorism in different parts of the country has been due to the failure of our political leadership and the MEA to make it clear to the world through facts and figures ---- and not through rhetoric--- that the LET’s acts have a much larger agenda and have no longer much to do with the Kashmir issue. Unfortunately, Pakistan has once again almost succeeded in making the US and the UK look at the LET activities through the Kashmir prism.
14. The Mumbai terrorist strike---the attacks on Israelis and other Jewish people, the targeted killings of nationals of countries having troops in Afghanistan, attacks on Western businessmen etc--- clearly illustrated the global agenda of the LET, but our political leadership and diplomacy failed to clearly draw attention to the much larger agenda. As a result, we are once again seeing references to the so-called linkages between the Kashmir issue and the LET’s acts of terrorism. Pakistan has profited from our inaction or inept action.
15. The meeting between Manmohan Singh and Zardari did not lead to a decision to resume the composite dialogue. It merely led to an agreement for a meeting between the Foreign Secretaries of the two countries to discuss the action taken by Pakistan after the Mumbai attack. Any decision on the resumption of the composite dialogue would depend on the outcome of this meeting.
16. Manmohan Singh is not a man of confrontation. He took the decision to freeze the composite dialogue mainly because of the fears of a likely adverse impact on the voting in the recently-held elections to the Parliament if he did not take a seemingly hard line against Pakistan. Now that the Congress (I)-led coalition has come back to power----with the Congress (I) improving its own individual position in the Lok Sabha, the lower House of the Parliament--- he is unlikely to feel the need for maintaining the present hardline position on the composite dialogue.
17. In the meanwhile, there has been a window of respite in acts of Pakistan-origin jihadi terrorism in the Indian territory. There has been no act of terrorism by the so-called Indian Mujahideen since September last. There has been no major act of terrorism by the LET in the Indian territory outside J&K since November last.
18. If this respite continues, it is quite likely that Manmohan Singh will agree to a resumption of the composite dialogue in some form or the other even if the forthcoming meeting of the two Foreign Secretaries does not give satisfaction to the Indian investigators.
19. The US is equally interested in a resumption of the dialogue even if Pakistan does not act against the anti-Indian terrorist infrastructure in its territory. At the same time, in due regard to Indian sensitivities, it will continue to exercise pressure on Pakistan to improve the quality of its mutual legal assistance to India and to ensure that the present respite continues. This is an issue, which is likely to figure prominently in the discussions of Mrs.Hilary Clinton, US Secretary of State, with the Indian leaders in New Delhi during her forthcoming visit in July.
20. There have once again been warm references to India in the pronouncements of US leaders. We noticed it for the first time in the address delivered by Robert Gates, the US Defence Secretary, at the recent meeting of Defence Ministers at Singapore organized by the International Institute of Strategic Studies of London, and in the interactions of his officials with Indian journalists who had gone to Singapore to cover the meeting. One of the officials was reported to have referred to Indo-US relations as a three-stage rocket. According to him, the first stage was fired when Bill Clinton was the President and the second stage under George Bush. He spoke tantalizingly of the coming firing of the third stage under the Obama Administration. They sought to project the Indo-US relations as enjoying broad bi-partisan support and hence unlikely to be affected by the change of incumbency in the White House. Mrs. Clinton has now given some idea of the third stage the Obama Administration has in mind in her address earlier this week to a gathering of businessmen in Washington DC.
21. The earlier coming closer together of the US and China as seen during the visit of Mrs.Clinton to Beijing in February last was partly warranted by the economic difficulties inherited by the Obama Administration from its predecessor. There are already some indications of the beginning of a possible recovery. If the recovery is maintained and strengthened, the USA’s opportunistic dependence on China for sorting out its economic ills would weaken and this could be to the benefit of India.
22. At this time, when winds of some change for the better seem to be blowing towards India from Washington DC, Manmohan Singh would find it difficult to reject suggestions from the US for a political gesture to the Government in Islamabad by way of a resumption of the composite dialogue.
23. The question is no longer whether it will be resumed, but when and how it will be projected to save the faces of both India and Pakistan. The relevant question should no longer be whether we should agree to a resumption of the composite dialogue, but how to keep up the pressure on Pakistan on the issue of anti-Indian terrorism even if the dialogue is resumed. This needs some thought by our policy-makers.
24. Indo-Pakistan relations do not have an over-all strategy. We keep zigging and zagging and riding a rollercoaster depending on the anger, pressures and compulsions of the moment. The time has come to work out a strategy, which is transparent to our people, to the people of Pakistan and to the rest of the world. (19-6-09)
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
June 18, 2009
CHINA: Media Anger on Arunachal Pradesh Continues Unabated
By D. S. Rajan
1. The Chinese President Hu Jintao and the Indian Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh have met in Yekaterinburg (Russia) on 15 June 2009. The former referred to his country’s policy of promoting relationship with India from a ‘strategic and long term perspective’ and hoped for a solution to the border dispute with India at ‘an early date’ through negotiations in the spirit of ‘equal consultations, mutual respect and mutual accommodation’. Dr Manmohan Singh, on his part, stated that India would give ‘top priority’ to its relations with China and that India is seeking a ‘fair and reasonable’ solution to the boundary problem ‘acceptable to both sides’. The two leaders at the same time called for maintaining ‘peace and tranquility along the border’, till a solution to the boundary issue could be found. (Xinhua, 16 June 2009).
2. The meeting in Russia has taken place in the background of Chinese media concerns over two important developments -India’s dispatch of additional troops to and deployment of SU-30 fighter aircraft in the border as well as the Indian Prime Minister’s statement (9 June 2009) ruling out any compromise on the border issue. It is not known whether such concerns figured in the meeting, but what is important is that both sides have agreed on the occasion to maintain ‘peace and tranquility’ in the border pending a final solution.
3. Beijing’s practice to articulate on its strategic concerns through its media is well known. It is therefore not surprising that the Chinese state-controlled strategic and military journals are coming out with more and more hard-hitting articles, castigating India on the border issue. The following are some samples.
4. Global Times (Chinese, 16 June 2009), an affiliate of the party central organ, the People’s Daily, has accused certain Indian bodies and officials like the Indian Air Force Chief of raising the bogey of Chinese military threat and in this connection, noted a statement of the Indian Defence Minister advising the military leaders not to make open statements on issues relating to India including on China’s military strength.
5. A comment reflecting a military viewpoint (www.mil.people.com.cn, Chinese, 17 June 2009) has alleged that the dispatch of additional Indian troops soon after the conclusion of the Indian general election would mean, “the new government of Dr.Manmohan Singh will adopt a hard and uncompromising stand on important questions relating to national security and interests”.
6. A report in the ‘International Herald Leader’, a journal associated with Xinhua, quoted (16 June 2009) one Kuo Shaowen, now with the Chinese Foreign Ministry and earlier worked in the Chinese Embassy in New Delhi as saying that the geographical terrain in the Sino-Indian border is difficult, denying taking of positions there by large scale armies. “ If the Indian military is not planning to attack China, then the deployment of its additional troops in the border may not have great military significance. Perhaps, India wants to exploit the factor of additional troops as a ‘political card’ in the border talks”. Pointing out that India’s 33rd Corps, 15th Corps and the 3rd Mountain Infantry Division, along with the special force comprising Tibetans, are meant to deal with China, it has stated that the “strengthening of its war preparedness in the border by India, contradicts with its policy of having friendly relations between the Chinese and Indian armies. Perhaps, India feels the necessity for both”.
7. An article in the same journal (17 June 2009), has tried to address the question whether the Indian Prime Minister’s ‘hawkish’ remarks on 9 June 2009 had anything to do with India’s ground level actions like dispatch of additional troops to and deployment of SU-30 fighter aircraft in the border. Taking note of the remarks made by Dr Srikanth of the Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, during an interview with the paper’s correspondent that it is natural for a head of the government like Dr Manmohan Singh to dwell on an issue of territorial integrity, the paper has opined that what Dr.Manmohan Singh has said may perhaps have had no links with actions like dispatch of troops. It has also admitted that ‘fierce’ language was used in the Chinese media’s comments on the Indian prime minister. An effort to project the Indian Prime Minister in a positive light is thus being seen, in contrast to the general media trend so far in China to criticize him.
8. The article, while covering the ‘quick’ reactions of the Indian scholars and media to the Chinese press criticisms of India on the border issue, has highlighted two examples – the article in the Times of India and another in the Chennai Centre for China Studies website, both of 12 June 2009. On the latter, it has said, “ Mr Rajan, of the Chennai Centre for China Studies, who can read and understand Chinese, has especially mentioned about the satirical tone in the language used by the Chinese media to criticise India and commented on a Chinese website article captioned ‘India is a paper tiger and its use of force against China will be trounced’”. In conclusion, it has said, “no matter whether it is ‘Tiger’ China or ‘Elephant’ India, the border and national security issues will always remain sensitive to them. As such, the officials, military circles and public opinion in both the countries should earnestly search for “a neighbourly path” and any move or action causing provocation intentionally or unintentionally, will not be beneficial for the coexistence of the two nations”.
9. According to a high-level Chinese military strategist, writing under the pseudonym “China Strategy”, (China Centre for International and Strategic Studies, Chinese, 17 June 2009), India has started thinking in recent years that its power has already exceeded that of China. New Delhi also perceives that the international situation has become extremely beneficial to it; in particular, it feels that India is getting the support of the US and Europe in pressurising Pakistan and in turn in “restricting China’s military”. The writer has alleged that accordingly, India is trying to change the Sino-Indian border status quo, while accusing the Chinese troops of carrying out incursions into the borders. Noting in this connection India’s dispatch to ‘Arunachal Pradesh’ (i.e China’s Southern Tibet) of additional two divisions with a total of 50000-60000 troops and induction of two squadrons of SU-30 MK1 fighter aircraft, each consisting of 18 aircraft, the write-up has assessed that the key question before China and India now relates to the border and that the ‘China factor’ now occupies a greater place in India’s strategy. Observing that under this strategy, India has even reached the Western Pacific through its Look East policy, strengthened military relations with China’s surrounding nations, allied with the US and Japan to conduct strategic containment of China and taken steps to control the strategic location of Malacca straits, it viewed India’s dispatch of additional troops to the border as an attempt to achieve ‘absolute military superiority’ and a ‘strategic balance’ vis-à-vis China.
10. Arguing that the Chinese troops in the border are well experienced in operating from the high altitude Tibetan plateau, an advantage the Indian soldiers may not enjoy, the ‘Chinese strategist’ has pointed to the completion of Qinghai-Tibet railway with capacity to transport 63,000 tonnes of material to Tibet in a week, in support of the Chinese troops in Tibet belonging to 5 mountain brigades. ‘The railway would mean that India no longer enjoys power to threaten the Chinese army from the rear or to check the speed of the latter in marching up to the borders’.
11. The Chinese specialist has also disclosed, rather unusual in China, the military ORBAT in the Sino-Indian border, in an effort to prove that the Indian military may not be a match to China’s troop strength. ‘India will not be in a position to conduct any border clash or any small or middle-scale war in the border’. According to the given ORBAT, the Chinese People’s Liberation army (PLA) has deployed a total of 13 Border Defence Regiments in Eastern and Western sectors of Sino-Indian border, the 52 Mountain Infantry Brigade to protect Southern Qinghai- Tibet region, the 53 Mountain Infantry Brigade to protect the high plateau in the Western sector, the 149th Division of the 13th Group Army in the Eastern Sector and the 61st Division of the 21st Group Army in the Western Sector.
12. In sum, the write-up has analysed that with China completing its basic infrastructure building in Tibet to connect the latter with the inland, particularly through the construction of the Qinghai-Tibet railway and A LI airport, the border military conditions in Eastern and Western Sectors have improved and as against this, if India, by dispatching additional troops, wants to gain ‘military balance’, the same will be ‘impractical’. It has finally warned the “Indian top brains” behind such dispatch that they “ will feel dizzy in acting rashly against China; India’s loss will outweigh its gains”.
13. There is no need to emphasise the importance for India of what the Chinese media have said on the border issue; this is particularly so for India’s foreign policy planners. An examination of the articles appearing since the appearance of reports on India’s dispatching additional troops to the border, are notable for the following points:
The Chinese military viewpoint foreseeing adoption of a hard and an uncompromising border position by the new government of Dr.Manmohan Singh
China’s unrelenting stand that Arunachal Pradesh, called by it as Southern Tibet, belongs to the PRC
Beijing’s perception of India’s dispatch of additional troops to the border. The Chinese appear to see a new element in the border issue.
The Chinese opinion that India’s dispatch of additional troops to the border will affect Sino-Indian border talks (Prof.Sun Shihai, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, www.people.com.cn, 12 June 2009
Some Chinese opinions on India making its dispatch of additional troops as a bargaining chip during border talks.
The role of the newly formed Department of Boundary and Ocean Affairs under China’s foreign ministry, in Sino-Indian border talks. The main agenda of this department is to develop policies concerning land and maritime boundaries including handling of external boundary matters (Foreign Ministry Spokesperson, 5 May 2009).
The Chinese suggestion at academic levels that the India-China border dispute can be solved taking the Sino-Russian border agreement as a model. (Refer SAAG article entitled “Solving the Sino-Indian Boundary Problem: China-Russia Border Agreement Could be a Model, feel Chinese scholars”, SAAG Paper No.3247dated 11 June 2009)
The Chinese position that its military deployment across Indian border is strong and India, in spite of the additional troops, will not be a match to China.
Beijing’s linkage of India’s additional troops in the border with the alleged Indian foreign policy of joining with the US and Japan to contain China.
(The writer, Mr.D.S.Rajan, is the Director of the Chennai Centre for China Studies, Chennai, India. Necessary translation done by him. Email: dsrajan@gmail.com)
1. The Chinese President Hu Jintao and the Indian Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh have met in Yekaterinburg (Russia) on 15 June 2009. The former referred to his country’s policy of promoting relationship with India from a ‘strategic and long term perspective’ and hoped for a solution to the border dispute with India at ‘an early date’ through negotiations in the spirit of ‘equal consultations, mutual respect and mutual accommodation’. Dr Manmohan Singh, on his part, stated that India would give ‘top priority’ to its relations with China and that India is seeking a ‘fair and reasonable’ solution to the boundary problem ‘acceptable to both sides’. The two leaders at the same time called for maintaining ‘peace and tranquility along the border’, till a solution to the boundary issue could be found. (Xinhua, 16 June 2009).
2. The meeting in Russia has taken place in the background of Chinese media concerns over two important developments -India’s dispatch of additional troops to and deployment of SU-30 fighter aircraft in the border as well as the Indian Prime Minister’s statement (9 June 2009) ruling out any compromise on the border issue. It is not known whether such concerns figured in the meeting, but what is important is that both sides have agreed on the occasion to maintain ‘peace and tranquility’ in the border pending a final solution.
3. Beijing’s practice to articulate on its strategic concerns through its media is well known. It is therefore not surprising that the Chinese state-controlled strategic and military journals are coming out with more and more hard-hitting articles, castigating India on the border issue. The following are some samples.
4. Global Times (Chinese, 16 June 2009), an affiliate of the party central organ, the People’s Daily, has accused certain Indian bodies and officials like the Indian Air Force Chief of raising the bogey of Chinese military threat and in this connection, noted a statement of the Indian Defence Minister advising the military leaders not to make open statements on issues relating to India including on China’s military strength.
5. A comment reflecting a military viewpoint (www.mil.people.com.cn, Chinese, 17 June 2009) has alleged that the dispatch of additional Indian troops soon after the conclusion of the Indian general election would mean, “the new government of Dr.Manmohan Singh will adopt a hard and uncompromising stand on important questions relating to national security and interests”.
6. A report in the ‘International Herald Leader’, a journal associated with Xinhua, quoted (16 June 2009) one Kuo Shaowen, now with the Chinese Foreign Ministry and earlier worked in the Chinese Embassy in New Delhi as saying that the geographical terrain in the Sino-Indian border is difficult, denying taking of positions there by large scale armies. “ If the Indian military is not planning to attack China, then the deployment of its additional troops in the border may not have great military significance. Perhaps, India wants to exploit the factor of additional troops as a ‘political card’ in the border talks”. Pointing out that India’s 33rd Corps, 15th Corps and the 3rd Mountain Infantry Division, along with the special force comprising Tibetans, are meant to deal with China, it has stated that the “strengthening of its war preparedness in the border by India, contradicts with its policy of having friendly relations between the Chinese and Indian armies. Perhaps, India feels the necessity for both”.
7. An article in the same journal (17 June 2009), has tried to address the question whether the Indian Prime Minister’s ‘hawkish’ remarks on 9 June 2009 had anything to do with India’s ground level actions like dispatch of additional troops to and deployment of SU-30 fighter aircraft in the border. Taking note of the remarks made by Dr Srikanth of the Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, during an interview with the paper’s correspondent that it is natural for a head of the government like Dr Manmohan Singh to dwell on an issue of territorial integrity, the paper has opined that what Dr.Manmohan Singh has said may perhaps have had no links with actions like dispatch of troops. It has also admitted that ‘fierce’ language was used in the Chinese media’s comments on the Indian prime minister. An effort to project the Indian Prime Minister in a positive light is thus being seen, in contrast to the general media trend so far in China to criticize him.
8. The article, while covering the ‘quick’ reactions of the Indian scholars and media to the Chinese press criticisms of India on the border issue, has highlighted two examples – the article in the Times of India and another in the Chennai Centre for China Studies website, both of 12 June 2009. On the latter, it has said, “ Mr Rajan, of the Chennai Centre for China Studies, who can read and understand Chinese, has especially mentioned about the satirical tone in the language used by the Chinese media to criticise India and commented on a Chinese website article captioned ‘India is a paper tiger and its use of force against China will be trounced’”. In conclusion, it has said, “no matter whether it is ‘Tiger’ China or ‘Elephant’ India, the border and national security issues will always remain sensitive to them. As such, the officials, military circles and public opinion in both the countries should earnestly search for “a neighbourly path” and any move or action causing provocation intentionally or unintentionally, will not be beneficial for the coexistence of the two nations”.
9. According to a high-level Chinese military strategist, writing under the pseudonym “China Strategy”, (China Centre for International and Strategic Studies, Chinese, 17 June 2009), India has started thinking in recent years that its power has already exceeded that of China. New Delhi also perceives that the international situation has become extremely beneficial to it; in particular, it feels that India is getting the support of the US and Europe in pressurising Pakistan and in turn in “restricting China’s military”. The writer has alleged that accordingly, India is trying to change the Sino-Indian border status quo, while accusing the Chinese troops of carrying out incursions into the borders. Noting in this connection India’s dispatch to ‘Arunachal Pradesh’ (i.e China’s Southern Tibet) of additional two divisions with a total of 50000-60000 troops and induction of two squadrons of SU-30 MK1 fighter aircraft, each consisting of 18 aircraft, the write-up has assessed that the key question before China and India now relates to the border and that the ‘China factor’ now occupies a greater place in India’s strategy. Observing that under this strategy, India has even reached the Western Pacific through its Look East policy, strengthened military relations with China’s surrounding nations, allied with the US and Japan to conduct strategic containment of China and taken steps to control the strategic location of Malacca straits, it viewed India’s dispatch of additional troops to the border as an attempt to achieve ‘absolute military superiority’ and a ‘strategic balance’ vis-à-vis China.
10. Arguing that the Chinese troops in the border are well experienced in operating from the high altitude Tibetan plateau, an advantage the Indian soldiers may not enjoy, the ‘Chinese strategist’ has pointed to the completion of Qinghai-Tibet railway with capacity to transport 63,000 tonnes of material to Tibet in a week, in support of the Chinese troops in Tibet belonging to 5 mountain brigades. ‘The railway would mean that India no longer enjoys power to threaten the Chinese army from the rear or to check the speed of the latter in marching up to the borders’.
11. The Chinese specialist has also disclosed, rather unusual in China, the military ORBAT in the Sino-Indian border, in an effort to prove that the Indian military may not be a match to China’s troop strength. ‘India will not be in a position to conduct any border clash or any small or middle-scale war in the border’. According to the given ORBAT, the Chinese People’s Liberation army (PLA) has deployed a total of 13 Border Defence Regiments in Eastern and Western sectors of Sino-Indian border, the 52 Mountain Infantry Brigade to protect Southern Qinghai- Tibet region, the 53 Mountain Infantry Brigade to protect the high plateau in the Western sector, the 149th Division of the 13th Group Army in the Eastern Sector and the 61st Division of the 21st Group Army in the Western Sector.
12. In sum, the write-up has analysed that with China completing its basic infrastructure building in Tibet to connect the latter with the inland, particularly through the construction of the Qinghai-Tibet railway and A LI airport, the border military conditions in Eastern and Western Sectors have improved and as against this, if India, by dispatching additional troops, wants to gain ‘military balance’, the same will be ‘impractical’. It has finally warned the “Indian top brains” behind such dispatch that they “ will feel dizzy in acting rashly against China; India’s loss will outweigh its gains”.
13. There is no need to emphasise the importance for India of what the Chinese media have said on the border issue; this is particularly so for India’s foreign policy planners. An examination of the articles appearing since the appearance of reports on India’s dispatching additional troops to the border, are notable for the following points:
The Chinese military viewpoint foreseeing adoption of a hard and an uncompromising border position by the new government of Dr.Manmohan Singh
China’s unrelenting stand that Arunachal Pradesh, called by it as Southern Tibet, belongs to the PRC
Beijing’s perception of India’s dispatch of additional troops to the border. The Chinese appear to see a new element in the border issue.
The Chinese opinion that India’s dispatch of additional troops to the border will affect Sino-Indian border talks (Prof.Sun Shihai, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, www.people.com.cn, 12 June 2009
Some Chinese opinions on India making its dispatch of additional troops as a bargaining chip during border talks.
The role of the newly formed Department of Boundary and Ocean Affairs under China’s foreign ministry, in Sino-Indian border talks. The main agenda of this department is to develop policies concerning land and maritime boundaries including handling of external boundary matters (Foreign Ministry Spokesperson, 5 May 2009).
The Chinese suggestion at academic levels that the India-China border dispute can be solved taking the Sino-Russian border agreement as a model. (Refer SAAG article entitled “Solving the Sino-Indian Boundary Problem: China-Russia Border Agreement Could be a Model, feel Chinese scholars”, SAAG Paper No.3247dated 11 June 2009)
The Chinese position that its military deployment across Indian border is strong and India, in spite of the additional troops, will not be a match to China.
Beijing’s linkage of India’s additional troops in the border with the alleged Indian foreign policy of joining with the US and Japan to contain China.
(The writer, Mr.D.S.Rajan, is the Director of the Chennai Centre for China Studies, Chennai, India. Necessary translation done by him. Email: dsrajan@gmail.com)
Venezuela Orders End to Coca-Cola Zero Production
June 12th 2009, by Tamara Pearson – Venezuelanalysis.com
Mérida, June 12th 2009 (Venezuelanalysis.com) - On Wednesday the Venezuelan Ministry for Health ordered the Coca-Cola Company to remove its product Coca-Cola Zero from sale for containing a cancerous ingredient, sodium cyclamate, an ingredient not included in the US version of the drink.
Jesus Mantilla, the health minister, said, "The product should stop circulating in order to protect the health of Venezuelans." He said the product contains sodium cyclamate, which in large amounts can be harmful, and then announced that the product should be recalled, destroyed, and not produced anymore.
Divis Antunez, director of sanitary control for the Health Ministry, said the ingredient wasn't in the company's application that it made in 2007 and that was approved by the Ministry. Later, in a random test conducted by the National Institute for Hygiene Rafael Rangel, sodium cyclamate was found and the Health Ministry started a legal process for non-compliance with the Health Registry.
Antunez said that the recommended amount of sodium cyclamate for human consumption is 11 mg per kilo, whereas the new Coca-Cola Zero has 18-22mg per 10 mils, exceeding the amount approved by the Venezuelan Commission of Industrial Norms (COVENIN).
Yesterday Coca-Cola said in a press release, "The Coca-Cola Company and its bottler Coca-Cola Femsa Venezuela responsibly declare that Coca-Cola Zero doesn't contain any ingredient that could be harmful to the health." However, Coca-Cola said that until the government concludes its administrative proceedings it will suspend production in Venezuela and recall the drink.
Coca-Cola Zero is a drink without any calories (or an amount small enough to be rounded down to zero) and is marketed to young males who are self conscious of their weight but see Diet Coke as being for women. The diet and zero versions in the US, England, and Canada both contain non-calorie sweeteners aspartame (E951) and acesulfame K (E950), but in slightly different proportions and they therefore have slightly different tastes.
However the versions produced in Venezuela (as well as in Chile and some other Central American countries) have sodium cyclamate (E952) in larger proportions than aspartame. Whilst aspartame is cleared by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), sodium cyclamate has been prohibited since 1969 when it was proved to cause cancerous tumours and congenital malformations.
Sodium cyclamate, when combined with other chemicals, has the capacity to sweeten up to 600 times more than sugar. According to Aporrea.org, it is also much cheaper than aspartame at $10/kilo compared to $152/kilo for aspartame.
In Mexico in August 2007, El Universal-Mexico reported that Coca-Cola was also putting sodium cyclamate in the coca-cola zero drink there. The article said that the drink contained 25mg of the ingredient for every 100g in a can of 355ml. Pro-U.S president Vicente Fox authorized the ingredient for the government's list of permitted food additives in July 2006.
In February 2008 Mexican feminist news Cimanoticias reported that consumers had "triumphed" and that the ingredient had been removed from the drink.
Mérida, June 12th 2009 (Venezuelanalysis.com) - On Wednesday the Venezuelan Ministry for Health ordered the Coca-Cola Company to remove its product Coca-Cola Zero from sale for containing a cancerous ingredient, sodium cyclamate, an ingredient not included in the US version of the drink.
Jesus Mantilla, the health minister, said, "The product should stop circulating in order to protect the health of Venezuelans." He said the product contains sodium cyclamate, which in large amounts can be harmful, and then announced that the product should be recalled, destroyed, and not produced anymore.
Divis Antunez, director of sanitary control for the Health Ministry, said the ingredient wasn't in the company's application that it made in 2007 and that was approved by the Ministry. Later, in a random test conducted by the National Institute for Hygiene Rafael Rangel, sodium cyclamate was found and the Health Ministry started a legal process for non-compliance with the Health Registry.
Antunez said that the recommended amount of sodium cyclamate for human consumption is 11 mg per kilo, whereas the new Coca-Cola Zero has 18-22mg per 10 mils, exceeding the amount approved by the Venezuelan Commission of Industrial Norms (COVENIN).
Yesterday Coca-Cola said in a press release, "The Coca-Cola Company and its bottler Coca-Cola Femsa Venezuela responsibly declare that Coca-Cola Zero doesn't contain any ingredient that could be harmful to the health." However, Coca-Cola said that until the government concludes its administrative proceedings it will suspend production in Venezuela and recall the drink.
Coca-Cola Zero is a drink without any calories (or an amount small enough to be rounded down to zero) and is marketed to young males who are self conscious of their weight but see Diet Coke as being for women. The diet and zero versions in the US, England, and Canada both contain non-calorie sweeteners aspartame (E951) and acesulfame K (E950), but in slightly different proportions and they therefore have slightly different tastes.
However the versions produced in Venezuela (as well as in Chile and some other Central American countries) have sodium cyclamate (E952) in larger proportions than aspartame. Whilst aspartame is cleared by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), sodium cyclamate has been prohibited since 1969 when it was proved to cause cancerous tumours and congenital malformations.
Sodium cyclamate, when combined with other chemicals, has the capacity to sweeten up to 600 times more than sugar. According to Aporrea.org, it is also much cheaper than aspartame at $10/kilo compared to $152/kilo for aspartame.
In Mexico in August 2007, El Universal-Mexico reported that Coca-Cola was also putting sodium cyclamate in the coca-cola zero drink there. The article said that the drink contained 25mg of the ingredient for every 100g in a can of 355ml. Pro-U.S president Vicente Fox authorized the ingredient for the government's list of permitted food additives in July 2006.
In February 2008 Mexican feminist news Cimanoticias reported that consumers had "triumphed" and that the ingredient had been removed from the drink.
Globalization and the `Auto' Bailout
This article appears in the June 12, 2009 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
by John Hoefle
[PDF version of this article]
June 5—The bankruptcy of General Motors, once one of the world's industrial giants, is the result of a policy shift which began the day President Franklin Roosevelt died. Though it officially filed for bankruptcy on June 1, 2009, GM has been bankrupt for years, hemorrhaging money at an accelerating rate. At the time of its bankruptcy filing, the company had a net worth of negative $90 billion.
The U.S. government has now pumped over $70 billion into GM and Chrysler, their suppliers, and GMAC, the former finance arm of GM—which is now a bank holding company. Our government could have bought the lot of them outright far cheaper: GM had a market capitalization of less than $1 billion when it failed, and, at about $1 a share, was still overpriced.
Chrysler is being taken over by Italian automaker Fiat, and the "new" GM has said it will reduce its dependence upon its domestic manufacturing capability by importing cars it makes overseas. GM will shed several of its brands, reduce its workforce by some 21,000 union workers (from about 125,000 U.S. employees prior to the bankruptcy), and close 14 plants and three parts-distribution centers. By 2012, it expects to have just 33 plants in the United States, down from 47 just last year. In the early 1980s, it had 150 U.S. assembly plants and employed some 349,000 workers.
It would appear that we taxpayers got very little for our $70 billion, and that is true—but this so-called "bailout" of the auto sector never has been about saving auto production and auto jobs. What it is, is part of the bailout of the financial sector.
Industrial Takedown
Coming out of World War II, the United States was the most powerful industrial power the world had ever seen, and under President Roosevelt, was committed to leading the world forward into new prosperity. One element of that prosperity was the elimination of the colonialism of the Anglo-Dutch Liberal system. Naturally, the oligarchs did not like that. And as soon as FDR died, on April 12, 1945, they set about dismantling the U.S. from within.
This was the origin of the policy of post-industrialism, which was based upon the phony theory that services, information, and finance were the natural successors to industry. Under the sway of this false ideology, we began to shift our attention from the development of our physical economy, towards pushing papers and manipulating money. It took a while to overcome America's can-do disposition, but we eventually turned our back on nuclear power, thus cutting off the leap into a new era of scientific and technological progress. As we lost contact with our heritage, we began to turn "green," adopting an anti-science outlook and viewing the world in terms of money and profit. It is that shift which has destroyed our productive base, and allowed the financial parasites to take over.
Under the control of the financier class and its expanding system of corporate cartels, we began to move our production of goods overseas, to places where labor was cheaper. We were told this would make us more competitive—and more profitable—but it was a lie. What happened is that we systematically dismantled our manufacturing base, eliminating skilled and decent-paying jobs by the millions, until our former industrial heartland became a disaster area. The parasites of Wall Street and the City of London did indeed get richer, some of them obscenely rich, but the American people, the working people who are the foundation of our nation, did not. Instead, they found themselves with ever declining standards of living, working in lower-paying jobs, with growing debts, and despair.
Today, we see the last vestiges of our former industrial might withering on the vine. What remains of our productive base largely revolves around that which President Dwight Eisenhower warned us about, the military-industrial complex. We still produce weaponry and war materiel, ever-intrusive police-state products, and related items, though even there, we buy much from overseas.
Auto-Destruct
What we are witnessing in the auto sector is not a "rescue," but continued destruction, another looting operation by the global financier parasites. The so-called auto bailout is nothing but an attempt to control the damage to the financial sector caused by the collapse of the auto companies. What is being protected is not production, but the valuations of the debt and other financial obligations of the auto sector, and the derivatives bets piled atop those obligations. That is why the government bailed out GMAC, why it poured $5 billion into Chrysler and $50 billion into GM. It was yet another backdoor bailout of banks like JP Morgan Chase and Citigroup, of the hedge and private equity funds, and others. Auto production was not saved—it will continue to decline and be globalized.
The unions are not being saved, far from it. Chrysler's union retiree health fund will own 55% of the post-bankruptcy, Fiat-run Chrysler, but in return gave up claims to much of the $10 billion Chrysler owed it. The union members may have believed it was the best deal they could get, but they are being taken for a ride. The Chrysler dealers are also getting the shaft. After helping the company by loading up on inventory, many of them were cut loose, given a month to liquidate their stocks of cars and trucks. Money talks, everyone else walks.
The GM case is not much different. In its bankruptcy filing, it listed $173 billion in debts, against assets of $82 billion. Under its bankruptcy plan, the U.S. government would own 60% of the "new" GM, while the governments of Canada and Ontario would own a combined 12%. The union health trust would own 17.5%, and the company's pre-bankruptcy bondholders would own 10%. In return for its 60% share of a company with a net worth of minus $90 billion, the U.S. government will pay $30 billion. The United Autoworkers' retiree health fund will exchange the $20 billion it is owed by GM for that 17.5% stake, plus $9 billion in notes and preferred stock. That may seem reasonable, until you consider what such a stake in a dying company is really worth.
Death of a Nation
To understand what is happening here, and to effectively fight it, one must step back and view the matter in a larger perspective. The issue is not GM or Chrysler, or even auto production, but the collapse of the U.S. economy, and its looting by the global financial oligarchy. The auto sector is not in trouble because its executives made poor decisions—though they did. The auto sector is in trouble because a decision was made by the financiers to collapse the core of the U.S. machine-tool capability, which is crucial for new leaps of productivity in the United States and the world. It is the nation which is dying, and taking the auto sector with it.
Rather than deal with that crucial problem, the Obama Administration, like the Bush Administration before it, has decided to save the fictitious paper values of Wall Street, the trillions of dollars of unpayable debts and quadrillions of dollars of derivatives bets. To do so, it must mercilessly impose austerity upon the American people, raising taxes, cutting services, dismantling the social safety net at a time when our citizens need it more than ever.
The purpose of all of this is not really to save the financial system, which is already dead. The purpose is to complete the destruction of the United States, as a necessity for destroying the nation-state system as a rival to imperial rule. The United States, which was committed under FDR to ending the colonial system, is instead being reabsorbed into the Anglo-Dutch Liberal empire, under the guise of "saving our economy."
We are killing ourselves, destroying our economy and our people, and for what? The perpetuation of some medieval system which should have died last century, and would have, had FDR lived, and we not been so damned stupid.
johnhoefle@larouchepub.com
by John Hoefle
[PDF version of this article]
June 5—The bankruptcy of General Motors, once one of the world's industrial giants, is the result of a policy shift which began the day President Franklin Roosevelt died. Though it officially filed for bankruptcy on June 1, 2009, GM has been bankrupt for years, hemorrhaging money at an accelerating rate. At the time of its bankruptcy filing, the company had a net worth of negative $90 billion.
The U.S. government has now pumped over $70 billion into GM and Chrysler, their suppliers, and GMAC, the former finance arm of GM—which is now a bank holding company. Our government could have bought the lot of them outright far cheaper: GM had a market capitalization of less than $1 billion when it failed, and, at about $1 a share, was still overpriced.
Chrysler is being taken over by Italian automaker Fiat, and the "new" GM has said it will reduce its dependence upon its domestic manufacturing capability by importing cars it makes overseas. GM will shed several of its brands, reduce its workforce by some 21,000 union workers (from about 125,000 U.S. employees prior to the bankruptcy), and close 14 plants and three parts-distribution centers. By 2012, it expects to have just 33 plants in the United States, down from 47 just last year. In the early 1980s, it had 150 U.S. assembly plants and employed some 349,000 workers.
It would appear that we taxpayers got very little for our $70 billion, and that is true—but this so-called "bailout" of the auto sector never has been about saving auto production and auto jobs. What it is, is part of the bailout of the financial sector.
Industrial Takedown
Coming out of World War II, the United States was the most powerful industrial power the world had ever seen, and under President Roosevelt, was committed to leading the world forward into new prosperity. One element of that prosperity was the elimination of the colonialism of the Anglo-Dutch Liberal system. Naturally, the oligarchs did not like that. And as soon as FDR died, on April 12, 1945, they set about dismantling the U.S. from within.
This was the origin of the policy of post-industrialism, which was based upon the phony theory that services, information, and finance were the natural successors to industry. Under the sway of this false ideology, we began to shift our attention from the development of our physical economy, towards pushing papers and manipulating money. It took a while to overcome America's can-do disposition, but we eventually turned our back on nuclear power, thus cutting off the leap into a new era of scientific and technological progress. As we lost contact with our heritage, we began to turn "green," adopting an anti-science outlook and viewing the world in terms of money and profit. It is that shift which has destroyed our productive base, and allowed the financial parasites to take over.
Under the control of the financier class and its expanding system of corporate cartels, we began to move our production of goods overseas, to places where labor was cheaper. We were told this would make us more competitive—and more profitable—but it was a lie. What happened is that we systematically dismantled our manufacturing base, eliminating skilled and decent-paying jobs by the millions, until our former industrial heartland became a disaster area. The parasites of Wall Street and the City of London did indeed get richer, some of them obscenely rich, but the American people, the working people who are the foundation of our nation, did not. Instead, they found themselves with ever declining standards of living, working in lower-paying jobs, with growing debts, and despair.
Today, we see the last vestiges of our former industrial might withering on the vine. What remains of our productive base largely revolves around that which President Dwight Eisenhower warned us about, the military-industrial complex. We still produce weaponry and war materiel, ever-intrusive police-state products, and related items, though even there, we buy much from overseas.
Auto-Destruct
What we are witnessing in the auto sector is not a "rescue," but continued destruction, another looting operation by the global financier parasites. The so-called auto bailout is nothing but an attempt to control the damage to the financial sector caused by the collapse of the auto companies. What is being protected is not production, but the valuations of the debt and other financial obligations of the auto sector, and the derivatives bets piled atop those obligations. That is why the government bailed out GMAC, why it poured $5 billion into Chrysler and $50 billion into GM. It was yet another backdoor bailout of banks like JP Morgan Chase and Citigroup, of the hedge and private equity funds, and others. Auto production was not saved—it will continue to decline and be globalized.
The unions are not being saved, far from it. Chrysler's union retiree health fund will own 55% of the post-bankruptcy, Fiat-run Chrysler, but in return gave up claims to much of the $10 billion Chrysler owed it. The union members may have believed it was the best deal they could get, but they are being taken for a ride. The Chrysler dealers are also getting the shaft. After helping the company by loading up on inventory, many of them were cut loose, given a month to liquidate their stocks of cars and trucks. Money talks, everyone else walks.
The GM case is not much different. In its bankruptcy filing, it listed $173 billion in debts, against assets of $82 billion. Under its bankruptcy plan, the U.S. government would own 60% of the "new" GM, while the governments of Canada and Ontario would own a combined 12%. The union health trust would own 17.5%, and the company's pre-bankruptcy bondholders would own 10%. In return for its 60% share of a company with a net worth of minus $90 billion, the U.S. government will pay $30 billion. The United Autoworkers' retiree health fund will exchange the $20 billion it is owed by GM for that 17.5% stake, plus $9 billion in notes and preferred stock. That may seem reasonable, until you consider what such a stake in a dying company is really worth.
Death of a Nation
To understand what is happening here, and to effectively fight it, one must step back and view the matter in a larger perspective. The issue is not GM or Chrysler, or even auto production, but the collapse of the U.S. economy, and its looting by the global financial oligarchy. The auto sector is not in trouble because its executives made poor decisions—though they did. The auto sector is in trouble because a decision was made by the financiers to collapse the core of the U.S. machine-tool capability, which is crucial for new leaps of productivity in the United States and the world. It is the nation which is dying, and taking the auto sector with it.
Rather than deal with that crucial problem, the Obama Administration, like the Bush Administration before it, has decided to save the fictitious paper values of Wall Street, the trillions of dollars of unpayable debts and quadrillions of dollars of derivatives bets. To do so, it must mercilessly impose austerity upon the American people, raising taxes, cutting services, dismantling the social safety net at a time when our citizens need it more than ever.
The purpose of all of this is not really to save the financial system, which is already dead. The purpose is to complete the destruction of the United States, as a necessity for destroying the nation-state system as a rival to imperial rule. The United States, which was committed under FDR to ending the colonial system, is instead being reabsorbed into the Anglo-Dutch Liberal empire, under the guise of "saving our economy."
We are killing ourselves, destroying our economy and our people, and for what? The perpetuation of some medieval system which should have died last century, and would have, had FDR lived, and we not been so damned stupid.
johnhoefle@larouchepub.com
Open Creativity (Game Education Summit )
http://www.gameeducationsummit.com/index.php
Source: Sources and Methods ( http://SourcesandMethods.Blogspot.com )
Lance Weiler and Vicki Callahan talked about their concept of open creativity. Open creativity, as I understood it, was the explicit integration of the audience, players, viewers, students, whatever into the creative process in a transmedia environment. Transmedia, in turn, is the term these guys used to describe what I think Flint Dille is also getting at in The Blur.
The essential element of both open creativity and The Blur seems to me to be that content providers (including teachers) can no longer expect to engage their audience, players, students, etc. through only one media. You can't just make a film, for example and be done with it. You need to have a book and a documentary and a game, etc.
In addition, you cannot expect the audience, players, students, etc to remain passive in the process. They are going to want to participate in (or, at least, have a window into) your process. Weiler probably put it best when he called open creativity an evolution in storytelling involving both amateurs and professionals.
I see something analogous to this in the modern classroom all the time. It revolves around the concept of peer learning. It is one of the most powerful and under-utilized tools in modern education. You almost never see a lesson plan that explicitly takes into account or incorporates peer learning yet almost every teacher depends upon it.
Peer learning has, in fact, been brought up several times in this conference. Not in those terms exactly but it often permeates the presentations. Don Marinelli, yesterday's keynote speaker flat came out and said the the reason behind his program's success was that they let the students be the teachers.
Now, that is all well and good but there has been little talk about what that means or how to implement that in the classroom. This is ultimately why I found the open creativity presentation so interesting. Here is the logic: If the game design analogue of peer learning is open creativity, then what lessons from open creativity can I bring back to the concept of peer learning?
- Think of learning as a social experience. I am not suggesting that individual reflection is not an essential part of learning but, currently, there seems to be a unwarranted bias towards modes of learning that emphasize individual activities over group activities. Part of this is due to philosophy and part is due to problems of classroom management but the lesson being implicitly taught here is that games may well be a way to overcome this.
- See the students as collaborators. This not only plays into their preferences it also helps them begin to model their behavior along professional lines. Modeling behavior is a powerful learning tool. Students, for example, who see themselves as scientists rather than as students, do much better in science classes.
- Plan for multiple levels of interactivity and "unlock" new content as the students achieve. "Unlocking content" is a very game-ish term; e.g. kill the big monster and get a new sword or open up a new story line. I am not sure how this translates into the classroom but I am interested in exploring how the idea of "unlocking content" might change how I teach my courses.
- Franchise your content. Even Weiler and Callahan weren't sure what this means but they seemed to be pushing towards a time where amateurs who had contributed adequate time and effort into a creative project might derive benefits more tangible than a t-shirt or free tickets. Education already does this to an extent. Peer tutors are often paid and one could see the granting of a degree (particularly a masters or doctorate) to be a license to teach the same material to others. Again, the interesting possibilities emerge from thinking about this activity explicitly as a franchise instead of more traditional ways.
"The Ayatollah Begs to Differ"
Summary
Perhaps more than any other country, Iran holds the world in suspense. The country's conflicting messages in recent months have run the gamut: Iran has both rebuffed and warmed to President Obama's overtures, conceded the release of journalist Roxana Saberi, and brazenly test-fired a missile with potential nuclear capacities.
Hooman Majd, author of "The Ayatollah Begs to Differ," talks with Nisid Hajari, Foreign Editor of Newsweek, about Iran and the role of its people in influencing its politics.
SSI conference voices warning over new security threats
Kelly Schloesser, Army War College Public Affairs
KINGSTON, Ontario – Transnational crime, drug trafficking, homeland security, natural disasters, and health pandemics were all voiced as major concerns facing the Western Hemisphere in the next decade during a recent conference co-sponsored by the Army War College Strategic Studies Institute.
More than 100 military officers, government officials, academics, and policy makers representing the United States, Canada, and Mexico gathered for the conference in Kingston, Ontario June 10-12 to discuss regional security threats.
"North Americans face a complex and changing security environment. Where enemies of the past were relatively predictable, today we face a range of threats extending across multiple domains," said Lt. Gen. Thomas R. Turner, commander of U.S. Army North.
Turner participated in a panel discussion on North American security perspectives and described the developing threats and mutual security concerns.
"Many of today's threats, including terrorist use of WMD, illicit drug trafficking, threat of pandemic influenza and other natural and manmade disasters, attacks on information and space systems, are unpredictable, diverse, decentralized, and yet increasingly networked," said Turner.
Dr. Max Manwaring discusses new security threats in the Western Hemisphere and the need for a mulitlateral approach to resolve them at the Kingston Conference on International Security June 10-12. Over 100 military officers, government officials, academics, and policy makers representing the United States, Canada, and Mexico, gathered in Kingston, Ontario to discuss regional security threats. Photo by Kelly Schloesser.
SSI share studies with international partners
In co-sponsoring the event, SSI contributed research and analytical expertise to the dialogue: Col. Douglas Lovelace, director of the Strategic Studies Institute, and research professors Dr. Max Manwaring and Col. Alex Crowther.
Army War College faculty member, Dr. Paul Kan, participated as a panel chairperson as well.
Both Manwaring and Crowther presented studies that outlined new security threats for the region.
"War has changed from the unilateral dimension to the multilateral dimension of the social, political, and economic paradigm," said Manwaring.
"Most of the threats we, the United States, and much of the rest of the world face today are transnational in nature and require transnational solutions," he said.
Manwaring encouraged the three countries to work together consistently and face the new threats as a united front.
"All of the elements of power must be applied to solve these challenges. And we need not just a whole-of-government approach but a multilateral, hemispheric approach," said Manwaring.
During a panel on building security in the Americas, Crowther discussed difficulties that must be overcome in order to curb drug trafficking from Latin America through Mexico and into the United States and Canada.
"In many of the Latin American countries the policing levels are very low, allowing for ships, aircrafts, trucks, and people to transport drugs," he said.
Crowther addressed the policing efforts and underlined the need for improved coordination from the U.S. and Mexico.
"With the support of several organizations, once the drugs reach Mexico they have a very well developed system. It's very hard to control," said Crowther. "With mass corruption and threats, it's very difficult to encourage local police to challenge the trafficking."
Crowther advocated supporting a police exchange program, where the units are assigned to another location in Mexico, far from their home. This would provide more protection for forces and their families, he said.
Col. Alex Crowther, SSI research professor, presented research on drug-trafficking originating in Latin America, to Mexico, and then to the United States and Canada. Photo by Kelly Schloesser.
Working as partners, sharing information
In facing these threats, several panelists highlighted the need for continued open-discussions and information sharing.
"This conference brought together key partners to interact in thought-provoking discussions on enhancing security in the Americas," said Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard, deputy commander of North American Aerospace Defense Command.
"We need to continue to strengthen our relationships and learn from each other," said Bouchard.
Several of the panelists noted that Canada's re-engagement in the region over the last few years has greatly increased the amount of information shared. The relationship between the two countries was said to be very effective by speakers.
Turner also focused on the growing ties between the United States and Mexico, where growing security concerns have led to increased U.S. engagement.
"It's incredibly important to build our relationship, for us to work military to military and build our confidence to fight these threats," said Turner.
Representing the Mexican Navy, Admiral Jorge Pastor Gómez, further described the Mexican Armed Forces role as being supportive to both federal and state authorities on issues such as organized crime, drug, weapons, or human trafficking, terrorism, natural disasters and pandemics. Gomez also noted the need for strengthening relations with regional partners and collaborating on security concerns.
SSI participates in several academic conferences throughout the year.
"SSI's Academic Engagement Program creates and sustains partnerships with the global strategic community. We co-sponsor academic conferences to examine issues of importance to the Army, collaborating with some of the most prestigious universities in the country," said Dr. Dallas Owens, chairman of SSI's Strategic Research and Analysis Department.
KINGSTON, Ontario – Transnational crime, drug trafficking, homeland security, natural disasters, and health pandemics were all voiced as major concerns facing the Western Hemisphere in the next decade during a recent conference co-sponsored by the Army War College Strategic Studies Institute.
More than 100 military officers, government officials, academics, and policy makers representing the United States, Canada, and Mexico gathered for the conference in Kingston, Ontario June 10-12 to discuss regional security threats.
"North Americans face a complex and changing security environment. Where enemies of the past were relatively predictable, today we face a range of threats extending across multiple domains," said Lt. Gen. Thomas R. Turner, commander of U.S. Army North.
Turner participated in a panel discussion on North American security perspectives and described the developing threats and mutual security concerns.
"Many of today's threats, including terrorist use of WMD, illicit drug trafficking, threat of pandemic influenza and other natural and manmade disasters, attacks on information and space systems, are unpredictable, diverse, decentralized, and yet increasingly networked," said Turner.
Dr. Max Manwaring discusses new security threats in the Western Hemisphere and the need for a mulitlateral approach to resolve them at the Kingston Conference on International Security June 10-12. Over 100 military officers, government officials, academics, and policy makers representing the United States, Canada, and Mexico, gathered in Kingston, Ontario to discuss regional security threats. Photo by Kelly Schloesser.
SSI share studies with international partners
In co-sponsoring the event, SSI contributed research and analytical expertise to the dialogue: Col. Douglas Lovelace, director of the Strategic Studies Institute, and research professors Dr. Max Manwaring and Col. Alex Crowther.
Army War College faculty member, Dr. Paul Kan, participated as a panel chairperson as well.
Both Manwaring and Crowther presented studies that outlined new security threats for the region.
"War has changed from the unilateral dimension to the multilateral dimension of the social, political, and economic paradigm," said Manwaring.
"Most of the threats we, the United States, and much of the rest of the world face today are transnational in nature and require transnational solutions," he said.
Manwaring encouraged the three countries to work together consistently and face the new threats as a united front.
"All of the elements of power must be applied to solve these challenges. And we need not just a whole-of-government approach but a multilateral, hemispheric approach," said Manwaring.
During a panel on building security in the Americas, Crowther discussed difficulties that must be overcome in order to curb drug trafficking from Latin America through Mexico and into the United States and Canada.
"In many of the Latin American countries the policing levels are very low, allowing for ships, aircrafts, trucks, and people to transport drugs," he said.
Crowther addressed the policing efforts and underlined the need for improved coordination from the U.S. and Mexico.
"With the support of several organizations, once the drugs reach Mexico they have a very well developed system. It's very hard to control," said Crowther. "With mass corruption and threats, it's very difficult to encourage local police to challenge the trafficking."
Crowther advocated supporting a police exchange program, where the units are assigned to another location in Mexico, far from their home. This would provide more protection for forces and their families, he said.
Col. Alex Crowther, SSI research professor, presented research on drug-trafficking originating in Latin America, to Mexico, and then to the United States and Canada. Photo by Kelly Schloesser.
Working as partners, sharing information
In facing these threats, several panelists highlighted the need for continued open-discussions and information sharing.
"This conference brought together key partners to interact in thought-provoking discussions on enhancing security in the Americas," said Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard, deputy commander of North American Aerospace Defense Command.
"We need to continue to strengthen our relationships and learn from each other," said Bouchard.
Several of the panelists noted that Canada's re-engagement in the region over the last few years has greatly increased the amount of information shared. The relationship between the two countries was said to be very effective by speakers.
Turner also focused on the growing ties between the United States and Mexico, where growing security concerns have led to increased U.S. engagement.
"It's incredibly important to build our relationship, for us to work military to military and build our confidence to fight these threats," said Turner.
Representing the Mexican Navy, Admiral Jorge Pastor Gómez, further described the Mexican Armed Forces role as being supportive to both federal and state authorities on issues such as organized crime, drug, weapons, or human trafficking, terrorism, natural disasters and pandemics. Gomez also noted the need for strengthening relations with regional partners and collaborating on security concerns.
SSI participates in several academic conferences throughout the year.
"SSI's Academic Engagement Program creates and sustains partnerships with the global strategic community. We co-sponsor academic conferences to examine issues of importance to the Army, collaborating with some of the most prestigious universities in the country," said Dr. Dallas Owens, chairman of SSI's Strategic Research and Analysis Department.
BALOCHISTAN: Speech by son of a Baloch Martyr
The Great Shaheed e Balochistan Lala Munir Baloch's Son Making a Historical Speech in Panjgoor on the Occasion of Martyerdom of his Father.
Groupings Seek World Order Shift
Russia's recent hosting of a summit of groupings, seen as potential counterbalances to the West, reflects Moscow advocacy for their greater global clout, comments Sergei Blagov for ISN Security Watch.
By Sergei Blagov in Moscow for ISN Security Watch
By simultaneously hosting summit meetings of the BRIC nations (Brazil, Russia, India and China) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), Russia aimed to find more common ground between the world's emerging four-nation powerhouse and the Eurasian grouping.
The first formal BRIC summit adopted a joint statement on 16 June, calling for a fairer and more democratic world order and multilateral cooperation. The BRIC nations, representing some 40 percent of the world population and more than a quarter of the globe's territory, also advocated a rule of international law.
Simultaneously, BRIC officials argued their cooperation should not be directed against other states and it should have no confrontational overtones. Nonetheless, pledges of more democratic world order and multilateralism cooperation still sounded as implicit criticism of a perceived western dominance, seen as unilateral and hence illegitimate.
In the past decade, Moscow has been pursuing an informal grouping of Russia, China and India, in an apparent bid to challenge the West. With the latest addition of Brazil, BRIC nations apparently sought a greater voice in global affairs.
The summit of the SCO, which includes Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, also focused on security issues, terrorism and Afghanistan. The SCO prioritized regional security and stability by adopting the SCO anti-terrorism convention. The Yekaterinburg declaration of the SCO once again advocated the "multipolar" world order and a principle of equal security for all nations.
BRIC and the SCO apparently shared rhetoric of a democratic world order and multilateralism, indicating that both groupings would now move to forge closer ties. Meanwhile, in the past decade Russia's repeated pronouncements of the "multipolar" world have done little to prevent excesses of the perceived US unilateralism.
The SCO has long been seen as aiming to uniting Central Eurasia's nations in their opposition to the US presence in the region. In August 2007, SCO leaders adopted a joint statement, pledging to prevent instability in the region.
However, the SCO member states have been careful to avoid any clear manifestations of an anti-West stance. But the SCO still has the potential of taking on an even more anti-western overtone as Iran has repeatedly requested full SCO membership to replace its current observer status.
Not surprisingly, despite growing domestic turmoil Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad opted to travel to Russia to attend the SCO summit. The Iranian president lashed out at the unipolar world order and told the SCO summit that the "age of empires has ended."
Ahmadinejad's remarks seemed to be well received, and Russia described the disputed re-election of the president as an "internal affair," thus implicitly warning the West against interference in Iranian struggles.
Simultaneously, the SCO summit provided a convenient venue for security interaction between observer nations. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari and his Afghan counterpart Hamid Karzai, who met at the sidelines of the SCO summit, pledged to unite in the battle against terrorism.
The SCO member states have prioritized security issues, they repeatedly pledged not to form a military bloc. However, the group's major military drill in Russia's Urals in August 2007 and plans for similar war-games in Kazakhstan later this year arguably indicated an apparent drift towards military and security agenda. The SCO repeated war games, carried out mainly by Russia and China, appeared designed to send message to the West not to interfere in Central Eurasia.
By flexing their diplomatic muscles, BRIC nations were understood to be aiming to demonstrate that the world order was undergoing significant changes. However, it remains to be seen whether mere pronouncements of multilateralism and democratic world order, shared by BRIC and the SCO, could entail any practical results and help sustaining global security.
Sergei Blagov is a Moscow-based correspondent for ISN Security Watch.
By Sergei Blagov in Moscow for ISN Security Watch
By simultaneously hosting summit meetings of the BRIC nations (Brazil, Russia, India and China) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), Russia aimed to find more common ground between the world's emerging four-nation powerhouse and the Eurasian grouping.
The first formal BRIC summit adopted a joint statement on 16 June, calling for a fairer and more democratic world order and multilateral cooperation. The BRIC nations, representing some 40 percent of the world population and more than a quarter of the globe's territory, also advocated a rule of international law.
Simultaneously, BRIC officials argued their cooperation should not be directed against other states and it should have no confrontational overtones. Nonetheless, pledges of more democratic world order and multilateralism cooperation still sounded as implicit criticism of a perceived western dominance, seen as unilateral and hence illegitimate.
In the past decade, Moscow has been pursuing an informal grouping of Russia, China and India, in an apparent bid to challenge the West. With the latest addition of Brazil, BRIC nations apparently sought a greater voice in global affairs.
The summit of the SCO, which includes Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, also focused on security issues, terrorism and Afghanistan. The SCO prioritized regional security and stability by adopting the SCO anti-terrorism convention. The Yekaterinburg declaration of the SCO once again advocated the "multipolar" world order and a principle of equal security for all nations.
BRIC and the SCO apparently shared rhetoric of a democratic world order and multilateralism, indicating that both groupings would now move to forge closer ties. Meanwhile, in the past decade Russia's repeated pronouncements of the "multipolar" world have done little to prevent excesses of the perceived US unilateralism.
The SCO has long been seen as aiming to uniting Central Eurasia's nations in their opposition to the US presence in the region. In August 2007, SCO leaders adopted a joint statement, pledging to prevent instability in the region.
However, the SCO member states have been careful to avoid any clear manifestations of an anti-West stance. But the SCO still has the potential of taking on an even more anti-western overtone as Iran has repeatedly requested full SCO membership to replace its current observer status.
Not surprisingly, despite growing domestic turmoil Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad opted to travel to Russia to attend the SCO summit. The Iranian president lashed out at the unipolar world order and told the SCO summit that the "age of empires has ended."
Ahmadinejad's remarks seemed to be well received, and Russia described the disputed re-election of the president as an "internal affair," thus implicitly warning the West against interference in Iranian struggles.
Simultaneously, the SCO summit provided a convenient venue for security interaction between observer nations. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari and his Afghan counterpart Hamid Karzai, who met at the sidelines of the SCO summit, pledged to unite in the battle against terrorism.
The SCO member states have prioritized security issues, they repeatedly pledged not to form a military bloc. However, the group's major military drill in Russia's Urals in August 2007 and plans for similar war-games in Kazakhstan later this year arguably indicated an apparent drift towards military and security agenda. The SCO repeated war games, carried out mainly by Russia and China, appeared designed to send message to the West not to interfere in Central Eurasia.
By flexing their diplomatic muscles, BRIC nations were understood to be aiming to demonstrate that the world order was undergoing significant changes. However, it remains to be seen whether mere pronouncements of multilateralism and democratic world order, shared by BRIC and the SCO, could entail any practical results and help sustaining global security.
Sergei Blagov is a Moscow-based correspondent for ISN Security Watch.
India gears up to counter potential China threat
by Jyoti Malhotra
Wed Jun 17, 2009 5:52 pm (PDT)
India gears up to counter potential China threat
http://news.rediff.com/report/2009/jun/17/india-gears-up-to-keep-china-at-bay.htm
Exactly a year after the Indian Air Force landed an An-32 transport plane at Daulat Begh Oldhi, a mere 8 km from the Sino-Indian border in Ladakh, the IAF on Monday operationalised four nuclear-capable Sukhoi-30 MKI fighter jets at a newly refurbished airbase, some 3,000 km away in Tezpur, Assam.
Two weeks earlier, J J Singh, former army chief and now Arunachal Pradesh governor, had announced that the Centre would soon add two divisions (about 50,000 troops) to the 10 mountain divisions that already exist for defence against China. The heightened deployment, said Singh, was intended to meet "future security challenges" posed by China.
The two additional army divisions, along with artillery, medical, signals and engineering support, will be placed along the disputed Line of Actual Control between India and China, he said.
Soon after, a defence ministry team from Delhi [ Images ] was in the state capital of Itanagar to sign an agreement with the state government for the transfer of eight airfields in Arunachal to the IAF.
The IAF's sweep, from Ladakh in the northwest to Arunachal Pradesh in the northeast, combined with the additional mountain divisions, form the core of New Delhi's response to the realisation that defence preparedness against China has to be upgraded.
Last November, the IAF landed aircraft in Chushul and Fukche, two airfields in Ladakh just off the Aksai Chin, which last saw action during the 1962 border war with China. Defence sources also say the first of three AWACS (airborne warning and control systems) planes will also soon be in the region, to act as a "potent force-multiplier" that will monitor the movement of Chinese aircraft and troops across the LAC.
Meanwhile, there is increased activity on the border. India's heightened patrolling has detected 270 "intrusions" by the Chinese over the past year, compared to 60 the year before.
So, even as Delhi and Beijing [ Images ] prepare to celebrate 60 years of the establishment of diplomatic relations in 2010 -- with a visit by President Pratibha Patil [ Images ] to China and a return visit by Xi Jinping, China's vice-president and the man expected to succeed President Hu Jintao -- Manmohan Singh's [ Images ] government intends to complete the upgrade of the defence and civilian infrastructure that it embarked upon in 2005 along what had been a neglected border.
In April 2008, defence minister A K Antony travelled to the north-east, noted with surprise the superior infrastructure on the Chinese side of the LAC, and promised troops would be armed with the latest equipment "so that our armed forces can be among the best in the world."
While the decision to build a motorable road to Daulat Begh Oldhi was taken during the Vajpayee government's tenure, in 2001, it was UPA-I which decided to build a network of roads in Arunachal Pradesh, to accompany the upgrade of the military infrastructure.
Shyam Saran, foreign secretary at the time, proposed that the Centre change the colonial manner in which it treated border areas, with its 'buffer zones and Inner Lines', and better integrate them with the rest of the country.
Saran told Business Standard this week the need existed to 'multiply opportunities across the border as well'. So Nathu La in Sikkim was opened to border trade in 2006, while permits to visit border areas in Ladakh (eg Chushul) were relaxed. It was also decided to add 1,000 km of roads in Arunachal, including 13 strategic roads that connected the entire trans-Himalayan region, with feeder roads right up to the LAC.
China has been even busier than India, upgrading its own infrastructure by building 22,000 km of roads in the Tibet [ Images ] region (including more than 6,000 km of roads in Nagari prefecture that adjoins Ladakh), as many as 15 airfields in Tibet, Yunan and Sichuan provinces, and a network of roads and railway lines connecting Lhasa, including a highway from Kunming (in Yunan province adjoining Arunachal), its feeder roads almost touching the LAC or the British-era McMahon Line.
Meanwhile, unlike the defence brass (like the just-retired IAF chief Fali Major), who have spoken of the Chinese threat, Indian diplomats decline to talk on the subject. In fact, the defence brass has been reprimanded by Antony for speaking out of turn.
'India has to speak softly, but remain focused on its priorities,' a diplomat said, pointing out that despite 12 rounds of talks between Indian and Chinese representatives, the resolution of the border dispute is very much a 'long haul' issue.
Referring to the June 11 editorial in China's People's Daily ('India can't actually compete with China in a number of areas, like international influence, overall national power and economic scale…India has not realised this…'), the diplomat pointed out that Beijing was signalling its intent to keep the border issue alive.
Jyoti Malhotra in New Delhi
Wed Jun 17, 2009 5:52 pm (PDT)
India gears up to counter potential China threat
http://news.rediff.com/report/2009/jun/17/india-gears-up-to-keep-china-at-bay.htm
Exactly a year after the Indian Air Force landed an An-32 transport plane at Daulat Begh Oldhi, a mere 8 km from the Sino-Indian border in Ladakh, the IAF on Monday operationalised four nuclear-capable Sukhoi-30 MKI fighter jets at a newly refurbished airbase, some 3,000 km away in Tezpur, Assam.
Two weeks earlier, J J Singh, former army chief and now Arunachal Pradesh governor, had announced that the Centre would soon add two divisions (about 50,000 troops) to the 10 mountain divisions that already exist for defence against China. The heightened deployment, said Singh, was intended to meet "future security challenges" posed by China.
The two additional army divisions, along with artillery, medical, signals and engineering support, will be placed along the disputed Line of Actual Control between India and China, he said.
Soon after, a defence ministry team from Delhi [ Images ] was in the state capital of Itanagar to sign an agreement with the state government for the transfer of eight airfields in Arunachal to the IAF.
The IAF's sweep, from Ladakh in the northwest to Arunachal Pradesh in the northeast, combined with the additional mountain divisions, form the core of New Delhi's response to the realisation that defence preparedness against China has to be upgraded.
Last November, the IAF landed aircraft in Chushul and Fukche, two airfields in Ladakh just off the Aksai Chin, which last saw action during the 1962 border war with China. Defence sources also say the first of three AWACS (airborne warning and control systems) planes will also soon be in the region, to act as a "potent force-multiplier" that will monitor the movement of Chinese aircraft and troops across the LAC.
Meanwhile, there is increased activity on the border. India's heightened patrolling has detected 270 "intrusions" by the Chinese over the past year, compared to 60 the year before.
So, even as Delhi and Beijing [ Images ] prepare to celebrate 60 years of the establishment of diplomatic relations in 2010 -- with a visit by President Pratibha Patil [ Images ] to China and a return visit by Xi Jinping, China's vice-president and the man expected to succeed President Hu Jintao -- Manmohan Singh's [ Images ] government intends to complete the upgrade of the defence and civilian infrastructure that it embarked upon in 2005 along what had been a neglected border.
In April 2008, defence minister A K Antony travelled to the north-east, noted with surprise the superior infrastructure on the Chinese side of the LAC, and promised troops would be armed with the latest equipment "so that our armed forces can be among the best in the world."
While the decision to build a motorable road to Daulat Begh Oldhi was taken during the Vajpayee government's tenure, in 2001, it was UPA-I which decided to build a network of roads in Arunachal Pradesh, to accompany the upgrade of the military infrastructure.
Shyam Saran, foreign secretary at the time, proposed that the Centre change the colonial manner in which it treated border areas, with its 'buffer zones and Inner Lines', and better integrate them with the rest of the country.
Saran told Business Standard this week the need existed to 'multiply opportunities across the border as well'. So Nathu La in Sikkim was opened to border trade in 2006, while permits to visit border areas in Ladakh (eg Chushul) were relaxed. It was also decided to add 1,000 km of roads in Arunachal, including 13 strategic roads that connected the entire trans-Himalayan region, with feeder roads right up to the LAC.
China has been even busier than India, upgrading its own infrastructure by building 22,000 km of roads in the Tibet [ Images ] region (including more than 6,000 km of roads in Nagari prefecture that adjoins Ladakh), as many as 15 airfields in Tibet, Yunan and Sichuan provinces, and a network of roads and railway lines connecting Lhasa, including a highway from Kunming (in Yunan province adjoining Arunachal), its feeder roads almost touching the LAC or the British-era McMahon Line.
Meanwhile, unlike the defence brass (like the just-retired IAF chief Fali Major), who have spoken of the Chinese threat, Indian diplomats decline to talk on the subject. In fact, the defence brass has been reprimanded by Antony for speaking out of turn.
'India has to speak softly, but remain focused on its priorities,' a diplomat said, pointing out that despite 12 rounds of talks between Indian and Chinese representatives, the resolution of the border dispute is very much a 'long haul' issue.
Referring to the June 11 editorial in China's People's Daily ('India can't actually compete with China in a number of areas, like international influence, overall national power and economic scale…India has not realised this…'), the diplomat pointed out that Beijing was signalling its intent to keep the border issue alive.
Jyoti Malhotra in New Delhi
BRICs and G-2
Indian Express,
http://www.indianexpress.com/story-print/477573/
C. Raja Mohan Posted online: Wednesday, Jun 17, 2009 at 0140 hrs
All the soaring rhetoric from Yekaterinburg on the solidarity of the second tier powers against Anglo-Saxon hegemony can’t hide one simple reality — that China is a cut above the rest of the BRICs.Unpack the impressive combined statistics of the BRICs and you will find an unmistakable hierarchy. Russia is a declining power and is on the way down. India and Brazil are on the way up, but have a long way to go. Among the BRICs, China is the number one.
When you are on top of a heap, you get a better perspective than when you are at its bottom. That is what probably separates China and India at this week’s talk-fest in Yekaterinburg. India has gone to Yekaterinburg because of its abiding sense of obligation to Russia. The Chinese, in contrast, are in the Urals to enjoy a free political ride. China has two reasons to encourage Russia’s anti-Western bravado. If someone has to bash the Americans, why not get the Russians to do it? The harder the Russians go at America, Beijing knows, the greater its own leverage with Washington.
This, indeed, is an old story. Russia’s confrontation with the West helped China get better terms from the British imperialists in the nineteenth century and the hegemonic Americans in the twentieth. The twenty-first century, however, is different with China ranked higher than Russia. The Obama administration has confirmed the new global pecking order when it declared that managing its bilateral relationship with China is the most important foreign policy priority. The idea of ‘Group of Two’ — America and China — jointly managing the world has steadily gained ground since Barack Obama took charge of Washington.
Russia might have thousands of nuclear weapons and could yet blow up and the world in an instant. But it is not Russia’s rusty nuke arsenal that keeps Americans awake at night. It is China’s ability to threaten mutually assured financial destruction that makes the Anglo-Saxons nervous. It is no secret that only the Chinese have the clout to negotiate with the Americans on global financial system. Why should any one expect Beijing to dilute its own power by sharing it with the rest of the BRICs?
The Han and the Slavs
If BRICs is Russia’s baby, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation is the only international forum that has been founded by China. Beijing’s objective was simple — to stabilise its distant western frontiers by engaging the Central Asian neighbours.
For China, Russia was a useful partner in Eurasia. Neither of them wants an expansion of US influence in inner Asia. Nor do Beijing and Moscow take kindly to Washington’s half-baked efforts at promoting democratic revolutions on their borders. Like all else in world politics, the recent convergence of the Han and Slav interests in Eurasia is not permanent.
As China becomes stronger than Russia, Moscow will necessarily have to rethink its ties to Beijing and Washington.As it serenades the disparate bunch from SCO and BRICs in Yekaterinburg this week, Russia is gearing up to receive President Obama in Moscow next month. Obama’s promise to ‘reset’ relations with Russia has boosted Moscow’s hopes for a renewed partnership with Washington. It is not for nothing that Russia’s national symbol is an eagle with two heads — one looking east and the other looking west.
Tragedy or farce?
If the BRICs and SCO are Russian and Chinese bargaining chips with America, what is India doing at Yekaterinburg? India has traveled down this road before when it deluded itself about Asian unity in the early years after independence and ignored the gathering crisis with China.
Within a decade Delhi was locked in a debilitating conflict with Beijing. Delhi faces similar challenges with Beijing today. These include the stalled boundary talks, deepening distrust on Tibet, and the gathering sense of mutual geopolitical encirclement.
If India sweeps these difficult bilateral issues under the carpet and indulges in soaring multilateral rhetoric with China, Beijing will administer a painful reality check sooner than later.Those in the South Block who remember the tragic results from the delusions of Asian unity in the 1950s, one hopes, do recognise that the chatter in Yekaterinburg on Eurasian solidarity is little more than that.
The writer is a professor at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
http://www.indianexpress.com/story-print/477573/
C. Raja Mohan Posted online: Wednesday, Jun 17, 2009 at 0140 hrs
All the soaring rhetoric from Yekaterinburg on the solidarity of the second tier powers against Anglo-Saxon hegemony can’t hide one simple reality — that China is a cut above the rest of the BRICs.Unpack the impressive combined statistics of the BRICs and you will find an unmistakable hierarchy. Russia is a declining power and is on the way down. India and Brazil are on the way up, but have a long way to go. Among the BRICs, China is the number one.
When you are on top of a heap, you get a better perspective than when you are at its bottom. That is what probably separates China and India at this week’s talk-fest in Yekaterinburg. India has gone to Yekaterinburg because of its abiding sense of obligation to Russia. The Chinese, in contrast, are in the Urals to enjoy a free political ride. China has two reasons to encourage Russia’s anti-Western bravado. If someone has to bash the Americans, why not get the Russians to do it? The harder the Russians go at America, Beijing knows, the greater its own leverage with Washington.
This, indeed, is an old story. Russia’s confrontation with the West helped China get better terms from the British imperialists in the nineteenth century and the hegemonic Americans in the twentieth. The twenty-first century, however, is different with China ranked higher than Russia. The Obama administration has confirmed the new global pecking order when it declared that managing its bilateral relationship with China is the most important foreign policy priority. The idea of ‘Group of Two’ — America and China — jointly managing the world has steadily gained ground since Barack Obama took charge of Washington.
Russia might have thousands of nuclear weapons and could yet blow up and the world in an instant. But it is not Russia’s rusty nuke arsenal that keeps Americans awake at night. It is China’s ability to threaten mutually assured financial destruction that makes the Anglo-Saxons nervous. It is no secret that only the Chinese have the clout to negotiate with the Americans on global financial system. Why should any one expect Beijing to dilute its own power by sharing it with the rest of the BRICs?
The Han and the Slavs
If BRICs is Russia’s baby, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation is the only international forum that has been founded by China. Beijing’s objective was simple — to stabilise its distant western frontiers by engaging the Central Asian neighbours.
For China, Russia was a useful partner in Eurasia. Neither of them wants an expansion of US influence in inner Asia. Nor do Beijing and Moscow take kindly to Washington’s half-baked efforts at promoting democratic revolutions on their borders. Like all else in world politics, the recent convergence of the Han and Slav interests in Eurasia is not permanent.
As China becomes stronger than Russia, Moscow will necessarily have to rethink its ties to Beijing and Washington.As it serenades the disparate bunch from SCO and BRICs in Yekaterinburg this week, Russia is gearing up to receive President Obama in Moscow next month. Obama’s promise to ‘reset’ relations with Russia has boosted Moscow’s hopes for a renewed partnership with Washington. It is not for nothing that Russia’s national symbol is an eagle with two heads — one looking east and the other looking west.
Tragedy or farce?
If the BRICs and SCO are Russian and Chinese bargaining chips with America, what is India doing at Yekaterinburg? India has traveled down this road before when it deluded itself about Asian unity in the early years after independence and ignored the gathering crisis with China.
Within a decade Delhi was locked in a debilitating conflict with Beijing. Delhi faces similar challenges with Beijing today. These include the stalled boundary talks, deepening distrust on Tibet, and the gathering sense of mutual geopolitical encirclement.
If India sweeps these difficult bilateral issues under the carpet and indulges in soaring multilateral rhetoric with China, Beijing will administer a painful reality check sooner than later.Those in the South Block who remember the tragic results from the delusions of Asian unity in the 1950s, one hopes, do recognise that the chatter in Yekaterinburg on Eurasian solidarity is little more than that.
The writer is a professor at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
The other Islamist threat in Pakistan
By Selig S. Harrison
June 17, 2009
THE DANGER of an Islamist takeover of Pakistan is real. But it does not come from the Taliban guerrillas now battling the Pakistan Army in the Swat borderlands. It comes from a proliferating network of heavily armed Islamist militias in the Punjab heartland and major cities directed by Lashkar-e-Taiba, a close ally of Al Qaeda, which staged the terrorist attack last November in Mumbai, India.
Pakistan’s failure to crack down on Lashkar-e-Taiba militias and the recent release of two of its leaders jailed after the Mumbai attack led to an angry exchange on Monday at a meeting in Russia between Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Pakistan Prime Minister Asif Ali Zardari.
No new US aid commitments should be made to Islamabad until it takes decisive action to disarm Lashkar-e-Taiba in accordance with Article 256 of the Pakistan Constitution, which bars private militias. The administration wants to provide $3 billion in new military aid on top of the $10 billion already showered on Pakistan since 2001, together with a five-year, $7.5 billion program of economic aid. Surprisingly, while congressional leaders are seeking to attach a variety of conditions to the aid package, they have so far ignored the critical issue of the militias.
Disarming Lashkar-e-Taiba should be the top US priority in Pakistan because it would greatly reduce the possibility of a coup by Islamist sympathizers in the armed forces. The closet Islamists in the Army and the powerful Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI) are not likely to risk a coup in Islamabad unless they can count on armed support from Lashkar-e-Taiba and its allies to help them consolidate their grip on the countryside.
Equally important, a strong US stand on Lashkar-e-Taiba is necessary to defuse India-Pakistan tensions that could lead to another war and to sustain the improvement now taking place in US relations with India, a rising power eight times larger than Pakistan.
New Delhi fears a repeat of the Mumbai massacre, in which 166 were killed, and views US readiness to pressure Islamabad on the militias as a litmus test of US friendship.
To be sure, the Pakistan government did make a show of cracking down on Lashkar-e-Taiba after the Mumbai tragedy. It banned it, placed two of its leaders under house arrest, and jailed and arrested six of its operatives on charges of “facilitating a terrorist act.’’ But the two leaders were released on June 2. The government stopped short of breaking up the militias and destroying the weapons stockpiles at their four training camps near Muridke and Muzaffarabad, and it has yet to prosecute the six prisoners or to arrest Zaki-ur-Rahman Lakhvi, identified by US and Indian intelligence sources as the ringleader of the Mumbai attack, who is still at large.Continued...
Under a new name, Jawad-ud-Dawa, Lashkar-e-Taiba has continued to operate its militias, its FM radio station, and hundreds of seminaries where jihadis are trained, in addition to its legitimate charities and educational institutions. When the UN designated Jawat-ud-Dawa as a terrorist group, the Pakistan government issued another ban and Jawat-ud-Dawa changed its name to the Falah-e-Insaniat Foundation.
The “foundation’’ now has 2,000 members doing relief work in war-torn Swat with the approval of the Pakistan government, amid credible reports that it is using its humanitarian cover to recruit new members as it did after the 2002 Kashmir earthquake.
Lashkar-e-Taiba is on the Sunni side of the Sunni-Shia doctrinal divide in Islam and has its deepest roots in a 20,000-square-mile swath of southern Punjab between Jhang and Bahawalpur, where it champions the cause of landless Sunni peasants indentured to big Shia landowners.
“It is common knowledge that the local police are in their pocket in much of that area,’’ retired diplomat Tariq Fatemi, a former ambassador to Washington, told me recently.
Sunni extremist groups have been active in the Punjab since the creation of Pakistan and became the nucleus of Lashkar-e-Taiba when the ISI, with US funding, built up a jihadi movement to fight against Soviet forces in Afghanistan. Lashkar-e-Taiba and key allies such as Lashkar-e-Jhangvi still get ISI support and have close ties with other intelligence agencies, but how much and how close remain uncertain.
Like Al Qaeda to Americans, Lashkar-e-Taiba is a powerful emotive symbol to the 1.2 billion people of India. Hindu nationalists use this symbolism to fan fears of another Mumbai and to step up demands for reprisals against Pakistan. Increasingly, they are criticizing the United States for giving Pakistan money and weaponry without monitoring whether they are being used to strengthen Pakistan forces on the Indian border.
Why, they ask, should the United States give another $10.5 billion in aid, on top of the $14 billion already provided since 2001, to a government in Islamabad that is unwilling or unable to disarm home-grown terrorists who threaten India?
Why, indeed.
Under a new name, Jawad-ud-Dawa, Lashkar-e-Taiba has continued to operate its militias, its FM radio station, and hundreds of seminaries where jihadis are trained, in addition to its legitimate charities and educational institutions. When the UN designated Jawat-ud-Dawa as a terrorist group, the Pakistan government issued another ban and Jawat-ud-Dawa changed its name to the Falah-e-Insaniat Foundation.
Discuss
COMMENTS (3)
The “foundation’’ now has 2,000 members doing relief work in war-torn Swat with the approval of the Pakistan government, amid credible reports that it is using its humanitarian cover to recruit new members as it did after the 2002 Kashmir earthquake.
Lashkar-e-Taiba is on the Sunni side of the Sunni-Shia doctrinal divide in Islam and has its deepest roots in a 20,000-square-mile swath of southern Punjab between Jhang and Bahawalpur, where it champions the cause of landless Sunni peasants indentured to big Shia landowners.
“It is common knowledge that the local police are in their pocket in much of that area,’’ retired diplomat Tariq Fatemi, a former ambassador to Washington, told me recently.
Sunni extremist groups have been active in the Punjab since the creation of Pakistan and became the nucleus of Lashkar-e-Taiba when the ISI, with US funding, built up a jihadi movement to fight against Soviet forces in Afghanistan. Lashkar-e-Taiba and key allies such as Lashkar-e-Jhangvi still get ISI support and have close ties with other intelligence agencies, but how much and how close remain uncertain.
Like Al Qaeda to Americans, Lashkar-e-Taiba is a powerful emotive symbol to the 1.2 billion people of India. Hindu nationalists use this symbolism to fan fears of another Mumbai and to step up demands for reprisals against Pakistan. Increasingly, they are criticizing the United States for giving Pakistan money and weaponry without monitoring whether they are being used to strengthen Pakistan forces on the Indian border.
Why, they ask, should the United States give another $10.5 billion in aid, on top of the $14 billion already provided since 2001, to a government in Islamabad that is unwilling or unable to disarm home-grown terrorists who threaten India?
Why, indeed.
Selig S. Harrison is author of “Pakistan, The State of the Union,’’ a report just published by the Center for International Policy, where he is director of the Asia program.
Selig S. Harrison is author of “Pakistan, The State of the Union,’’ a report just published by the Center for International Policy, where he is director of the Asia program.
© Copyright 2009 Globe Newspaper Company
June 17, 2009
THE DANGER of an Islamist takeover of Pakistan is real. But it does not come from the Taliban guerrillas now battling the Pakistan Army in the Swat borderlands. It comes from a proliferating network of heavily armed Islamist militias in the Punjab heartland and major cities directed by Lashkar-e-Taiba, a close ally of Al Qaeda, which staged the terrorist attack last November in Mumbai, India.
Pakistan’s failure to crack down on Lashkar-e-Taiba militias and the recent release of two of its leaders jailed after the Mumbai attack led to an angry exchange on Monday at a meeting in Russia between Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Pakistan Prime Minister Asif Ali Zardari.
No new US aid commitments should be made to Islamabad until it takes decisive action to disarm Lashkar-e-Taiba in accordance with Article 256 of the Pakistan Constitution, which bars private militias. The administration wants to provide $3 billion in new military aid on top of the $10 billion already showered on Pakistan since 2001, together with a five-year, $7.5 billion program of economic aid. Surprisingly, while congressional leaders are seeking to attach a variety of conditions to the aid package, they have so far ignored the critical issue of the militias.
Disarming Lashkar-e-Taiba should be the top US priority in Pakistan because it would greatly reduce the possibility of a coup by Islamist sympathizers in the armed forces. The closet Islamists in the Army and the powerful Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI) are not likely to risk a coup in Islamabad unless they can count on armed support from Lashkar-e-Taiba and its allies to help them consolidate their grip on the countryside.
Equally important, a strong US stand on Lashkar-e-Taiba is necessary to defuse India-Pakistan tensions that could lead to another war and to sustain the improvement now taking place in US relations with India, a rising power eight times larger than Pakistan.
New Delhi fears a repeat of the Mumbai massacre, in which 166 were killed, and views US readiness to pressure Islamabad on the militias as a litmus test of US friendship.
To be sure, the Pakistan government did make a show of cracking down on Lashkar-e-Taiba after the Mumbai tragedy. It banned it, placed two of its leaders under house arrest, and jailed and arrested six of its operatives on charges of “facilitating a terrorist act.’’ But the two leaders were released on June 2. The government stopped short of breaking up the militias and destroying the weapons stockpiles at their four training camps near Muridke and Muzaffarabad, and it has yet to prosecute the six prisoners or to arrest Zaki-ur-Rahman Lakhvi, identified by US and Indian intelligence sources as the ringleader of the Mumbai attack, who is still at large.Continued...
Under a new name, Jawad-ud-Dawa, Lashkar-e-Taiba has continued to operate its militias, its FM radio station, and hundreds of seminaries where jihadis are trained, in addition to its legitimate charities and educational institutions. When the UN designated Jawat-ud-Dawa as a terrorist group, the Pakistan government issued another ban and Jawat-ud-Dawa changed its name to the Falah-e-Insaniat Foundation.
The “foundation’’ now has 2,000 members doing relief work in war-torn Swat with the approval of the Pakistan government, amid credible reports that it is using its humanitarian cover to recruit new members as it did after the 2002 Kashmir earthquake.
Lashkar-e-Taiba is on the Sunni side of the Sunni-Shia doctrinal divide in Islam and has its deepest roots in a 20,000-square-mile swath of southern Punjab between Jhang and Bahawalpur, where it champions the cause of landless Sunni peasants indentured to big Shia landowners.
“It is common knowledge that the local police are in their pocket in much of that area,’’ retired diplomat Tariq Fatemi, a former ambassador to Washington, told me recently.
Sunni extremist groups have been active in the Punjab since the creation of Pakistan and became the nucleus of Lashkar-e-Taiba when the ISI, with US funding, built up a jihadi movement to fight against Soviet forces in Afghanistan. Lashkar-e-Taiba and key allies such as Lashkar-e-Jhangvi still get ISI support and have close ties with other intelligence agencies, but how much and how close remain uncertain.
Like Al Qaeda to Americans, Lashkar-e-Taiba is a powerful emotive symbol to the 1.2 billion people of India. Hindu nationalists use this symbolism to fan fears of another Mumbai and to step up demands for reprisals against Pakistan. Increasingly, they are criticizing the United States for giving Pakistan money and weaponry without monitoring whether they are being used to strengthen Pakistan forces on the Indian border.
Why, they ask, should the United States give another $10.5 billion in aid, on top of the $14 billion already provided since 2001, to a government in Islamabad that is unwilling or unable to disarm home-grown terrorists who threaten India?
Why, indeed.
Under a new name, Jawad-ud-Dawa, Lashkar-e-Taiba has continued to operate its militias, its FM radio station, and hundreds of seminaries where jihadis are trained, in addition to its legitimate charities and educational institutions. When the UN designated Jawat-ud-Dawa as a terrorist group, the Pakistan government issued another ban and Jawat-ud-Dawa changed its name to the Falah-e-Insaniat Foundation.
Discuss
COMMENTS (3)
The “foundation’’ now has 2,000 members doing relief work in war-torn Swat with the approval of the Pakistan government, amid credible reports that it is using its humanitarian cover to recruit new members as it did after the 2002 Kashmir earthquake.
Lashkar-e-Taiba is on the Sunni side of the Sunni-Shia doctrinal divide in Islam and has its deepest roots in a 20,000-square-mile swath of southern Punjab between Jhang and Bahawalpur, where it champions the cause of landless Sunni peasants indentured to big Shia landowners.
“It is common knowledge that the local police are in their pocket in much of that area,’’ retired diplomat Tariq Fatemi, a former ambassador to Washington, told me recently.
Sunni extremist groups have been active in the Punjab since the creation of Pakistan and became the nucleus of Lashkar-e-Taiba when the ISI, with US funding, built up a jihadi movement to fight against Soviet forces in Afghanistan. Lashkar-e-Taiba and key allies such as Lashkar-e-Jhangvi still get ISI support and have close ties with other intelligence agencies, but how much and how close remain uncertain.
Like Al Qaeda to Americans, Lashkar-e-Taiba is a powerful emotive symbol to the 1.2 billion people of India. Hindu nationalists use this symbolism to fan fears of another Mumbai and to step up demands for reprisals against Pakistan. Increasingly, they are criticizing the United States for giving Pakistan money and weaponry without monitoring whether they are being used to strengthen Pakistan forces on the Indian border.
Why, they ask, should the United States give another $10.5 billion in aid, on top of the $14 billion already provided since 2001, to a government in Islamabad that is unwilling or unable to disarm home-grown terrorists who threaten India?
Why, indeed.
Selig S. Harrison is author of “Pakistan, The State of the Union,’’ a report just published by the Center for International Policy, where he is director of the Asia program.
Selig S. Harrison is author of “Pakistan, The State of the Union,’’ a report just published by the Center for International Policy, where he is director of the Asia program.
© Copyright 2009 Globe Newspaper Company
Full Text of Hillary Clinton's remarks on US-India relations
Dear Friends:
Addressing the U.S.-India Business Council’s 34th Anniversary "Synergies Summit" in Washington DC today (June 17, 2009), Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said that the Obama administration is "clearly committed to furthering and deepening our relationship with India in every way possible," outlined "four platforms of cooperation in global security, human development, economic activity, science and technology" and affirmed that she planned to make the U.S.-India relationship "a personal priority."
The FULL TEXT of her speech can be read at http://usindiafriendship.net/ (see top left hand corner),
The Highlights:
**We are clearly committed to furthering and deepening our relationship with India in every way possible.
**I will be visiting India next month, which I’m looking forward to. The new governments in Washington and New Delhi will build this future together, and we will be discussing the details of that partnership when I visit India next month.
**When I was elected to the Senate, I co-founded and co-chaired the Senate’s India Caucus, the first time we had done that.
**I want you to place me and where I stand as Secretary of State. It is in a position of deep commitment to building stronger ties with India, a commitment based on mutual respect and mutual interests. And I know that President Obama feels the same way. We see India as one of a few key partners worldwide who will help us shape the 21st century.
**The nuclear deal, which was completed through the efforts of former President Bush, removed the final barrier to broader cooperation between us.
**Today, I can tell you my hope and President Obama’s hope that the next stage in our country’s relationship will see a dramatic expansion in our common agenda, and a greater role for India in solving global challenges. We recognize the extraordinary progress that India has made already, and we know that many of these advances have not come easily, and we don’t take them for granted. As we pursue an enhanced bilateral partnership, we should recognize that compared to other metrics of our cooperation, our official ties are past due for an upgrade.
**We need the bilateral cooperation between our governments to catch up with our people-to-people and economic ties. We need to make sure that the partnership between Washington and New Delhi, our capitals, will be as advanced and fruitful as the linkages that already exist between Manhattan and Mumbai, or Boston and Bangalore.
**I hope that an expanded partnership between the U.S. and India will be one of the signature accomplishments of both new governments in both countries, and I do plan to make that a personal priority. To achieve the goal of stronger ties between our countries, we will have to confront and transcend the mistrust that has hampered our cooperation in the past, and address the lingering uncertainties in our relationship still today.
**Some Americans fear that greater prosperity and partnership with India will mean lost jobs or falling wages here in the United States. Some Indians believe that closer cooperation with us runs counter to their nation’s very strong tradition of independence.
**But as friendly democracies, in fact, as the oldest and largest democracies in the world, we should work through any issues in our relationship and differences in our perspective by focusing on shared objectives and concrete results. I want to put us into the solutions business.
**We need to build on several natural platforms. The first is global security. India and the United States share an overriding interest in making the world more secure. The tragic attacks of 26/11 were a global event. They played out in slow motion on television screens across India, the United States, and the world. The violence inflicted on the people of Mumbai, and the loss of six American citizens in those attacks, was a reminder that terrorism represents a common threat to our nations and our people, and we must meet it with a common strategy.
**As part of that strategy, we should expand our broader security relationship and increase cooperation on counterterrorism and intelligence sharing. And the President and I are committed to working with India in whatever way is appropriate to enhance India’s ability to protect itself.
**We should also work to realize a vision articulated by generations of Indians, Americans, and recently by President Obama, of a nuclear-free world. The Civil Nuclear Agreement helped us get over our defining disagreement, and I believe it can and should also serve as the foundation of a productive partnership on nonproliferation.
**We have a common interest in creating a stable, peaceful Afghanistan, where India is already providing $1.2 billion in assistance to facilitate reconstruction efforts. The United States is committed to the task ahead in Afghanistan, and I hope India will continue its efforts there as well. And of course, we believe that India and Pakistan actually face a number of common challenges, and we welcome a dialogue between them.
**As we have said before, the pace, scope, and character of that dialogue is something that Indian and Pakistani leaders will decide on their own terms and in their own time. But as Pakistan now works to take on the challenge of terrorists in its own country, I am confident that India, as well as the United States, will support those efforts.
**India’s moral stature and its long tradition of leadership among developing countries means that it is particularly well-suited to take on the challenges that multinational institutions face. I have always believed states should be awarded enhanced roles in international bodies not only on the basis of their power, but whether they use that power constructively to advance the common good and address global problems. India already is a major player on the world stage, and we will look to cooperate with New Delhi as it shoulders the responsibilities that accompany its new position of global leadership.
**Human development – particularly in the fields of education, women’s empowerment, and health – is another platform for cooperation.
**We should build on the goals articulated by India’s leadership to boost literacy, expand vocational training, and improve access to higher education. I hope we can partner with India to improve outcomes at all levels of education. Our countries should continue the tradition of intellectual exchange by increasing opportunities for interaction by American institutions of higher learning and their Indian counterparts as well.
**We should continue working together to promote initiatives like micro-lending and provide training programs for rural women as tools to help lift them and their families out of poverty.
**We can also work together to address health challenges including nutrition, maternal and child health, HIV/AIDS, and other infectious diseases, as well as the growing problem of chronic disease in both of our nations. We need to share knowledge and best practices to improve human development at home and around the world. And I appreciate all that is being done by this group and certainly this Council to promote economic and trade cooperation. We should begin negotiations on a bilateral investment treaty soon. And I’m confident that our Trade Representative and Minister Sharma will bring a fresh perspective and new ideas to help move the Doha Round negotiations to a successful conclusion.
**President Obama has been clear that the United States has learned the lessons of the past. We will not use the global financial crisis as an excuse to fall back on protectionism. We hope India will work with us to create a more open, equitable set of opportunities for trade between our nations.
**Encouraging greater agricultural cooperation should be a major focus of our economic agenda. India is ripe for a second green revolution. A significant expansion of India’s agricultural sector would have dramatic benefits for Indians, but also could help to spur agricultural revolutions in Africa and other parts of the globe where food security remains a persistent problem.
**Our commitment to work with the business community means that in September we will re-launch the CEO Forum on the margins of the United Nations General Assembly. We hope that effort, along with other initiatives, will channel the power of the private sector and entrepreneurs to build and improve the lives of both Indians and Americans.
**Finally, we should bring together the best of our technological and scientific brains to encourage breakthroughs in both science and technology. This is particularly important on issues related to energy and climate. We are committed to working with India to see India’s economy continue to prosper, to create more economic opportunity, rising incomes. We want Indians to have a higher standard of living. And we hope our countries can work together to achieve that overriding goal, while avoiding the mistakes that were made by everyone in creating the climate crisis we face today. We think there is great promise in a clean energy cooperation strategy focused on adopting low carbon technologies, improving energy efficiency, forestation, and water management. And these efforts should be supported by new and existing high-level dialogues between representatives of our governments.
**We can also learn from Indian doctors and companies that are pioneering low-cost solutions to many of the health challenges we face today. The Serum Institute’s groundbreaking work to reduce the cost of vaccine manufacturing is one example of this phenomenon. There are many others. Applying their discoveries to global health initiatives will help us save resources and lives.
**Public-private partnerships between governments, industry, civil society will be vital to everyone of these platforms.
**So four platforms of cooperation – global security, human development, economic activity, science and technology – can support us in launching this third phase of the U.S.-India relationship.
Cheers,
Ram Narayanan
US-India Friendship
http://usindiafriendship.net/
Addressing the U.S.-India Business Council’s 34th Anniversary "Synergies Summit" in Washington DC today (June 17, 2009), Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said that the Obama administration is "clearly committed to furthering and deepening our relationship with India in every way possible," outlined "four platforms of cooperation in global security, human development, economic activity, science and technology" and affirmed that she planned to make the U.S.-India relationship "a personal priority."
The FULL TEXT of her speech can be read at http://usindiafriendship.net/ (see top left hand corner),
The Highlights:
**We are clearly committed to furthering and deepening our relationship with India in every way possible.
**I will be visiting India next month, which I’m looking forward to. The new governments in Washington and New Delhi will build this future together, and we will be discussing the details of that partnership when I visit India next month.
**When I was elected to the Senate, I co-founded and co-chaired the Senate’s India Caucus, the first time we had done that.
**I want you to place me and where I stand as Secretary of State. It is in a position of deep commitment to building stronger ties with India, a commitment based on mutual respect and mutual interests. And I know that President Obama feels the same way. We see India as one of a few key partners worldwide who will help us shape the 21st century.
**The nuclear deal, which was completed through the efforts of former President Bush, removed the final barrier to broader cooperation between us.
**Today, I can tell you my hope and President Obama’s hope that the next stage in our country’s relationship will see a dramatic expansion in our common agenda, and a greater role for India in solving global challenges. We recognize the extraordinary progress that India has made already, and we know that many of these advances have not come easily, and we don’t take them for granted. As we pursue an enhanced bilateral partnership, we should recognize that compared to other metrics of our cooperation, our official ties are past due for an upgrade.
**We need the bilateral cooperation between our governments to catch up with our people-to-people and economic ties. We need to make sure that the partnership between Washington and New Delhi, our capitals, will be as advanced and fruitful as the linkages that already exist between Manhattan and Mumbai, or Boston and Bangalore.
**I hope that an expanded partnership between the U.S. and India will be one of the signature accomplishments of both new governments in both countries, and I do plan to make that a personal priority. To achieve the goal of stronger ties between our countries, we will have to confront and transcend the mistrust that has hampered our cooperation in the past, and address the lingering uncertainties in our relationship still today.
**Some Americans fear that greater prosperity and partnership with India will mean lost jobs or falling wages here in the United States. Some Indians believe that closer cooperation with us runs counter to their nation’s very strong tradition of independence.
**But as friendly democracies, in fact, as the oldest and largest democracies in the world, we should work through any issues in our relationship and differences in our perspective by focusing on shared objectives and concrete results. I want to put us into the solutions business.
**We need to build on several natural platforms. The first is global security. India and the United States share an overriding interest in making the world more secure. The tragic attacks of 26/11 were a global event. They played out in slow motion on television screens across India, the United States, and the world. The violence inflicted on the people of Mumbai, and the loss of six American citizens in those attacks, was a reminder that terrorism represents a common threat to our nations and our people, and we must meet it with a common strategy.
**As part of that strategy, we should expand our broader security relationship and increase cooperation on counterterrorism and intelligence sharing. And the President and I are committed to working with India in whatever way is appropriate to enhance India’s ability to protect itself.
**We should also work to realize a vision articulated by generations of Indians, Americans, and recently by President Obama, of a nuclear-free world. The Civil Nuclear Agreement helped us get over our defining disagreement, and I believe it can and should also serve as the foundation of a productive partnership on nonproliferation.
**We have a common interest in creating a stable, peaceful Afghanistan, where India is already providing $1.2 billion in assistance to facilitate reconstruction efforts. The United States is committed to the task ahead in Afghanistan, and I hope India will continue its efforts there as well. And of course, we believe that India and Pakistan actually face a number of common challenges, and we welcome a dialogue between them.
**As we have said before, the pace, scope, and character of that dialogue is something that Indian and Pakistani leaders will decide on their own terms and in their own time. But as Pakistan now works to take on the challenge of terrorists in its own country, I am confident that India, as well as the United States, will support those efforts.
**India’s moral stature and its long tradition of leadership among developing countries means that it is particularly well-suited to take on the challenges that multinational institutions face. I have always believed states should be awarded enhanced roles in international bodies not only on the basis of their power, but whether they use that power constructively to advance the common good and address global problems. India already is a major player on the world stage, and we will look to cooperate with New Delhi as it shoulders the responsibilities that accompany its new position of global leadership.
**Human development – particularly in the fields of education, women’s empowerment, and health – is another platform for cooperation.
**We should build on the goals articulated by India’s leadership to boost literacy, expand vocational training, and improve access to higher education. I hope we can partner with India to improve outcomes at all levels of education. Our countries should continue the tradition of intellectual exchange by increasing opportunities for interaction by American institutions of higher learning and their Indian counterparts as well.
**We should continue working together to promote initiatives like micro-lending and provide training programs for rural women as tools to help lift them and their families out of poverty.
**We can also work together to address health challenges including nutrition, maternal and child health, HIV/AIDS, and other infectious diseases, as well as the growing problem of chronic disease in both of our nations. We need to share knowledge and best practices to improve human development at home and around the world. And I appreciate all that is being done by this group and certainly this Council to promote economic and trade cooperation. We should begin negotiations on a bilateral investment treaty soon. And I’m confident that our Trade Representative and Minister Sharma will bring a fresh perspective and new ideas to help move the Doha Round negotiations to a successful conclusion.
**President Obama has been clear that the United States has learned the lessons of the past. We will not use the global financial crisis as an excuse to fall back on protectionism. We hope India will work with us to create a more open, equitable set of opportunities for trade between our nations.
**Encouraging greater agricultural cooperation should be a major focus of our economic agenda. India is ripe for a second green revolution. A significant expansion of India’s agricultural sector would have dramatic benefits for Indians, but also could help to spur agricultural revolutions in Africa and other parts of the globe where food security remains a persistent problem.
**Our commitment to work with the business community means that in September we will re-launch the CEO Forum on the margins of the United Nations General Assembly. We hope that effort, along with other initiatives, will channel the power of the private sector and entrepreneurs to build and improve the lives of both Indians and Americans.
**Finally, we should bring together the best of our technological and scientific brains to encourage breakthroughs in both science and technology. This is particularly important on issues related to energy and climate. We are committed to working with India to see India’s economy continue to prosper, to create more economic opportunity, rising incomes. We want Indians to have a higher standard of living. And we hope our countries can work together to achieve that overriding goal, while avoiding the mistakes that were made by everyone in creating the climate crisis we face today. We think there is great promise in a clean energy cooperation strategy focused on adopting low carbon technologies, improving energy efficiency, forestation, and water management. And these efforts should be supported by new and existing high-level dialogues between representatives of our governments.
**We can also learn from Indian doctors and companies that are pioneering low-cost solutions to many of the health challenges we face today. The Serum Institute’s groundbreaking work to reduce the cost of vaccine manufacturing is one example of this phenomenon. There are many others. Applying their discoveries to global health initiatives will help us save resources and lives.
**Public-private partnerships between governments, industry, civil society will be vital to everyone of these platforms.
**So four platforms of cooperation – global security, human development, economic activity, science and technology – can support us in launching this third phase of the U.S.-India relationship.
Cheers,
Ram Narayanan
US-India Friendship
http://usindiafriendship.net/
“The Baluch Martyrs Day 15 July”
BALOCH COMMUNITY LONDON
“Shahmiren Balochaane Roch' 15 July”
“Martyrs of Balochistan and Victims of State Terrorism”
Baloch, like many other nations, in their struggle for freedom and democratic rights have endured great sacrifices. In their endeavour to achieve these aims many have encountered and experienced the wrath of the occupying states. In consequence, many Baloch men, women and children in their struggle for their democratic rights including right to FREEDOM have been treated violently and inhumanly by the military and the intelligence services of these occupying states. The very harsh treatment of Baloch people is well recorded, particularly by states such as Pakistan and Iran. Since their illegal occupation of Balochistan these states have been involved in the systematic imprisonment, torture, abduction and execution of Baloch. Currently thousands of Baloch are missing from Pakistani occupied Balochistan; tens of thousands have been displaced. Similarly hundreds of Baloch have been executed by the Iranian regime in Western Balochistan and several are on death row waiting to be executed.
In tribute to sacrifices of the Baloch Martyrs the Baloch community in London have decided to hold a day of remembrance for these victims. The 15th of July of every year is the date designated for the purpose of remembrance, to make sure that their sacrifice for our freedom and our nation has not been lost in vain.
The day is nominated for “Martyrs of Balochistan and Victims of State Terrorism.” On this day there will also be an exhibition of pictures, names, and a brief description on the background of each victim.
The actual day that this Remembrance Day will take place in London is on Sunday 19th July 2009. The Remembrance Day starts from 12 noon to 5pm at:
THE CENTRE FOR POLISH ART AND CULTURE
Shahid this the announcement for the 19 July meeting
238 – 246 KINGS STREET, HAMMERSMITH
LONDON W6 0RF
Closest Tube station: Hammersmith Station.
We wish to request from all Baloch from Eastern, Western Balochistan or elsewhere to assist us to e-mail pictures, names or any other information regarding the Baloch martyrs and victims of state terror to the following E-mail addresses:
fmbaluch@gmail.com
balochetawaar@yahoo.com
Baloch Community London
“Shahmiren Balochaane Roch' 15 July”
“Martyrs of Balochistan and Victims of State Terrorism”
Baloch, like many other nations, in their struggle for freedom and democratic rights have endured great sacrifices. In their endeavour to achieve these aims many have encountered and experienced the wrath of the occupying states. In consequence, many Baloch men, women and children in their struggle for their democratic rights including right to FREEDOM have been treated violently and inhumanly by the military and the intelligence services of these occupying states. The very harsh treatment of Baloch people is well recorded, particularly by states such as Pakistan and Iran. Since their illegal occupation of Balochistan these states have been involved in the systematic imprisonment, torture, abduction and execution of Baloch. Currently thousands of Baloch are missing from Pakistani occupied Balochistan; tens of thousands have been displaced. Similarly hundreds of Baloch have been executed by the Iranian regime in Western Balochistan and several are on death row waiting to be executed.
In tribute to sacrifices of the Baloch Martyrs the Baloch community in London have decided to hold a day of remembrance for these victims. The 15th of July of every year is the date designated for the purpose of remembrance, to make sure that their sacrifice for our freedom and our nation has not been lost in vain.
The day is nominated for “Martyrs of Balochistan and Victims of State Terrorism.” On this day there will also be an exhibition of pictures, names, and a brief description on the background of each victim.
The actual day that this Remembrance Day will take place in London is on Sunday 19th July 2009. The Remembrance Day starts from 12 noon to 5pm at:
THE CENTRE FOR POLISH ART AND CULTURE
Shahid this the announcement for the 19 July meeting
238 – 246 KINGS STREET, HAMMERSMITH
LONDON W6 0RF
Closest Tube station: Hammersmith Station.
We wish to request from all Baloch from Eastern, Western Balochistan or elsewhere to assist us to e-mail pictures, names or any other information regarding the Baloch martyrs and victims of state terror to the following E-mail addresses:
fmbaluch@gmail.com
balochetawaar@yahoo.com
Baloch Community London
CALLS FOR SEA OF GREEN IN IRAN ON THURSDAY & FRIDAY
B.RAMAN
"If Iran sleeps tonight, it will sleep for ever."
"Obama is a single choice US President. His only choice is not to make any choice."
"Putin and Hu do not know what is going on in Iran. They were among the first to congratulate Ahmadinejad."
------------------ From Iranian twitters.
Iranian protesters against the alleged rigging of the Presidential elections held on June 12,2009, in which President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was announced to have been re-elected with a big majority are repeatedly calling upon the reformists and other opponents of the Government to join a huge procession to be held on June 18,2009, at Tehran in memory of eight Iranian protesters killed by the security forces when they allegedly opened fire on a procession protesting against the election results on June 15. They have appealed to the participants to wear a green armband. According to their information, the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is planning to address a Friday congregation in Tehran on June 19,2009. They have appealed to all those planning to attend the congregation to wear a green arm band. They have called for Iran to be turned into a sea of green on June 18 and 19.
2. Twitters continue to flow in from Iran beating the efforts of the Iranian security agencies to stop them. Some more twitters received up to 10 AM Indian Standard Time on June 18 are given below. Their time of origin is not known.
"Plz ignore @FreeMediaNews - the person is spreading disinfo!"
"Help FIGHT propaganda re rebels confined to Tehran, VAST rally centre of Isfahan TODAY , pass it on."
"Many many arrests in tehran 2day. hundreds. - now is dark baseej start to make trouble. "
"Help hide Iranian protesters: change your Twitter location to Tehran, time to +3:30 GMT. Please RT."
"CNN has set up a special Iran desk to monitor social networking sites, esp now that we're barred from reporting on streets of Tehran."
"RT from Iran : Yesterdays shooting outside Basiji HQ Tehran http://is.gd/13PXT
"HELP COVER THE IRANIAN BLOGGERS: CHANGE YOUR TWITTER SETTINGS SO THAT YOUR LOCATION IS TEHRAN AND YOUR TIME ZONE.. http://tinyurl.com/ls8zo7
"CNN & BBC, We have NUMEROUS eye witness accounts that the Basij militia are ransacking the city of Tehran, where are you?"
"Our lives are in real danger now - we are the eyes - they need to stop us."
"Iran supreme leader under pressure ( Al Jazeera English ).
"Do NOT follow any instructions on twitter except from the trusted sources."
"Plain Clothed Basij entered people's houses broke stuff to blame freedom lovers."
"IF IRAN SLEEPS TONIGHT, IT WILL SLEEP FOR EVER"
"Tear Down This Cyberwall!" Tweets vs. Bullets"
"Men in civilian clothes attacked Day hospital in Tehran."
"Reliable Source: Families of those murdered by Basij militia are under pressure and being prevented from contacting media."
"Please disseminate this fax number as widely as possible: 001 773 321 0202. We will post any faxes we receive at iranfax.org."
"Please view these (some are graphic, warning) http://is.gd/14YjJ "
" FAX Univ. of Chicago at 001 773 321 0202. They will post any faxes we receive at iranfax.org.
"Twitter is the only open news source working in Iran right now.Twiitter maintenance shut down was postponed due to huge out cry from twitter users.Main Stream Media (State Media) has been forced and dragged kicking and screaming by twitter users to cover events in Iran
Twitter is being monitored by Iranian Secret police be careful about giving twitter addresses on RT(retweets) or any pro democracy information too specific with your tweets"
"Listen to Grandmaster Shajarian's Persian song "Iran, the Land of Hope" ."
"DON'T join Google Group "mowje-sabz". Smells like a honey-pot run by AN supporters. Spread."
" A place to gather info about the militia how's killing our brothers & sisters! http://lebasshakhsi.blogspot.
" Iran ban families of killed.Protesters R under gov. control & not allowed 2 talk2 any media."
"200 rights activists said to be arrested ."
"Mousavi is telling what 2do; with Silence! "
"Ayyatollah Amjad: "I believe in Mousavi honesty".
"Fear has gone in a land that has tasted freedom."----Robert Fisk.
"Some are going to gather in front of UN office in Tehran 2morrow 2p before g/t Toop-khoone 4p ."
" Montazeri warns it is against Islam to follow orders to hurt demonstrators."
"Religion is a main part of ppl's life in Iran, but i hope clerics don't interfere in politics this much! "
"CNN Atlanta h/ just ann/ Khatami h/joined Mousavi in req/ for all jailed protesters to be released immed." ( 18-6-2009)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
"If Iran sleeps tonight, it will sleep for ever."
"Obama is a single choice US President. His only choice is not to make any choice."
"Putin and Hu do not know what is going on in Iran. They were among the first to congratulate Ahmadinejad."
------------------ From Iranian twitters.
Iranian protesters against the alleged rigging of the Presidential elections held on June 12,2009, in which President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was announced to have been re-elected with a big majority are repeatedly calling upon the reformists and other opponents of the Government to join a huge procession to be held on June 18,2009, at Tehran in memory of eight Iranian protesters killed by the security forces when they allegedly opened fire on a procession protesting against the election results on June 15. They have appealed to the participants to wear a green armband. According to their information, the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is planning to address a Friday congregation in Tehran on June 19,2009. They have appealed to all those planning to attend the congregation to wear a green arm band. They have called for Iran to be turned into a sea of green on June 18 and 19.
2. Twitters continue to flow in from Iran beating the efforts of the Iranian security agencies to stop them. Some more twitters received up to 10 AM Indian Standard Time on June 18 are given below. Their time of origin is not known.
"Plz ignore @FreeMediaNews - the person is spreading disinfo!"
"Help FIGHT propaganda re rebels confined to Tehran, VAST rally centre of Isfahan TODAY , pass it on."
"Many many arrests in tehran 2day. hundreds. - now is dark baseej start to make trouble. "
"Help hide Iranian protesters: change your Twitter location to Tehran, time to +3:30 GMT. Please RT."
"CNN has set up a special Iran desk to monitor social networking sites, esp now that we're barred from reporting on streets of Tehran."
"RT from Iran : Yesterdays shooting outside Basiji HQ Tehran http://is.gd/13PXT
"HELP COVER THE IRANIAN BLOGGERS: CHANGE YOUR TWITTER SETTINGS SO THAT YOUR LOCATION IS TEHRAN AND YOUR TIME ZONE.. http://tinyurl.com/ls8zo7
"CNN & BBC, We have NUMEROUS eye witness accounts that the Basij militia are ransacking the city of Tehran, where are you?"
"Our lives are in real danger now - we are the eyes - they need to stop us."
"Iran supreme leader under pressure ( Al Jazeera English ).
"Do NOT follow any instructions on twitter except from the trusted sources."
"Plain Clothed Basij entered people's houses broke stuff to blame freedom lovers."
"IF IRAN SLEEPS TONIGHT, IT WILL SLEEP FOR EVER"
"Tear Down This Cyberwall!" Tweets vs. Bullets"
"Men in civilian clothes attacked Day hospital in Tehran."
"Reliable Source: Families of those murdered by Basij militia are under pressure and being prevented from contacting media."
"Please disseminate this fax number as widely as possible: 001 773 321 0202. We will post any faxes we receive at iranfax.org."
"Please view these (some are graphic, warning) http://is.gd/14YjJ "
" FAX Univ. of Chicago at 001 773 321 0202. They will post any faxes we receive at iranfax.org.
"Twitter is the only open news source working in Iran right now.Twiitter maintenance shut down was postponed due to huge out cry from twitter users.Main Stream Media (State Media) has been forced and dragged kicking and screaming by twitter users to cover events in Iran
Twitter is being monitored by Iranian Secret police be careful about giving twitter addresses on RT(retweets) or any pro democracy information too specific with your tweets"
"Listen to Grandmaster Shajarian's Persian song "Iran, the Land of Hope" ."
"DON'T join Google Group "mowje-sabz". Smells like a honey-pot run by AN supporters. Spread."
" A place to gather info about the militia how's killing our brothers & sisters! http://lebasshakhsi.blogspot.
" Iran ban families of killed.Protesters R under gov. control & not allowed 2 talk2 any media."
"200 rights activists said to be arrested ."
"Mousavi is telling what 2do; with Silence! "
"Ayyatollah Amjad: "I believe in Mousavi honesty".
"Fear has gone in a land that has tasted freedom."----Robert Fisk.
"Some are going to gather in front of UN office in Tehran 2morrow 2p before g/t Toop-khoone 4p ."
" Montazeri warns it is against Islam to follow orders to hurt demonstrators."
"Religion is a main part of ppl's life in Iran, but i hope clerics don't interfere in politics this much! "
"CNN Atlanta h/ just ann/ Khatami h/joined Mousavi in req/ for all jailed protesters to be released immed." ( 18-6-2009)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
June 17, 2009
SCO summit shows there is no alternative to international cooperation
RIA Novosti
19:2216/06/2009
MOSCOW. (Alexei Vlasov, director of Moscow State University’s Center for the Study of Political Processes in the post-Soviet Space, a member of the RIA Novosti Expert Council) – A summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which has ended in Yekaterinburg, adopted decisions that can seriously influence the organization’s future.
The SCO was initially known as the Shanghai Five, a group set up by China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan in Shanghai in 1996 to promote trans-border cooperation. After Uzbekistan joined the group in 2001, the organization addressed regional security issues.
Since then, the SCO has become an influential international organization focusing on global issues, from energy security to educational, social and cultural cooperation.
This unique organization is guided by the so-called “Shanghai Spirit,” one of resistance to any form of confrontation, hostile competition and disregard of each other’s interests.
More and more countries are keen on joining it, above all Iran, whose president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, attended the extended meeting of the SCO leaders despite the complicated political situation in his homeland. Ahmadinejad spoke at the meeting about the SCO’s role in resolving economic problems and positive changes in all spheres of its operation.
Possible enlargement of the SCO’s sphere of responsibility entails the use of more complex mechanisms for attaining its goals. During the ongoing global financial and economic crisis, the SCO should determine its place in the system of international integration. While trying to deal with arising challenges and risks, the SCO is also working to strengthen its consolidation and to encourage more effective interaction between its member states.
These principles have been sealed in the Yekaterinburg Declaration, the main political document adopted at the summit. It also provides a clear assessment of the current geopolitical and geoeconomic realities.
The key idea of the declaration is that there is no alternative to international cooperation. The document also seals the member states’ commitment to the principles of peace based on equal security for all countries without exception.
“We regard this meeting as the focal point of Russia’s presidency of the SCO,” Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said in Yekaterinburg. “Active participation in the organization’s efforts, and the development of multifaceted cooperation within it, have long become the priorities of Russia’s foreign policy.”
The summit considered the proposals of the Russian and Kazakh leaders to develop cooperation in the financial sphere and create a common supranational currency for the SCO countries.
“Using a national currency as a regional and global reserve currency is an obsolete scheme that gives the country in question unilateral advantages,” said Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev.
This seems like a very good idea, but are the SCO countries ready to implement it?
Arkady Dvorkovich, an economic aide to the Russian president, has said more than once that it would be premature to consider a common monetary unit for the SCO because of considerable structural and development differences between the economies of its member states.
However, the summit participants welcomed the proposal of the Kazakh president.
It was announced in Yekaterinburg that Belarus and Sri Lanka would be granted partner status, and that a package of documents would be adopted soon to regulate the admission of new members.
The SCO summit also discussed one of the most distressing problems, the Afghan conflict. Uzbek President Islam Karimov reaffirmed his country’s proposal on changing the format of peacekeeping efforts in Afghanistan.
In his view, the UN Contact Group for Afghanistan should include the six states bordering on Afghanistan, the United States, Russia and NATO. The Uzbek president said that the new contact group could become a major consultative body facilitating conciliation in Afghanistan and the surrounding region.
And so, the SCO summit in Yekaterinburg has strengthened the organization’s stance as a collective international player, and showed that the SCO leaders address all global problems. Time will show how much the possible expansion of the zone of their responsibility will benefit the organization.
Currently, the underlying principles of the SCO boil down to a mutually acceptable ideology of interaction, uniting the countries which are prepared for constructive and equal cooperation. In this sense, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization has no alternative.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
19:2216/06/2009
MOSCOW. (Alexei Vlasov, director of Moscow State University’s Center for the Study of Political Processes in the post-Soviet Space, a member of the RIA Novosti Expert Council) – A summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which has ended in Yekaterinburg, adopted decisions that can seriously influence the organization’s future.
The SCO was initially known as the Shanghai Five, a group set up by China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan in Shanghai in 1996 to promote trans-border cooperation. After Uzbekistan joined the group in 2001, the organization addressed regional security issues.
Since then, the SCO has become an influential international organization focusing on global issues, from energy security to educational, social and cultural cooperation.
This unique organization is guided by the so-called “Shanghai Spirit,” one of resistance to any form of confrontation, hostile competition and disregard of each other’s interests.
More and more countries are keen on joining it, above all Iran, whose president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, attended the extended meeting of the SCO leaders despite the complicated political situation in his homeland. Ahmadinejad spoke at the meeting about the SCO’s role in resolving economic problems and positive changes in all spheres of its operation.
Possible enlargement of the SCO’s sphere of responsibility entails the use of more complex mechanisms for attaining its goals. During the ongoing global financial and economic crisis, the SCO should determine its place in the system of international integration. While trying to deal with arising challenges and risks, the SCO is also working to strengthen its consolidation and to encourage more effective interaction between its member states.
These principles have been sealed in the Yekaterinburg Declaration, the main political document adopted at the summit. It also provides a clear assessment of the current geopolitical and geoeconomic realities.
The key idea of the declaration is that there is no alternative to international cooperation. The document also seals the member states’ commitment to the principles of peace based on equal security for all countries without exception.
“We regard this meeting as the focal point of Russia’s presidency of the SCO,” Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said in Yekaterinburg. “Active participation in the organization’s efforts, and the development of multifaceted cooperation within it, have long become the priorities of Russia’s foreign policy.”
The summit considered the proposals of the Russian and Kazakh leaders to develop cooperation in the financial sphere and create a common supranational currency for the SCO countries.
“Using a national currency as a regional and global reserve currency is an obsolete scheme that gives the country in question unilateral advantages,” said Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev.
This seems like a very good idea, but are the SCO countries ready to implement it?
Arkady Dvorkovich, an economic aide to the Russian president, has said more than once that it would be premature to consider a common monetary unit for the SCO because of considerable structural and development differences between the economies of its member states.
However, the summit participants welcomed the proposal of the Kazakh president.
It was announced in Yekaterinburg that Belarus and Sri Lanka would be granted partner status, and that a package of documents would be adopted soon to regulate the admission of new members.
The SCO summit also discussed one of the most distressing problems, the Afghan conflict. Uzbek President Islam Karimov reaffirmed his country’s proposal on changing the format of peacekeeping efforts in Afghanistan.
In his view, the UN Contact Group for Afghanistan should include the six states bordering on Afghanistan, the United States, Russia and NATO. The Uzbek president said that the new contact group could become a major consultative body facilitating conciliation in Afghanistan and the surrounding region.
And so, the SCO summit in Yekaterinburg has strengthened the organization’s stance as a collective international player, and showed that the SCO leaders address all global problems. Time will show how much the possible expansion of the zone of their responsibility will benefit the organization.
Currently, the underlying principles of the SCO boil down to a mutually acceptable ideology of interaction, uniting the countries which are prepared for constructive and equal cooperation. In this sense, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization has no alternative.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
TWITTERS FROM IRAN SILENCED?
B.RAMAN
The twitters from Iran have been decreasing in number since 4 PM Indian Standard Time on June 17,2009. Some Twitters sites have been covered with pornographic pictures.
2. The Iranian authorities stepped up their efforts to silence the Twitters after a Twitter appealing to the members of the Iranian soccer team playing in South Korea to wear green wrist bands as a sign of protest was sent across.
3. Some other Twitters monitored before 4 PM disseminated the following messages:
confirmed by MOUSAVI - Thursday march - in memory of those killed - location tbc - sea of green.
Tehran march TODAY 5pm - 7Tir Sq - Meydan 7 Tir - silent - sea of green.
BEWARE.
Khamenei has said he will preside over Friday Prayers in Tehran this week - sea of green.
Mousavi supporters to march on Friday to Friday Prayers - Namaz Joame - Tehran - sea of green.
IRIB has been saying that demos r work of anti-gov thugs. IRIB want to turn ppl against Mousavi - hack them pls.
It is now dawn in Tehran - streets are quiet - we must move from here - this was good internet connection but not ours .
Last night thousands stayed in streets between Parkway and Vanak sq until after 2 am.
Unconfirmed - several Generals have been arested.
In Azadi sq the killing was by Baseej ONLY - military did not react -
Baseej militia and Etellaat following orders - they cannot contain country without Army.
Unconfirmed - military has refused orders to shoot protesters.
Kamenei is under pressure and fighting for survival - without ANejad his authority is finished.
Large demo today outside Tehran tv-radio headquarters - Karroubi attended .
Support for Mousavi in Tabriz is v-high - many protests .
Conflicting reports from Rasht of many dead and all night street fighting.
Situation in Ahwaz critical - many many dead in past 48 hrs - hundreds arrested and beaten .
Reliable hospital sources say that at least 8 killed in Azadi sq Monday.
Sheereen Ebadi - Nobel laureat - says Iran election is void.
Militia in streets of Tehran all night trying to scare ppl .
Sannaie & Bayat supporting Moussavi.
Several HR activists inc Ebadi have spoken out against election.
Reliable source - Montazeri has withdrawn support from Khamenei.
From Tuesday our march was big success!! militia are now frightened of us - they know world is watching.
Several arrests today after tracking thru twiter proxys.
Any proxy addss shown on twitter is possible trap - freedom twitters in Iran DO NOT follow - YOUR LOCATION IS VISIBLE.
Any proxy addss twittered is blocked almost immediately.
Sorry for delay - no ISP could be accessed for long time - are now in a different location for very short time with access.
DO NOT RT any other tweeters posts unless u are 100% sure they are GENUINE .
RT all my posts as much as possble to help confuse censors.
Our lives are in real danger now - we are the eyes - they need to stop us.
Pls everyone change your location on tweeter to IRAN inc timezone GMT+3.30 hrs.
For all followers outside Iran pls follow my next tweet - v\important .
You will know them by looking at their past tweets.
I cannot name the reliable sources because we are now the main attention of censors.
Ignore all instructions from new twitters or twitters with no history of accurate posts.
Do NOT follow any instructions on twitter except from the trusted sources -
IMPORTANT to all tweeters in iran - follow my next message carefuully.
Tonight twitter is full of gov usernames. all users IGNORE all posts except from reliable sources .
Reports of street fighting in azadi sq and surrounding st's -pepper gas and fires.
1000's on balconys - Tehran is alive with sound of freedom - marg bar dictator.
Many many arrests in Tehran 2day. hundreds. - now is dark. baseej start to make trouble.
Also DoS IRIB - all hacks IRIB.
DoS vezarat ershad - DoS - pls.
Sorry for not responding to soooo many follower. v\bad internet connection - thank u everybody 4 following.
Confirmed - tomorrow Haft Teer Sq at 4pm pro mousavi\freedom - carry flowers for baseej - no confrontation .
Our scout at Evin reports many many prisoners being brought and high security outside.
If u have functional portal\proxy which has not been twitted - pls do NOT tweet it - will tell u what to do with this later.
Unconfmd major incident at Azadi - shooting - fires - ppl running.
Tonight we will have full info about Ahwaz - contact has arrived in Tehran - v\weak internet today plus diff computr k\board.
Hackers pls target vezarat ershad website - we know they jaming from that proxy.
Unconfmd - Montazeri speaks out rejecting election result.
Call from Niavaran saying plainclothes going door2door now looking for satellite dsh.
ANejad supporters not civilian, but plain clothes, many from out of Teharn.
I estimate more than quarter million for mousavi.
Demo today v\peaceful but it is going to change tonight - too many baseej tody .
Some students have left but need to get off street before night.
We have info that Tehran uni will be attacked tonight - have contact inside - says uni blocked.
Have returned from valli asr to update and request help.
Everybody try to film as much as poss today on mobiles - v\imptnt - these are eyes of world. (17-6-09)
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-Mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
The twitters from Iran have been decreasing in number since 4 PM Indian Standard Time on June 17,2009. Some Twitters sites have been covered with pornographic pictures.
2. The Iranian authorities stepped up their efforts to silence the Twitters after a Twitter appealing to the members of the Iranian soccer team playing in South Korea to wear green wrist bands as a sign of protest was sent across.
3. Some other Twitters monitored before 4 PM disseminated the following messages:
confirmed by MOUSAVI - Thursday march - in memory of those killed - location tbc - sea of green.
Tehran march TODAY 5pm - 7Tir Sq - Meydan 7 Tir - silent - sea of green.
BEWARE.
Khamenei has said he will preside over Friday Prayers in Tehran this week - sea of green.
Mousavi supporters to march on Friday to Friday Prayers - Namaz Joame - Tehran - sea of green.
IRIB has been saying that demos r work of anti-gov thugs. IRIB want to turn ppl against Mousavi - hack them pls.
It is now dawn in Tehran - streets are quiet - we must move from here - this was good internet connection but not ours .
Last night thousands stayed in streets between Parkway and Vanak sq until after 2 am.
Unconfirmed - several Generals have been arested.
In Azadi sq the killing was by Baseej ONLY - military did not react -
Baseej militia and Etellaat following orders - they cannot contain country without Army.
Unconfirmed - military has refused orders to shoot protesters.
Kamenei is under pressure and fighting for survival - without ANejad his authority is finished.
Large demo today outside Tehran tv-radio headquarters - Karroubi attended .
Support for Mousavi in Tabriz is v-high - many protests .
Conflicting reports from Rasht of many dead and all night street fighting.
Situation in Ahwaz critical - many many dead in past 48 hrs - hundreds arrested and beaten .
Reliable hospital sources say that at least 8 killed in Azadi sq Monday.
Sheereen Ebadi - Nobel laureat - says Iran election is void.
Militia in streets of Tehran all night trying to scare ppl .
Sannaie & Bayat supporting Moussavi.
Several HR activists inc Ebadi have spoken out against election.
Reliable source - Montazeri has withdrawn support from Khamenei.
From Tuesday our march was big success!! militia are now frightened of us - they know world is watching.
Several arrests today after tracking thru twiter proxys.
Any proxy addss shown on twitter is possible trap - freedom twitters in Iran DO NOT follow - YOUR LOCATION IS VISIBLE.
Any proxy addss twittered is blocked almost immediately.
Sorry for delay - no ISP could be accessed for long time - are now in a different location for very short time with access.
DO NOT RT any other tweeters posts unless u are 100% sure they are GENUINE .
RT all my posts as much as possble to help confuse censors.
Our lives are in real danger now - we are the eyes - they need to stop us.
Pls everyone change your location on tweeter to IRAN inc timezone GMT+3.30 hrs.
For all followers outside Iran pls follow my next tweet - v\important .
You will know them by looking at their past tweets.
I cannot name the reliable sources because we are now the main attention of censors.
Ignore all instructions from new twitters or twitters with no history of accurate posts.
Do NOT follow any instructions on twitter except from the trusted sources -
IMPORTANT to all tweeters in iran - follow my next message carefuully.
Tonight twitter is full of gov usernames. all users IGNORE all posts except from reliable sources .
Reports of street fighting in azadi sq and surrounding st's -pepper gas and fires.
1000's on balconys - Tehran is alive with sound of freedom - marg bar dictator.
Many many arrests in Tehran 2day. hundreds. - now is dark. baseej start to make trouble.
Also DoS IRIB - all hacks IRIB.
DoS vezarat ershad - DoS - pls.
Sorry for not responding to soooo many follower. v\bad internet connection - thank u everybody 4 following.
Confirmed - tomorrow Haft Teer Sq at 4pm pro mousavi\freedom - carry flowers for baseej - no confrontation .
Our scout at Evin reports many many prisoners being brought and high security outside.
If u have functional portal\proxy which has not been twitted - pls do NOT tweet it - will tell u what to do with this later.
Unconfmd major incident at Azadi - shooting - fires - ppl running.
Tonight we will have full info about Ahwaz - contact has arrived in Tehran - v\weak internet today plus diff computr k\board.
Hackers pls target vezarat ershad website - we know they jaming from that proxy.
Unconfmd - Montazeri speaks out rejecting election result.
Call from Niavaran saying plainclothes going door2door now looking for satellite dsh.
ANejad supporters not civilian, but plain clothes, many from out of Teharn.
I estimate more than quarter million for mousavi.
Demo today v\peaceful but it is going to change tonight - too many baseej tody .
Some students have left but need to get off street before night.
We have info that Tehran uni will be attacked tonight - have contact inside - says uni blocked.
Have returned from valli asr to update and request help.
Everybody try to film as much as poss today on mobiles - v\imptnt - these are eyes of world. (17-6-09)
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-Mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Austria: Eurofighter Saga Continues
17 Jun 2009
With politically tinged arguments and cost overruns, the Eurofighter continues to be a target for controversy in Austria, writes Andrew Rhys Thompson for ISN Security Watch.
By Andrew Rhys Thompson for ISN Security Watch
The Eurofighter has had a rough ride in Austria. From the very beginning and since the previous center-right government made the strategic acquisition decision back in 2002, the aircraft has been a lightning rod of political disagreement and at the center of national defense debate.
While the ruling People's Party (ÖVP) initiated the procurement process in 2002, the opposition Social Democrats (SPÖ) invested a lot of political capital into ensuing attempts to prevent and possibly cancel the purchase of the expensive fighter jets. The SPÖ campaigned hard in the 2006 general elections with a Eurofighter cancellation platform; and even though the party won the election with 35 percent of the vote, it had no choice but to form a grand-coalition government with the ÖVP, forcing the SPÖ into a political compromise and making it impossible for the party to reverse the purchase process.
Ironically, Norbert Darabos, a declared SPÖ opponent of the jets, was appointed defense minister in the new government and in turn the aircraft became his direct responsibility. Unable to cancel the water-tight contract with the Eurofighter consortium, Darabos still embarked on path of negotiations with EADS in an attempt to secure a face-saving deal for his party and to partially appease the segments of the Austrian population that were opposed to the jet.
While EADS had clearly outlined to the Austrian government that canceling the contract would carry with it a €1.2 billion ($1.66 billion) penalty in exchange for zero aircraft, the company was willing to negotiate the final number of actually supplied jets, and in turn Darabos was able to reduce the Austrian purchase order from 18 to 15 in 2007. From the initial contract value of close to €2 billion for 18 jets, the negotiated reduction to 15 represented a net savings of about €250 million.
Increased cost, fewer jets
While Darabos was quick to trumpet his horn and represent his agreement with EADS as a boon to the Austrian taxpayer, subsequent verification by the Rechnungshof, the Austrian government's oversight office, however quickly showed that the change in contract conditions actually created completely new delivery parameters and also featured many negative side-effects.
Aside from reducing the total number of jets to 15, Darabos also slashed various options for technical upgrades and advanced equipment, such as the modernization of the jets to cutting-edge Tranche-2 standards or the fitting of nighttime infrared gear.
Furthermore, Darabos also accepted that 6 of the delivered aircraft may have been previously used and others may feature used components. The various reductions from the global budget also meant that EADS was able to cut its industrial off-set obligations and therefore the Austrian economy received less in exchange spending.
All in all, the 2008 report by the Rechnungshof calculated that instead of getting 18 state-of-the-art Tranche-2 jets at a price of €109 million each, as stipulated by the original contract, the revised Darabos deal meant that Austria was suddenly paying an increased unit price of €114 million for 15 partially used, less-advanced Tranche-1 jets. Not only the Rechnungshof concluded that the math didn't equate and EADS got the better end of the deal; the Austrian parliament and media in turn ripped Darabos, some even openly calling for his resignation.
Eurofighter deal plagued from start
The competitive €109 million price per jet was actually one of the leading factors that led the Austrian government to choose the Eurofighter back in 2002. Aside from the perceived value in price and various economic off-set deals, the desire for a prestigious next-generation aircraft that was fully compatible with the air forces of the country’s larger neighbors, made the Austrian government choose the Eurofighter over competing US offers for less expensive F-16 fighters or Swedish lobbying for the Gripen.
Despite that, the final selection of the Eurofighter originally surprised many people in the Austrian armed forces when the deal was announced. Many proponents from the Austrian air force had assumed that the Gripen would be the favored choice for a next-generation fighter, as Austria had just flown the Saab-built predecessor model, the Draken, since the 1970s.
While initially most of the political and financial controversy over the Eurofighters surrounded their almost €2 billion price tag, much of the follow-up argument has since then focused on cost overruns in infrastructure adaptations to house the jets, as well as disagreements over projected annual and lifetime operation costs.
The jets made came under fire again recently when the defense ministry had to concede that infrastructure improvements at the Zeltweg airbase, the only base in the country adapted to host the aircraft, had ballooned from €49 million to €160 million. This quickly led the opposition Green Party to call for an inquiry and to label the Zeltweg facility as a posh “Eurofighter Palazzo.”
On the operations front, the Austrian Defense Ministry has allocated €32 million per annum for the deployment and maintenance of the jets, even though a calculation by the Rechnungshof has estimated operations for 1500 flight hours to cost €50 million a year, later even climbing to over €100 million a year after 2013. If those projections prove accurate, and without the implementation of financial adjustments, the Austrian armed forces would have to cover the additional Eurofighter operations costs with funds originally earmarked for other purposes.
According to Professor Heinz Gärtner from the Austrian Institute for International Affairs, “Austria’s main defense profile lies in international missions and disaster relief. For these tasks the Eurofighter is useless,” he told ISN Security Watch.
“Territorial defense is only of tertiary importance. The high acquisition and maintenance costs of the Eurofighter require necessary cuts in other areas, such as helicopters, armed vehicles, air lift and surveillance, reconnaissance and communication.”
From a tactical point of view, the technical limitations and the politically induced downgrades of the aircraft have also forced the Austrian air force to forego any options for air defense and focus strictly on air policing responsibilities. Even there it seems handcuffed, as at present the 15 jets must share between themselves a total of 20 purchased missiles.
Although the Austrian government attempted to break away from the country’s image as one of the lowest spenders on defense matters, opting for a big-name, cutting-edge plane like the Eurofighter, the jet has so far only proven to be prestigious on paper and has been handcuffed by political processes and widespread unpopularity.
Andrew Rhys Thompson is a correspondent for ISN Security Watch.
With politically tinged arguments and cost overruns, the Eurofighter continues to be a target for controversy in Austria, writes Andrew Rhys Thompson for ISN Security Watch.
By Andrew Rhys Thompson for ISN Security Watch
The Eurofighter has had a rough ride in Austria. From the very beginning and since the previous center-right government made the strategic acquisition decision back in 2002, the aircraft has been a lightning rod of political disagreement and at the center of national defense debate.
While the ruling People's Party (ÖVP) initiated the procurement process in 2002, the opposition Social Democrats (SPÖ) invested a lot of political capital into ensuing attempts to prevent and possibly cancel the purchase of the expensive fighter jets. The SPÖ campaigned hard in the 2006 general elections with a Eurofighter cancellation platform; and even though the party won the election with 35 percent of the vote, it had no choice but to form a grand-coalition government with the ÖVP, forcing the SPÖ into a political compromise and making it impossible for the party to reverse the purchase process.
Ironically, Norbert Darabos, a declared SPÖ opponent of the jets, was appointed defense minister in the new government and in turn the aircraft became his direct responsibility. Unable to cancel the water-tight contract with the Eurofighter consortium, Darabos still embarked on path of negotiations with EADS in an attempt to secure a face-saving deal for his party and to partially appease the segments of the Austrian population that were opposed to the jet.
While EADS had clearly outlined to the Austrian government that canceling the contract would carry with it a €1.2 billion ($1.66 billion) penalty in exchange for zero aircraft, the company was willing to negotiate the final number of actually supplied jets, and in turn Darabos was able to reduce the Austrian purchase order from 18 to 15 in 2007. From the initial contract value of close to €2 billion for 18 jets, the negotiated reduction to 15 represented a net savings of about €250 million.
Increased cost, fewer jets
While Darabos was quick to trumpet his horn and represent his agreement with EADS as a boon to the Austrian taxpayer, subsequent verification by the Rechnungshof, the Austrian government's oversight office, however quickly showed that the change in contract conditions actually created completely new delivery parameters and also featured many negative side-effects.
Aside from reducing the total number of jets to 15, Darabos also slashed various options for technical upgrades and advanced equipment, such as the modernization of the jets to cutting-edge Tranche-2 standards or the fitting of nighttime infrared gear.
Furthermore, Darabos also accepted that 6 of the delivered aircraft may have been previously used and others may feature used components. The various reductions from the global budget also meant that EADS was able to cut its industrial off-set obligations and therefore the Austrian economy received less in exchange spending.
All in all, the 2008 report by the Rechnungshof calculated that instead of getting 18 state-of-the-art Tranche-2 jets at a price of €109 million each, as stipulated by the original contract, the revised Darabos deal meant that Austria was suddenly paying an increased unit price of €114 million for 15 partially used, less-advanced Tranche-1 jets. Not only the Rechnungshof concluded that the math didn't equate and EADS got the better end of the deal; the Austrian parliament and media in turn ripped Darabos, some even openly calling for his resignation.
Eurofighter deal plagued from start
The competitive €109 million price per jet was actually one of the leading factors that led the Austrian government to choose the Eurofighter back in 2002. Aside from the perceived value in price and various economic off-set deals, the desire for a prestigious next-generation aircraft that was fully compatible with the air forces of the country’s larger neighbors, made the Austrian government choose the Eurofighter over competing US offers for less expensive F-16 fighters or Swedish lobbying for the Gripen.
Despite that, the final selection of the Eurofighter originally surprised many people in the Austrian armed forces when the deal was announced. Many proponents from the Austrian air force had assumed that the Gripen would be the favored choice for a next-generation fighter, as Austria had just flown the Saab-built predecessor model, the Draken, since the 1970s.
While initially most of the political and financial controversy over the Eurofighters surrounded their almost €2 billion price tag, much of the follow-up argument has since then focused on cost overruns in infrastructure adaptations to house the jets, as well as disagreements over projected annual and lifetime operation costs.
The jets made came under fire again recently when the defense ministry had to concede that infrastructure improvements at the Zeltweg airbase, the only base in the country adapted to host the aircraft, had ballooned from €49 million to €160 million. This quickly led the opposition Green Party to call for an inquiry and to label the Zeltweg facility as a posh “Eurofighter Palazzo.”
On the operations front, the Austrian Defense Ministry has allocated €32 million per annum for the deployment and maintenance of the jets, even though a calculation by the Rechnungshof has estimated operations for 1500 flight hours to cost €50 million a year, later even climbing to over €100 million a year after 2013. If those projections prove accurate, and without the implementation of financial adjustments, the Austrian armed forces would have to cover the additional Eurofighter operations costs with funds originally earmarked for other purposes.
According to Professor Heinz Gärtner from the Austrian Institute for International Affairs, “Austria’s main defense profile lies in international missions and disaster relief. For these tasks the Eurofighter is useless,” he told ISN Security Watch.
“Territorial defense is only of tertiary importance. The high acquisition and maintenance costs of the Eurofighter require necessary cuts in other areas, such as helicopters, armed vehicles, air lift and surveillance, reconnaissance and communication.”
From a tactical point of view, the technical limitations and the politically induced downgrades of the aircraft have also forced the Austrian air force to forego any options for air defense and focus strictly on air policing responsibilities. Even there it seems handcuffed, as at present the 15 jets must share between themselves a total of 20 purchased missiles.
Although the Austrian government attempted to break away from the country’s image as one of the lowest spenders on defense matters, opting for a big-name, cutting-edge plane like the Eurofighter, the jet has so far only proven to be prestigious on paper and has been handcuffed by political processes and widespread unpopularity.
Andrew Rhys Thompson is a correspondent for ISN Security Watch.
Italy, Libya Mend Fences
17 Jun 2009
Both countries got what they wanted out of Muammar Gaddafi's Rome visit, signaling that each party is willing to put the past behind, comments Dr Dominic Moran for ISN Security Watch.
By Dominic Moran for ISN Security Watch
Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi's recently completed three-day visit to Rome was his usual mix of hugs and slaps with pledges of bilateral cooperation accompanied by the usual theatrics.
Facing opposition to his visit from left of center legislators, Gaddafi stood up the chamber, refusing to turn up for his scheduled parliamentary address.
Nevertheless, the visit signaled the completion of a turnaround in the two countries' often fraught relations.
Here, the focus is on Italy's colonial occupation of Libya from 1911. In a highly symbolic move, Gaddafi included in his Rome party the grandson of Omar al-Mukhtar, the revered leader of the anti-occupation struggle, hanged by the Italian colonial authorities in 1931.
Italian pretensions reached an apogee under Mussolini with moves to incorporate Libyan holdings into the state and the transplantation of around 110,000 Italians to Libyan coastal cities by 1940.
Most remaining Italians were expelled after Gaddafi's 1969 seizure of power, so his Rome meeting with their representatives - during which he offered repatriation - underlines that Libya is seeking a fresh start in bilateral relations. It also may constitute an indirect signal to Israel given that many of those ejected were Jews.
All this was made possible by the Berlusconi government's offer last August of a 25-year US$5 billion compensation package for past injustices.
The potential payoff for Italy is immense. Gaddafi pledged in Rome that Italy would have priority in Libya's €11.8 billion (US$16.3 billion) foreign investment plan – crucial to the redevelopment of Libya's dilapidated public sector and in bolstering oil and gas extraction.
The Guardian reports that Italian investors are already being offered a variety of sweeteners including a 5-year tax break on profits and discounted energy.
According to the Libyan Investment Fund, 52 Italian companies are now operating in the country – the largest representation of any single country. Gaddafi held talks in Rome with the head of Italian energy giant Eni, which focused on the extension of joint ventures with Libya's National Oil Corporation (NOC) and on boosting Libyan gas supplies to Europe.
State-controlled Libyan funds already have significant investments in Italian firms including Eni and Unicredit. Eni signed fresh oil and gas deals with NOC last year running through to 2042 and 2047 respectively and remains the largest player in the Libyan gas market. Construction company Impregilo and electricity generator Enel are also reportedly drawing interest from the Libyan Investment Authority.
For the EU, the development of Maghreb gas supplies is crucial in efforts to diversify supply and undercut Russian market predominance.
Italy now relies on Libya for 25 percent of its oil imports and 33 percent of its gas supply. Gaddafi pledged in Rome that gas and oil deals with other foreign partners would not be made at Rome's expense.
However, the progressive extension of Libyan relations with France, Russia, the US and others are likely to progressively undermine Italy's favored nation position.
Libya has a clear interest in technology and infrastructure indigenization (investment funding is usually premised on joint venture development) that will also likely diminish the influence of Italian partners in the long term.
Nevertheless, a short-term, inside run at key energy contracts and related Libyan investment moves will almost certainly prove a major boon for the slumping Italian economy.
Dr Dominic Moran, based in Tel Aviv, is ISN Security Watch's senior correspondent in the Middle East and the Director of Operations of ISA Consulting.
Both countries got what they wanted out of Muammar Gaddafi's Rome visit, signaling that each party is willing to put the past behind, comments Dr Dominic Moran for ISN Security Watch.
By Dominic Moran for ISN Security Watch
Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi's recently completed three-day visit to Rome was his usual mix of hugs and slaps with pledges of bilateral cooperation accompanied by the usual theatrics.
Facing opposition to his visit from left of center legislators, Gaddafi stood up the chamber, refusing to turn up for his scheduled parliamentary address.
Nevertheless, the visit signaled the completion of a turnaround in the two countries' often fraught relations.
Here, the focus is on Italy's colonial occupation of Libya from 1911. In a highly symbolic move, Gaddafi included in his Rome party the grandson of Omar al-Mukhtar, the revered leader of the anti-occupation struggle, hanged by the Italian colonial authorities in 1931.
Italian pretensions reached an apogee under Mussolini with moves to incorporate Libyan holdings into the state and the transplantation of around 110,000 Italians to Libyan coastal cities by 1940.
Most remaining Italians were expelled after Gaddafi's 1969 seizure of power, so his Rome meeting with their representatives - during which he offered repatriation - underlines that Libya is seeking a fresh start in bilateral relations. It also may constitute an indirect signal to Israel given that many of those ejected were Jews.
All this was made possible by the Berlusconi government's offer last August of a 25-year US$5 billion compensation package for past injustices.
The potential payoff for Italy is immense. Gaddafi pledged in Rome that Italy would have priority in Libya's €11.8 billion (US$16.3 billion) foreign investment plan – crucial to the redevelopment of Libya's dilapidated public sector and in bolstering oil and gas extraction.
The Guardian reports that Italian investors are already being offered a variety of sweeteners including a 5-year tax break on profits and discounted energy.
According to the Libyan Investment Fund, 52 Italian companies are now operating in the country – the largest representation of any single country. Gaddafi held talks in Rome with the head of Italian energy giant Eni, which focused on the extension of joint ventures with Libya's National Oil Corporation (NOC) and on boosting Libyan gas supplies to Europe.
State-controlled Libyan funds already have significant investments in Italian firms including Eni and Unicredit. Eni signed fresh oil and gas deals with NOC last year running through to 2042 and 2047 respectively and remains the largest player in the Libyan gas market. Construction company Impregilo and electricity generator Enel are also reportedly drawing interest from the Libyan Investment Authority.
For the EU, the development of Maghreb gas supplies is crucial in efforts to diversify supply and undercut Russian market predominance.
Italy now relies on Libya for 25 percent of its oil imports and 33 percent of its gas supply. Gaddafi pledged in Rome that gas and oil deals with other foreign partners would not be made at Rome's expense.
However, the progressive extension of Libyan relations with France, Russia, the US and others are likely to progressively undermine Italy's favored nation position.
Libya has a clear interest in technology and infrastructure indigenization (investment funding is usually premised on joint venture development) that will also likely diminish the influence of Italian partners in the long term.
Nevertheless, a short-term, inside run at key energy contracts and related Libyan investment moves will almost certainly prove a major boon for the slumping Italian economy.
Dr Dominic Moran, based in Tel Aviv, is ISN Security Watch's senior correspondent in the Middle East and the Director of Operations of ISA Consulting.
QUOTE OF THE DAY: Kanwal Sibal on Indo-US Relations
Kanwal SibalIndia faces strategic threats principally from two countries-Pakistan and China, with both collaborating to confront and contain India. Our strategic partnership with the US would not have much meaning if its policies aggravate our problems, instead of alleviating them. The US is giving massive arms aid to Pakistan, irrespective of the implications for India. Much of this assistance has already been used by Pakistan to augment its conventional strength against us. US-Pakistan military links, currently being strengthened, have traditionally worked against our interests. US's Af-Pak policy, with its potential overtures to the "good" Taliban, has strategic downsides for us. Would Obama's conspicuous courtship of the Muslim world shield a major Muslim country like Pakistan from real accountability, however erratic its conduct? It is also ironical that the country that persists in selling arms to Pakistan wants to be India's choice defense partner, selling us the same arms! With our other strategic adversary, the talk of a US-China diarchy, at least financial to begin with, says all.
Our strategic relationship with the US should take care of our interests too, and not merely mean India becoming an integral part of US strategy.
Mahindra to Help India Beat China to U.S. Auto Market
By Alan Ohnsman and Vipin V. Nair
Updated: New York, Jun 17 07:35
June 17 (Bloomberg) -- Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd., India’s largest maker of sport-utility vehicles, is betting its diesel pickup trucks can beat the Chinese to the U.S. market.
Early next year, Mumbai-based Mahindra plans to start selling small 2- and 4-door pickups with a diesel engine that meets California’s strict exhaust rules. U.S. plans for Chinese brands such as Cherry Automobile Co. and Geely Automobile Holdings Ltd. have yet to materialize, five years into their announcements.
“Once you establish the brand, volumes will come,” Pawan Goenka, Mahindra’s president in charge of the automotive business, said in a June 16 interview. “There is a hole available to us which is not populated.”
Mahindra’s trucks will arrive in the U.S. even as recession and job losses have pushed auto sales to the lowest in three decades, triggering bankruptcy filings for General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC. A weak economy and cheaper diesel prices may help the Indian automaker win buyers seeking a bargain, said industry analyst Eric Noble.
“It’s not a bad time to launch a durable, value-oriented brand,” said Noble, president of Car Lab, an Orange, California-based consulting firm for automakers. “There’s no real competition in compact trucks with a diesel powertrain.”
“Totally Unknown”
With a brand that’s “totally unknown” to U.S. customers, an Indian automaker will face the same challenges Hyundai Motor Co., Toyota Motor Corp. and Honda Motor Corp. faced when they entered the world’s largest economy, said Puneet Gupta, a New Delhi-based analyst at CSM Worldwide Inc. In India, Mahindra makes Scorpio and Bolero SUVs.
“It’s a big challenge,” Gupta said. “Selling a very cheap vehicle may not work. Selling in a matured market may also spoil your reputation if your product is not up-to-the expectations of customers there.”
Mahindra’s shares have more than doubled this year in Mumbai trading. That’s the best performance in the benchmark 30- share Sensex index during that period.
The vehicles will be “competitive” with similar vehicles in the range of $20,000 to less than $30,000, Goenka said, without giving a specific price. The company has spent between $60 million and $70 million in reworking its Scorpio SUV into a pickup for the U.S. market. Mahindra has set up a network of 336 dealers throughout the country.
Fuel Economy
Mahindra expects the pickups to get at least 30 miles per gallon in highway driving and carry a payload of at least 2,600 pounds. By comparison, Toyota’s gasoline-engine Tacoma, the best-selling small pickup in the U.S., gets 26 mpg on the highway and can carry 1,570 pounds in its bed. Diesel engines are generally at least 20 percent more fuel efficient than gasoline engines.
Key to Mahindra starting sales on schedule will be completing U.S. crash and safety tests by August, said Larry Daniel, senior vice president of sales and marketing at Global Vehicles U.S.A Inc., Mahindra’s distributor.
“We’re cutting it close, but are confident the trucks will do well in the tests,” Daniel said in a June 12 interview.
Plans for U.S. models from China’s Chery, first announced in late 2004, failed because of disagreements with its U.S. distribution partner Visionary Vehicles LLC. Chrysler LLC also abandoned plans to sell Chery-made cars in the U.S. Geely, China’s biggest privately owned carmaker, hasn’t met its initial goal of selling cars in the U.S. by 2008 amid talks with Ford Motor Co. on buying its Volvo Car unit.
GM’s Small Car
Last month, GM agreed with a United Auto Workers request to build small cars at an unnamed U.S. assembly plant instead of importing them from overseas. Detroit-based GM’s initial plan was to sell a U.S. version of a car built by Chinese venture partner SAIC Motor Corp., according to the Associated Press.
The first highway-legal Chinese car in the U.S. may be the Coda sedan, a battery-powered model that Santa Monica, California-based Miles Electric Vehicles plans to retail in California in late 2010. The model will be supplied by China’s Hafei Motor Co.
Mahindra was set up in 1945 as a franchise to assemble Jeeps of Willys, according to its Web site. The automaker later had a partnership with Ford Motor Co. and now makes the Logan sedan with Renault SA in India.
India Engineering
While China’s auto market has drawn more attention, India’s experience in the industry is longer, broader and more sophisticated, said Noble. China is the world’s largest auto market in the first five months of the year, ahead of the U.S.
“Probably half the global vehicle structural analysis for automakers gets done overnight in India,” Noble said. “Indian engineers have been part of the fabric of the automotive industry for 15 years. China’s engineering capabilities are much more nascent.”
Honda, which entered the U.S. pickup market four years ago with the midsize Ridgeline model, said Mahindra should be viewed as a serious competitor.
“We discount any new entrants at our own peril,” John Mendel, Honda’s U.S. executive vice president, said in a June 11 interview. “I think they can get it right.”
To contact the reporters on this story: Alan Ohnsman in Los Angeles at aohnsman@bloomberg.net; Vipin V. Nair in Mumbai at vnair12@bloomberg.net.
Last Updated: June 16, 2009 23:16 EDT
Updated: New York, Jun 17 07:35
June 17 (Bloomberg) -- Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd., India’s largest maker of sport-utility vehicles, is betting its diesel pickup trucks can beat the Chinese to the U.S. market.
Early next year, Mumbai-based Mahindra plans to start selling small 2- and 4-door pickups with a diesel engine that meets California’s strict exhaust rules. U.S. plans for Chinese brands such as Cherry Automobile Co. and Geely Automobile Holdings Ltd. have yet to materialize, five years into their announcements.
“Once you establish the brand, volumes will come,” Pawan Goenka, Mahindra’s president in charge of the automotive business, said in a June 16 interview. “There is a hole available to us which is not populated.”
Mahindra’s trucks will arrive in the U.S. even as recession and job losses have pushed auto sales to the lowest in three decades, triggering bankruptcy filings for General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC. A weak economy and cheaper diesel prices may help the Indian automaker win buyers seeking a bargain, said industry analyst Eric Noble.
“It’s not a bad time to launch a durable, value-oriented brand,” said Noble, president of Car Lab, an Orange, California-based consulting firm for automakers. “There’s no real competition in compact trucks with a diesel powertrain.”
“Totally Unknown”
With a brand that’s “totally unknown” to U.S. customers, an Indian automaker will face the same challenges Hyundai Motor Co., Toyota Motor Corp. and Honda Motor Corp. faced when they entered the world’s largest economy, said Puneet Gupta, a New Delhi-based analyst at CSM Worldwide Inc. In India, Mahindra makes Scorpio and Bolero SUVs.
“It’s a big challenge,” Gupta said. “Selling a very cheap vehicle may not work. Selling in a matured market may also spoil your reputation if your product is not up-to-the expectations of customers there.”
Mahindra’s shares have more than doubled this year in Mumbai trading. That’s the best performance in the benchmark 30- share Sensex index during that period.
The vehicles will be “competitive” with similar vehicles in the range of $20,000 to less than $30,000, Goenka said, without giving a specific price. The company has spent between $60 million and $70 million in reworking its Scorpio SUV into a pickup for the U.S. market. Mahindra has set up a network of 336 dealers throughout the country.
Fuel Economy
Mahindra expects the pickups to get at least 30 miles per gallon in highway driving and carry a payload of at least 2,600 pounds. By comparison, Toyota’s gasoline-engine Tacoma, the best-selling small pickup in the U.S., gets 26 mpg on the highway and can carry 1,570 pounds in its bed. Diesel engines are generally at least 20 percent more fuel efficient than gasoline engines.
Key to Mahindra starting sales on schedule will be completing U.S. crash and safety tests by August, said Larry Daniel, senior vice president of sales and marketing at Global Vehicles U.S.A Inc., Mahindra’s distributor.
“We’re cutting it close, but are confident the trucks will do well in the tests,” Daniel said in a June 12 interview.
Plans for U.S. models from China’s Chery, first announced in late 2004, failed because of disagreements with its U.S. distribution partner Visionary Vehicles LLC. Chrysler LLC also abandoned plans to sell Chery-made cars in the U.S. Geely, China’s biggest privately owned carmaker, hasn’t met its initial goal of selling cars in the U.S. by 2008 amid talks with Ford Motor Co. on buying its Volvo Car unit.
GM’s Small Car
Last month, GM agreed with a United Auto Workers request to build small cars at an unnamed U.S. assembly plant instead of importing them from overseas. Detroit-based GM’s initial plan was to sell a U.S. version of a car built by Chinese venture partner SAIC Motor Corp., according to the Associated Press.
The first highway-legal Chinese car in the U.S. may be the Coda sedan, a battery-powered model that Santa Monica, California-based Miles Electric Vehicles plans to retail in California in late 2010. The model will be supplied by China’s Hafei Motor Co.
Mahindra was set up in 1945 as a franchise to assemble Jeeps of Willys, according to its Web site. The automaker later had a partnership with Ford Motor Co. and now makes the Logan sedan with Renault SA in India.
India Engineering
While China’s auto market has drawn more attention, India’s experience in the industry is longer, broader and more sophisticated, said Noble. China is the world’s largest auto market in the first five months of the year, ahead of the U.S.
“Probably half the global vehicle structural analysis for automakers gets done overnight in India,” Noble said. “Indian engineers have been part of the fabric of the automotive industry for 15 years. China’s engineering capabilities are much more nascent.”
Honda, which entered the U.S. pickup market four years ago with the midsize Ridgeline model, said Mahindra should be viewed as a serious competitor.
“We discount any new entrants at our own peril,” John Mendel, Honda’s U.S. executive vice president, said in a June 11 interview. “I think they can get it right.”
To contact the reporters on this story: Alan Ohnsman in Los Angeles at aohnsman@bloomberg.net; Vipin V. Nair in Mumbai at vnair12@bloomberg.net.
Last Updated: June 16, 2009 23:16 EDT
LIMITS TO STRATEGIC TIES WITH U.S.
BY KANWAL SIBAL
Last week's visit to India of Undersecretary William Burns reflected both the qualitative improvement in our ties with the US and the fragility of our strategic relationship with it. That he met the Prime Minister, the External affairs, Home and HRD Ministers, the Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission, the National Security Adviser and others was exceptional in terms of access. The doors of our political leadership would not be so open to bureaucratic level visitors from other countries. This gesture was made because of the prime importance we now attach to our relations with America. The Indian Foreign Secretary too is received at much higher levels in Washington than previously.
During UPA's first term, an ambitious agenda of boosting bilateral ties in diverse fields- energy, defense, agriculture, science and technology, education, commerce etc- had been drawn up, but with patchy progress in implementation. UPA 2 would be in position to advance more purposefully as internal challenges to comprehensively expanding ties with the US have faded. Burns' visit was an occasion for the US to make a first hand assessment of government's thinking on India-US issues, and for India, through the upgraded access given, to both gauge the commitment of the Obama Administration to the renewed India-US relationship, as well as to convey our readiness to develop it further.
Most importantly, Burns visit was meant to prepare the ground for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's visit in the third week of July. As it is, Clinton has already visited a few Asian countries, beginning with China. She has already called, in a hyperbolic flourish, the US-China relationship as the most important bilateral relationship in the world. Burns has apparently assured the Indian side of the Obama Administration's desire to move the India relationship forward on all fronts. Between now and the date of Clinton's arrival both sides will presumably work hard to finalize some pending agreements so that some tangible results flow from the visit. Otherwise the existing impression that the Obama Administration attaches reduced importance to ties with India would get reinforced. A modest outcome would also signify that it is difficult for India, despite positive sentiments towards the US, to accept US legal frameworks for intensifying bilateral cooperation, not to mention aligning itself with US thinking on various issues to achieve that level of congruence in foreign policy that US protagonists of the nuclear deal had hoped for.
US is keen to expand defense ties with India. With contracts for transport and maritime reconnaissance aircraft concluded, it is now looking avidly at the contract for the 126 multi-role combat aircraft. The attempt would be to finalize three pending agreements: the end-user agreement, the communication information and security agreement and the one on logistics support. On the first, we are opposed to giving the US intrusive rights to inspect American supplied equipment in situ. That US law requires this, but that in practice the US will not be intrusive, cannot be an acceptable argument. As India is keen to obtain advanced technologies from the US, we seem to be open to some compromise, and would be ready to allow inspection at a convenient location. But appropriate language that would meet the requirement of both sides would need to be worked out. The second, some believe, would actually be helpful to India, but we want to be extra cautious. On the third, we prefer a case-by-case arrangement rather than a blanket one, as its benefits will be essentially one sided. Whether the differences in position can be reconciled by the time Clinton comes would be interesting to note, because if they did, it would show a degree of determination on both sides to give the Clinton visit an air of success. On the Proliferation Security Initiative, differences between the two sides remain.
The US nuclear industry would certainly look forward to some progress during Clinton's visit on realizing the commercial spin-offs for themselves of the Indo-US nuclear deal. India has committed itself to US companies setting up 10,000 MWs of civilian nuclear power capacity in the country in two different sites. So far no sites have been allotted to the Americans; legislative measures to limit the liability of foreign companies in case of nuclear accidents etc, which is a crucial pre-requisite for US companies, have not been taken by the government yet. Meanwhile, the erstwhile opponent of the nuclear deal, Ellen Tauscher, the newly appointed Undersecretary of Disarmament and Security, in her Senate confirmation hearings has mentioned the commercial opportunities awaiting the US companies. India has effectively linked real progress on contracts with US companies to the timely finalization of the bilateral Reprocessing Agreement, which was to have been completed within one year of the 123 Agreement. Burns announced in Delhi that talks on this subject will begin before August 2. The argument that whatever the line-up of opponents of the nuclear deal in the State Department, the US side, given their commercial stakes, will be pragmatic on the reprocessing question, will be tested in due course.
Burns, without possibly intending it, sounded almost patronizing when he said that while the US would welcome the resumption of dialogue between India and Pakistan, it was for India to decide on its scope, content and character. Who else would decide this for us in any case? His words provided us relief as we had worked ourselves up into believing that he, and Clinton when she comes, would press us to resume the dialogue. We should not feel defensive about our very reasonable position that as the Mumbai massacre organized by Pakistani elements interrupted the dialogue, Pakistan must deal credibly with these elements before the suspended dialogue can be resumed. Those who argue that not having a dialogue is not an option need to be reminded that the US has spurned a political level dialogue with Korea and Cuba for almost five decades and with Iran for three.
India faces strategic threats principally from two countries-Pakistan and China, with both collaborating to confront and contain India. Our strategic partnership with the US would not have much meaning if its policies aggravate our problems, instead of alleviating them. The US is giving massive arms aid to Pakistan, irrespective of the implications for India. Much of this assistance has already been used by Pakistan to augment its conventional strength against us. US-Pakistan military links, currently being strengthened, have traditionally worked against our interests. US's Af-Pak policy, with its potential overtures to the "good" Taliban, has strategic downsides for us. Would Obama's conspicuous courtship of the Muslim world shield a major Muslim country like Pakistan from real accountability, however erratic its conduct? It is also ironical that the country that persists in selling arms to Pakistan wants to be India's choice defense partner, selling us the same arms! With our other strategic adversary, the talk of a US-China diarchy, at least financial to begin with, says all.
Our strategic relationship with the US should take care of our interests too, and not merely mean India becoming an integral part of US strategy.
The writer is a former Foreign Secretary(sibalkanwal@gmail.com)
The End of the Affair? Washington's Cooling Passion for New Delhi
ForeignAffairs.org
Sumit Ganguly and S. Paul Kapur
SUMIT GANGULY is the Rabindranath Tagore Professor in Indian Cultures and Civilizations at Indiana University. S. PAUL KAPUR is an associate professor in the Department of National Security Affairs at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School; the views expressed here are his own.
One of the signature features, and generally acknowledged successes, of the George W. Bush administration's foreign policy was the close relationship forged between the United States and India. For decades, due to Cold War politics and mutual antagonism over India's quest for nuclear weapons, the U.S.-Indian relationship had languished. The Bush administration, however, identified India as a potential strategic partner early on and chose to build on the goodwill the Clinton administration had garnered with New Delhi in its closing days. The capstone of Bush's efforts was the U.S.-Indian nuclear deal, which gave India access to technology and material for its civilian nuclear program in spite of its refusal to sign the Nonproliferation Treaty. By the time Bush left office, U.S. relations with India were the best they had ever been.
By contrast, during its first months in office, the Obama administration has essentially ignored India. Until this week, the only senior administration official to make a significant India-related policy speech has been Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg. In its dealings with Asia, the administration has focused instead on China, Afghanistan, and Pakistan -- going so far in its attempt to woo the latter as to float the idea of mediating the Kashmir dispute (something long sought by Islamabad but anathema to New Delhi).
This behavior has not gone unnoticed. India's strategic elites recognize that no other U.S. president is likely to match Bush's personal commitment to strengthening Indo-U.S. ties, but they worry that Barack Obama's apparent lack of interest could do real harm to the relationship and squander recent hard-won gains.
Were this indeed to occur, it would be a major blunder. India and the United States share important interests on some of today's most pressing strategic issues, including the struggle against Islamist terrorism, the stabilization and de-Talibanization of Afghanistan, the cautious engagement of a rising China, and the pursuit of improved bilateral economic ties. To advance those common interests, however, Washington and New Delhi need to cooperate closely.
The United States fully woke to the dangers of Islamist terrorism only after September 11, 2001. India, by contrast, began battling Islamist militants in Kashmir during the late 1980s. Since 9/11, the United States has avoided further attacks on its soil, while India has suffered numerous terrorist incidents, including an assault on its parliament and a multiple, coordinated strikes in Mumbai. The response to the Mumbai attacks revealed significant shortcomings in India's anti-terrorism capabilities. Nonetheless, India can provide valuable analytical, logistical, and intelligence support to U.S. anti-terrorism efforts. What is more, India truly cares about the issue -- something that cannot always be said about other supposed U.S. allies in the war on terror, including Pakistan.
The Obama administration has made the stabilization of Afghanistan one of its top priorities, meanwhile, relying heavily on Pakistani cooperation to defeat radical Islamist militants there and across the Pakistani border. Yet Pakistani support for this project has been lukewarm, and many in the Pakistani military and intelligence services still see the militants not as enemies to be defeated but as once and future allies.
India has taken a different approach to the Afghan problem from its subcontinental neighbor's, spending approximately $750 million in recent years (and pledging $1.6 billion more) to help rebuild the country and spur development. This makes India Afghanistan's sixth largest bilateral aid donor. Projects funded by New Delhi include the rebuilding of the Afghan national airline; the construction of telecommunications, power, and transportation networks; and improved sanitation facilities. Indian policymakers believe that these efforts will help to stabilize the country, thereby lowering the odds of a Taliban resurgence, curtailing Pakistan's regional influence, and facilitating Indian ties with energy-rich Central Asia. Such goals are clearly rooted in national self-interest, but the point is that Indian and U.S. interests converge here. Washington should thus support and expand Indian involvement in Afghanistan, rather than relying exclusively or even primarily on Pakistan's help.
When it comes to the rise of China, India -- like the United States -- is watching closely. One of New Delhi's greatest concerns is its unresolved Himalayan border dispute with Beijing. This triggered a bloody war between the two countries in 1962, in which the Indians were thoroughly trounced. The two sides have made only glacial progress in resolving the disagreement since then, and it has remained a source of recurring tension. Energy issues also dog the Sino-Indian relationship, as both rising giants have begun competing actively for access to oil from Africa to Asia. India thus shares the U.S. interest in ensuring that China does not emerge as an Asia-Pacific hegemon. No Indian regime will participate in any outright American attempt to contain China, but many Indian policymakers and strategists would be prepared to work with the United States in pursuing a hedging strategy against potential Chinese revisionism.
The Congress Party's recent electoral victory, finally, should allow the Indian government to move forward on a number of long-delayed reforms designed to maintain and increase economic growth. Given growing U.S.-Indian economic ties, as well as the need to pull both the American and Indian economies out of a slump, such efforts can only benefit both nations. The United States should gently prod New Delhi to tackle reforms in such nettlesome areas as labor law, land acquisition legislation, and the power sector.
Given the two countries' numerous and important common interests, the Obama administration's neglect of India is puzzling. Perhaps senior decision-makers have worried that paying too much attention to India will derail efforts to nurture Sino-U.S. ties, or get in the way of cooperation with Pakistan. Perhaps the Obama team has been irked by India's continued refusal to join the nuclear nonproliferation regime. Or perhaps the administration has simply wanted to distinguish itself from its predecessor. Whatever the reason, a clear signal is being sent and received -- as a previous Bush might have put it, "Message: I don't care."
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is expected to give a major policy speech on India this week. She and the administration could begin to engage India by taking its concerns about Pakistan-supported terror in Kashmir and elsewhere seriously, by eschewing any temptation to mediate the Kashmir dispute, by working more closely with New Delhi on stabilizing Afghanistan, and by stepping up the pace on bilateral discussions about renewable energy technology cooperation. Progress on the last item would be particularly sensible, since it would advance two agendas simultaneously -- helping India to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (a looming source of contention) and enabling U.S. firms to develop and sell green technologies.
In recent months, some deft negotiation has eased bilateral disputes over end-user agreements on U.S. weapons sales to India. Similar pragmatism in other areas, along with some solicitous gestures from the Obama team, can make sure the relationship continues to warm rather than cooling down.
Copyright © 2002-2009 by the Council on Foreign Relations, Inc.
All rights reserved.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source URL: http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/65141/sumit-ganguly-and-s-paul-kapur/the-end-of-the-affair
Sumit Ganguly and S. Paul Kapur
SUMIT GANGULY is the Rabindranath Tagore Professor in Indian Cultures and Civilizations at Indiana University. S. PAUL KAPUR is an associate professor in the Department of National Security Affairs at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School; the views expressed here are his own.
One of the signature features, and generally acknowledged successes, of the George W. Bush administration's foreign policy was the close relationship forged between the United States and India. For decades, due to Cold War politics and mutual antagonism over India's quest for nuclear weapons, the U.S.-Indian relationship had languished. The Bush administration, however, identified India as a potential strategic partner early on and chose to build on the goodwill the Clinton administration had garnered with New Delhi in its closing days. The capstone of Bush's efforts was the U.S.-Indian nuclear deal, which gave India access to technology and material for its civilian nuclear program in spite of its refusal to sign the Nonproliferation Treaty. By the time Bush left office, U.S. relations with India were the best they had ever been.
By contrast, during its first months in office, the Obama administration has essentially ignored India. Until this week, the only senior administration official to make a significant India-related policy speech has been Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg. In its dealings with Asia, the administration has focused instead on China, Afghanistan, and Pakistan -- going so far in its attempt to woo the latter as to float the idea of mediating the Kashmir dispute (something long sought by Islamabad but anathema to New Delhi).
This behavior has not gone unnoticed. India's strategic elites recognize that no other U.S. president is likely to match Bush's personal commitment to strengthening Indo-U.S. ties, but they worry that Barack Obama's apparent lack of interest could do real harm to the relationship and squander recent hard-won gains.
Were this indeed to occur, it would be a major blunder. India and the United States share important interests on some of today's most pressing strategic issues, including the struggle against Islamist terrorism, the stabilization and de-Talibanization of Afghanistan, the cautious engagement of a rising China, and the pursuit of improved bilateral economic ties. To advance those common interests, however, Washington and New Delhi need to cooperate closely.
The United States fully woke to the dangers of Islamist terrorism only after September 11, 2001. India, by contrast, began battling Islamist militants in Kashmir during the late 1980s. Since 9/11, the United States has avoided further attacks on its soil, while India has suffered numerous terrorist incidents, including an assault on its parliament and a multiple, coordinated strikes in Mumbai. The response to the Mumbai attacks revealed significant shortcomings in India's anti-terrorism capabilities. Nonetheless, India can provide valuable analytical, logistical, and intelligence support to U.S. anti-terrorism efforts. What is more, India truly cares about the issue -- something that cannot always be said about other supposed U.S. allies in the war on terror, including Pakistan.
The Obama administration has made the stabilization of Afghanistan one of its top priorities, meanwhile, relying heavily on Pakistani cooperation to defeat radical Islamist militants there and across the Pakistani border. Yet Pakistani support for this project has been lukewarm, and many in the Pakistani military and intelligence services still see the militants not as enemies to be defeated but as once and future allies.
India has taken a different approach to the Afghan problem from its subcontinental neighbor's, spending approximately $750 million in recent years (and pledging $1.6 billion more) to help rebuild the country and spur development. This makes India Afghanistan's sixth largest bilateral aid donor. Projects funded by New Delhi include the rebuilding of the Afghan national airline; the construction of telecommunications, power, and transportation networks; and improved sanitation facilities. Indian policymakers believe that these efforts will help to stabilize the country, thereby lowering the odds of a Taliban resurgence, curtailing Pakistan's regional influence, and facilitating Indian ties with energy-rich Central Asia. Such goals are clearly rooted in national self-interest, but the point is that Indian and U.S. interests converge here. Washington should thus support and expand Indian involvement in Afghanistan, rather than relying exclusively or even primarily on Pakistan's help.
When it comes to the rise of China, India -- like the United States -- is watching closely. One of New Delhi's greatest concerns is its unresolved Himalayan border dispute with Beijing. This triggered a bloody war between the two countries in 1962, in which the Indians were thoroughly trounced. The two sides have made only glacial progress in resolving the disagreement since then, and it has remained a source of recurring tension. Energy issues also dog the Sino-Indian relationship, as both rising giants have begun competing actively for access to oil from Africa to Asia. India thus shares the U.S. interest in ensuring that China does not emerge as an Asia-Pacific hegemon. No Indian regime will participate in any outright American attempt to contain China, but many Indian policymakers and strategists would be prepared to work with the United States in pursuing a hedging strategy against potential Chinese revisionism.
The Congress Party's recent electoral victory, finally, should allow the Indian government to move forward on a number of long-delayed reforms designed to maintain and increase economic growth. Given growing U.S.-Indian economic ties, as well as the need to pull both the American and Indian economies out of a slump, such efforts can only benefit both nations. The United States should gently prod New Delhi to tackle reforms in such nettlesome areas as labor law, land acquisition legislation, and the power sector.
Given the two countries' numerous and important common interests, the Obama administration's neglect of India is puzzling. Perhaps senior decision-makers have worried that paying too much attention to India will derail efforts to nurture Sino-U.S. ties, or get in the way of cooperation with Pakistan. Perhaps the Obama team has been irked by India's continued refusal to join the nuclear nonproliferation regime. Or perhaps the administration has simply wanted to distinguish itself from its predecessor. Whatever the reason, a clear signal is being sent and received -- as a previous Bush might have put it, "Message: I don't care."
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is expected to give a major policy speech on India this week. She and the administration could begin to engage India by taking its concerns about Pakistan-supported terror in Kashmir and elsewhere seriously, by eschewing any temptation to mediate the Kashmir dispute, by working more closely with New Delhi on stabilizing Afghanistan, and by stepping up the pace on bilateral discussions about renewable energy technology cooperation. Progress on the last item would be particularly sensible, since it would advance two agendas simultaneously -- helping India to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (a looming source of contention) and enabling U.S. firms to develop and sell green technologies.
In recent months, some deft negotiation has eased bilateral disputes over end-user agreements on U.S. weapons sales to India. Similar pragmatism in other areas, along with some solicitous gestures from the Obama team, can make sure the relationship continues to warm rather than cooling down.
Copyright © 2002-2009 by the Council on Foreign Relations, Inc.
All rights reserved.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source URL: http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/65141/sumit-ganguly-and-s-paul-kapur/the-end-of-the-affair
June 16, 2009
Dmitry Medvedev's interview to the China Central TV Host
12:2515/06/2009
Interview to the China Central TV Host
June 15, 2009
Gorki, Moscow Region
ZHANG YU: I was very happy that you have accepted our request for this interview.
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: I am also glad to be interviewed by you.
ZHANG YU: I have learnt that you swim in the pool every morning and evening. Is it so?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: What you say is absolutely true. Indeed, Iswim in the mornings and evenings, in the morning I swim a long distance, and in the evening – a shorter. On average I swim about 1,000 to 1,500 meters a day to keep fit. I think that it is very important for everybody, including the President, as there is certain stress in my work, flights and trips. Russia is a large country after all. And in general, I think that it is very important for all of us to be in good shape.
In this regard, I would like to say that Chinese culture also gives us fine examples of how to exercise and look after one's health. There is traditional Chinese medicine. We are very interested in all of these issues now, and are keeping close tabs on it with certain fascination.
ZHANG YU: Thank you very much.
We noted that in your address in April you mentioned that the Russian economy is facing great difficulties. Can we say now that those difficulties have already been overcome?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: Indeed, my budget policy outlines and some other documents are largely focused on the situation in the economy. Unfortunately, we cannot say yet that all the difficulties have been overcome. That is true, I think, with regard to the entire world economy and all national economies. All of us are now undertaking efforts to address the consequences of the global financial crisis; we are doing that in our country, our partners are doing that, and the People's Republic of China is doing that too.
What can I say about the current situation? Unfortunately, in recent years, despite a certain progress achieved in modernising our national economy, we failed to solve a number of problems. I have in mind, first of all, the commodity bias in our exports as well as our failure to create an elaborate and effective banking system which would be less sensitive to speculative financial flows. That is why, when we came to face problems with our exports, including falling prices for major energy commodities, and the outflow of speculative funds omnipresent on any market we found ourselves in a rather difficult situation which could not but affect the industrial production and the entire real sector resulting in the slowing down of the economy growth. Unfortunately, this year we do not expect any GDP growth in absolute figures. Rather, the GDP is likely to drop. For the moment we are anticipating a 6 percent fall but the situation can aggravate.
Regarding other indicators, they also could be better. Inflation, though it has slowed down, remains high and there are problems on the labor market with the total number of officially unemployed exceeding 2.2million which is quite a lot for Russia. Besides, there are those who are not registered with employment offices. Overall, in our estimate the number of people looking for a job is about 6million. Therefore, it is a serious social problem which we are also trying to address.
What is being done to that end? A special anti-crisis government program has been developed to support the real sector of the economy, including individual enterprises, especially large ones being sole or major employers for local residents. Another program has been designed to support people who either have lost their jobs, are on an unpaid vacation or have to work part-time. Measures contemplated in the latter program include retraining, raising unemployment benefits, assistance in launching numerous small businesses which would employ people who are currently unemployed. It is quite a serious, arduous effort that we undertake. We do not overdramatise the situation which is, in general, neither worse nor better than in the majority of developed economies, but we understand that a lot still needs to be done.
Just a few days ago, St Petersburg International Economic Forum was held. Within its framework, I met with representatives of other countries and, naturally, we all came to a rather simple conclusion that the global crisis requires a global response which makes it necessary to set a new financial architecture, and that is what we are doing now. We are doing that in coordination with our partners, especially such close ones as the People's Republic of China.
ZHANG YU: As for the Russian raw materials exports, we know that the energy sector played a major role in reviving the Russian economy. In the current global financial and economic crisis energy prices have sunk, and the Russian economy is now facing certain problems. In what way, you think, should they be addressed?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: The solution is as follows: on the one hand, we should develop our energy sector as the fundamental industry shaping our export capacity and generating the main cash flow. On the other hand, we must on the whole reform and diversify the economic structure in our country. We need more economic diversity. We have quite a number of relevant programmes; we believe, for instance, that innovations, which constitute a very promising factor of economic development, are under-used in our country. We would like to see our economy more adapted to modern conditions. We would like to see a greater share of IT in the economy. We would like our companies to be more fit for contemporary economic environment. In this context, the main lesson we have learned from this crisis is the need to set up a more diverse economy. We look at other players, analyse other countries' experiences, study the energetic and successful development of the Chinese economy in recent years. We see that you managed to significantly diversify your economy. That has stood China in good stead helping it to withstand the impacts of the economic crisis. This is exactly the approach we should follow. This maybe the main lesson of the crisis and the main initiative for the future.
ZHANG YU: Before you took the office of the President, you had repeatedly asserted that your task was to improve the quality of life of the people; now, during your Presidency you are facing the economic crisis. Is the current situation likely to affect your crucial task, i.e. improvement of quality of life of the people?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: Certainly, the task will stand unchanged. Improvement of the quality of life of Russian citizens is a task of paramount importance for the state and a major priority of our social development. In the current situation, the crisis is, certainly, not something that makes people feel positive; however, so far we had no substantial worsening. Moreover, we practically managed to preserve the revenue base that existed both in the private and public sectors. We adjust the benefits, the wages, and we also keep an eye on private enterprises to ensure timely payment of wages.
There are problems with certain companies that have problems due to, for instance, the operation cycle disruptions or collapse of export prices. Such companies receive specific targeted support.
However, there is nothing dramatic with the living standards of our people. And we are set to ensure that the impact of the crisis on the living standards in Russia be almost none.
I believe this goal is feasible, we should just go for it on a daily basis. This is exactly what our Government and I are doing.
ZHANG YU: When we arrived in Russia, we learned that according to opinion polls your approval rating is 68percent. It means that you have not disappointed the voters' trust.
We would also like to know how you assess your first year of Presidency?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: I think that it is not up to me to assess the ratings or even more so – to give an assessment of my own actions. First and foremost, it is the business of those who track the actions of politicians and, naturally, sociological researchers.
Yet, speaking of my perceptions, I believe that despite rather many dramatic events, that took place during the last few years, including the current crisis that gives all of us a rather bad time, our main achievement is that we have managed to maintain the development trend of our country and society, and the pursuit of the goals that we have set. Not a single social program, not a single economic program has been rolled back even despite the crisis. This is probably what is most important. We want to ensure the fulfillment of those tasks, which we have put so much effort into during the last few years. By the way, our foreign policy priorities remain the same, including development of close partnership relations with the People’s Republic of China- our strategic partner- with which we have special trust-based friendly relations. So, I believe that this kind of continuity should ensure stable development of our country for many years ahead. This is what I will continue to do.
ZHANG YU: As far as we know, you have your own Internet blog frequented by a large audience. Do you maintain it personally? Do you read the comments left by its visitors?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: This is a good, relevant question. You know, I have been using Internet for a rather long time, probably for about 12 years and I have been following the development of this global information network. I think it is a very promising thing and for a very big number of individuals on our planet it is a source of the most various– official, news and informal - information that meets the most different requirements. That is why I found it important that the state leaders have a good command of it. For these reasons the Presidential web portal was modified to include a special section where the video blog of the President of the Russian Federation is maintained. I make notes there periodically, present my views on one or another topical issue. I address domestics issues, including those related to the crisis, sometimes I highlight less pressing subjects that are yet of great interest for our people, and sometimes I talk on the foreign policy problems.
Certainly after that these subjects are discussed, people write their comments expressing interest and sometimes criticism and sometimes their gratitude for something. But nevertheless it is very important that such first hand information really comes on my desk, in more exact terms, to my PC and I see by myself what the people who visit the web-site and comment on my video blog presentation, write.
Sometimes in case of complicated situations I give certain instructions, because if there are some major and serious shortcomings or problems I have to issue immediate instructions to rectify ones. I do not do it all the time but in some cases it has to be done. So this is a direct and very efficient information channel that links the President, on the one hand, to all other people having a computer and wishing to communicate, on the other hand.
ZHANG YU: On May20, an entry appeared in your blog which generated great public interest. Its subject was fight against corruption. You also said that you would declare your and your family's income.
The question is whether this is a symbolical act or any measures have been taken to fight corruption which lead to a real tangible result?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: You know, this decision— I refer to the decision to fight corruption— has little to do with the blog entry of May20; the decision had been made much earlier. Certainly, there may be some symbolism, but it was mainly a substantive step. Corruption is a social evil, and a great evil for Russia, I regret to say. It can be found in any society, in any state, yet for us it is a burning issue. Therefore it calls for a systemic response.
I am referring to amending legislation. I referred to it as far as a year ago. Now the relevant legislation has been adopted. We have established a special national Anti-Corruption Council which is tasked with countering corruption. Changes have been introduced to legislation. A special law has been adopted which has defined the corruption and for the first time included special requirements applying to civil servants. A number of Presidential executive orders have been enacted. Certainly, these decisions should necessarily be backed with relevant steps at the ministerial, regional and municipal levels. For this reason it is vital that this message from the top is heard all the way to the bottom.
As for my being happy with any results of this work, you know, it is too early to speak about it; the work has just begun. This issue has a long history and is a burning one. Nevertheless, the fact that we have managed to elaborate a legal framework for the first time in the Russian history— that is, for the first time in a thousand years— is an achievement. That means some experience has been gained, including the practices of civil servants' declaring their incomes. Certainly, one can always say that part of the income may be concealed, yet if a civil servant has declared his or her income and at the same time he or she has property which does not correspond to this income, it will always provoke discussions in the media, in the press, and make law enforcement agencies analyze and respond to this situation. That is why a step was made in the right direction when all ministers, senior officials of the Presidential Executive Office, and regional governors followed the President's example and published their income declarations. We will continue our efforts, as the task is really immense; yet, I believe we can curb corruption in this country.
ZHANG YU: You said it was difficult for you to assess your own performance, but could you nevertheless make an assessment of your work in tandem with Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. You once said that time would prove the efficiency of this tandem. It has been a year since you said it. How well do you think this tandem is working at presen?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: I think that everything is all right, everything is fine. I believe that we indeed work together efficiently - me as President, and Mr Putin as Prime Minister. Furthermore, I must say frankly that during our joint work we faced a series of dramatic events, including the crisis that we are discussing, and some other problems of regional dimension. I believe that due to our concerted efforts we manage to resolve many problems and we are doing it quite efficiently. I would like to reiterate that it is not up to the politicians to assess their own performance, nevertheless I believe that this mechanism works and it works effectively.
ZHANG YU: Chinese President Hu Jintao will undertake a state visit to Russia in just a few days. What kind of results do you expect to get from this visit, and what do you think of future prospects for the relations between China and Russia?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: Needless to say that we have high expectations. We are looking forward to meeting Chinese President Hu Jintao in our country during his state visit, which will become an important milestone in the Russian-Chinese relations. What is more important, however, is that we communicate on a regular basis, holding at least four or five meetings a year in various formats. A state visit, of course, is the culminating point, but we communicate in other formats as well, meet each other at various international forums as well as at regional organisational meetings of any kind. For example, our country will soon host the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit in Yekaterinburg, as well as the first summit of BRIC, the organization of Brazil, Russia, India and China. Such regional and international forums also give us an opportunity to share information.
As for the visit itself, it is clearly a landmark event. It takes place regularly, at least once a year, in the form of either the Chinese President’s visit to our country or the Russian President’s visit to the People’s Republic of China, and is usually accompanied by a series of parallel events. To begin with, our countries have actually established strategic partnership and cooperation, and each of these visits helps to deepen them. We have recently achieved a substantial progress in our trade and economic as well as humanitarian relations. Naturally, such visits provide an opportunity for signing new agreements and finding new ways for the promotion of our multifaceted ties.
A lot has been done recently to advance our energy dialogue. In fact, we have launched this mechanism a while ago; we first agreed on it with the Chinese President during my first visit to the People’s Republic of China last year, which was, in fact, one of my first international visits. This mechanism has proved to be effective. We have concluded solid and serious energy agreements on a practical level, and we have implemented a whole bunch of economic projects, not just energy-related ones. We hope to advance them further as well, including through our joint efforts with the Chinese President.
Our humanitarian dialogue is making good progress. The Year of Russia in China and the Year of the People’s Republic of China in Russia have been among the most significant events in recent years. They were held on an unprecedented scale, with each side organising approximately 300 activities, which helped our citizens to get to know each other better. This year was designated as the Year of the Russian Language in the People’s Republic of China; next year will be declared as the Year of the Chinese Language in Russia. A whole series of events will mark these occasions, with approximately 40 to 50 various thematic events being planned by each side. We therefore maintain very intensive contacts at the level of our bilateral relations.
Yet we also have this international dimension. Russia and the People’s Republic of China coordinate their positions on international issues, the issues of maintaining regional security within the SCO and BRIC formats that I have just mentioned, as well as through our contacts in the framework of interaction of our two countries at the United Nations. We also have formats in which our countries participate as key peace process and verification sponsors.
Let me just mention, for instance, the situation around North Korea. In other words, our relations are really at the highest level. Speaking with utmost openness, this is the highest level of ties in the history of Russian-Chinese relations. Now these are genuinely friendly and partner relations. And we would like to further develop them. All the more so as on October2, 2009 we will be celebrating the 60th anniversary of establishment of diplomatic relations between our two countries, and on October1, 2009 the People’s Republic of China is going to celebrate a great day – the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the People's Republic of China. I think that these two events are very closely connected.
ZHANG YU: I think that no one could miss the news story this March that showed you at the control wheel of the SU-34 aircraft. And of course many immediately recalled how MrPutin, the then President, flew a combat aircraft during the Chechen campaign.
We wonder whether it was not just your interest in military equipment. Probably you wanted to deliver some kind of a message by this?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: I indeed wanted to deliver several messages. First, I wanted to learn first hand about the potential of Russian equipment, Russian aircraft and, in particular, such modern aircraft as SU-34. And I wish to tell you straightly that I have experienced it all personally and therefore I am convinced that this equipment is really great. We are interested to expand the export geography for these aircraft to include our neighbors as well as other countries. This is message number one.
Message number two is obvious. Any national leader is the Commander-in-Chief and should put himself in the shoes of the people serving in the Armed Forces and go through their experiences: excessive strain and other challenges facing those who have dedicated their lives to military service. Therefore, the flight was in a way my fulfilled desire to feel the experience of our pilots when they go through overloads in order to fulfill complex, sometimes combat, tasks. It is simply necessary in order to do my job better. I am glad I have done this. Among other things it is very exciting to make a fly-by and have a look at our country, at our land from the SU-34 aircraft, which is an excellent fighter-bomber.
ZHANGYU: We noted that in your first State of the Nation Address you criticised the United States, in particular, over the issue of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. How do you evaluate the present international order?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: Well, the situation around South Ossetia and Abkhazia is certainly very complicated. Let me recall that in the judgment of the Russian Federation and in my own opinion as the President of the country, everything that happened was brought about by the irresponsible and delinquent policy pursued by the Georgian leadership at that time. If it were not for these witless actions life could develop diffetently. Nevertheless, some very grave actions, very dangerous actions were committed that led to human losses. As a result, the Russian Federation had to protect its own citizens, the citizens of South Ossetia and in fact the citizens of Abkhazia too. After that we granted recognition to these new states, having recognised South Ossetia and Abkhazia as subjects of international law.
The United States took a rather tough stand regarding these actions. Finally, this is for this state to decide. We took our decision all by ourselves, without reckoning upon any support in this regard since this was our humanitarian, and, if you wish, simply and solely moral duty in this situation. Nevertheless, we really had rather difficult talks on this subject with the United States and other European partners, but I am not dramatising anything. The present situation is somewhat different. We may diverge on certain issues but our decision is irreversible, the decision we adopted was certainly painful. Today we are engaged in rendering assistance to these new states- both economic, humanitarian and military technical- and will continue to do this in the future, irrespective of whether somebody likes it or not. This is our choice and we will work with these projects.
However needless to say that we are ready to and will discuss with our partners all the issues related to the whole security situation in the Caucasus, the issues of both humanitarian and economic nature, being prepared to do this in any venues. The only thing is that we have some kind of "red lines". One of them I already mentioned- this is our decision to grant recognition. And the second one is our attitude to the present Georgian regime. It is our view that this political regime committed a crime and we shall have nothing in common with it. At the same time after elections that sooner or later will be held in Georgia we surely will be ready to resume deliberations on different issues if the Georgian people elect a new leadership capable of maintaining a friendly dialogue with Russia and with close neighbors of the Georgian state- peoples of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
ZHANG YU: Thank you very much.
Mr President. do you have time to go to shows and performances?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: Not very often but sometimes I go to the theatre. This does not happen as often as I wish, time was when I went to the theatre more frequently.
ZHANG YU: Let me make you a genuinely Chinese present. This is a pencraft made by a very famous Chinese craftsman.
D.MEDVEDEV: What is written here?
ZHANG YU: Wisdom and virtuousness win new friends. These are your qualities- wisdom and virtuousness.
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: The more so when it comes to such close friend of ours as the People's Republic of Chine.
Thank you. This is beautiful. I like Chinese art very much, including pencraft. Generally speaking, I would like to say that we take a great interest in Chinese art and Chinese history.
Thank you
Interview to the China Central TV Host
June 15, 2009
Gorki, Moscow Region
ZHANG YU: I was very happy that you have accepted our request for this interview.
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: I am also glad to be interviewed by you.
ZHANG YU: I have learnt that you swim in the pool every morning and evening. Is it so?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: What you say is absolutely true. Indeed, Iswim in the mornings and evenings, in the morning I swim a long distance, and in the evening – a shorter. On average I swim about 1,000 to 1,500 meters a day to keep fit. I think that it is very important for everybody, including the President, as there is certain stress in my work, flights and trips. Russia is a large country after all. And in general, I think that it is very important for all of us to be in good shape.
In this regard, I would like to say that Chinese culture also gives us fine examples of how to exercise and look after one's health. There is traditional Chinese medicine. We are very interested in all of these issues now, and are keeping close tabs on it with certain fascination.
ZHANG YU: Thank you very much.
We noted that in your address in April you mentioned that the Russian economy is facing great difficulties. Can we say now that those difficulties have already been overcome?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: Indeed, my budget policy outlines and some other documents are largely focused on the situation in the economy. Unfortunately, we cannot say yet that all the difficulties have been overcome. That is true, I think, with regard to the entire world economy and all national economies. All of us are now undertaking efforts to address the consequences of the global financial crisis; we are doing that in our country, our partners are doing that, and the People's Republic of China is doing that too.
What can I say about the current situation? Unfortunately, in recent years, despite a certain progress achieved in modernising our national economy, we failed to solve a number of problems. I have in mind, first of all, the commodity bias in our exports as well as our failure to create an elaborate and effective banking system which would be less sensitive to speculative financial flows. That is why, when we came to face problems with our exports, including falling prices for major energy commodities, and the outflow of speculative funds omnipresent on any market we found ourselves in a rather difficult situation which could not but affect the industrial production and the entire real sector resulting in the slowing down of the economy growth. Unfortunately, this year we do not expect any GDP growth in absolute figures. Rather, the GDP is likely to drop. For the moment we are anticipating a 6 percent fall but the situation can aggravate.
Regarding other indicators, they also could be better. Inflation, though it has slowed down, remains high and there are problems on the labor market with the total number of officially unemployed exceeding 2.2million which is quite a lot for Russia. Besides, there are those who are not registered with employment offices. Overall, in our estimate the number of people looking for a job is about 6million. Therefore, it is a serious social problem which we are also trying to address.
What is being done to that end? A special anti-crisis government program has been developed to support the real sector of the economy, including individual enterprises, especially large ones being sole or major employers for local residents. Another program has been designed to support people who either have lost their jobs, are on an unpaid vacation or have to work part-time. Measures contemplated in the latter program include retraining, raising unemployment benefits, assistance in launching numerous small businesses which would employ people who are currently unemployed. It is quite a serious, arduous effort that we undertake. We do not overdramatise the situation which is, in general, neither worse nor better than in the majority of developed economies, but we understand that a lot still needs to be done.
Just a few days ago, St Petersburg International Economic Forum was held. Within its framework, I met with representatives of other countries and, naturally, we all came to a rather simple conclusion that the global crisis requires a global response which makes it necessary to set a new financial architecture, and that is what we are doing now. We are doing that in coordination with our partners, especially such close ones as the People's Republic of China.
ZHANG YU: As for the Russian raw materials exports, we know that the energy sector played a major role in reviving the Russian economy. In the current global financial and economic crisis energy prices have sunk, and the Russian economy is now facing certain problems. In what way, you think, should they be addressed?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: The solution is as follows: on the one hand, we should develop our energy sector as the fundamental industry shaping our export capacity and generating the main cash flow. On the other hand, we must on the whole reform and diversify the economic structure in our country. We need more economic diversity. We have quite a number of relevant programmes; we believe, for instance, that innovations, which constitute a very promising factor of economic development, are under-used in our country. We would like to see our economy more adapted to modern conditions. We would like to see a greater share of IT in the economy. We would like our companies to be more fit for contemporary economic environment. In this context, the main lesson we have learned from this crisis is the need to set up a more diverse economy. We look at other players, analyse other countries' experiences, study the energetic and successful development of the Chinese economy in recent years. We see that you managed to significantly diversify your economy. That has stood China in good stead helping it to withstand the impacts of the economic crisis. This is exactly the approach we should follow. This maybe the main lesson of the crisis and the main initiative for the future.
ZHANG YU: Before you took the office of the President, you had repeatedly asserted that your task was to improve the quality of life of the people; now, during your Presidency you are facing the economic crisis. Is the current situation likely to affect your crucial task, i.e. improvement of quality of life of the people?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: Certainly, the task will stand unchanged. Improvement of the quality of life of Russian citizens is a task of paramount importance for the state and a major priority of our social development. In the current situation, the crisis is, certainly, not something that makes people feel positive; however, so far we had no substantial worsening. Moreover, we practically managed to preserve the revenue base that existed both in the private and public sectors. We adjust the benefits, the wages, and we also keep an eye on private enterprises to ensure timely payment of wages.
There are problems with certain companies that have problems due to, for instance, the operation cycle disruptions or collapse of export prices. Such companies receive specific targeted support.
However, there is nothing dramatic with the living standards of our people. And we are set to ensure that the impact of the crisis on the living standards in Russia be almost none.
I believe this goal is feasible, we should just go for it on a daily basis. This is exactly what our Government and I are doing.
ZHANG YU: When we arrived in Russia, we learned that according to opinion polls your approval rating is 68percent. It means that you have not disappointed the voters' trust.
We would also like to know how you assess your first year of Presidency?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: I think that it is not up to me to assess the ratings or even more so – to give an assessment of my own actions. First and foremost, it is the business of those who track the actions of politicians and, naturally, sociological researchers.
Yet, speaking of my perceptions, I believe that despite rather many dramatic events, that took place during the last few years, including the current crisis that gives all of us a rather bad time, our main achievement is that we have managed to maintain the development trend of our country and society, and the pursuit of the goals that we have set. Not a single social program, not a single economic program has been rolled back even despite the crisis. This is probably what is most important. We want to ensure the fulfillment of those tasks, which we have put so much effort into during the last few years. By the way, our foreign policy priorities remain the same, including development of close partnership relations with the People’s Republic of China- our strategic partner- with which we have special trust-based friendly relations. So, I believe that this kind of continuity should ensure stable development of our country for many years ahead. This is what I will continue to do.
ZHANG YU: As far as we know, you have your own Internet blog frequented by a large audience. Do you maintain it personally? Do you read the comments left by its visitors?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: This is a good, relevant question. You know, I have been using Internet for a rather long time, probably for about 12 years and I have been following the development of this global information network. I think it is a very promising thing and for a very big number of individuals on our planet it is a source of the most various– official, news and informal - information that meets the most different requirements. That is why I found it important that the state leaders have a good command of it. For these reasons the Presidential web portal was modified to include a special section where the video blog of the President of the Russian Federation is maintained. I make notes there periodically, present my views on one or another topical issue. I address domestics issues, including those related to the crisis, sometimes I highlight less pressing subjects that are yet of great interest for our people, and sometimes I talk on the foreign policy problems.
Certainly after that these subjects are discussed, people write their comments expressing interest and sometimes criticism and sometimes their gratitude for something. But nevertheless it is very important that such first hand information really comes on my desk, in more exact terms, to my PC and I see by myself what the people who visit the web-site and comment on my video blog presentation, write.
Sometimes in case of complicated situations I give certain instructions, because if there are some major and serious shortcomings or problems I have to issue immediate instructions to rectify ones. I do not do it all the time but in some cases it has to be done. So this is a direct and very efficient information channel that links the President, on the one hand, to all other people having a computer and wishing to communicate, on the other hand.
ZHANG YU: On May20, an entry appeared in your blog which generated great public interest. Its subject was fight against corruption. You also said that you would declare your and your family's income.
The question is whether this is a symbolical act or any measures have been taken to fight corruption which lead to a real tangible result?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: You know, this decision— I refer to the decision to fight corruption— has little to do with the blog entry of May20; the decision had been made much earlier. Certainly, there may be some symbolism, but it was mainly a substantive step. Corruption is a social evil, and a great evil for Russia, I regret to say. It can be found in any society, in any state, yet for us it is a burning issue. Therefore it calls for a systemic response.
I am referring to amending legislation. I referred to it as far as a year ago. Now the relevant legislation has been adopted. We have established a special national Anti-Corruption Council which is tasked with countering corruption. Changes have been introduced to legislation. A special law has been adopted which has defined the corruption and for the first time included special requirements applying to civil servants. A number of Presidential executive orders have been enacted. Certainly, these decisions should necessarily be backed with relevant steps at the ministerial, regional and municipal levels. For this reason it is vital that this message from the top is heard all the way to the bottom.
As for my being happy with any results of this work, you know, it is too early to speak about it; the work has just begun. This issue has a long history and is a burning one. Nevertheless, the fact that we have managed to elaborate a legal framework for the first time in the Russian history— that is, for the first time in a thousand years— is an achievement. That means some experience has been gained, including the practices of civil servants' declaring their incomes. Certainly, one can always say that part of the income may be concealed, yet if a civil servant has declared his or her income and at the same time he or she has property which does not correspond to this income, it will always provoke discussions in the media, in the press, and make law enforcement agencies analyze and respond to this situation. That is why a step was made in the right direction when all ministers, senior officials of the Presidential Executive Office, and regional governors followed the President's example and published their income declarations. We will continue our efforts, as the task is really immense; yet, I believe we can curb corruption in this country.
ZHANG YU: You said it was difficult for you to assess your own performance, but could you nevertheless make an assessment of your work in tandem with Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. You once said that time would prove the efficiency of this tandem. It has been a year since you said it. How well do you think this tandem is working at presen?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: I think that everything is all right, everything is fine. I believe that we indeed work together efficiently - me as President, and Mr Putin as Prime Minister. Furthermore, I must say frankly that during our joint work we faced a series of dramatic events, including the crisis that we are discussing, and some other problems of regional dimension. I believe that due to our concerted efforts we manage to resolve many problems and we are doing it quite efficiently. I would like to reiterate that it is not up to the politicians to assess their own performance, nevertheless I believe that this mechanism works and it works effectively.
ZHANG YU: Chinese President Hu Jintao will undertake a state visit to Russia in just a few days. What kind of results do you expect to get from this visit, and what do you think of future prospects for the relations between China and Russia?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: Needless to say that we have high expectations. We are looking forward to meeting Chinese President Hu Jintao in our country during his state visit, which will become an important milestone in the Russian-Chinese relations. What is more important, however, is that we communicate on a regular basis, holding at least four or five meetings a year in various formats. A state visit, of course, is the culminating point, but we communicate in other formats as well, meet each other at various international forums as well as at regional organisational meetings of any kind. For example, our country will soon host the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit in Yekaterinburg, as well as the first summit of BRIC, the organization of Brazil, Russia, India and China. Such regional and international forums also give us an opportunity to share information.
As for the visit itself, it is clearly a landmark event. It takes place regularly, at least once a year, in the form of either the Chinese President’s visit to our country or the Russian President’s visit to the People’s Republic of China, and is usually accompanied by a series of parallel events. To begin with, our countries have actually established strategic partnership and cooperation, and each of these visits helps to deepen them. We have recently achieved a substantial progress in our trade and economic as well as humanitarian relations. Naturally, such visits provide an opportunity for signing new agreements and finding new ways for the promotion of our multifaceted ties.
A lot has been done recently to advance our energy dialogue. In fact, we have launched this mechanism a while ago; we first agreed on it with the Chinese President during my first visit to the People’s Republic of China last year, which was, in fact, one of my first international visits. This mechanism has proved to be effective. We have concluded solid and serious energy agreements on a practical level, and we have implemented a whole bunch of economic projects, not just energy-related ones. We hope to advance them further as well, including through our joint efforts with the Chinese President.
Our humanitarian dialogue is making good progress. The Year of Russia in China and the Year of the People’s Republic of China in Russia have been among the most significant events in recent years. They were held on an unprecedented scale, with each side organising approximately 300 activities, which helped our citizens to get to know each other better. This year was designated as the Year of the Russian Language in the People’s Republic of China; next year will be declared as the Year of the Chinese Language in Russia. A whole series of events will mark these occasions, with approximately 40 to 50 various thematic events being planned by each side. We therefore maintain very intensive contacts at the level of our bilateral relations.
Yet we also have this international dimension. Russia and the People’s Republic of China coordinate their positions on international issues, the issues of maintaining regional security within the SCO and BRIC formats that I have just mentioned, as well as through our contacts in the framework of interaction of our two countries at the United Nations. We also have formats in which our countries participate as key peace process and verification sponsors.
Let me just mention, for instance, the situation around North Korea. In other words, our relations are really at the highest level. Speaking with utmost openness, this is the highest level of ties in the history of Russian-Chinese relations. Now these are genuinely friendly and partner relations. And we would like to further develop them. All the more so as on October2, 2009 we will be celebrating the 60th anniversary of establishment of diplomatic relations between our two countries, and on October1, 2009 the People’s Republic of China is going to celebrate a great day – the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the People's Republic of China. I think that these two events are very closely connected.
ZHANG YU: I think that no one could miss the news story this March that showed you at the control wheel of the SU-34 aircraft. And of course many immediately recalled how MrPutin, the then President, flew a combat aircraft during the Chechen campaign.
We wonder whether it was not just your interest in military equipment. Probably you wanted to deliver some kind of a message by this?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: I indeed wanted to deliver several messages. First, I wanted to learn first hand about the potential of Russian equipment, Russian aircraft and, in particular, such modern aircraft as SU-34. And I wish to tell you straightly that I have experienced it all personally and therefore I am convinced that this equipment is really great. We are interested to expand the export geography for these aircraft to include our neighbors as well as other countries. This is message number one.
Message number two is obvious. Any national leader is the Commander-in-Chief and should put himself in the shoes of the people serving in the Armed Forces and go through their experiences: excessive strain and other challenges facing those who have dedicated their lives to military service. Therefore, the flight was in a way my fulfilled desire to feel the experience of our pilots when they go through overloads in order to fulfill complex, sometimes combat, tasks. It is simply necessary in order to do my job better. I am glad I have done this. Among other things it is very exciting to make a fly-by and have a look at our country, at our land from the SU-34 aircraft, which is an excellent fighter-bomber.
ZHANGYU: We noted that in your first State of the Nation Address you criticised the United States, in particular, over the issue of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. How do you evaluate the present international order?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: Well, the situation around South Ossetia and Abkhazia is certainly very complicated. Let me recall that in the judgment of the Russian Federation and in my own opinion as the President of the country, everything that happened was brought about by the irresponsible and delinquent policy pursued by the Georgian leadership at that time. If it were not for these witless actions life could develop diffetently. Nevertheless, some very grave actions, very dangerous actions were committed that led to human losses. As a result, the Russian Federation had to protect its own citizens, the citizens of South Ossetia and in fact the citizens of Abkhazia too. After that we granted recognition to these new states, having recognised South Ossetia and Abkhazia as subjects of international law.
The United States took a rather tough stand regarding these actions. Finally, this is for this state to decide. We took our decision all by ourselves, without reckoning upon any support in this regard since this was our humanitarian, and, if you wish, simply and solely moral duty in this situation. Nevertheless, we really had rather difficult talks on this subject with the United States and other European partners, but I am not dramatising anything. The present situation is somewhat different. We may diverge on certain issues but our decision is irreversible, the decision we adopted was certainly painful. Today we are engaged in rendering assistance to these new states- both economic, humanitarian and military technical- and will continue to do this in the future, irrespective of whether somebody likes it or not. This is our choice and we will work with these projects.
However needless to say that we are ready to and will discuss with our partners all the issues related to the whole security situation in the Caucasus, the issues of both humanitarian and economic nature, being prepared to do this in any venues. The only thing is that we have some kind of "red lines". One of them I already mentioned- this is our decision to grant recognition. And the second one is our attitude to the present Georgian regime. It is our view that this political regime committed a crime and we shall have nothing in common with it. At the same time after elections that sooner or later will be held in Georgia we surely will be ready to resume deliberations on different issues if the Georgian people elect a new leadership capable of maintaining a friendly dialogue with Russia and with close neighbors of the Georgian state- peoples of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
ZHANG YU: Thank you very much.
Mr President. do you have time to go to shows and performances?
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: Not very often but sometimes I go to the theatre. This does not happen as often as I wish, time was when I went to the theatre more frequently.
ZHANG YU: Let me make you a genuinely Chinese present. This is a pencraft made by a very famous Chinese craftsman.
D.MEDVEDEV: What is written here?
ZHANG YU: Wisdom and virtuousness win new friends. These are your qualities- wisdom and virtuousness.
DMITRY MEDVEDEV: The more so when it comes to such close friend of ours as the People's Republic of Chine.
Thank you. This is beautiful. I like Chinese art very much, including pencraft. Generally speaking, I would like to say that we take a great interest in Chinese art and Chinese history.
Thank you
Iranian president blasts U.S. at SCO summit in Russia
15:3316/06/2009
YEKATERINBURG, June 16 (RIA Novosti) - Iran's controversial president said on Tuesday that ongoing regional conflicts and the global economic crisis proved that the current unipolar world dominated by the United States is not viable.
Despite mass protests at home against his landslide reelection last Friday, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad arrived in the Urals city of Yekaterinburg for a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), in which Iran has observer status.
"Iraq continues to be occupied, chaos is growing in Afghanistan, the Palestinian problem remains unresolved, the world is swept by political and economic crises, and there is no hope for their resolution," he said.
Ahmadinejad said the U.S. and its allies were unable to cope with the crises, showing that "the end has come" for the current unipolar world order.
He urged the SCO to take a leading role in efforts to tackle the global economic recession, and reiterated Iran's ambition for closer cooperation with the regional group, which includes Russia, China and four ex-Soviet Central Asian republics.
The Islamic Republic, the world's fifth largest oil exporter, has lobbied for full membership in the organization, seen as a counterbalance to U.S. interests in energy-rich Central Asia. The security grouping has recently expanded its remit to encompass economic and energy projects.
Ahmadinejad briefly met with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on the sidelines of the summit on Tuesday. "The parties agreed to continue economic and humanitarian cooperation, and other contacts," a Kremlin spokesperson said after the meeting.
Media reports said earlier on Tuesday that Medvedev had canceled his bilateral meeting with Ahmadinejad, citing a busy schedule, as the Iranian leader arrived a day late.
Tehran and other Iranian cities were swept by mass protests at the weekend over alleged vote fraud in the reelection of the hardline, anti-Western president.
The protests, the worst since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, continued in defiance of a government ban on Monday, with sporadic shooting reported in the capital. Seven people were killed when shots were fired into a group of protesters, Iran's Press TV reported on Tuesday, citing state radio.
U.S. President Barack Obama said on Monday he was "deeply troubled" by the violence in Iran.
Russia's deputy foreign minister, Sergei Ryabkov, said on Tuesday that the "election in Iran is an internal affair of the Iranian people." He also welcomed Ahmadinejad as "the reelected president" on his first foreign visit.
Iran has been in the center of a long-running international dispute over its nuclear program. Western powers have been trying to persuade Tehran to halt nuclear activity suspecting it of plans to build a nuclear bomb. Iran says it needs nuclear technology for electricity generation.
Russia is completing the construction of Iran's first nuclear power plant, and has supplied nuclear fuel for it. Russia and China, permanent UN Security Council members, have prevented strict sanctions against the Islamic Republic over its controversial nuclear activity.
YEKATERINBURG, June 16 (RIA Novosti) - Iran's controversial president said on Tuesday that ongoing regional conflicts and the global economic crisis proved that the current unipolar world dominated by the United States is not viable.
Despite mass protests at home against his landslide reelection last Friday, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad arrived in the Urals city of Yekaterinburg for a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), in which Iran has observer status.
"Iraq continues to be occupied, chaos is growing in Afghanistan, the Palestinian problem remains unresolved, the world is swept by political and economic crises, and there is no hope for their resolution," he said.
Ahmadinejad said the U.S. and its allies were unable to cope with the crises, showing that "the end has come" for the current unipolar world order.
He urged the SCO to take a leading role in efforts to tackle the global economic recession, and reiterated Iran's ambition for closer cooperation with the regional group, which includes Russia, China and four ex-Soviet Central Asian republics.
The Islamic Republic, the world's fifth largest oil exporter, has lobbied for full membership in the organization, seen as a counterbalance to U.S. interests in energy-rich Central Asia. The security grouping has recently expanded its remit to encompass economic and energy projects.
Ahmadinejad briefly met with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on the sidelines of the summit on Tuesday. "The parties agreed to continue economic and humanitarian cooperation, and other contacts," a Kremlin spokesperson said after the meeting.
Media reports said earlier on Tuesday that Medvedev had canceled his bilateral meeting with Ahmadinejad, citing a busy schedule, as the Iranian leader arrived a day late.
Tehran and other Iranian cities were swept by mass protests at the weekend over alleged vote fraud in the reelection of the hardline, anti-Western president.
The protests, the worst since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, continued in defiance of a government ban on Monday, with sporadic shooting reported in the capital. Seven people were killed when shots were fired into a group of protesters, Iran's Press TV reported on Tuesday, citing state radio.
U.S. President Barack Obama said on Monday he was "deeply troubled" by the violence in Iran.
Russia's deputy foreign minister, Sergei Ryabkov, said on Tuesday that the "election in Iran is an internal affair of the Iranian people." He also welcomed Ahmadinejad as "the reelected president" on his first foreign visit.
Iran has been in the center of a long-running international dispute over its nuclear program. Western powers have been trying to persuade Tehran to halt nuclear activity suspecting it of plans to build a nuclear bomb. Iran says it needs nuclear technology for electricity generation.
Russia is completing the construction of Iran's first nuclear power plant, and has supplied nuclear fuel for it. Russia and China, permanent UN Security Council members, have prevented strict sanctions against the Islamic Republic over its controversial nuclear activity.
India and the Impending FMCT
Interview with Prof R Rajaraman
This interview aims to clarify the contentious issues regarding the Fissile Material Control Treaty (FMCT) and explains how these affect India's position on the treaty. According to the authors, whatever the final outcome of the scope of the FMCT may be, India has to prepare accordingly, especially on seminal matters such as its minimum credible deterrence, the existing stockpiles of plutonium, and its fast breeder reactor program.
© 2009 Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS)
Download: English (PDF · 8 pages · 180 KB)
Author: Rekha Chakravarthi, Yogesh Joshi
Series:
IPCS Special Reports
Issue: 73
Publisher: Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies , New Delhi , India
Ahmadinejad or Obama -- Who Will Have the Last Laugh?
By B. Raman
The surprise re-election of incumbent Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the first round itself of the Iranian Presidential elections on June 12, 2009, has been questioned by his opponents in the reformist camp, who had backed his leading opponent Mir Hossein Mousavi. According to the results announced by the Interior Ministry, Ahmadinejad secured 62.6 per cent of the votes polled and Mousavi only 33.8 per cent.
2. Reliable reports from Iran during the election campaign did not speak of any pro-Ahmadinejad wave. On the contrary, there were reports of unusual support for Mousavi, the reformist candidate, who had promised a change from the confrontationist policies of the incumbent President.
3. The unusually large turn-out of 85 per cent of the eligible voters strengthened the impression of an anti-Ahmadinejad wave and gave rise to expectations of a possible Mousavi victory in the first round itself. The announcement by the Interior Ministry that Ahmadinejad has been voted back with a huge majority has stunned his opponents, who suspect widespread rigging by the official machinery to ensure the continuance in power of Ahmadinejad.
4. There have been reports of sporadic violent incidents by the angry members of the reformist groups who have questioned the validity of the results. Over 100 leading members and cadres of the reformist groups are reported to have been arrested.
5. Opponents of Ahmadinejad can challenge his election before the Guardian Council before Sunday, but the Council, which has traditionally been against the reformists, is unlikely to set the election aside. The endorsement of the election results by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the country’s supreme leader, makes it unlikely that the challenges of the opposition will be accepted.
6. With the backing of Ayatollah Khamenei, Ahmadinejad should have no difficulty in putting down any street violence if it persists. The reformists too may like to avoid a confrontational situation over the disputed election.
7. From the initial pronouncements of Ahmadinejad, who has hailed his re-election as an epic moment, it is apparent that he is not embarrassed by the opposition allegations of rigging and is confident of the legitimacy of his re-election ultimately prevailing.
8. The country most concerned by the re-election of Ahmadinejad would be Israel. There is unlikely to be any change in his hardline, virulent stand against Israel and the Jewish people and he will continue with his policy of seeking to undermine the Jewish State. He will press ahead with Iran’s nuclear programme by expanding its capacity for uranium enrichment by installing more centrifuges under the pretext of producing low-grade enriched uranium for the production of electricity.
9. At a time, when Israel is confused and disheartened by the less than enthusiastic support for its security concerns from the Barack Obama Administration, the re-election of Ahmadinejad would add to its fears regarding the security of the country and its citizens living in the midst of a hostile Islamic world.
10. What gave confidence and optimism to Israel in the past was the steadfast support from a succession of American Presidents. Right from the birth of the State of Israel, successive US Presidents had not hesitated to strongly endorse and support the security concerns of Israel. For the first time, the US has a President, who has been showing a worrisome insensitivity to the concerns of Israel and the Jewish people and has been trying to project a picture of neutrality in the confrontation between the Jewish people and the Arabs and Iranians, in the belief, which could prove to be mistaken, that he could thereby win the hearts and minds of the Arabs and other Muslims.
11. At a time when large sections of the people of Israel feel increasingly that their basic interests have been betrayed by Obama, the re-election of Ahmadinejad, who had in the past vowed to work against the existence of Israel, would add to Israeli fears of an existential threat to the Jewish State and strengthen its determination to act against Iran before it acquires a military nuclear capability.
12. Presuming that the large number of votes that Ahmadinejad reportedly obtained were genuine and not rigged, the rallying of so many voters behind him could be attributed only partially to their support for his pro-poor economic policies. Another major reason ought to have been their endorsement of his hardline policy towards Israel and the US and his determination to press ahead with Iran’s nuclear programme. It is a strong nationalistic vote meant to support the foreign and nuclear policies hitherto followed by Ahmadinejad.
13. The US would have hoped for the victory of the reformists. These hopes have been belied and the US would have to make do with Ahmadinejad. Iran is not North Korea. North Korea has only the nuclear and missile cards against the US. Iran has many--- its oil, the support enjoyed by it in the Islamic world, its perceived indispensability for peace and stability in Iraq and a similar role that it could play in Afghanistan. With so many cards in its hands, Obama will find Iran a tough nut to crack.
14. The US has had the Israeli card against Iran. Teheran was always nervous about the possibility of the US encouraging Israel to put Iran in its place if the worst comes to the worst. Obama has thrown away that card much to the relief of Iran.
15. If Iran spurns Obama’s overtures to it and follows on its nuclear and anti-Israel path, Obama has not kept for himself a fall-back option. In his anxiety to project a “good guy” image of himself right across the Islamic world, including Iran, Obama has unwittingly encouraged hardline elements such as Ahmadinejad, who have no genuine love for the US and who will lose no opportunity to make the interests of the Islamic world prevail over those of the international community.
16. The US may have to pay a heavy price for Obama’s policy U-turns in the Arab world and towards Iran.
17. Who will have the last laugh---- Obama or the likes of Ahmadinejad, Kim-Jong-il, Mulla Mohammad Omar, the Amir of the Afghan Taliban, or Osama bin Laden? One wishes it will be Obama, but one apprehends it may not be him.
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com)
The surprise re-election of incumbent Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the first round itself of the Iranian Presidential elections on June 12, 2009, has been questioned by his opponents in the reformist camp, who had backed his leading opponent Mir Hossein Mousavi. According to the results announced by the Interior Ministry, Ahmadinejad secured 62.6 per cent of the votes polled and Mousavi only 33.8 per cent.
2. Reliable reports from Iran during the election campaign did not speak of any pro-Ahmadinejad wave. On the contrary, there were reports of unusual support for Mousavi, the reformist candidate, who had promised a change from the confrontationist policies of the incumbent President.
3. The unusually large turn-out of 85 per cent of the eligible voters strengthened the impression of an anti-Ahmadinejad wave and gave rise to expectations of a possible Mousavi victory in the first round itself. The announcement by the Interior Ministry that Ahmadinejad has been voted back with a huge majority has stunned his opponents, who suspect widespread rigging by the official machinery to ensure the continuance in power of Ahmadinejad.
4. There have been reports of sporadic violent incidents by the angry members of the reformist groups who have questioned the validity of the results. Over 100 leading members and cadres of the reformist groups are reported to have been arrested.
5. Opponents of Ahmadinejad can challenge his election before the Guardian Council before Sunday, but the Council, which has traditionally been against the reformists, is unlikely to set the election aside. The endorsement of the election results by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the country’s supreme leader, makes it unlikely that the challenges of the opposition will be accepted.
6. With the backing of Ayatollah Khamenei, Ahmadinejad should have no difficulty in putting down any street violence if it persists. The reformists too may like to avoid a confrontational situation over the disputed election.
7. From the initial pronouncements of Ahmadinejad, who has hailed his re-election as an epic moment, it is apparent that he is not embarrassed by the opposition allegations of rigging and is confident of the legitimacy of his re-election ultimately prevailing.
8. The country most concerned by the re-election of Ahmadinejad would be Israel. There is unlikely to be any change in his hardline, virulent stand against Israel and the Jewish people and he will continue with his policy of seeking to undermine the Jewish State. He will press ahead with Iran’s nuclear programme by expanding its capacity for uranium enrichment by installing more centrifuges under the pretext of producing low-grade enriched uranium for the production of electricity.
9. At a time, when Israel is confused and disheartened by the less than enthusiastic support for its security concerns from the Barack Obama Administration, the re-election of Ahmadinejad would add to its fears regarding the security of the country and its citizens living in the midst of a hostile Islamic world.
10. What gave confidence and optimism to Israel in the past was the steadfast support from a succession of American Presidents. Right from the birth of the State of Israel, successive US Presidents had not hesitated to strongly endorse and support the security concerns of Israel. For the first time, the US has a President, who has been showing a worrisome insensitivity to the concerns of Israel and the Jewish people and has been trying to project a picture of neutrality in the confrontation between the Jewish people and the Arabs and Iranians, in the belief, which could prove to be mistaken, that he could thereby win the hearts and minds of the Arabs and other Muslims.
11. At a time when large sections of the people of Israel feel increasingly that their basic interests have been betrayed by Obama, the re-election of Ahmadinejad, who had in the past vowed to work against the existence of Israel, would add to Israeli fears of an existential threat to the Jewish State and strengthen its determination to act against Iran before it acquires a military nuclear capability.
12. Presuming that the large number of votes that Ahmadinejad reportedly obtained were genuine and not rigged, the rallying of so many voters behind him could be attributed only partially to their support for his pro-poor economic policies. Another major reason ought to have been their endorsement of his hardline policy towards Israel and the US and his determination to press ahead with Iran’s nuclear programme. It is a strong nationalistic vote meant to support the foreign and nuclear policies hitherto followed by Ahmadinejad.
13. The US would have hoped for the victory of the reformists. These hopes have been belied and the US would have to make do with Ahmadinejad. Iran is not North Korea. North Korea has only the nuclear and missile cards against the US. Iran has many--- its oil, the support enjoyed by it in the Islamic world, its perceived indispensability for peace and stability in Iraq and a similar role that it could play in Afghanistan. With so many cards in its hands, Obama will find Iran a tough nut to crack.
14. The US has had the Israeli card against Iran. Teheran was always nervous about the possibility of the US encouraging Israel to put Iran in its place if the worst comes to the worst. Obama has thrown away that card much to the relief of Iran.
15. If Iran spurns Obama’s overtures to it and follows on its nuclear and anti-Israel path, Obama has not kept for himself a fall-back option. In his anxiety to project a “good guy” image of himself right across the Islamic world, including Iran, Obama has unwittingly encouraged hardline elements such as Ahmadinejad, who have no genuine love for the US and who will lose no opportunity to make the interests of the Islamic world prevail over those of the international community.
16. The US may have to pay a heavy price for Obama’s policy U-turns in the Arab world and towards Iran.
17. Who will have the last laugh---- Obama or the likes of Ahmadinejad, Kim-Jong-il, Mulla Mohammad Omar, the Amir of the Afghan Taliban, or Osama bin Laden? One wishes it will be Obama, but one apprehends it may not be him.
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com)
QUOTE OF THE DAY: "The US advice on Kashmir is lunacy "
Why is it so difficult for the US diplomats to understand that India and more specifically, Kashmir had been the epicenter of the Pakistan terrorism. The terrorism virus which was cultured and multiplied in Kshmir has infected the world. India had been confronting the brunt of viciousness of fanatics in Kashmir.
Are the US diplomats seeking a second Waziristan to be founded in Kashmir? Kashmir had conducted dozens of elections during last sixty years under the Indian constitution. How many elections have taken place in so to call 'Azad Kashmir'? And for that reason how many free elections have taken place in Pakistan itself and the elected government was allowed to rule?
Sure, leaving aside how the Indian Government may respond to such nefarious pursuits but as the Indian community in the USA, we should strongly express our feelings to the US Congress via India caucuses in the US Senate and in the House opposing any interference on the Kashmir issue.
Vijay Kapoor
Are the US diplomats seeking a second Waziristan to be founded in Kashmir? Kashmir had conducted dozens of elections during last sixty years under the Indian constitution. How many elections have taken place in so to call 'Azad Kashmir'? And for that reason how many free elections have taken place in Pakistan itself and the elected government was allowed to rule?
Sure, leaving aside how the Indian Government may respond to such nefarious pursuits but as the Indian community in the USA, we should strongly express our feelings to the US Congress via India caucuses in the US Senate and in the House opposing any interference on the Kashmir issue.
Vijay Kapoor
Washington ignores India's protests
US aid to Pakistan
Washington ignores India's protests
by Kuldip Nayar
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20090616/edit.htm#6
India-America relations are better under the Republicans than the Democrats. Idea-wise or ideology-wise, Indians should feel closer to the latter but it does not happen that way. No doubt, Washington is guided by self-interest which every country does. Surely New Delhi understands that policy.
Yet self-interest is not something euphoric. It does not change in a few months' time. The same State Department which was singing praises of India is different because a Democratic President is at the helm of affairs.
Even the body language of US officials has changed. They give the impression of a regime which either takes India for granted or follows a policy which is opposed to New Delhi's interests.
Some unhappy messages to India began emanating as soon as President Obama won. Those messages are taking shape gradually. There is not one point which reflects growing distance between the Government of India and the Obama's administration.
There are a host of problems which are small but they are not getting resolved because the understanding and the equation which the Bush administration showed towards India is lacking.
Words by the new set-up are effusive like that India is a major power or that without its active presence in South Asia nothing can be sorted out in the region.
Yet when it comes to something concrete, America behaves like the mightiest power in the world—undoubtedly it is— and wants India to accept its wrong perceptions.
New Delhi has protested many a time that the military aid given to Pakistan to fight terrorism is misused and the latter buys weapons. Pentagon documents made public a few days ago said that Islamabad used the $6.9 billion aid it received during the Bush administration to buy modern weapons for a conventional warfare against India.
This is not the first time that Pakistan has used the money to buy weapons. India has faced them in the 1965 war against Pakistan. Then the US administration had said in reply to India's protest that Washington was helpless.
Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru was committed to holding a plebiscite in Kashmir until Pakistan joined the CENTO.
When America injected modern weapons for the use of the Pakistan army, he said that the whole situation had changed and that India was not bound by its promise to hold a plebiscite because America had injected new weapons in the region.Pakistan had to pay a heavy price for siding with America during the cold war.
The Obama administration has announced an aid of some $1.5 billion to Pakistan per year for the next five years to fight terrorists. The Bill in the US Congress was sought to be amended that the aid would not be used against India.
The Obama administration agreed to Islamabad's substitution of word neighbour instead of India. Perhaps it comes to the same thing. But then why to change the word if India is not in the mind of Pakistan?
Nobody has any doubt that Islamabad will divert a major portion of the US aid to buy weapons instead of using it to build roads, schools or health centres as President Obama has announced.
Pentagon documents or some other papers would reveal after some years that the aid given by Washington was again used by Islamabad to buy weapons.
New Delhi does not object to America helping Pakistan in the social sector and lessening the impact of non-development in that country. But New Delhi's experience has been unhappy.
Point Four by President Truman was a good programme which helped India also get foodgrains from America at the time when New Delhi needed it the most. But Obama's programme is specific and earmarks some assistance for weapons.
There is no gun which fires only in one direction. Weapons meant to fight against terrorists are bound to be used by Pakistan to build up its army.
Washington may express regret for that, if it does, but the harm would have been done. It should learn the lesson which Pentagon documents teach. Why does America want to follow the same path?
Similarly, one does not understand the American embassy's advisory to the US citizens not to travel to India because they would put themselves to risk for coming to a country which is exposed to terrorists.
Ironically, the advisory was issued on the same day when President Obama at Cairo appealed to the Muslim world to forget America's past mistakes. India too wants Obama not to commit the same mistakes which it had done earlier in the subcontinent.
The latest is that Washington would pursue the policy of non-proliferation more vigorously than before. At a meeting of the Foreign Relations Committee of the US Senate, Ellen Tauscher said that if confirmed for the post of Under Secretary for arms control and international security, she would work towards a number of non-proliferation goals of which one was the ratification of the CTBT.
India was mentioned as one of the countries to be asked to sign the treaty. New Delhi is willing to sign the nuke ban treaty provided Washington also does so.
Once again, America does not want any other country besides itself, Great Britain, France, Russia and China to possess nuclear weapons. Once again, Washington desires to revive the club of the elite five.
Efforts of both India and Pakistan have been to demolish the exclusiveness of the super powers. The Obama administration would get no response from India or Pakistan unless the non-proliferation treaty is accepted by all countries in the world.
Why does not Washington voluntarily promise to sign the CTBT? Ellen Tauscher should tell the Senate committee that the Obama administration would ultimately put its signature on the treaty.
If it were to do so, the other members of the club would also agree. The people all over the world would then be able to sleep in peace. President Obama would go down in history and may go on to win the Nobel Prize
Washington ignores India's protests
by Kuldip Nayar
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20090616/edit.htm#6
India-America relations are better under the Republicans than the Democrats. Idea-wise or ideology-wise, Indians should feel closer to the latter but it does not happen that way. No doubt, Washington is guided by self-interest which every country does. Surely New Delhi understands that policy.
Yet self-interest is not something euphoric. It does not change in a few months' time. The same State Department which was singing praises of India is different because a Democratic President is at the helm of affairs.
Even the body language of US officials has changed. They give the impression of a regime which either takes India for granted or follows a policy which is opposed to New Delhi's interests.
Some unhappy messages to India began emanating as soon as President Obama won. Those messages are taking shape gradually. There is not one point which reflects growing distance between the Government of India and the Obama's administration.
There are a host of problems which are small but they are not getting resolved because the understanding and the equation which the Bush administration showed towards India is lacking.
Words by the new set-up are effusive like that India is a major power or that without its active presence in South Asia nothing can be sorted out in the region.
Yet when it comes to something concrete, America behaves like the mightiest power in the world—undoubtedly it is— and wants India to accept its wrong perceptions.
New Delhi has protested many a time that the military aid given to Pakistan to fight terrorism is misused and the latter buys weapons. Pentagon documents made public a few days ago said that Islamabad used the $6.9 billion aid it received during the Bush administration to buy modern weapons for a conventional warfare against India.
This is not the first time that Pakistan has used the money to buy weapons. India has faced them in the 1965 war against Pakistan. Then the US administration had said in reply to India's protest that Washington was helpless.
Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru was committed to holding a plebiscite in Kashmir until Pakistan joined the CENTO.
When America injected modern weapons for the use of the Pakistan army, he said that the whole situation had changed and that India was not bound by its promise to hold a plebiscite because America had injected new weapons in the region.Pakistan had to pay a heavy price for siding with America during the cold war.
The Obama administration has announced an aid of some $1.5 billion to Pakistan per year for the next five years to fight terrorists. The Bill in the US Congress was sought to be amended that the aid would not be used against India.
The Obama administration agreed to Islamabad's substitution of word neighbour instead of India. Perhaps it comes to the same thing. But then why to change the word if India is not in the mind of Pakistan?
Nobody has any doubt that Islamabad will divert a major portion of the US aid to buy weapons instead of using it to build roads, schools or health centres as President Obama has announced.
Pentagon documents or some other papers would reveal after some years that the aid given by Washington was again used by Islamabad to buy weapons.
New Delhi does not object to America helping Pakistan in the social sector and lessening the impact of non-development in that country. But New Delhi's experience has been unhappy.
Point Four by President Truman was a good programme which helped India also get foodgrains from America at the time when New Delhi needed it the most. But Obama's programme is specific and earmarks some assistance for weapons.
There is no gun which fires only in one direction. Weapons meant to fight against terrorists are bound to be used by Pakistan to build up its army.
Washington may express regret for that, if it does, but the harm would have been done. It should learn the lesson which Pentagon documents teach. Why does America want to follow the same path?
Similarly, one does not understand the American embassy's advisory to the US citizens not to travel to India because they would put themselves to risk for coming to a country which is exposed to terrorists.
Ironically, the advisory was issued on the same day when President Obama at Cairo appealed to the Muslim world to forget America's past mistakes. India too wants Obama not to commit the same mistakes which it had done earlier in the subcontinent.
The latest is that Washington would pursue the policy of non-proliferation more vigorously than before. At a meeting of the Foreign Relations Committee of the US Senate, Ellen Tauscher said that if confirmed for the post of Under Secretary for arms control and international security, she would work towards a number of non-proliferation goals of which one was the ratification of the CTBT.
India was mentioned as one of the countries to be asked to sign the treaty. New Delhi is willing to sign the nuke ban treaty provided Washington also does so.
Once again, America does not want any other country besides itself, Great Britain, France, Russia and China to possess nuclear weapons. Once again, Washington desires to revive the club of the elite five.
Efforts of both India and Pakistan have been to demolish the exclusiveness of the super powers. The Obama administration would get no response from India or Pakistan unless the non-proliferation treaty is accepted by all countries in the world.
Why does not Washington voluntarily promise to sign the CTBT? Ellen Tauscher should tell the Senate committee that the Obama administration would ultimately put its signature on the treaty.
If it were to do so, the other members of the club would also agree. The people all over the world would then be able to sleep in peace. President Obama would go down in history and may go on to win the Nobel Prize
The End of the Affair?Washington's Cooling Passion for New Delhi
Sumit Ganguly and S. Paul Kapur
June 15, 2009
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/65141/sumit-ganguly-and-s-paul-kapur/the-end-of-the-affair?page=show
Article Summary During its first few months in office, the Obama administration has essentially ignored India. This could be a serious strategic blunder, given India and the United States' shared interests.
SUMIT GANGULY is the Rabindranath Tagore Professor in Indian Cultures and Civilizations at Indiana University. S. PAUL KAPUR is an associate professor in the Department of National Security Affairs at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School; the views expressed here are his own.
Show paged Print Send to friend
Decrease font sizeTextIncrease font sizeLogin or Register to leave a comment.One of the signature features, and generally acknowledged successes, of the George W. Bush administration's foreign policy was the close relationship forged between the United States and India. For decades, due to Cold War politics and mutual antagonism over India's quest for nuclear weapons, the U.S.-Indian relationship had languished. The Bush administration, however, identified India as a potential strategic partner early on and chose to build on the goodwill the Clinton administration had garnered with New Delhi in its closing days. The capstone of Bush's efforts was the U.S.-Indian nuclear deal, which gave India access to technology and material for its civilian nuclear program in spite of its refusal to sign the Nonproliferation Treaty. By the time Bush left office, U.S. relations with India were the best they had ever been.
By contrast, during its first months in office, the Obama administration has essentially ignored India. Until this week, the only senior administration official to make a significant India-related policy speech has been Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg. In its dealings with Asia, the administration has focused instead on China, Afghanistan, and Pakistan -- going so far in its attempt to woo the latter as to float the idea of mediating the Kashmir dispute (something long sought by Islamabad but anathema to New Delhi).
This behavior has not gone unnoticed. India's strategic elites recognize that no other U.S. president is likely to match Bush's personal commitment to strengthening Indo-U.S. ties, but they worry that Barack Obama's apparent lack of interest could do real harm to the relationship and squander recent hard-won gains.
Were this indeed to occur, it would be a major blunder. India and the United States share important interests on some of today's most pressing strategic issues, including the struggle against Islamist terrorism, the stabilization and de-Talibanization of Afghanistan, the cautious engagement of a rising China, and the pursuit of improved bilateral economic ties. To advance those common interests, however, Washington and New Delhi need to cooperate closely.
The United States fully woke to the dangers of Islamist terrorism only after September 11, 2001. India, by contrast, began battling Islamist militants in Kashmir during the late 1980s. Since 9/11, the United States has avoided further attacks on its soil, while India has suffered numerous terrorist incidents, including an assault on its parliament and a multiple, coordinated strikes in Mumbai. The response to the Mumbai attacks revealed significant shortcomings in India's anti-terrorism capabilities. Nonetheless, India can provide valuable analytical, logistical, and intelligence support to U.S. anti-terrorism efforts. What is more, India truly cares about the issue -- something that cannot always be said about other supposed U.S. allies in the war on terror, including Pakistan.
The Obama administration has made the stabilization of Afghanistan one of its top priorities, meanwhile, relying heavily on Pakistani cooperation to defeat radical Islamist militants there and across the Pakistani border. Yet Pakistani support for this project has been lukewarm, and many in the Pakistani military and intelligence services still see the militants not as enemies to be defeated but as once and future allies.
India has taken a different approach to the Afghan problem from its subcontinental neighbor's, spending approximately $750 million in recent years (and pledging $1.6 billion more) to help rebuild the country and spur development. This makes India Afghanistan's sixth largest bilateral aid donor. Projects funded by New Delhi include the rebuilding of the Afghan national airline; the construction of telecommunications, power, and transportation networks; and improved sanitation facilities. Indian policymakers believe that these efforts will help to stabilize the country, thereby lowering the odds of a Taliban resurgence, curtailing Pakistan's regional influence, and facilitating Indian ties with energy-rich Central Asia. Such goals are clearly rooted in national self-interest, but the point is that Indian and U.S. interests converge here. Washington should thus support and expand Indian involvement in Afghanistan, rather than relying exclusively or even primarily on Pakistan's help.
When it comes to the rise of China, India -- like the United States -- is watching closely. One of New Delhi's greatest concerns is its unresolved Himalayan border dispute with Beijing. This triggered a bloody war between the two countries in 1962, in which the Indians were thoroughly trounced. The two sides have made only glacial progress in resolving the disagreement since then, and it has remained a source of recurring tension. Energy issues also dog the Sino-Indian relationship, as both rising giants have begun competing actively for access to oil from Africa to Asia. India thus shares the U.S. interest in ensuring that China does not emerge as an Asia-Pacific hegemon. No Indian regime will participate in any outright American attempt to contain China, but many Indian policymakers and strategists would be prepared to work with the United States in pursuing a hedging strategy against potential Chinese revisionism.
The Congress Party's recent electoral victory, finally, should allow the Indian government to move forward on a number of long-delayed reforms designed to maintain and increase economic growth. Given growing U.S.-Indian economic ties, as well as the need to pull both the American and Indian economies out of a slump, such efforts can only benefit both nations. The United States should gently prod New Delhi to tackle reforms in such nettlesome areas as labor law, land acquisition legislation, and the power sector.
Given the two countries' numerous and important common interests, the Obama administration's neglect of India is puzzling. Perhaps senior decision-makers have worried that paying too much attention to India will derail efforts to nurture Sino-U.S. ties, or get in the way of cooperation with Pakistan. Perhaps the Obama team has been irked by India's continued refusal to join the nuclear nonproliferation regime. Or perhaps the administration has simply wanted to distinguish itself from its predecessor. Whatever the reason, a clear signal is being sent and received -- as a previous Bush might have put it, "Message: I don't care."
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is expected to give a major policy speech on India this week. She and the administration could begin to engage India by taking its concerns about Pakistan-supported terror in Kashmir and elsewhere seriously, by eschewing any temptation to mediate the Kashmir dispute, by working more closely with New Delhi on stabilizing Afghanistan, and by stepping up the pace on bilateral discussions about renewable energy technology cooperation. Progress on the last item would be particularly sensible, since it would advance two agendas simultaneously -- helping India to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (a looming source of contention) and enabling U.S. firms to develop and sell green technologies.
In recent months, some deft negotiation has eased bilateral disputes over end-user agreements on U.S. weapons sales to India. Similar pragmatism in other areas, along with some solicitous gestures from the Obama team, can make sure the relationship continues to warm rather than cooling down.
June 15, 2009
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/65141/sumit-ganguly-and-s-paul-kapur/the-end-of-the-affair?page=show
Article Summary During its first few months in office, the Obama administration has essentially ignored India. This could be a serious strategic blunder, given India and the United States' shared interests.
SUMIT GANGULY is the Rabindranath Tagore Professor in Indian Cultures and Civilizations at Indiana University. S. PAUL KAPUR is an associate professor in the Department of National Security Affairs at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School; the views expressed here are his own.
Show paged Print Send to friend
Decrease font sizeTextIncrease font sizeLogin or Register to leave a comment.One of the signature features, and generally acknowledged successes, of the George W. Bush administration's foreign policy was the close relationship forged between the United States and India. For decades, due to Cold War politics and mutual antagonism over India's quest for nuclear weapons, the U.S.-Indian relationship had languished. The Bush administration, however, identified India as a potential strategic partner early on and chose to build on the goodwill the Clinton administration had garnered with New Delhi in its closing days. The capstone of Bush's efforts was the U.S.-Indian nuclear deal, which gave India access to technology and material for its civilian nuclear program in spite of its refusal to sign the Nonproliferation Treaty. By the time Bush left office, U.S. relations with India were the best they had ever been.
By contrast, during its first months in office, the Obama administration has essentially ignored India. Until this week, the only senior administration official to make a significant India-related policy speech has been Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg. In its dealings with Asia, the administration has focused instead on China, Afghanistan, and Pakistan -- going so far in its attempt to woo the latter as to float the idea of mediating the Kashmir dispute (something long sought by Islamabad but anathema to New Delhi).
This behavior has not gone unnoticed. India's strategic elites recognize that no other U.S. president is likely to match Bush's personal commitment to strengthening Indo-U.S. ties, but they worry that Barack Obama's apparent lack of interest could do real harm to the relationship and squander recent hard-won gains.
Were this indeed to occur, it would be a major blunder. India and the United States share important interests on some of today's most pressing strategic issues, including the struggle against Islamist terrorism, the stabilization and de-Talibanization of Afghanistan, the cautious engagement of a rising China, and the pursuit of improved bilateral economic ties. To advance those common interests, however, Washington and New Delhi need to cooperate closely.
The United States fully woke to the dangers of Islamist terrorism only after September 11, 2001. India, by contrast, began battling Islamist militants in Kashmir during the late 1980s. Since 9/11, the United States has avoided further attacks on its soil, while India has suffered numerous terrorist incidents, including an assault on its parliament and a multiple, coordinated strikes in Mumbai. The response to the Mumbai attacks revealed significant shortcomings in India's anti-terrorism capabilities. Nonetheless, India can provide valuable analytical, logistical, and intelligence support to U.S. anti-terrorism efforts. What is more, India truly cares about the issue -- something that cannot always be said about other supposed U.S. allies in the war on terror, including Pakistan.
The Obama administration has made the stabilization of Afghanistan one of its top priorities, meanwhile, relying heavily on Pakistani cooperation to defeat radical Islamist militants there and across the Pakistani border. Yet Pakistani support for this project has been lukewarm, and many in the Pakistani military and intelligence services still see the militants not as enemies to be defeated but as once and future allies.
India has taken a different approach to the Afghan problem from its subcontinental neighbor's, spending approximately $750 million in recent years (and pledging $1.6 billion more) to help rebuild the country and spur development. This makes India Afghanistan's sixth largest bilateral aid donor. Projects funded by New Delhi include the rebuilding of the Afghan national airline; the construction of telecommunications, power, and transportation networks; and improved sanitation facilities. Indian policymakers believe that these efforts will help to stabilize the country, thereby lowering the odds of a Taliban resurgence, curtailing Pakistan's regional influence, and facilitating Indian ties with energy-rich Central Asia. Such goals are clearly rooted in national self-interest, but the point is that Indian and U.S. interests converge here. Washington should thus support and expand Indian involvement in Afghanistan, rather than relying exclusively or even primarily on Pakistan's help.
When it comes to the rise of China, India -- like the United States -- is watching closely. One of New Delhi's greatest concerns is its unresolved Himalayan border dispute with Beijing. This triggered a bloody war between the two countries in 1962, in which the Indians were thoroughly trounced. The two sides have made only glacial progress in resolving the disagreement since then, and it has remained a source of recurring tension. Energy issues also dog the Sino-Indian relationship, as both rising giants have begun competing actively for access to oil from Africa to Asia. India thus shares the U.S. interest in ensuring that China does not emerge as an Asia-Pacific hegemon. No Indian regime will participate in any outright American attempt to contain China, but many Indian policymakers and strategists would be prepared to work with the United States in pursuing a hedging strategy against potential Chinese revisionism.
The Congress Party's recent electoral victory, finally, should allow the Indian government to move forward on a number of long-delayed reforms designed to maintain and increase economic growth. Given growing U.S.-Indian economic ties, as well as the need to pull both the American and Indian economies out of a slump, such efforts can only benefit both nations. The United States should gently prod New Delhi to tackle reforms in such nettlesome areas as labor law, land acquisition legislation, and the power sector.
Given the two countries' numerous and important common interests, the Obama administration's neglect of India is puzzling. Perhaps senior decision-makers have worried that paying too much attention to India will derail efforts to nurture Sino-U.S. ties, or get in the way of cooperation with Pakistan. Perhaps the Obama team has been irked by India's continued refusal to join the nuclear nonproliferation regime. Or perhaps the administration has simply wanted to distinguish itself from its predecessor. Whatever the reason, a clear signal is being sent and received -- as a previous Bush might have put it, "Message: I don't care."
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is expected to give a major policy speech on India this week. She and the administration could begin to engage India by taking its concerns about Pakistan-supported terror in Kashmir and elsewhere seriously, by eschewing any temptation to mediate the Kashmir dispute, by working more closely with New Delhi on stabilizing Afghanistan, and by stepping up the pace on bilateral discussions about renewable energy technology cooperation. Progress on the last item would be particularly sensible, since it would advance two agendas simultaneously -- helping India to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (a looming source of contention) and enabling U.S. firms to develop and sell green technologies.
In recent months, some deft negotiation has eased bilateral disputes over end-user agreements on U.S. weapons sales to India. Similar pragmatism in other areas, along with some solicitous gestures from the Obama team, can make sure the relationship continues to warm rather than cooling down.
June 15, 2009
Why doesn’t the US hold a dialogue with Osama?
by TAVLEEN SINGH
INDIAN EXPRESS, India
Am I the only one shocked by an American official daring to suggest ‘dialogue’ with Pakistan in the wake of the release of Hafiz Mohammad Saeed? Why did nobody ask Under Secretary William Burns if his country would be persuaded to have a ‘dialogue’ with Pakistan if Osama bin Laden were similarly arrested and released? Not because of the due process of the law, as some spokesmen of the Pakistani government claim, but because no charges were brought against him. So there were no grounds for further preventive detention according to the court that released him.
The vile Saeed is our Osama and if Pakistan wants to talk peace with India the very least it must do is arrest him again and close down the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba. Then, we can begin to talk. Not only are we certain that it was this ghastly conglomerate of jihadi killers that was responsible for what happened in Mumbai but Lashkar’s spokesmen admit proudly their involvement in the ‘jihad’ in Kashmir. Speaking of which, Under Secretary Burns got away with stating at a press conference in Delhi that his government wanted a solution in Kashmir that took into account ‘the views of the Kashmiri people’. Did nobody tell him that there were free and fair elections in that state not long ago? If by the ‘Kashmiri people’ he means a handful of self-appointed leaders in the Valley who never dare to contest elections, then perhaps the American President needs to do some more homework on Kashmir.
As someone who thought Barack Obama really was ‘the one’, I find myself increasingly disillusioned by his South Asia policy. Is he so naïve that he believes Islamist terrorism can be fought selectively? How is it possible to fight the Taliban in Swat and Waziristan while continuing to support the Lashkar brand of jihad in Lahore and Karachi?
How can anyone believe that the Pakistan government is sincere in its fight against jihadi terrorism when it releases the man who started the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba? If you want to hear Hafiz Mohammed Saeed’s thoughts and feelings about India, go to You Tube and listen to the interview he gave last week. He accuses India of being responsible for every act of terrorism on Pakistani soil and of being behind the violence in Baluchistan. The suggestion that India is responsible for sponsoring Islamist violence is beyond bizarre. If our covert agencies were that good, we would have taken the Taliban, the Lashkar and the evil Maulana Azhar Masood out long ago. Where is Azhar Masood, by the way? Does the Pakistani government expect us to seriously believe that he has vanished into thin air?
While I was writing this piece, bombs went off in Lahore and Naushera. It is true that the jihadis have started to bite the hand that nurtured them, but is this not the inevitable consequence of two decades of breeding violent religious fanatics with the idea of making them the sword arm of Pakistani foreign policy? And, now that Pakistan appears to be coming apart at the seams, all that the new American President has come up with by way of policy is to give Pakistan more aid. If financial aid was the solution to Pakistan’s problems then it should have been saved long ago by the more than $11 billion that George W. Bush gave Musharraf to fight terrorism.
Our problem is not just American foreign policy in the region but our own foreign policy, which is namby-pamby to the point of being non-existent. For a start, our Ministry of External Affairs seems to be linguistically challenged, so when Saeed was released all we could do was use words like ‘regrettable’ and ‘unfortunate’ to state our case. When will we realise that if we want to be heard, we need our Prime Minister to state loudly and clearly that we cannot and will not talk to Pakistan as long as it refuses to bring well-known terrorists to justice.
It is now more than six months since Mumbai was attacked and there is no sign of Pakistan either handing over those who were responsible or trying them. Unless this happens, what is there for us to have a dialogue about? We would do better instead to strengthen our defences. This newspaper has over the past weeks produced detailed analysis of what went wrong on 26/11. Everything failed. The police, the commandos, our intelligence agencies, our coastal defense. Everything. And, so far, there are no signs that anything has been done to rectify this shameful state of affairs. What are we waiting for? Another Indian city to be attacked? If this happens and the response is as hopeless as it was on November 26, 2008, the honeymoon with our new government will come to an abrupt and ugly end.
INDIAN EXPRESS, India
Am I the only one shocked by an American official daring to suggest ‘dialogue’ with Pakistan in the wake of the release of Hafiz Mohammad Saeed? Why did nobody ask Under Secretary William Burns if his country would be persuaded to have a ‘dialogue’ with Pakistan if Osama bin Laden were similarly arrested and released? Not because of the due process of the law, as some spokesmen of the Pakistani government claim, but because no charges were brought against him. So there were no grounds for further preventive detention according to the court that released him.
The vile Saeed is our Osama and if Pakistan wants to talk peace with India the very least it must do is arrest him again and close down the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba. Then, we can begin to talk. Not only are we certain that it was this ghastly conglomerate of jihadi killers that was responsible for what happened in Mumbai but Lashkar’s spokesmen admit proudly their involvement in the ‘jihad’ in Kashmir. Speaking of which, Under Secretary Burns got away with stating at a press conference in Delhi that his government wanted a solution in Kashmir that took into account ‘the views of the Kashmiri people’. Did nobody tell him that there were free and fair elections in that state not long ago? If by the ‘Kashmiri people’ he means a handful of self-appointed leaders in the Valley who never dare to contest elections, then perhaps the American President needs to do some more homework on Kashmir.
As someone who thought Barack Obama really was ‘the one’, I find myself increasingly disillusioned by his South Asia policy. Is he so naïve that he believes Islamist terrorism can be fought selectively? How is it possible to fight the Taliban in Swat and Waziristan while continuing to support the Lashkar brand of jihad in Lahore and Karachi?
How can anyone believe that the Pakistan government is sincere in its fight against jihadi terrorism when it releases the man who started the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba? If you want to hear Hafiz Mohammed Saeed’s thoughts and feelings about India, go to You Tube and listen to the interview he gave last week. He accuses India of being responsible for every act of terrorism on Pakistani soil and of being behind the violence in Baluchistan. The suggestion that India is responsible for sponsoring Islamist violence is beyond bizarre. If our covert agencies were that good, we would have taken the Taliban, the Lashkar and the evil Maulana Azhar Masood out long ago. Where is Azhar Masood, by the way? Does the Pakistani government expect us to seriously believe that he has vanished into thin air?
While I was writing this piece, bombs went off in Lahore and Naushera. It is true that the jihadis have started to bite the hand that nurtured them, but is this not the inevitable consequence of two decades of breeding violent religious fanatics with the idea of making them the sword arm of Pakistani foreign policy? And, now that Pakistan appears to be coming apart at the seams, all that the new American President has come up with by way of policy is to give Pakistan more aid. If financial aid was the solution to Pakistan’s problems then it should have been saved long ago by the more than $11 billion that George W. Bush gave Musharraf to fight terrorism.
Our problem is not just American foreign policy in the region but our own foreign policy, which is namby-pamby to the point of being non-existent. For a start, our Ministry of External Affairs seems to be linguistically challenged, so when Saeed was released all we could do was use words like ‘regrettable’ and ‘unfortunate’ to state our case. When will we realise that if we want to be heard, we need our Prime Minister to state loudly and clearly that we cannot and will not talk to Pakistan as long as it refuses to bring well-known terrorists to justice.
It is now more than six months since Mumbai was attacked and there is no sign of Pakistan either handing over those who were responsible or trying them. Unless this happens, what is there for us to have a dialogue about? We would do better instead to strengthen our defences. This newspaper has over the past weeks produced detailed analysis of what went wrong on 26/11. Everything failed. The police, the commandos, our intelligence agencies, our coastal defense. Everything. And, so far, there are no signs that anything has been done to rectify this shameful state of affairs. What are we waiting for? Another Indian city to be attacked? If this happens and the response is as hopeless as it was on November 26, 2008, the honeymoon with our new government will come to an abrupt and ugly end.
June 14, 2009
Is your ATM doling out fake notes?
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/is-your-atm-doling-out-fake-notes/476126/
Rajni Shaleen Chopra
Posted: Jun 14, 2009 at 0206 hrs IST
Chandigarh
The next time you visit an ATM to withdraw money, be careful as cases of ATMs dispensing fake notes are being reported from across the country. And a common refrain by customers is that the banks have turned their backs on them.
Alarmed by the complaints, the Reserve Bank of India has made it mandatory for the currency chest branches of all banks to have verification and sorting machines. Senior bankers of the city claim that these machines are in regular use at their respective banks.
As Chief Manager S L Paul at Punjab National Bank points out: “All the notes to be supplied to banks are verified through the machine. Fake and soiled notes are separated. Only genuine notes and those in good condition are supplied to our branches and to the ATMs.”
Similar claims are made by officials of SBI, ICICI, HDFC and other banks. But what about customers who have already got fake notes by the automated teller machines?
Top officials of public and private banks assert that unless the consumer is able to prove that the note was taken from its ATM machine, nothing can be done.
A senior official at the local head office of State Bank of India, Sector 17, says: “The onus is on the customer to prove that he got the note from a particular ATM. It is simply impossible that banks will exchange a fake note with a real one, if any person comes and claims that it is from their ATM.” This is where the aggrieved customers reach a dead end.
Take the case of IAF Corporal Prakash G, who got a fake currency note of Rs 1,000 from a private bank’s ATM in Sector 19 D. Prakash had withdrawn a total of Rs 9,000. What caught his eye was that while the other notes were crisp and new, one note was badly soiled. He met the manager of the nearest bank branch, who told him the note could not be exchanged till it was confirmed that it came from their ATM.
Where to go
Possession of fake currency notes is punishable with the guilty being awarded up to life imprisonment under various clauses of Section 489 A of the IPC. Passing on a fake currency note knowingly is an offence too. According to RBI instructions, a fake note should be given at a bank, which will then stamp the note as ‘counterfeit’, and also file an FIR with the police. You need not fear police action if you can give convincing evidence of how you got the notes.
How to check if a note is genuine
The portrait of Mahatma Gandhi, the seal of the Reserve Bank of India, the Ashoka Pillar emblem, the guarantee and promise clause and the RBI Governor’s signature are printed in relief on genuine notes. These can be felt by hand in notes of denominations Rs 20, Rs 50, Rs 100, Rs 500 and Rs 1,000. On the other side, a vertical band on the right of Mahatma Gandhi’s portrait carries a latent image showing the denominational value of the particular note. Hold the note horizontally at eye level, and this image becomes visible.
Rajni Shaleen Chopra
Posted: Jun 14, 2009 at 0206 hrs IST
Chandigarh
The next time you visit an ATM to withdraw money, be careful as cases of ATMs dispensing fake notes are being reported from across the country. And a common refrain by customers is that the banks have turned their backs on them.
Alarmed by the complaints, the Reserve Bank of India has made it mandatory for the currency chest branches of all banks to have verification and sorting machines. Senior bankers of the city claim that these machines are in regular use at their respective banks.
As Chief Manager S L Paul at Punjab National Bank points out: “All the notes to be supplied to banks are verified through the machine. Fake and soiled notes are separated. Only genuine notes and those in good condition are supplied to our branches and to the ATMs.”
Similar claims are made by officials of SBI, ICICI, HDFC and other banks. But what about customers who have already got fake notes by the automated teller machines?
Top officials of public and private banks assert that unless the consumer is able to prove that the note was taken from its ATM machine, nothing can be done.
A senior official at the local head office of State Bank of India, Sector 17, says: “The onus is on the customer to prove that he got the note from a particular ATM. It is simply impossible that banks will exchange a fake note with a real one, if any person comes and claims that it is from their ATM.” This is where the aggrieved customers reach a dead end.
Take the case of IAF Corporal Prakash G, who got a fake currency note of Rs 1,000 from a private bank’s ATM in Sector 19 D. Prakash had withdrawn a total of Rs 9,000. What caught his eye was that while the other notes were crisp and new, one note was badly soiled. He met the manager of the nearest bank branch, who told him the note could not be exchanged till it was confirmed that it came from their ATM.
Where to go
Possession of fake currency notes is punishable with the guilty being awarded up to life imprisonment under various clauses of Section 489 A of the IPC. Passing on a fake currency note knowingly is an offence too. According to RBI instructions, a fake note should be given at a bank, which will then stamp the note as ‘counterfeit’, and also file an FIR with the police. You need not fear police action if you can give convincing evidence of how you got the notes.
How to check if a note is genuine
The portrait of Mahatma Gandhi, the seal of the Reserve Bank of India, the Ashoka Pillar emblem, the guarantee and promise clause and the RBI Governor’s signature are printed in relief on genuine notes. These can be felt by hand in notes of denominations Rs 20, Rs 50, Rs 100, Rs 500 and Rs 1,000. On the other side, a vertical band on the right of Mahatma Gandhi’s portrait carries a latent image showing the denominational value of the particular note. Hold the note horizontally at eye level, and this image becomes visible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
