Tag: China

  • as i see it Changed Scenario

    as i see it Changed Scenario

    Fifty years ago, China launched a massive invasion along the border springing a surprise in India, the US and elsewhere in the world. While the golden jubilee of this incident has refreshed painful memories in India as can be seen in news and views expressed in various Indian media, it is not the same scenario in China. Chinese are not celebrating the victory over India. But China has been watching India and its domestic and foreign affairs very closely.

    What all happened about fifty years ago are not dead history. In fact, in international relations 50 years can be considered a very short duration. A brief journey to the past reminds that India-China friendship had begun to develop cracks by mid-1950s. India’s earlier recognition of Chinese suzerainty over Tibet failed to please China in the wake of Tibetan uprising that culminated in Dalai Lama and his tens of thousands of followers seeking asylum in India.

    Fifty years later, one finds that Tibet issue not only remains alive but also now and then hits the global headlines-a development quite irritating for China.

    The US declaration of support to Tibetan ‘self-determination,’ supply of weapons to and training of Tibetan guerrillas by the Central Intelligence Agency had blinded the Chinese to acute political differences between India and the US and rather had convinced the Chinese leadership that India and the US were conspiring against China. Today, Dalai Lama’s presence in India and his acceptability in political circles in Washington are resented by the Chinese government.

    Fifty years ago, the United States followed a declared policy of containment of China. China, on the other hand, supported wars of “national liberation” by communist groups and was virulently anti-imperialist-more than the former Soviet Union that, unlike China, believed in “peaceful co-existence.”

    India adopted a policy of constructive engagement of China for Asian cooperation and to keep the imperialist forces at bay from the Asian continent. The US at this time detested Nehru’s non-alignment and his leadership of the newly independent countries.

    Significantly, even China abhorred India’s leadership of the Third World. The US disliked India’s softness for international communism, including Chinese communists, and China considered India’s non-alignment not-hard-enough against the imperialists. Still worse, China viewed India to be a lackey of US-led western imperialists!

    Strategic partner

    Fifty years later, American suspicion of India and Chinese views on India has not qualitatively changed much. Despite a growing strategic partnership and closer defense ties with India, some Americans view India as an unreliable strategic partner and others view with suspicion Indian concept of “strategic autonomy.”

    Those in Washington who think that India can be a better counterweight to a growing Chinese hegemony feel disappointed to see rising China-India trade and investment ties and diplomatic coordination on international issues, such as climate change and trade negotiations.

    Others who consider ‘strategic autonomy’ mantra as a redefined ‘non-alignment’ oppose closer defense and security ties between the US and India, particularly sharing of defense technology and selling of sophisticated weapons to India.

    However, the mainstream Chinese perception of Indo-US relations in recent years is not very positive. Some believe that India’s economy is a third of Chinese economy and India cannot win a conventional war against China.
    Consequently, India has developed nuclear weapons and is building defense ties with the US. Indo-US defense ties, growing stronger by years, are viewed as aimed at China. Chinese perception of Obama’s ‘pivot to Asia’ strategy, where India finds a place, veers between critical to outright disapproval.

    In addition, around the time, India and China went to war, the world viewed China and India as two competing models of growth for the Third World. In fact, the crushing defeat of India in the war was viewed by many as rejection of Indian model as well. Some argued that one of China’s motivations for going to war was to destroy the Indian model
    Today, once again there is talk of “Beijing consensus” and “Mumbai consensus”. The two countries are large, populous, old civilizations and among the fastest growing economies of the world. There is talk in the international community about the Chinese and the Indian model of growth. Such talks have assumed added significance after the American economic downturn and the Eurozone crisis.

    When Japanese investment in China got affected by the ongoing spar over the Diaoyu/Skenkaku islands, some analysts in China have begun to argue that Japanese investment will now move to other emerging economies, including India. They think that it would be a Japanese strategy (read US-Japan strategy) to slow Chinese economic growth! Before long, growth in Indo-US economic cooperation may be viewed in similar ways.

    What is different after 50 years since the 1962 war is, however, equally significant. Both China and India are nuclear weapon powers. If China has enormously engaged the US in economic field, US-India defense ties have transformed the paradigm of their relations. China can be rest assured that this complex web of triangular ties will force the US to adopt a non-aligned strategy in any future conflict (not necessarily war) between two Asian giants.

    (The author is a Tagore Chair professor at Yunnan University, China)

  • Kerala Center to honor six at Awards Banquet on November 3rd

    Kerala Center to honor six at Awards Banquet on November 3rd

    NEW YORK (TIP):The Indian American Kerala Cultural and Civic Center (http://keralacenterny.com) will honor five Indian American Malayalees for their outstanding achievements in their field of specialization or for their service to the society and one diplomat for his service to the UN. The awardees will be honored at Kerala Center’s annual banquet on Saturday, November 3rd starting at 7.00 p.m. at Leonards of Great Neck in Long Island, 555 Northern Boulevard, Great Neck, NY 11021.

    The Chief Guest for the evening is Vijay K. Nambiar, Under Secretary-General and Special Adviser of the UN Secretary-General on Myanmar. Ambassador Nambiar will be honored for his service to the U,N. The keynote speaker is Dr. Geeta Menon, Dean, Undergraduate College and Abraham Krasnoff Professor of Global Business, Stern School of Business, New York University. Dr. Menon will also be honored for her achievement in the field of Education. Other award recipients who will be honored at the Awards Banquet are: Joy Kuttiyani, President of Kerala Samajam of South Florida, whose initiative to erect Mahatma Gandhi came to fruition recently for Community Service; Viju Menon, Vice President of Supply Chain Management at Verizon, the largest wireless carrier in the United States for Applied Sciences; Dr. Narayanan Neithalath is an Associate Professor in the School of Sustainable Engineering and the Built Environment at Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, for Engineering; Roy Thomas, Deputy Director at New York State Mental Health Department for Social Work.

    An entertainment will follow after the award ceremony with a special performance by Wanted Ashiq, NY’s Premier Bollywood & Fusion Dance Troupe. Tickets for banquet can be reserved by contacting Kerala Center at 516-358-2000 or e-mail at kc@keralacenterny.com.

    This year’s awardees are as follows:

    Chief Guest and Being Recognized for Service to the UN

    Vijay Nambiar

    Ambassador Vijay Nambiar is Under Secretary-General and Special Adviser of the UN Secretary-General on Myanmar. He has been with the United Nations for the last six years before which, as an Indian Foreign Service Officer, he spent thirty eight years with the Government of India and served between 1985 and 2004 as Ambassador of India in Algeria, Afghanistan, Malaysia, China, Pakistan and the United Nations. He is fluent in Chinese and holds a post-graduate degree from Bombay University where he was awarded the Chancellor’s Gold Medal in 1965. He is married to Malini Nambiar and has two daughters.

    Keynote Speaker – Recognition for Outstanding Achievement in Education

    Dr. Geeta Menon

    Dr. Geeta Menon is the 11th Dean of the Undergraduate College at NYU’s Leonard N. Stern School of Business and the Abraham Krasnoff Professor of Global Business and Professor of Marketing. A respected educator at the graduate and undergraduate levels, she has mentored many doctoral students who have gone on to become faculty members at top schools. Dean Menon is also a prominent scholar whose study of the role of consumer memory and emotion in survey methodology has been published in leading academic journals, at which she has held editorial roles. She is the past President of the Association for Consumer Research (ACR). Dean Menon received her undergraduate degree from Stella Maris College and graduate degree from Madras Christian College in Chennai and Ph.D. in Business Administration at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

    Recognition for Outstanding Community Service

    Joy Kuttiyani

    Joy Kuttiyani is the current president of Kerala Samajam of South Florida. He conceived the idea to create a memorial to Mahatma Gandhi on a half acre site in a public park in the city of Davie, where he lives. This was done with the involvement of a number of Indian Organizations and the City of Davie. The dedication of the Gandhi Square and the unveiling was done by Dr. Abdul Kalam along with American and Indian dignitaries. He is highly active in the both Indian and American political and community development. Advisory board member of Park & Recreation Town of Davie.

    Recognition for Outstanding Achievement in Applied Sciences

    Viju Menon

    Viju Menon is Vice President of Supply Chain Management at Verizon, the largest wireless carrier in the United States. He is a Fellow of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Leaders for Global Operations Program with graduate degrees in Engineering and Management from MIT. Prior to Verizon, Viju led Intel Corporation’s World-wide Supply Planning Operations. A recognized thought-leader in Lean Manufacturing and Supply Chain Transformations, Viju has published in various journals and is an invited speaker at Industry Conferences. In 2012, Viju was selected to Diversity MBA Magazine’s “Top 100 Under 50” National list of “Diverse Executive and Emerging Leaders”.

    Recognition for Outstanding Achievement in Engineering

    Dr. Narayanan Neithalath

    Dr. Narayanan Neithalath is an Associate Professor in the School of Sustainable Engineering and the Built Environment at Arizona State University, Tempe. AZ. Prior to that he was in the faculty at Clarkson University in Potsdam, NY. His expertise is in the science of sustainable materials for buildings and infrastructure. He is credited with developing, characterizing, and modeling novel cementitious materials that have lower carbon footprints, lower resource and energy implications, and lasts much longer, for use in infrastructural systems. He has authored more than 100 international journal and conference articles, and has delivered keynote lectures in several conferences within and outside the United States. His research on novel materials has been acknowledged by several awards including a CAREER award by the National Science Foundation.

    Recognition for Outstanding Accomplishments in Social Service

    Roy Thomas

    Roy Thomas has been appointed as the Deputy Director at New York State Mental Health Department by the Governor, Andrew M. Cuomo’s office. He is probably the only person of South Asian descent who is entrusted with this title in the history of the New York State Civil Service. During his last tenure of 5 years as the Chief of Service, his bold leadership and management was instrumental in transforming the Bronx Psychiatric Center into one of the leading hospitals in New York State. This landmark achievement has helped him to be chosen by the political leadership in Albany.

  • Indo-US Relations: Economic Respite?

    Indo-US Relations: Economic Respite?

    Amid domestic political opposition by various states and political parties, the Indian government issued a notification clearing the way for the implementation of economic reforms. New Delhi announced massive set of reforms viz. 100 percent Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in single-brand sector (earlier it was 51 per cent), 51 per cent FDI in multi-brand retail (prohibited so far), 49 per cent in aviation and 74 per cent in broadcast sector (except the TV news channels and FM Radio). The move is not surprising as the proposal regarding the reforms was approved by the cabinet in November 2011. But the implementation of the proposals had been deferred because of lack of a broader consensus among the various states.

    Some states and union territories extended their support in written and asked for its implementation, while other states expressed their reservations on the proposed reforms. Following the announcement, there has been widespread criticism amongst various political parties. They argue that through this step the government is trying to divert the people’s attention from corruption issues faced by the government

    According to them, the small industry sector will be adversely affected by these reforms. However, the government justified these reforms in terms of capital infusion and employment opportunities.

    These economic reforms are being seen as a second wave of reforms after 1991, when reforms were introduced to save India from the severe balance of payment crisis. India integrated its economy with the world economy by adopting the policy of liberalization.

    However, despite the opposition, this move will strengthen the bilateral relations of India with other countries as the foreign companies would get a chance to invest more in many sectors.

    The US media and corporations have hailed the Indian reforms as the biggest positive development in the last decade. US-India Business Council (USIBC) President Ron Somers said that these big bang reforms send a crystal clear signal that India is open for business.

    In fact, the leadership in the US had been pushing India for economic reforms for a long time. Earlier, US President Barak Obama had expressed concerns over deteriorating investment climate and stated that India has delayed decisions on FDI proposals in many sectors. However, corporate minister Veerappa Moily had countered such statements by stating that the US President was not properly informed about the country’s strong economic fundamentals. Thereafter, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during her Indian visit in May this year expressed her expectations from India regarding economic reforms.

    This visit was significant because she visited China just before arriving in India. During this visit she met with her Indian counterparts and the Chief Minister of West Bengal.

    There were media reports that during her meeting with Indian officials, Secretary Clinton discussed the investment issue that indicated the US desire of the economic reforms as its business corporation can get benefits from the large Indian market.

    So, one of the motives of Hillary Clinton’s visit to India was to push India for further reforms particularly in the multi-brand retail sector. While in 1991 Indian policy of liberalization was one of the major factors that led to the gradual improvement in Indo- US relations, India’s hesitance of late was now being deemed by analysts in both the countries as an area of discord in Indo-US economic relations.

    The recent reforms in India can be deemed as bonhomie in the Indo-US relations. Despite this, US investors may be hesitant on the absence of Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) between India and the US. According to this treaty, the government commits to protect investment in their territory by other countries (82 of them currently). At the instance of lack of security assurance the US investors will find themselves in a disadvantageous condition as compared to other foreign competitors. There is no doubt that these reforms will make way for better Indo-US relations and especially in the economic realm.

    But signing the Bilateral Investment Treaty is a must if both the nations want to gain full advantage from each other’s markets. At the same time, the Indian decision to put on hold its complaint against the US over the visa fee hike in the World Trade Organization (WTO) is also a welcome move from New Delhi as it will strengthen the bilateral relations further

  • Less than 25% of Chinese like India, finds survey

    Less than 25% of Chinese like India, finds survey

    BEIJING (TIP): Less than onefourth of Chinese like India, found a survey by the Washington-based Pew Research Center. The attitude of the Chinese towards Pakistan though somewhat better, is not hugely favourable. The findings underscore Indian government’s poor efforts to implement the muchpublicized attempt to build peopleto- people relationship. The annual survey of global attitudes found 23% of people in India and China take a favourable view of each other’s country. About 53% urban Indians think the economic rise of China is bad for India and 26% said it was good for the country. The Pew report found the Chinese attitude towards Pakistan is only slightly better – 31% of Chinese respondents favour Pakistan.

    This is surprising since foreign ministry officials and the state-controlled media are constantly praising Pakistan for being in the “forefront in the war against terror”. Only 39% of Chinese respondents said they viewed Beijing’s relationship with New Delhi as one of cooperation compared to 53% in 2010. The number of Chinese who regard India’s economic advances as positive slid from 60% in 2010 to only 44% now.

    Criticism in the Chinese media about New Delhi’s “adamant attitude” on the boundary dispute is seen as a reason for the slide in public opinion about India. Inadequate effort to explain the Indian point of view and build bridges with the ordinary people by facilitating travel and cultural connections is another, observers said.

    Most cultural functions and film festivals organized in China by the Indian government are poorly attended by the Chinese due to bad canvassing and distribution of tickets and passes. The India page on Weibo, the Chinese version of Twitter, attracts very poor response compared to pages put up by governments of other countries. Industry interaction programmes organized by the Indian government and industry bodies are usually attended by lower rung Chinese executives. Senior executives and chief executive officers rarely participate, said Shanghai-based country head of an Indian company.

  • Less than 25% of Chinese like India, finds survey

    Less than 25% of Chinese like India, finds survey

    BEIJING (TIP): Less than onefourth of Chinese like India, found a survey by the Washington-based Pew Research Center. The attitude of the Chinese towards Pakistan though somewhat better, is not hugely favourable. The findings underscore Indian government’s poor efforts to implement the muchpublicized attempt to build peopleto- people relationship

    The annual survey of global attitudes found 23% of people in India and China take a favourable view of each other’s country. About 53% urban Indians think the economic rise of China is bad for India and 26% said it was good for the country.

    The Pew report found the Chinese attitude towards Pakistan is only slightly better – 31% of Chinese respondents favour Pakistan. This is surprising since foreign ministry officials and the state-controlled media are constantly praising Pakistan for being in the “forefront in the war against terror”.

    Only 39% of Chinese respondents said they viewed Beijing’s relationship with New Delhi as one of cooperation compared to 53% in 2010. The number of Chinese who regard India’s economic advances as positive slid from 60% in 2010 to only 44% now.

    Criticism in the Chinese media about New Delhi’s “adamant attitude” on the boundary dispute is seen as a reason for the slide in public opinion about India. Inadequate effort to explain the Indian point of view and build bridges with the ordinary people by facilitating travel and cultural connections is another, observers said. Most cultural functions and film festivals organized in China by the Indian government are poorly attended by the Chinese due to bad canvassing and distribution of tickets and passes. The India page on Weibo, the Chinese version of Twitter, attracts very poor response compared to pages put up by governments of other countries.

    Industry interaction programmes organized by the Indian government and industry bodies are usually attended by lower rung Chinese executives. Senior executives and chief executive officers rarely participate, said Shanghai-based country head of an Indian company.

  • Now, A Black Market for Sperm in China

    Now, A Black Market for Sperm in China

    BEIJING (TIP): There is a thriving black market in China — for sperm. With the country’s only 11 sperm banks unable to meet the needs of childless couples, many donors are pitching in with sperm for sale. There are only 11 sperm banks in China, and they face a shortage of sperm donors, said Jiang Xiang-long, director of the Jiangxi Province Human Sperm Bank. Yu Hua was on the Shanxi Human Sperm Bank’s waiting list for one year without success. ‘The reproductive medical centre told us that we have to wait for another 15 months, after I have done all the medical checkups. I’m already 32 and could not wait any longer,’ Yu Hua told the state-run daily.

    Huang has assured the couple that he could guarantee conception. ‘They could choose to have me either inject my sperm into the wife’s body artificially or through direct sexual intercourse,’ Huang told the Global Times.

    ‘I have been working on helping infertile couples and have accumulated some experience. Many clients come to me because they could not get sperm from the sperm bank,’ he said. ‘I will keep my sperm in a small vacuum cup after masturbation, and then inject it into the wife’s body through a plastic injector.’ Huang injects it himself and no doctors are involved in the process.

    Li Shaohua, 28, the organizer of an internet group of voluntary sperm donors, said donors suggest that intercourse is easier and more successful than artificial injection. Couples often insist on trying injection anyway, but in the end, they usually resort to sex, the media report said. The health ministry said that a sperm bank is the only place to get sperm legally. ‘This kind of deal to sell or offer sperm is not protected by Chinese law or accepted by social morality,’ an official said.

  • China to become second-wealthiest nation in five years

    China to become second-wealthiest nation in five years

    BEIJING (TIP): China will overtake Japan as the world’s second-wealthiest nation after the US in the next five years, says a global report on personal wealth. According to the “Global Wealth Report 2012”, the US will be the world’s richest nation with $89 trillion of household net worth, the China Daily said on Thursday.

    The study carried out by the Credit Suisse Research Institute said there were 964,000 millionaires in China by mid-2012, and the number was expected to almost double to 1.9 million by 2017, driven by the rapid development of the private sector. It defined “household wealth” as the value of financial assets and non-financial assets minus total household debts.

    By mid-2012, China’s total household wealth jumped $562 billion to $20 trillion. China is expected to add another $18 trillion in family wealth in the next five years, the report said. The projected $38 trillion total will surpass Japan’s $35 trillion, and make China the second wealthiest country by 2017. ‘Due to a high savings rate and relatively welldeveloped financial institutions, a high proportion of Chinese household assets are in financial form compared with other major developing countries,’ the report said.

  • Chinese novelist Mo Yan wins Literature Nobel

    Chinese novelist Mo Yan wins Literature Nobel

    BEIJING (TIP):Writer Mo Yan, whose complex world of fiction often reminds readers of William Faulkner and Gabriel Garcia Marquez, pipped bookmaker’s favourite Japanese Haruki Murakami to become the first Chinese citizen to win the Nobel Prize for literature. When told by organizers that he had won the award, Mo said he was both “overjoyed and scared”. Mo, 57, is the author of renowned novels such as ‘Red Sorghum’ (later made into an acclaimed film) and ‘Big Breasts and Wide Hips’. In an interview to Granta, he once said, “Censorship is great for literature creation.” Reacting to the award, Mo said, “I felt I was not very senior in terms of qualification (among Chinese writers).

    There are many good writers and my ranking was not so high,” adding, “The Nobel Literature Prize is a very important literature prize, but not the top award. It represents the opinions of the jury.” The award caused a stir in Chinese literary world, which has never been given the distinction from the Nobel academy. “His prize is an affirmation for Chinese literature on the world stage,” said another famous writer, Er Yue He, quoted by the state media. The Nobel must be music to the ears of Chinese authorities because it’s a rare case of a Chinese artist or writer, who is not a political dissident, winning the coveted prize.

    Beijing has been raging against the Swedish Academy since it gave the Nobel Peace Prize to dissident Liu Xiaobo in 2010. Another Chinese, Gao Xingjian, won the literature Nobel in 2000 but he was a naturalized French. The Swedish Academy conferred the award describing Mo as someone who, with “hallucinatory realism merges folk tales, history and the contemporary”. Mo suggested last month that he has not yet produced his best work. “The great novel that matches the great times has yet to be written,” Mo said while receiving China’s Mao Dun Literature in Beijing. A farmer’s son, he once dropped out of primary school due to poverty before continuing his studies and going on to become a writer.

    “Loneliness and hunger were my fortunes of creation,” he is reputed to have once said. Mo Yan (which means ‘do not speak’ in Mandarin) is a pseudonym for Guan Moye. Mo also did a stint with the People’s Liberation Army and collaborated in Communist Party’s literary projects. He is seen in some quarters as being too close to the party to be considered politically independent. Others feel he has effectively used literature to expose corruption, misdeeds during the family planning drive and decadence in society. China’s official media had launched a campaign in his favour in past weeks after two betting sites named Mo and Murakami as close runners. The People’s Daily said the Nobel Academy usually took decisions based on political reasons rather than pure merit while advising readers not to get agitated if Mo missed it. The award’s announcement was greeted with pride in the Chinese Internet but there were some who criticized the decision saying the writer is too close to the party to be regarded as politically independent. Some netizens said they were relieved that it did not go to a Japanese at a time when the two countries were involved in a serious dispute over ownership of islands in the South China Sea.

    Chinese winners: A tale of outliers
    Migrants who left China dominate the list of winners of Chinese origin for the Nobel Prize in different fields. Only two of the now 12 winners live in China. One of them is Mo Yan, the literary prize winner for 2012. The other is Liu Xiaobo, the 2010 peace prize winner who is in prison for anti-national activities. The other 10 winners including the Dalai Lama live in foreign countries. Most of them live partly in the United Kingdom and in United States. One of them lives in France, one in Taiwan (which China claims to be its territory) while the Dalai Lama resides in India.

    Eight of the dozen winners were born in China before they migrated to other countries. Three were born in the United States and one in Taiwan. Besides Mo, the other writer of Chinese origin to win the literary prize is Gao Xingjian, who lives in France. He was involved in anti-government demonstrations before migrating, and his works are banned in China. Six of the dozen winners have been honored for their contribution to physics and two each for chemistry, literature and world peace. Congratulating Mo, Shanghai Writers’ Association president Wang Anyi, said, “You are the pride of China.”

  • Iraq set to become India’s strategic energy partner: IEA Chief Economist

    Iraq set to become India’s strategic energy partner: IEA Chief Economist

    NEW DELHI (TIP): Iraq, which is set to become one of the major oil producers in the world, could also become India’s strategic energy partner, International Energy Agency’s (IEA) Chief Economist Fatih Birol said. Speaking to Business Line after the release of IEA’s report on ‘Iraq Energy Outlook’ Birol said Iraq’s role in the global oil market was growing rapidly. Currently, half of Iraq’s oil exports go to Asia. This situation will change by 2020, when exports to Asia will account for 80 per cent of Iraq’s oil exports. Two major oil importers in Asia – China and India – will have the largest share by end of this decade. Today, Iraq produces three million barrels a day of crude oil and, according to IEA’s Iraq Energy Outlook, the country’s oil production is expected to grow by over 5 million barrels a day to 2035, he said. Incidentally, Iraq recently replaced Iran as India’s second largest crude oil supplier.

    According to IEA Iraq Energy Outlook, by 2020, crude oil production is expected to more than double to 6.1 million barrels a day to reach 8.3 million barrels a day by 2035. Birol said by 2020, China will account for almost 2 million barrels of oil a day sourcing from Iraq, while India will be getting close to 1.5 million barrels a day. Twenty years down the line, Iraq will have reached GDP levels of what Saudi Arabia is today, he said. On whether Iraq will be able to meet the demand shortfall created due to geo-political issues in Iran, he said, “Iraq will be able to sustain it, because it has vast and low-cost oil resources. Iraq is on its way to become the second largest exporter of oil globally.

    The largest exporters today are Saudi Arabia, followed by Russia.” Asked if the flush of oil from Iraq will result in bringing down prices, Birol said, “If Iraq is able to sustain the developments, then it will.

    But, if it remains lower than expectations or developments weaken due to any kind of political uncertainty, the prices may be $15 a barrel higher than expected in 2035.” International crude oil prices are well over $105 a barrel today. On becoming a gas supplier to the world, Birol said natural gas could play a more important role in Iraq’s future for its power generation. He said there was a huge potential for Indian companies to invest in Iraq in not only oil and gas exploration but also in areas such petrochemicals, IT, engineering and infrastructure. The overseas investment arm of ONGC, ONGC Videsh Ltd, is the sole licensee of Block-8, a large on-land exploration Block in Western Desert, Iraq. The company is currently renegotiating the contract with Iraq.

  • Reverse Outsourcing: Indian remedies to a fever-pitch outsourcing debate

    Reverse Outsourcing: Indian remedies to a fever-pitch outsourcing debate

    Presidential elections in the US follow a scripted narrative. As the candidates battle for the highest office, everything is fair game. In a weak economy, that means it is open season on that familiar bogey: outsourcing of jobs. US firms, driven less by altruism than by a desperation to cut costs, send jobs overseas: a well-known story. A deep recession that cost many Americans their jobs fuelled a backlash against outsourcing’s beneficiaries. And as the American economy has been making only a languid recovery, outsourcing has returned to being a political hot potato.
    In his speech accepting the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination, President Barack Obama threw in an allusion to outsourcing. His campaign has accused Republican rival Mitt Romney of investing in firms that moved jobs overseas when he was at the helm of private equity firm Bain Capital. Romney, whose campaign is run on the promise of creating American jobs, has distanced himself from that record and to show his critics where he stands on outsourcing, said earlier this year: “We will not let China continue to steal jobs from the United States of America.” India, of course, gets pride of place in that narrative.

    The truth is less simple. Actually, Indian-origin firms have over the years steadily established a foothold in the US, employing Americans, building the local economies and giving back to the communities in which they have put down roots. This trend is putting a dent in the tired argument that India, the most identifiable beneficiary of outsourcing, only “takes away” American jobs. While their US counterparts tend to be PR-savvy, the Indian companies have been reluctant to announce and promote their accomplishments. Largely due to a cultural difference, says Ameet Nivsarkar, vice-president of NASSCOM, the IT lobbying body

    A NASSCOM report in March found that Indian IT created over 2,80,000 jobs in the US in the past five years, of which about 2,18,000 are held by Americans or Green Card holders. “The US is the largest trading partner in the technology sector for the Indian industry and will continue to be so in the future. Over a period of time, more and more companies are getting closer to their customers. This kind of work can be outsourced, but it can’t be offshored,” says Nivsarkar.

    It isn’t just in the tech sector that desi firms have carved a niche for themselves. They are spread over a broad range of sectors, including education, energy, manufacturing, financial services, healthcare and hospitality. “Hundreds of Indian-origin companies currently operate in the US; these have put down roots, invested millions of dollars, and are today an integral part of the economic and social fabric,” reads a Confederation of Indian Industries report.

    “Rather than send American jobs to India, an Indian company is sending, safeguarding and even creating jobs overseas in the US.” Mani Iyer, President Mahindra US says.

    A list of firms that have established a presence in the US reads like a veritable who’s who of Indian industry. Mahindra USA was incorporated in 1994 in Houston, Texas. It has four assembly and distribution facilities: Houston; Red Bluff, California; Chattanooga, Tennessee; and Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania. Mani Iyer, Mahindra USA president, has a unique take on outsourcing: Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd outsources jobs to the US in the form of Mahindra USA and its partner-supplier relationships. “Rather than sending American jobs overseas to India, an Indian firm is sending, safeguarding and creating jobs overseas in the US,” he says.

    In 1999, Madhu Vuppuluri opened up shop for Essar in North America. Today, Essar Americas has close to 10,000 employees; 99 per cent are Americans. Essar Americas operates three main businesses in North America-iron ore in Minnesota, coal in West Virginia and Kentucky, and BPOs. It has acquired three call centers in the past decade, two of which are based in Texas and are run under the banner Aegis. Its employee base in this sector has grown from around 2,200 at the time of acquisition to 5,000 American employees and around 55,000 employees globally. “We have stabilized the operation, increased the employee base, increased the reach of this company and made it into a truly global BPO company, which has nearshore, onshore and offshore capabilities,” says Vuppuluri, who is president and CEO of Essar Americas.

    Some Indian-origin firms have actually gone out of their way to hire Americans. Akhil Jindal, head of finance and corporate strategy at Welspun, says the company, steel pipe and home textile producers in the US, resisted employing Indians at its facilities. “We actually brought 200 unskilled Americans who had no experience making a pipe to India for training,” says Jindal. “Indian companies probably have thought (in terms) of cost-saving, but at Welspun we have employed more than 600 people in Arkansas, one of the poorest states in America. When the US was going through a very difficult phase, we created more jobs and more opportunities, and that is also good for the company. It is not a social service,” he adds.

    And Welspun has also made greenfield investments, setting up operations from scratch. Similarly, Essar Americas is constructing a $1.7 billion iron ore palletizing project, one of the largest greenfield projects ever undertaken by an Indian corporation outside India, at the iron ore venture in northern Minnesota that it acquired in 2007. This undertaking is the first of its kind in the area in the past 35 years. “We are essentially engaged in manufacturing a revival, in some ways, in that part of the world,” says Vuppuluri.

    “We did not establish a call centre in India and move to the US. We acquired a US call centre and grew it. We were the first ones.” Madhu Vuppuluri, CEO Essar Americas

    Indian firms that have set up BPOs in the US may seem to go against the common wisdom that drives outsourcing. Essar followed a completely different model, Vuppuluri says. “We did not establish a call centre in India and move to the US. We acquired a call centre in the US, we grew that in the US and also grew outside the US. We were the first,” he says. “The driving factor is that instead of setting up shop in India and looking for customers here, we thought we would first try and understand the business as it is run within the US and then try and grow outside the US in a logical way in which to bring value to the customer. We proved we can manage operations onshore and still keep the competitiveness of the onshore operations intact, not by huge but by healthy margins,” Vuppuluri adds.

    The US is an obvious destination for Indian companies looking to grow a global presence. New Jersey-based Maneesh Agarwal, senior VP (finance) at Birlasoft, a global IT services provider, says the US is at an advantage since it has the “largest share of the biggest companies in the world and whatever global expansion they are doing, there are a lot of residual benefits that come to the US, as far as innovation and profits go”.

    Besides employing Americans, Indian-origin companies are making significant contributions to the wider communities in which they are based. In Nashwauk, Minnesota, Essar Americas (the biggest employer in north Minnesota) uses cutting-edge technology, reducing environmental emissions. And Mahindra USA has sponsored a scholarship program that recognizes and celebrates the important role women play in securing the future of the agricultural industry. This year, it has pledged to donate a portion of revenue from its tractor sales to Operation Finally Home, a non-profit body that provides custom-made, mortgage-free homes to wounded and disabled war veterans as also war widows. It has also contributed money and resources to disaster recovery programs, including after Hurricane Katrina. Welspun, meanwhile, has made healthcare for the needy its primary focus in Little Rock, Arkansas.

    For most India-based companies, their US experience has been rewarding, but not without challenges. “Doing business in America is not a bed of roses,” Vuppuluri points out. Yet, their Indian roots haven’t hindered, but appear rather to have helped, firms seeking innovative solutions to the constraints posed by a cautious, post-recession US banking system. “We got a financial tie-up of our entire financing before the crisis and suddenly realized that all the banks that had sanctioned us money for the project were not that forthcoming because of their own challenges,” Jindal says. His firm was forced to raise funds from the Indian banking sector. Essar Americas’s Minnesota iron ore project too is financed through a club of Indian banks.

    Yet such challenges have done little to deter their quests to grow their operations in the US. Jindal summed up the experience thus: “All in all, it’s been a good experience in a difficult time.” It’s an assessment many would agree with.

  • First Presidential Debate – A Polite Affair

    First Presidential Debate – A Polite Affair

    NEW YORK (TIP): President Obama and challenger Mitt Romney differed sharply Wednesday, October 3 night over taxes, Medicare and, especially, the record of the last four years in a pointed but largely polite debate that highlighted the deep substantive divide between the two philosophical foes, says a Los Angeles Times report.

    Romney portrayed Obama’s tenure as an unmitigated failure, citing continued high unemployment, a rise in dependence on food stamps and other assistance programs, and disappointingly tepid economic growth. He said the president’s “trickle-down government” was “not the rightanswer for America. I’ll restore the vitality that gets America working again.”

    “Going forward with the status quo is not going to cut it for the American people who are struggling today,” Romney said.

    “It’s time for a new path,” he later added.

    Obama spoke of entering office amid an economic crisis and suggested the progress the nation had made – modest private sector job growth, the recovery of the auto industry, a slow healing of the housing market — would be jeopardized by a Romney return to the approach that caused the hardship in the first place.

    “Are we going to double-down on the top-down policies that helped get into this mess?” Obama said near the opening of the 90-minute session. He said Americans had heard the same pitch – promises of lower taxes and a smaller deficit – when George W. Bush ran in 2000, and the result was a soaring national debt capped by the worst economic downturn since the Depression.

    “Math, common sense and our history shows us that’s not a recipe for job growth,” Obama said. “Look, we’ve tried this.”

    The president entered the debate on the University of Denver campus with a breeze at his back, holding small but significant leads in the eight or so battleground states that are likely to decide the race. Romney, after a rough several weeks, was looking to reverse Obama’s momentum, and he was assertive throughout the night, several times talking over the moderator, longtime PBS anchor Jim Lehrer.

    Tonally, the debate was worlds apart from the slashing campaign being conducted in the key states. Obama did not mention Romney’s recently publicized remark critical of almost half of Americans – those who did not pay 2011 federal income taxes – nor Romney’s tenure at the Bain Capital venture firm, key components of the ads that helped push him ahead of the Republican.

    For his part, Romney seemed to steer toward the middle, emphasizing his support for popular elements of Obama’s healthcare plan and moderate regulation of the financial industry, and what he cast as his bipartisan approach in Massachusetts. And he displayed a polish that eluded Obama for most of the night.

    Obama repeatedly attacked Romney’s promise to cut taxes across the board and pay for it by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions. He said that, in truth, Romney would give cuts to the rich and raise the burden on the poor and middle class. There was simply no way, the president said, for Romney’s plan to mathematically add up.
    “He’s been asked over 100 times how you would close those deductions and loopholes, and he hasn’t been able to identify them,” said Obama, who proposes a tax hike on household incomes over $250,000 and individuals earning over $200,000.

    “Virtually everything he just said about my tax plan is inaccurate,” Romney fired back, insisting he would not “under any circumstances” raise taxes on the middle class or boost the deficit, though he did not offer more detail.
    Obama said Romney would gut schools and make deep, painful cuts to Medicare as part of his budget-balancing plan, which relies solely on spending cuts. The former Massachusetts governor heatedly denied he would cut education spending – boasting that the state’s schools were ranked No. 1 in the nation – and said raising taxes would “kill jobs.… You never balance the budget by raising taxes.”

    Instead, he vowed to cut funding for the Public Broadcasting System, eliminate the number of government employees through attrition, combine some federal agencies and apply a simple test to federal spending: “Is the program so critical it’s worth borrowing money from China to pay for it?”

    Romney took part in 19 debates during the primary season, turning in several strong performances when his candidacy was imperiled, and he spent months rehearsing for Wednesday night. Obama, by contrast, had not taken the debate stage in nearly four years.

    The challenger’s practice showed. While the president sometime drifted into long, professorial disquisitions, Romney was crisp and on offense for most of the night. “You’re entitled as the president to your own airplane and to your own house, but not to your own facts,” he tartly told the president at one point.

    “We have to work on a collaborative basis,” Romney said, at one point citing his Massachusetts healthcare plan, put together by Democrats and Republicans in his state. (Obama twitted Romney by citing the plan as a model for his own healthcare overhaul, saying the two men shared many of the same advisors.)

    Obama was, often, mildly sarcastic. He cited the lack of details from Romney on his tax plan, his proposal to repeal the president’s healthcare law and a promise to undo some of the financial regulations the administration put in place.

    “At some point,” Obama said, “I think the American people have to ask themselves, is the reason that Gov. Romney is keeping all those plans … secret is because they’re too good?”

    At another point, after one of Romney’s repeated pledges to govern in a more bipartisan fashion than Obama, the president scoffed that he wouldn’t get off to a much of a start by repealing the healthcare plan cherished by Democrats as avowedly his first order of business.

    Romney repeatedly attacked “Obamacare” – a label Obama happily embraced with a smile – saying it would rob $716 billion from Medicare and make it more difficult for seniors to find doctors and hospitals willing to treat them. He said his overhaul proposal would protect current beneficiaries as well as those approaching retirement age.

    Obama shot back that Romney’s promise was contradicted by the facts. Romney’s plan to give future retirees a voucher to help subsidize their coverage would end up driving up their out-of-pocket costs and undermining Medicare for future generations, he said. He added that his Medicare cuts are aimed at providers and insurance companies and would not scale back care for seniors.

    The session was expected to draw a TV viewership in the tens of millions, making it one of the most closely watched events of the lengthy campaign. But history has shown that it is often post-debate coverage, which plays out for several days, that has a more substantial impact on voter perceptions – a process that could be intensified this year by the rise of social media such as Facebook and Twitter.

    The two men will debate twice more, meeting Oct. 16 in Hempstead, N.Y., and Oct. 22 in Boca Raton, Fla. Their running mates will debate on Oct. 11 in Danville, Ky.

  • KUSHINAGAR A serene Buddhist destination

    KUSHINAGAR A serene Buddhist destination

    Welcome to the land of the Buddha. A breather from most other religious destinations, which, ironically, reel under chaos, Kushinagar – the place where Gautam Buddha breathed his last – is a place where you can pray in peace or simply soak in the beauty of the architectural marvels and the natural surrounding. Situated 51 km east of Gorakhpur in Uttar Pradesh, Kushinagar is one of the four important religious destinations for Buddhists.

    This is the place where the Buddha delivered his last sermon, and died. The other three important destinations are Lumbini, Bodh Gaya and Sarnath. It’s of little surprise then that the place, which is well endowed with greenery, is flocked by tourists – both domestic and foreign – through the year, but especially so in the cooler months between October and April. It is estimated that nearly two million tourists visit Kushinagar every year. “Many tourists come to Kushinagar to pray and to pay their respect to the place where Lord Buddha delivered his last sermon and finally rested in peace. From among foreign countries, we mainly have people coming from Thailand, Japan, China, Korea, Sri Lanka and Myanmar,” said Bhadant Choudhury, a Buddhist monk at the Mahaparinirvana temple. One of the main attractions of the place, the Niravana Chaitya or the Main Stupa, was excavated by Carlleyle in 1876 and stands at a height of 2.74 metres.

    A copper vessel was unearthed at this site and it bore an inscription in ancient Brahmi, which stated that Lord Buddha’s remains had been deposited there. The Stupa was restored and its chamber was ceremoniously closed in 1927, in the presence of 16 Buddhist priests. Several gold, silver and copper plateinscriptions were deposited inside, recording the facts of discovery and identification of the monument. Right in front of the Nirvana Stupa is the Mahaparinirvana temple, which you wouldn’t want to miss – not just for religious purposes but also for the grandeur of a 6.10 metre-long statue of the Buddha in a reclining position which dates back to the fifth century and was also excavated in 1876. While it looks as if it was made of gold, the statue, which represents the dying Buddha, is made of monolith red sandstone.

    “One of the amazing things about the statue is that the facial expression of Lord Buddha seems to change when you look from different positions. If you stand in front, from an angle, it looks like he is smiling; from behind his head, it looks like he is thinking; and from his feet, it looks like he is dying,” explained Amit Kumar, a resident of Kushinagar. Sitting on the steps of the temple, Choudhury motioned to the beeline of devotees to wait for some time until a Thai delegation of 20 people inside were done with their chanting. “The foreigners travel great distances to reach this place and that too for a few days. So it doesn’t make much of a difference if the rest of us wait for a few minutes…and people really don’t mind. Everyone is patient,” he said, as other devotees sat on the steps with him, chatting with the monks. One of those waiting, Lakshmi Devi, from the neighbouring state of Bihar, said: “It’s all right if we have to wait for a little while for the foreigners…they have, after all, come from so far and are our guests. My family and I wanted to pay our respects to Lord Buddha, and we are here. What will we get by creating a fuss?” Considering the heavy flow of foreign tourists, many neighbouring countries have built their own temples near the Mahaparinirvana temple.

    Their temple complexes also have guest houses to accommodate their citizens and are again a must-see for the sheer beauty of their architecture. The Watt Thai temple, for instance, is a huge temple complex built in the Thai- Buddhist architectural fashion. The Japanese temple has a beautiful Ashta Dhatu (eight metal) statue of the Buddha which has been brought from Japan. The Linth Son Chinese temple, Myanmar temple and the Korean temple, among others, are also some must visits. Just about 400 yards from the Nirvana Stupa is the Matha Kuar shrine which has a colossal statue of the Buddha in the ‘Bhumi Sparsh Mudra’ (earth touching posture) under the ‘Bodhi tree’, carved out of a single block of stone. The inscription at the base dates it to the 10th-11th century. Also on the itinerary should be a visit to the Ramabhar Stupa which is the cremation ground of the Buddha.

    Although there is no air or rail link right to Kushinagar, it is well connected to Gorakhpur, which in turn has a railway station and an air strip. Food and accommodation are not a problem with numerous guest houses and restaurants with, predictably, names like Vipassana and Nirvana! So pack your bags for a few days of nirvana in Kushinagar!

  • Auto parts industry attracts heavy online traffic: Study

    Auto parts industry attracts heavy online traffic: Study

    Is among the top three sectors on B2B site in terms of the number of buyers it attracted
    from developed and developing countries

    NEW DELHI (TIP): A report by IndiaMART.com, one of India’s largest online B2B marketplaces, has found that the SME-dominated automotive sector is among the top three sectors on the site in terms of the number of buyers it attracted from other countries, both developed and developing. The report, The Automotive Components Sector, reveals that the US emerged as one of the leading countries in terms of the number of its buyers visiting IndiaMART.com’s automotive category for their sourcing requirements — 12.8 per cent of its total buyers did so.

    Over one million SMEs from sectors such as auto components, apparel and fashion accessories, engineering and industrial, home decor, and others are registered with IndiaMART.com, which acts as a B2B matchmaking platform for these suppliers and helps them generate leads from over five million buyers from across the globe.

    Asian countries are also key buyers for auto products from India. The portal’s automotive category had visits from buyers based in Pakistan (8.2 per cent), China (7.6 per cent), Malaysia (7.3 per cent) and Bangladesh (7.2 per cent). Buyers from India alone accounted for 28.3 per cent of online visitors for auto parts.

    The sector also attracted 6.8 per cent of the total buyers from the UK, followed by 6.5 per cent of Canadian buyers, 6.4 per cent of buyers from Germany, and 6.3 per cent of Australian buyers. Other countries from where buyers showed interest in online sourcing of auto components were the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Iran.

    The importance of the automotive sector was also indicated by the number of suppliers from this sector as a proportion of the total number of suppliers from each key country.

    At the top was Canada, 13.8 per cent of whose registered vendors were from the auto parts sector, followed by Denmark (12.3 per cent), China (12.1 per cent), Australia (7.4 per cent), France and Germany. The report reveals that the most popular product searches were for air pollution control devices, fuel injection parts, digital tachometers, security gadgets, gear parts, and car cables. Information on “buy leads” – buyers’ sourcing inquiries that are aggregated by IndiaMART.com and purchased by interested suppliers, who then contact potential buyers to generate business – reveals that the most number come from Maharashtra, which contributes 25.6 per cent of the total buy leads generated in India.

  • Pakistan is developing non-strategic nuclear arms: US experts

    Pakistan is developing non-strategic nuclear arms: US experts

    WASHINGTON (TIP): To enhance its nuclear capability, Pakistan is developing non-strategic nuclear weapons, and thus joining the ranks of countries like the US and Russia, an American think-tank has said. India, however, not listed among five of the nine-nuclear weapons powered countries that has or is developing non-strategic nuclear weapons, said Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project, and Robert S Norris, senior fellow for Nuclear Policy, in a new edition of Nuclear Notebook. “At least five of the world’s nine nuclear weapons states have, or are developing, what appears to meet the definition of a nonstrategic nuclear weapon: Russia, the US, France, Pakistan, and China,” they concluded. In their report, the two US nuclear scientist wrote that the new weapon, the Nasr, is a 60-km ballistic missile launched from a mobile twin-canister launcher.

  • Netanyahu draws ‘red line’ on Iran’s nuclear program

    Netanyahu draws ‘red line’ on Iran’s nuclear program

    UNITED NATIONS (TIP): Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu drew a “red line” for Iran’s nuclear program on Thursday despite a U.S. refusal to set an ultimatum, saying Tehran will be on the brink of developing a nuclear weapon in less than a year.

    By citing a time frame in an address to the U.N. General Assembly, Netanyahu – who has clashed with President Barack Obama over the urgency of military action against Iran – appeared to suggest no Israeli attack was imminent before the November 6 U.S. presidential election.

    Holding up a cartoon-like drawing of a bomb with a fuse, Netanyahu literally drew a red line just below a label reading “final stage” to a bomb, in which Iran was 90 percent along the path to having sufficient weapons-grade material.

    Experts put that at the point that Iran has amassed enough uranium, purified to a level of 20 percent, that could quickly be enriched further and be used to produce an atomic bomb.

    Netanyahu told the United Nations he believes that faced with a clear red line, Iran will back down in a crisis that has sent jitters across the region and through financial markets.

    “And this will give more time for sanctions and diplomacy to convince Iran to dismantle its nuclear weapons program altogether,” said the Israeli leader, who later met with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for 75 minutes.
    Netanyahu’s remarks were the closest he or any top Israeli official has come to publicly laying out precisely which Iranian actions could trigger an Israeli military strike on Tehran’s nuclear infrastructure.

    But by referring to a spring or summer 2013 time frame for Iran to complete the next stage of uranium enrichment, the Israeli leader also seemed to dispel, at least for now, fears that Israel might strike Iran before the U.S. presidential election, 40 days away.

    Iran’s U.N. mission, responding to Netanyahu’s speech, accused him of making “baseless and absurd allegations” and said the Islamic Republic “reserves its full right to retaliate with full force against any attack.”
    Iran called Netanyahu’s visual tool “an unfounded and imaginary graph … used to justify a threat against a founding Member of the United Nations.”

    Netanyahu’s remarks also seemed to deliver a two-part message to the Obama White House – along with Iran’s leaders, his most important audience – signalling that the hawkish prime minister wanted an end to the all-too-public war of words with Washington over Iran’s suspected nuclear ambitions.

    But they also showed he was not backing down from his insistence that harsher warnings must be delivered to Tehran.
    A senior State Department official, making no mention of Netanyahu’s ultimatum, said the Israeli leader and Clinton reaffirmed “that the United States and Israel share the goal of preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.”
    White House spokesman Jay Carney said he expected Obama to have a follow-up phone call with Netanyahu, probably on Friday.

    ‘NEXT SPRING OR SUMMER’

    In his speech, Netanyahu never explicitly said that if Iran crossed his red line, Israel would launch attacks against Iranian nuclear facilities, but he did seem to imply such a threat.

    “At this late hour, there is only one way to peacefully prevent Iran from getting atomic bombs. That’s by placing a clear red line on Iran’s nuclear program,” Netanyahu said.

    Iran, Netanyahu said, was well into what he defined as the second stage of enrichment – 20 percent purification – and predicted it would complete that stage by “next spring, at most by next summer, at current enrichment rates.”
    According to an August report by the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iran has stockpiled 91.4 kg (201.5 pounds) of the 20 percent material.

    Some experts say Iran would need 200 to 250 kg (440 to 550 pounds) of such material for a weapon. Other experts suggest less might do it. Iran could potentially reach that threshold soon by producing roughly 15 kg (33 pounds) a month, a rate that could be speeded up if it activates new enrichment centrifuges.

    According to the U.N. nuclear watchdog, around 25 kg (55.1 pounds) of uranium enriched to a 90 percent purity level would be needed for a single nuclear weapon.

    In his own speech to the General Assembly on Tuesday, Obama said the United States will “do what we must” to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and that time is not unlimited for diplomacy to resolve the issue.

    Britain, France, Germany, the United States, Russia and China have negotiated with Iran without success in one form or another for nearly 10 years to persuade it to halt its nuclear program in exchange for political and economic incentives.

    Addressing the General Assembly on Thursday, Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi said disagreement over Iran’s nuclear program had reached “a new, crucial stage,” and urged a diplomatic solution.

    The six nations, whose foreign ministers met at the United Nations on Thursday, have held three rounds of talks with Iran this year without visible progress. A U.S. official voiced hope for a fourth round “in the not-too-distant future.”

    As if to highlight Netanyahu’s concerns that tougher U.N. sanctions against Iran are unlikely due to Russian and Chinese resistance, the group failed to agree on any plan for further steps against Tehran, envoys said.
    Obama set no ultimatum or clear “red line” of his own, despite public urging from Netanyahu over the past several weeks that has aggravated strains between the two leaders.

    ‘CHART A PATH FORWARD’

    Seeking re-election, Obama has faced criticism from Republican challenger Mitt Romney that the president is being too tough with Israel and not tough enough with Iran.

    “I very much appreciate the president’s position, as does everyone in my country. We share the goal of stopping Iran’s nuclear weapons program,” Netanyahu said. “Israel is in discussions with the United States over this issue, and I am confident we can chart a path forward together,” he said.

    He spoke a day after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the General Assembly. Ahmadinejad said on Monday he did not take seriously the threat that Israel could launch a military strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
    He also said Israel has no roots in the Middle East and would be “eliminated.”

    Obama has drawn criticism from Republicans for opting not to meet Netanyahu or other foreign leaders on the sidelines of the General Assembly and focus instead on his re-election campaign. Netanyahu has faced opposition within his cabinet and from former Israeli security chiefs to any go-it-alone attack on Iran. Opinion polls show Israelis are wary of any such strike by their military, whose capability of destroying underground Iranian facilities is limited.

    Israel, believed to have the Middle East’s only atomic arsenal, sees a nuclear-armed Iran as a threat to its existence and has expressed frustration over the failure of diplomacy and sanctions to rein in Tehran’s nuclear activity.

    Iran says it is enriching uranium only for peaceful energy and medical purposes, not for nuclear bombs.

  • Visa Interview Waiver Program Gaining Popularity in India

    Visa Interview Waiver Program Gaining Popularity in India

    NEW YORK (TIP): After Brazil and China, a recently launched pilot program to waive off interview for an American visa is gaining popularity in India as the US government intends to target the country to increase tourist flow in the years to come.

    In the brief span of a few months, since its launch in April, the US mission in India processed some 4,000 visa applications under its interview waiver pilot program (IWPP), the State Department said in a report.

    China and Brazil were the first two countries where IWPP was launched January 20, by the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security as part of its effort to streamline processing for low-risk visa applicants.
    The pilot program is for two years.

    “The IWPP is very popular in China and Brazil, where over 80 percent of IWPP cases are processed.
    State’s Mission (the Embassy and constituent consulates) in Brazil processed almost 33,000 IWPP cases between March 2012 and June 2012, while Mission China processed over 20,000 IWPP cases between February 2012 and June 2012,” the report said.

    “The IWPP is gaining popularity in other key markets, including India.

    Mission India processed almost 4,000 IWPP applications since it launched its program in April 2012,” the State Department said, adding that the program has been expanded to other countries including Mexico and Germany in July.
    According to latest figures available from the Department of Commerce, visitors from India spent a record-breaking USD 4.4 billion in the United States in 2011, an increase of more than 10 per cent from 2010.

    Visitation from Indian nationals is expected to increase by more than 30 per cent over the next five years, the Commerce Department report said, adding that the annual US travel and tourism exports to India have risen by double-digits in seven of the last eight years.

    The State Department is in front of this demand – visa applicants in India typically wait less than a week for an interview appointment and spend less than an hour in the consular section, and 97 per cent of visas are processed within 24 hours, the State Department report said.

    The State Department said it is taking steps to anticipate surges in visa demand from countries exhibiting strong economic growth.

  • Chinese FM Yang tells UN Japan stole disputed islands from China

    Chinese FM Yang tells UN Japan stole disputed islands from China

    UNITED NATIONS (TIP): The islands at the center of a territorial dispute between Japan and China were seized from the Chinese in 1895 and the Japanese government’s recent purchase of them is “illegal and invalid,” Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi said on Thursday.

    “The moves taken by Japan are totally illegal and invalid. They can in no way change the historical fact that Japan stole the Diaoyudao and affiliated islands and that China has sovereignty over them,” Yang told the United Nations General Assembly, using the Chinese name for what Japan calls the Senkakus.

    Yang urged Tokyo to resolve the issue through negotiations.

  • Queens College New York  launches ‘Year of India’ 2012

    Queens College New York launches ‘Year of India’ 2012

    Pooja Premchandran

    NEW YORK (TIP)New York’s Queens College dedicated academic year 2012 to India, by officially launching ‘Year of India’ at an event held at the Consulate General of India last week. The program was launched in the presence of Consulate General Prabhu Dayal and it went on to exhibit the rich cultural heritage India is renowned for. Queens College President Mr. James Muyskens presided over the event by providing a description of what the events throughout the year will comprise of.

    The student body representatives of Queens College present at the event said that it is an honor to have India recognized as the country of the Year of India. Student Body representative Sumit Singh explains, “The focus is going to not just be on Indian culture, so people will be more aware of other factors of India such as economy, politics, films, etc. which will help them in understanding our culture better. ”

    Consulate General Mr. Parbhu Dayal also expressed his enthusiasm in having India as the primary focus at Queens College this year. “We are very honored that India has been given this very important recognition. As you know, Indo-US relations are growing by leaps and bounds. And the gesture of Queens College to recognize this year as ‘Year of India’ is probably also an affirmation of the strength of this relation,” said Mr. Dayal.

    Recognizing a country each year is a tradition and an important part of the academic calendar at Queens College. The college recognized China in 2010 and Turkey in 2012. Mr. Muyskens told The Indian Panorama that the campus unanimously chose India as the country to focus in 2012. “We asked the campus several years back which countries do we have expertise in at the campus, which country will the students and others would like to focus on and study.

    Selecting a country meant, we would focus that year on its religion, politics, history and the current world we live in. And so they all selected India. The next year we have Brazil the South Africa but I am especially excited about India. I think there is no place more exciting than India,” said Mr. Muyskens.

    Mr. Muyskens also stressed on the importance of holding such events especially today’s scenario. “It is incredibly important to have such events. The borough of Queens is a very diverse borough. We have people from all over the world. And that is the future. We must have a genuine understanding of all countries and not just be shallow. To really understand each country in depth we need events like this.”

    Mr. Dayal also affirmed this thought by saying, “I think it is very important to hold such events because they reach out to young people. And our youth is the torchbearer for the future. And we feel that it is extremely important that a college that is as highly ranked as Queens College has taken this unique step to recognize this year as the ‘Year of India’.”

    To represent the cultural heritage and diversity of India, the program had the famous Odissi dancer Bani Ray, perform before her guests. The program concluded with an exhilarating display of Hindustani Carnatic music leaving the audience astounded.

    Year of India comprises of many events that resonate culture, traditions, politics, films, economy and sports of India. These programs aim to explore India and its values as well as map its influence in South Asia. The events will also plans to strengthen ties with the United States by enabling student and faculty exchanges between the two countries. It also will provide a massive audience and immense recognition to the best talents of India and to those Indians making world class contribution. The event at the Consulate General was a preview for the audience to what they can expect this year. The energy and enthusiasm of the participants was reciprocated by the audience with a standing ovation for the Queens College team, for its excellent efforts.

  • As i see it: Dollar Billionaires in Poor Countries India’s Philanthrocapitalism

    As i see it: Dollar Billionaires in Poor Countries India’s Philanthrocapitalism

    In this time of global financial crisis, when so many are suffering financial hardship, most countries have witnessed increases in their number of dollar millionaires. These ‘High Net-Worth Individuals’ (HNWI), according to a report by Capgemini and Merrill Lynch Wealth Management, have in recent years more than doubled in India. In 2008-09, India had 84,000 HNWIs. By 2010, it had risen by 50 per cent (126,700), the biggest increase of all countries.

    In the worldwide list of dollar billionaires for 2010, India ranked third with 69, behind China (128) and the US (403). Forbes states, however, that the wealthiest 100 Indians are collectively worth $276 billion, while their top 100 Chinese counterparts are worth $170 billion. The three richest Indians together had more wealth than the top 24 Chinese billionaires combined.

    You don’t have to look very far for evidence of their wealth, with more than 30 luxury skyscrapers springing up in Mumbai. For the rich occupants, the taller, the better, to escape from the reality of India below – the railway tracks, low-rise tenements, choking traffic and the 55 per cent of the city’s population who live in slums. People are paying nearly two million dollars for a designer apartment, built in complexes with private cinemas, swimming pools, floodlit tennis courts and high-level security. Developers believe each year Mumbai can absorb between 30,000 and 40,000 more homes in the one million dollar-plus category. (Another housing bubble in the making?)

    Such extreme wealth doesn’t go unnoticed. In the UK, people are questioning the decision to keep giving India some $460 million of aid annually, which makes India the largest single recipient of British aid. Many ordinary Brits are asking if it can be right that the downtrodden British taxpayer gives such sums to a nation that boasts such wealth (albeit highly concentrated).

    Siphoning off the country’s wealth

    Some of the most damning comments about India come from French author Dominique Lapierre, whose book royalties from ‘City of Joy’ fund projects for the underprivileged in India. He is frustrated by the greed and corruption that he encounters.

    Lapierre’s nonprofit organization, City of Joy Aid, runs a network of clinics, schools, rehabilitation centers and hospital boats. It operates 14 projects in India, most in the Sunderbans area. However, 90 per cent of free medicines get stolen in the journey from Delhi to Kolkata, and the project is thus forced to buy them at high prices from the market.

    A few years ago, Lapierre set up in Delhi a trust which offers a tax-deductible certificate for all donations. With more than a hint of disappointment, he notes the foundation still does not have any funds from affluent Indians who seem reluctant to help their fellow country-folk.

    Quite the opposite, it seems. Much of India’s wealth has been creamed off into Swiss banks, robbing ordinary folk of a quality of life they can now only but dream of. According to some estimates, it could be over Rs 7,280,000 crore (around $1.6 trillion). Data from the Swiss Banking Association in 2006 indicated that India had more black money than the rest of the world combined, or 13 times India’s total national debt. Global Finance Integrity notes this siphoning of wealth has served to widen the gap between rich and poor and asserts the main guilty parties have been private organizations and High Net Worth Individuals.

    By contrast, Global management and consulting firm Bain notes philanthropic donations amount to just 0.6 per cent of India’s GDP. This is not too good when compared to giving in the US and UK, for example, but is better than rates in other developing countries like Brazil and China. In the US, individuals and corporations are responsible for 75 per cent of charitable gifts, whereas in India individual and corporate donations make up only 10 per cent of charitable giving. Some 65 per cent comes from India’s central and state government, and the remaining gifts are provided by foreign organizations.

    In India, giving does not rise with income and education. As a percentage of household income, donations by the wealthy actually decrease. From an analysis of 30 HNWIs in India, Bain noted that they contribute, on average, just around one-fourth of one per cent of their net worth to social and charitable causes.

    All of this is not meant to imply that philanthropy is absent in India. Far from it. Vineet Nayyar’s Rs 30 crore gift (just under $7 million) to the Essel Social Welfare Foundation is a high-profile example of philanthropic giving. Over the years, Rohini Nilekani has donated $40 million to numerous causes that try to tackle the root causes of social problems and not merely the symptoms. Her biggest contribution has been to Arghyam, a Bangalore foundation that promotes clean water and hygiene, which now has projects in 800 villages. Philanthropy can and does positively impact people’s daily lives.

    Philanthrocapitalism: a plaster on a gaping wound

    What is really required, though, is a proper redistributive system of taxation, effective welfare provision and genuine economic democracy through forms of common ownership to help address inequality and poverty. In the absence of such things, wealthy philanthrocapitalists will have a major say in deciding which problems are addressed and how, and some will be highly selective.

    For instance, critics of Bill Gates say his foundation often ends up favoring his commercial investments. Instead of paying taxes to the state coffers, he donates his profits where it is favorable to him economically, such as supporting GM crops in Africa or high tech patented medicines. ‘Giving’ often acts as a smokescreen for channeling funds into pet projects and ‘business as usual’, with rich corporations receiving money to shape the world in their own image and ultimately for their own benefit. Apparent benevolence can have sinister motives, just like certain governments which provide money in the form of ‘development aid’ that is intentionally used to fund actions that serve geo-political self interest and ultimately undermine the recipient state.

    Philanthropy isn’t necessarily opposed to capitalism; it’s very much part of it. Capitalism is designed to ensure that the flow of wealth goes upwards and remains there via, among other things, the privatization of public assets, deregulation of the financial sector, the use of subsidies and tax policies that favor the rich, the legal obligation to maximize shareholder profits and the consistent downward pressures on labor costs.

    Professor Ha Joon Chang of Cambridge University says that economics isn’t a social science anymore, but adopts the role the Catholic Church played in medieval Europe. Essentially, economic neo liberalism is secular theology used to justify the prevailing system, with the hope that some drops of wealth will trickle down an extremely thin funnel to placate the mass of the population. Widening the funnel slightly by making benevolent donations will not address the underlying issues of a failed system.

    For example, consider that one in four people in India, is hungry and every second child is underweight and stunted. Environmentalist Vandana Shiva argues that hunger is a structural part of the design of the industrialized, globalize food system and of the design of capital-intensive, chemical-intensive monocultures of industrial agriculture. The long-term solution for hunger lies in moving away from and challenging the centralized, globalised food supply controlled by a handful of profiteering corporations.

    This type of built-in structural inequality, whether it concerns hunger, poverty, housing, income or health, is part and parcel of a development process that is skewed by elite interests in India and at the World Bank and by the corporations that pull the strings at the World Trade Organization, who have all succeeded in getting their ‘globalization’ agenda accepted. No amount of philanthropy, regardless of how well meaning it may be, will remedy the overall destructive effects of the type of capitalism (and massive corruption) being embraced by India’s economic and political leaders.

    (Originally from the northwest of England, Colin Todhunter has spent many years in India. He has written extensively for the Bangalore-based Deccan Herald, New Indian Express and Morning Star (Britain). His articles have also appeared in many other newspapers, journals and books. His East by Northwest site is at: http://colintodhunter.blogspot.com)

  • Maharaja Dalip Singh’s dinner plate up for auction

    Maharaja Dalip Singh’s dinner plate up for auction

    LONDON: Collectors of Maharaja Dalip Singh memorabilia will be thrilled at the prospect of bidding for a dinner plate that once belonged to the last independent ruler of the Punjab, reports appearing in London newspapers say.

    The plate being put up for auction by Mullock’s auctioneers in the English county of Shrops hire is valued at between £2,000 and £3000 (Rs1.5 to Rs 2.5 lakh). It was manufactured by ceramics manufacturer Mintons who also supplied china tableware to Queen Victoria.

    The plate is nowhere as valuable as other items from Dalip Singh’s estate, such as the Kohinoor diamond, which now lodges in one of the crowns belonging to the British royal family, or the golden throne of Ranjit Singh currently in a London museum, but itis till a reminder of the glory of the Sikh empire that stretched from Afghanistan to Kashmir.
    Inked on the back of the plate is a black ink certificate of provenance which reads, ‘From the collection of late Maharaja Dhuleep Singh. ‘Dalip Singh was only 11-year old when he was removed from his throne by the East India Company.

    He was ubsequently baptized as a Christian and sent to England where he was induced to ‘gift’ the Kohinoor to the Queen. Since his death other family heirlooms have surfaced from time to time and are immediately snatched up by eager collectors. Such was the case with the 12 bore hammer gun made by J.P Urdey and Sons that was offered for sale by Bonhams auctioneers last April.

    The gun commissioned for Dalip Singh’s 15-year-old son, Prince Victor, is thought to have been used for many of the shooting parties that were hosted by the exiled Maharaja at his country estate of Elveden in Norfolk.

    At least as much interest was generated more recently by a gold coin minted during the reign of Dalip Singh’s father, Maharaja Ranjit Singh, which was purchased for more than £10,000 by a mystery buyer from India.

    Although the provenance of the coin is not known, there was speculation that it came from the estate of the late Dr John Login, a Scottish doctor who was appointed by the East India Company as Dalip Singh’s guardian in the mid 19th century.

  • India Faces Multiple Challenges

    India Faces Multiple Challenges

    India, a country in South Asia with a population of more than 1.2 billion people, is the world’s largest democracy. Over the past two decades, with an influx of new money and new opportunities – led by service and I.T. industries – India has become a rising global powerhouse. Even so, grinding poverty and corruption still persist.

    Over the last year, India’s economy has slowed down: its currency, the rupee, is falling; investment is down; inflation is rising; and deficits are eating away at government coffers. On the plus side, analysts say India’s long-term strengths remain significant. It has one of the world’s youngest populations, and polls consistently show they are overwhelmingly optimistic about their future. Meanwhile, India’s businesses are competing more aggressively on the global stage.

    One serious threat hampering economic growth is the country’s inadequate power grid. For two days at the end of July, an unprecedented blackout crippled the nation, when the northern and eastern electricity grids failed. About 670 million people – or roughly 10 percent of the world’s population – were affected. The outage stopped hundreds of trains and stranded passengers, darkened traffic lights, trapped coal miners, caused huge traffic jams in the capital and left nearly everyone – the police, water utilities, private businesses and citizens – without electricity. Power was restored on Aug. 1, as the nation’s power minister sought to tamp down a growing argument between state and federal ministers over who was to blame.

    While short-term growth has slowed but not ground to a halt, India’s problems have dampened hopes that it, along with China and other non-Western economies, might help revive the global economy, as happened after the 2008 financial crisis. Instead, India is now facing a political reckoning, as the country’s elected leaders must address difficult, politically unpopular decisions.

    At the core of the political uncertainties is the weakened status of the Indian National Congress Party, which leads the coalition government, known as the United Progressive Alliance. Since 2004, the government has operated under an unorthodox partnership between Sonia Gandhi, president of the Congress Party and the governing coalition, and Manmohan Singh, her handpicked prime minister.

    The slowdown has punctured the once bubbly mood in the business and political classes and brought sharp criticism of the government. Indian business leaders, foreign investors and analysts say India’s strengths are being undermined by growing political dysfunction: the populist tendencies of Indian politicians, a lack of action by top leaders and allegations of corruption that have undermined the authority of policy makers.

    India is desperate for investment in mining, roads, ports, urban housing and other areas, but Indian businesses and foreign investors are starting to shy away. Indian corporations, unable to obtain governmental licenses or permissions for projects, are investing overseas instead. Foreigners are also pulling back; their investment in Indian stocks and bonds totaled only $16 billion in the last fiscal year, compared with $30 billion the year before. The trend accelerated in recent months after the Finance Ministry, trying to stem a rising budget deficit, proposed a raft of new taxes on foreign institutions doing business in India.

    Analysts say it will be harder for Indian policy makers to respond to a slowing economy now than in the financial crisis more than three years ago. At that time, the government’s finances were relatively healthier and it was able to spend money to stimulate the economy. Now, however, New Delhi is desperately trying to cut its fiscal deficit from 5.9 percent of its gross domestic product to 5.1 percent. Also, the Reserve Bank of India has less room to cut short-term interest rates to stimulate lending because inflation remains high, at about 7 percent.

    Indians have long thrived amid adversity, often by creatively – at times, illegally – subverting onerous regulations with a workaround ethos that has spurred economic activity. Even today, industries like pharmaceuticals, information technology and consumer goods, which do not need many licenses and official approvals, are prospering. But those sectors tied to the government, including mining, construction and manufacturing, are struggling.

    A Panicked Exodus to India’s Northeast

    In mid-August 2012, India witnessed a panicked exodus by tens of thousands of northeastern migrants working in major cities such as Bangalore, Chennai and Pune – a mass departure linked to a vicious communal fight between Muslims and the indigenous Bodo tribe in the northeastern state of Assam. The violence in Assam, rooted in a complex local dispute over land, immigration and political power, has claimed at least 78 lives as more than 14,000 homes have been burned. At least 300,000 people have fled to refugee camps in the state.

    The conflict in Assam, which started in July and worsened in early August, had initially remained contained to the state until tensions rippled outward. A protest by Muslims in Mumbai, the country’s financial center on the western coast, turned violent. Beatings of northeastern residents in the city of Pune spread alarm among other northeastern migrants.

    Then, on Aug. 15, authorities say, misleading cellphone text messages and other social media began circulating with warnings that Muslims would attack students and migrants from the northeast. Tens of thousands of people hurriedly boarded overcrowded trains to return to their home region as Indian leaders pleaded for calm.

    By Sunday, Aug. 19, the sense of panic had eased. In Pune, Indian news media reported that the number of northeastern students and migrants rushing to train stations to leave the city had declined. In Bangalore, the country’s technology capital, an estimated 30,000 northeastern migrants and students fled the week before, but local authorizes said the situation had now stabilized.

    V. S. D’Souza, deputy commissioner of the Bangalore police, said police had arrested 22 people on charges ranging from assault or intimidation against northeastern natives, as well as the spreading of inflammatory messages. Aug. 20 is the Muslim holy day of Id al-Fitr, and some of the threatening text messages sent the week before had warned that northeastern migrants would face reprisals if they had not left by the holiday.

    On Aug. 19, India’s top domestic security official called on the Pakistani government to investigate Indian claims that “elements based in Pakistan” had orchestrated a fear-mongering misinformation campaign using text messages and social media that helped set off the nationwide panic among northeastern migrants.

    The Indian news agency, IANS, quoted an anonymous Pakistani official denying any involvement. Describing India’s claims as “cooked up,” the official told IANS that “instead of indulging in mudslinging and the blame game, it’s time for India to address its internal issues.”

    The hysteria in several of the country’s most advanced urban centers underscored the deep roots of ethnic tensions in India, where communal conflicts are usually simplified as Hindu versus Muslim yet are often far more complex. For decades, Indian leaders have mostly managed to isolate and triangulate regional ethnic conflicts, if not always resolve them, but the recent public panic was a testament to how the old strategies may be less effective in an information age.

    Assam’s History of Ethnic Strife

    Assam, which has about 31 million people, has a long history of ethnic strife. The current violence has been focused on the westernmost region of the state, which is claimed by the Bodos as their homeland. For years, Bodo insurgent groups fought for political autonomy, with some seeking statehood and others seeking to create an independent Bodo nation.

    In 2003, India’s central government, then led by the Bharatiya Janata Party, brokered a deal in which Bodo insurgents agreed to cease their rebellions in exchange for the creation of a special autonomous region, now known as the Bodoland Territorial Autonomous Districts. It was a formula long used by Indian leaders to subdue regional rebellions: persuade rebels to trade the power of the gun for the power of the ballot box.

    The Bodos currently dominate the government overseeing the autonomous districts, even though they are not a majority, accounting for about 29 percent of a population otherwise splintered among Muslims, other indigenous tribal groups, Hindus and other native Assamese. Competition over landownership is a source of rivalry and resentment: the land rights of Muslims are tightly restricted inside the special districts, even though they constitute the region’s second-largest group, after the Bodos.

    The Bodos say illegal Muslim immigrants from Bangladesh have streamed into the autonomous districts and taken over vacant land, Muslims contend such claims are a smokescreen intended to disguise a Bodo campaign to drive out rightful Muslim residents in a campaign similar to ethnic cleansing.

    Opening a Door to Private Education

    It has long been the case in India that people who earn little money could only send their children to government-run schools. As a rule, these public schools suffer from teacher absences, poor infrastructure and a lack of facilities.
    But through a law upheld by the Indian Supreme Court in spring 2012, some families of little means are able to send their children to private school. The legislation – called the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, or the Right to Education Act – requires Indian private schools to admit 25 percent of their student body from ages 6 to 14 from families making less than 100,000 rupees, or $1,800, a year.

    There is still a long way to go and the number of children to benefit from new access to private schooling will be relatively small. Screening is forbidden in the admissions process, but that does not open it to everyone: Those put forward have to have a parent or sponsor with the tenacity to process the application.

    Critics of the law have accused the government of shirking responsibility toward the 80 percent of schools that are publicly financed. Of the 188 million children enrolled in elementary school in India, 70 percent study in public schools. In villages, 84 percent of children attend government schools, according to the District Information System for Education, a government database.

    The problems at public schools, beyond teacher absenteeism and poor infrastructure, include gender discrimination, with many schools lacking toilet facilities for girls. An article published in June 2012 in The Economic and Political Weekly pointed to a number of studies that found that even after five years of government schooling, some students do not have basic reading, writing and math skills.

    (From New York Times)

  • Protest marks souring of Chinese democracy experiment

    Protest marks souring of Chinese democracy experiment

    WUKAN (TIP): One of China’s most celebrated experiments in grass-roots democracy showed signs of faltering on September 21, as frustrations with elected officials in the southern fishing village of Wukan triggered a small and angry protest. On the first anniversary of an uprising that gave birth to the experiment, about 100 villagers rallied outside Wukan’s Communist Party offices to express anger at what they saw as slow progress by the village’s democ atically elected governing committee to resolve local land disputes. “We still haven’t got our land back,” shouted Liu Hancai, a retired 62-year-old party member, one of many villagers fighting to win back land that was seized by Wukan’s previous administration and illegally sold off for development. The small crowd, many on motorbikes, was kept under tight surveillance by plain-clothed officials fearful of any broader unrest breaking out. Police cars were patrolling the streets. “There would be more people here, but many people are afraid of trouble and won’t come out,” Liu told Reuters. A year ago, Wukan became a beacon of rights activism after the land seizures sparked unrest and led to the sacking of local party officials.

  • India beats China on Internet user additions

    India beats China on Internet user additions

    New Delhi (TIP): A report by industry body Assocham along with independent research firm comScore said that among the Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC) nations, India has been the fastest growing market adding over 18 million Internet users during the last one year.

    The report said the Internet users’ base in the country is growing at an annual rate of 41 per cent to reach 124 million users in July. The time spent has increased by 33 per cent over the past one year with the user base spending 48 billion minutes online in a month. The consumption of content has grown to 70 billion pages a month from 54.6 billion pages in July 2011.

    This is expected to be a continuing trend in coming years, given the age distribution in India. The top five popular categories accessed online are social networking, e-commerce portals, search, entertainment and news sites, the study titled ‘State of e-Commerce in India’ said. In comparison, China added over 14 million users to reach 336 million Internet users by July-end, followed by Russia and Brazil with 10 million and 3.1 million additions, respectively.
    According to Assocham, the e-Commerce revenues in India will increase from $1.6 billion in 2012 to $ 8.8 billion in 2016.

  • HAQQANI NETWORK AS  FTO: WHAT IMPACT?

    HAQQANI NETWORK AS FTO: WHAT IMPACT?

    By B.Raman

    In a report to the US Congress on September 7,2012, Mrs. Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State, intimated it of her decision to designate the Haqqani Network, an affiliate of the Afghan Taliban operating from the Kurram-North Waziristan areas of Pakistan, as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

    She said in a separate statement:

    “Today, I have sent a report to Congress saying that the Haqqani Network meets the statutory criteria of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) for designation as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO). This action meets the requirements of the Haqqani Network Terrorist Designation Act of 2012 (P.L. 112-168). Based on that assessment, I notified Congress of my intent to designate the Haqqani Network as an FTO under the INA. I also intend to designate the organization as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist entity under Executive Order 13224.

    “The consequences of these designations include a prohibition against knowingly providing material support or resources to, or engaging in other transactions with, the Haqqani Network, and the freezing of all property and interests in property of the organization that are in the United States, or come within the United States, or the control of U.S. persons. These actions follow a series of other steps that the U.S. government already has taken against the Haqqanis. The Department of State previously designated key Haqqani Network leaders under E.O. 13224, and the Department of the Treasury has designated other militants with ties to the Haqqanis under the same authority. We also continue our robust campaign of diplomatic, military, and intelligence pressure on the network, demonstrating the United States’ resolve to degrade the organization’s ability to execute violent attacks.

    “I take this action in the context of our overall strategy in Afghanistan, the five lines of effort that President Obama laid out when he was in Afghanistan in May: increasing the capacity of Afghan security forces to fight insurgents; transitioning to Afghan security lead; building an enduring partnership with Afghanistan; pursuing Afghan-led reconciliation; and putting together an international consensus to support peace and stability in the region. We will continue to work with both Afghanistan and Pakistan to move these efforts forward and build a more peaceful and secure future.”

    For some weeks now, the State Department had been under pressure from sections of the Congress to declare the Haqqani Network as an FTO because of its role in killing US and other NATO troops in Afghanistan. The State Department was resisting the pressure because US intelligence reportedly believed that Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl of the US Army, who disappeared from southern Afghanistan in June, 2009, might be in the custody of the Network. They were worried that the designation of the Network as an FTO could hamper efforts to rescue him. The decision now to designate the Network as an FTO would indicate that the US intelligence is pessimistic about its chances of being able to rescue him.

    The Agence France Presse (AFP) reported as follows on September 8,2012:

    “The network’s founder is Jalaluddin Haqqani, a disciplined Afghan guerrilla leader bankrolled by the US to fight Soviet troops in Afghanistan in the 1980s and now based with his family in Pakistan.

    “In the 1980s, Jalaluddin was close to the CIA and Pakistani intelligence. He allied himself to the Taliban after they took power in Kabul in 1996, serving as a cabinet minister under the militia’s supreme leader, Mullah Omar.

    “When American troops arrived after the 9/11 attacks, Haqqani looked up old friends and sought refuge in North Waziristan, becoming one of the first anti-US commanders based in Pakistan’s border areas.

    “He has training bases in eastern Afghanistan, is close to al Qaeda and his fighters are active across east and southeastern Afghanistan and in Kabul.

    “Militarily the most capable of the Taliban factions, the network operates independently but remains loyal to Omar and would probably fall behind any peace deal negotiated by the Taliban.

    “Now in his late 70s and frail, Jalaluddin’s seat on the Afghan Taliban leadership council has passed to his son Sirajuddin, who effectively runs a fighting force of at least 2,000 men.

    “The United States blames the network for some of the most spectacular attacks in Afghanistan, such as a 2011 siege on the US embassy and, in 2009, the deadliest attack on the CIA in 25 years.

    “Washington has long since designated Jalaluddin and Sirajuddin “global terrorists” but in July Congress urged the State Department to blacklist the entire network.

    “Supporters of the designation say the financial sanctions will help disrupt the Haqqani network’s fundraising activities in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

    “But Pakistanis fear it could further worsen ties between Islamabad and Washington just as cooperation had resumed after a series of major crises in 2011, particularly the killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan.

    “Any such decision will take the relationship back to square one, ruining the improvement seen in ties between the two countries during the last couple of months,” a senior Pakistani security official said.

    “Last year, the outgoing top US military officer, Admiral Mike Mullen, called the Haqqanis the “veritable arm” of Pakistan’s ISI, although other American officials later distanced themselves from the remarks.”

    The designation of an organization as an FTO impairs its ability to collect funds from the Diaspora in the US. Where an organization does not depend on flow of funds from the Diaspora in the US, it has very little impact on its operational capabilities.

    The US started the practice of declaring foreign terrorist set-ups as FTOs in 1997. Since then, there has not been a single instance of any terrorist organization withering away due to drying-up of funds because of its being declared an FTO. All organizations declared by the US as FTO continued to maintain their terrorist activities without any problem.

    The US declared the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) as an FTO in 1997. It had no impact on the activities of the LTTE. The LTTE was crushed 12 years later in May 2009 not by the US designation, but by the counter-insurgency operations of the Sri Lankan Army.

    Since 1997, the US has declared the Harkat-ul-Ansar also known as the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HUM), the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) and the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI) of Bangladesh as FTOs. The declarations have had no impact on their activities. They continue to be as active as before

    This is because the jihadi terrorist organizations based in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan get their funds not from the Diaspora in the US, but from the Diaspora in the Gulf, from so-called charitable organizations in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries and from the intelligence agencies sponsoring them such as those of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. They also get their funds from the narcotics trade in the Af-Pak region.

    Unless these real sources of funding are tackled, just designating an organization as an FTO and making it illegal for persons in the US to help it financially will not help.

    The US war of attrition based on precise intelligence, which has been effective against Al Qaeda in the tribal areas, has not been that effective against the Haqqani Network. Al Qaeda is perceived largely as an Arab organization. Some Pashtuns have had no qualms over co-operating with the US against Al Qaeda as one saw in the case of the Pashtun doctor, now in Pakistani custody, who allegedly collaborated against Osama bin Laden. But the Haqqani Network is a Pashtun organization. It has been more difficult to find Pashtun sources willing to collaborate against the leadership of the Network.

    Only the Shias of Kurram, who have been suffering due to the atrocities committed by the Afghan Taliban and the Network, and the Tajik remnants of Ahmed Shah Masood’s pre-2001 organization might be in a position to help in neutralizing the Haqqani Network through ground and air operations. The suspicions between the US and the former followers of Masood have come in the way of such operations. The US has been reluctant to seek the co-operation of the Shias of Kurram because of their reported links with Iran.

    New ideas, new operational methods and new allies are required to neutralize the Network without having to depend on Pakistan. The US has been bereft of such ideas, methods and allies. Designating the Haqqani Network an FTO alone will not help.

    The US and other NATO forces have been facing problems in Afghanistan because of the mix of conventional and terrorist strikes adopted by the Afghan Taliban and the commando style complex terrorist strikes in which the Haqqani Network specializes. Unless an effective answer is found to the capabilities and techniques of the Afghan Taliban, there is unlikely to be an improvement in the ground situation in Afghanistan.

    Only punitive pressure against Pakistan can help in neutralizing the Haqqani Network. The Network operates from sanctuaries in North Waziristan and Kurram. It maintains close links with the ISI, which is well-informed regarding the location and movements of its leaders. The ISI is in a position to help the US in neutralizing the Network, but is hesitant to do so as it looks upon the Network as its strategic ally for recovering its influence in Afghanistan after the withdrawal of the US and other NATO forces from there.

    The US is not prepared to declare Pakistan a state-sponsor of terrorism for its collusion with the Network. Declaration of Pakistan as a State-sponsor of terrorism could entail follow-up steps such as a rupture of diplomatic relations with Pakistan, termination of all military-military and intelligence-intelligence co-operation and suspension of all economic and military assistance. No US Government would be prepared to take such actions. The US has to tolerate Pakistan and find ways of getting along with it whatever the difficulties and consequences of such a policy.

    In the absence of a capability to mount an Abbottabad style unilateral strike against the Haqqani leadership, the only transit option left to the US is to have the Network designated as an FTO. That is what it has done without any illusions that it will lead to the neutralization of the Network.

    (The author is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com Twitter @SORBONNE75)

  • AS I SEE IT – China thrives in soft corner with two-track U.S. strategy

    AS I SEE IT – China thrives in soft corner with two-track U.S. strategy

    The U.S. strategy long has been geared against the rise of any hegemonic power in Asia and for a stable balance of power. Yet, as its 2006 national security strategy report acknowledges, the United States also remains committed to accommodate “the emergence of a China that is peaceful and prosperous and that cooperates with us to address common challenges and mutual interests.”

    Can U.S. policy reconcile these two seemingly conflicting objectives? The short answer is yes.

    The U.S., in fact, has played a key role in China’s rise. One example was the U.S. decision to turn away from trade sanctions against Beijing after the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre and instead integrate that country with global institutions – a major decision that allowed China to rise. Yet, paradoxically, many in the world today see China as America’s potential peer rival.

    Often overlooked is the fact that U.S. policy has a long tradition of following a China-friendly approach.
    In 1905, for example, President Theodore Roosevelt – who hosted the Japan-Russia peace conference in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, after the war between the two countries – argued for the return of Manchuria to Manchu-ruled China and for a balance of power in East Asia. The Russo-Japanese War actually ended up making the U.S. an active participant in China’s affairs.

    After the Communists seized power in China in 1949, the U.S. openly viewed Chinese Communism as benign and thus distinct from Soviet Communism. In more recent decades, U.S. policy has aided the integration and then ascension of Communist China, which began as an international pariah state.

    It was the U.S. that helped turn China into the export juggernaut that it has become by outsourcing the production of cheap goods to it. Such manufacturing resulted in China accumulating massive trade surpluses and becoming the principal source of capital flows to the U.S.

    America’s China policy has traversed three stages. In the first phase, America courted the Mao Zedong regime, despite its 1950-51 annexation of Tibet and its domestic witch hunts, such as the “Let a Hundred Flowers Bloom” campaign. Disappointment with courtship led to estrangement, and U.S. policy then spent much of the 1960s seeking to isolate China.

    The third phase began immediately after the 1969 Sino-Soviet bloody military clashes, as the U.S. actively sought to take advantage of the open rift between the two communist states to rope in China as an ally in its anti-Soviet strategy.

    Even though the border clashes were clearly instigated by China, as the Pentagon later acknowledged, Washington sided with Beijing. That helped lay the groundwork for the China “opening” of 1970-71 engineered by Henry Kissinger, who had no knowledge of China until then.

    Since the 1970s, the U.S. has followed a conscious policy to aid China’s rise – a policy approach that remains intact today, even as Washington seeks to hedge against the risks of Chinese power sliding into arrogance. The Carter White House, in fact, sent a memo to various U.S. departments instructing them to help in China’s rise.

    In the second half of the Cold War, Washington and Beijing quietly forged close intelligence and other strategic cooperation, as belief grew in both capitals that the two countries were natural allies. Such cooperation survived the end of the Cold War. Even China’s 1996 firing of missiles into the Taiwan Strait did not change the U.S. policy of promoting China’s rise, despite the consternation in Washington over the Chinese action.

    If anything, the U.S. has been gradually withdrawing from its close links with Taiwan, with no U.S. Cabinet member visiting Taiwan since those missile maneuvers. Indeed, U.S. policy went on to acknowledge China’s “core interests” in Taiwan and Tibet in a 2009 joint communiqué with Beijing.

    In this light, China’s spectacular economic success – illustrated by its emergence with the world’s biggest trade surplus and largest foreign-currency reserves – owes a lot to the U.S. policy from the 1970s, including Washington’s post-Tiananmen decision not to sustain trade sanctions.

    Without the significant expansion in U.S.-Chinese trade and financial relations since the 1970s, China’s economic growth would have been much harder.

    From being allies of convenience in the second half of the Cold War, the U.S. and China have emerged as partners tied together by close interdependence. America depends on Chinese trade surpluses and savings to finance its supersized budget deficits, while Beijing relies on its huge exports to the U.S. both to sustain its economic growth and subsidize its military modernization.

    By plowing two-thirds of its mammoth foreign-currency reserves into U.S. dollar-denominated investments, Beijing has gained significant political leverage.

    China thus is very different from the adversaries the U.S. has had in the past, like the Soviet Union and Japan. U.S. interests now are so closely intertwined with China that they virtually preclude a policy that seeks to either isolate or confront Beijing. Even on the democracy issue, the U.S. prefers to lecture some other dictatorships rather than the world’s largest and oldest-surviving autocracy.

    Yet it is also true that the U.S. views with unease China’s not-too-hidden aim to dominate Asia – an objective that runs counter to U.S. security and commercial interests and to the larger U.S. goal for a balance in power in Asia.
    To help avert such dominance, the U.S. has already started building countervailing influences and partnerships, without making any attempt to contain China. Where its interests converge with Beijing, the U.S. will continue to work closely with it. American academic John Garver, writing in the current issue of the Orbis journal, sees a de facto bargain between Washington and Beijing in the vast South Asia-Indian Ocean Region (SA-IOR): “Beijing accepts continuing U.S. pre-eminence in the SA-IOR in exchange for U.S. acceptance of a gradual, incremental and peaceful expansion of Chinese presence and influence in that region.”

    For the U.S., China’s rising power helps to validate U.S. forward military deployments in the Asian theater, keep existing allies in Asia, and win new strategic partners. An increasingly assertive China indeed has proven a diplomatic boon for Washington in strengthening and expanding U.S. security arrangements in Asia.

    South Korea has tightened its military alliance with the United States, Japan has backed away from a move to get the U.S. to move a marine airbase out of Okinawa, Singapore has allowed the stationing of U.S. Navy ships, Australia is hosting U.S. Marine and other deployments, and India, Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines, among others, have drawn closer to the U.S.

    The lesson: The rise of a muscle-flexing power can help strengthen the relevance and role of a power in relative decline.

    Let us not forget that barely a decade ago, the U.S. was beginning to feel marginalized in Asia because of several developments, including China’s “charm offensive.” It was worried about being shunted aside in Asia.
    Today, America has returned firmly to the center-stage in Asia, prompting President Barack Obama to declare his much-ballyhooed “pivot” toward Asia. To lend strategic heft to the “pivot,” the U.S. is to redirect 60 percent of its battleships to the Pacific and 40 percent to the Atlantic by 2020, compared to the 50-50 split at present.

    Despite the “pivot,” the U.S. intends to stick to its two-track approach in Asia – seek to maintain a balance of power with the help of its strategic allies and partners, while continuing to accommodate a rising China, including by reaching unpublicized bargains with it on specific issues and Asian subregions.

    Brahma Chellaney is a prolific writer. He has authored “Asian Juggernaut” (HarperCollins) and “Water: Asia’s New Battleground” (Georgetown University Press).