The Indian Panorama

Tag: Barack Obama

  • Hamid Karzai to meet Obama in Washington, Leon Panetta says

    Hamid Karzai to meet Obama in Washington, Leon Panetta says

    KABUL (TIP): Defense secretary Leon Panetta says Afghan President Hamid Karzai has accepted an invitation from President Barack Obama to meet in Washington. Panetta said at a joint news conference with Karzai that the meeting is to be held during the week of January 7. The two leaders will use the meeting to discuss Afghanistan’s future. Karzai said he and Obama will discuss the number of US troops that will remain in Afghanistan after the combat mission ends there in December 2014.

    Panetta also said that a suicide car bomber who staged an attack at the Kandahar Air Base killed one American serviceman and wounded three others. Two Afghan civilians were also killed in the attack Thursday. Taliban spokesman Qari Jusuf Ahmedi claimed responsibility for the attack in an email, saying a suicide car bomber had targeted foreign military vehicles that were stopped near the gate of Kandahar Airfield. It was unclear if the attack had anything to do with Panetta’s unannounced visit to Kandahar Airfield. Kandahar is a huge and sprawling facility that houses more than 20,000 service members from 20 countries and has more than 11,000 civilian contract workers.

  • US House Of Representatives Puts Off ‘Fiscal Cliff’ Vote

    US House Of Representatives Puts Off ‘Fiscal Cliff’ Vote

    WASHINGTON (TIP): Republicans in the House of Representatives, confronted with a revolt among the party’s rank and file, abandoned a vote on politically-charged but symbolic legislation aimed at averting a fast-approaching “fiscal cliff,” after failing to gather enough support for a measure meant to strengthen the party’s position ahead of final negotiations with US President Barack Obama. December 20th drama, a major defeat for the House Speaker John Boehner, left precious little time for a divided government to prevent across-the-board tax increases and deep spending cuts from taking effect with the new year.

    Economists say the combination threatened a return to recession for an economy that has been recovering slowly from the last one. Boehner’s so-called Plan B legislation was drafted unilaterally by Republicans who control the House and faced sure defeat in the Democrat-held Senate. It was crafted to protect almost all Americans from the expiration of Bush-era tax cuts on Jan. 1, 2013, but would have let rates increase for people earning more than $1 million annually – much higher than Obama’s proposed $400,000 threshold.

  • Shortage of Primary Care Physicians does not bode well for the Nation

    Shortage of Primary Care Physicians does not bode well for the Nation

    American medicine has long had the reputation of being the most advanced in the world. But the US today faces a looming shortage of the versatile doctors who form the backbone of its health system – generalists known as “primary care physicians” – a trend that industry experts call a threat to the nation’s health. If you look worldwide at the countries that have much better scores on health care quality measures than the United States, almost all of them have a higher percentage of their physicians engaged in primary care.

    The US is projected to have 52,000 fewer primary care physicians than needed by 2025, according to a report published in the current issue of the medical journal Annals of Family Medicine.

    The shortage threatens to exacerbate already skyrocketing medical costs in the US by diminishing access to the crucial preventative care offered by primary care physicians and prompting patients to turn to pricey specialists to treat routine maladies, health industry experts say.

    What’s more, such higher costs may actually result in worse outcomes for patients. If patients are bouncing from specialist to specialist, not only are the costs enormous, they get uncoordinated care. They get unnecessary tests, chase spurious information, and can get drug interactions because people get some medication from one physician, and other medicine from another.

    The value in primary care, medical professionals say, is the holistic approach the doctor takes when assessing a patient’s health. Building a stable relationship with a primary care doctor can help a person head off chronic diseases that incur significant financial and quality-of-life costs, they say.

    There’s something to be said for having a place to go and a therapist who knows who the patient is. They don’t have to go to see 20 different doctors and see 20 different records. The knowledge about you is all in one place.

    The increasing scarcity of primary care physicians is driven in part by the projected population growth in the US over the next two decades, as well as by the medical needs of an aging population and the tens of millions of Americans expected to be newly insured under the Affordable Care Act, US President Barack Obama’s signature health care reform.

    It is also driven by the growing income gap between primary care physicians and their counterparts in more financially lucrative specialist fields such as cardiology, medical professionals say.

    For many medical students weighed down with escalating levels of student debt, opting for a career as a specialist is a no-brainer. When young people graduate from medical school $250,000 in debt and see they can make $150,000 a year as a primary care physician, or be a cardiologist and make $450,000 a year, which one do they pick?

    The average salary for a primary care doctor in the US in 2010 was $202,392 compared to $356,885 for medical specialists, according to the US Bureau of Labor and Statistics. The reasons for this disparity are varied. One key factor, however, is that the primary care is holistic and consists of time-consuming patient encounters. These visits, however, have lower reimbursement rates than most medical procedures.

    According to a study published this week in the American Medical Journal, just 22 percent of medical students said they are planning a career in general internal medicine. Meanwhile, 64 percent of the 17,000 students polled said they wanted to become a specialist in fields such as oncology and dermatology.

    It’s a sad picture because primary care is very important. And it’s going to become even more important over the next 20 to 30 years.

  • US, Nato Behind ‘Insecurity’ in Afghanistan: Karzai

    US, Nato Behind ‘Insecurity’ in Afghanistan: Karzai

    Afghan President Hamid Karzai sharply criticized the United States in an exclusive interview with NBC News on Thursday, December 4 blaming American and NATO forces for some of the growing insecurity in his country. “Part of the insecurity is coming to us from the structures that NATO and America created in Afghanistan,” Karzai said during a one-on-one interview at the presidential palace.

    However, he also acknowledged that much of the country’s violence was caused by insurgent groups. The Taliban are regaining land and power lost after they were toppled by U.S.-backed forces in 2001. Meanwhile, Karzai has gone from being a favorite of Washington under the presidency of George W. Bush, to a thorn in the White House’s side with his criticism of American night raids and mounting civilian casualties at the hands of NATO troops.

    Many in Washington have also grown weary of Karzai, viewing him as ineffective and presiding over a deeply corrupt government.

    Karzai, who is serving his second five-year term, also told NBC News that he had sent a letter to President Barack Obama saying that Afghanistan would not sign any new security agreements with the United States until hundreds of prisoners held in U.S. custody were transferred to Afghan authorities.

    More than ten years after the beginning of the war, Afghanistan faces external pressure to reform as well as ongoing internal conflicts. His criticism of the United States, Afghanistan’s most important ally, has come after the start of complex bilateral talks on a security pact on the role the United States would play after most of its troops are withdrawn by the end of 2014.

    Karzai said the inmates in American detention in Afghanistan were being held in breach of an agreement he and Obama signed in March and must be handed over immediately. A vehicle filled with explosives detonated near one of the gates of the Jalalabad airfield in eastern Afghanistan on Sunday morning. “We signed the strategic partnership agreement with the expectation and the hope … the nature of the United States’ activities in Afghanistan will change,” Karzai said.

    But American behavior had not changed, he said, adding that terrorism would not be defeated “by attacking Afghan villages and Afghan homes.” The dispute between the two countries centers around Bagram Air Base and a nearby detention facility, which have long been seen as a symbol of American impunity and disrespect by many Afghans. “I have written to President Obama that the Afghan people will not allow its government to enter into a security agreement, while the United States continues to violate Afghan sovereignty and Afghan loss,” he said.

    In southern Afghanistan, the focus of the U.S. war effort, nearly all the Afghan soldiers are foreigners too. Photographer Kevin Frayer shows these soldiers in a series of portraits. During the interview, Karzai also said that he didn’t think al-Qaida “has a presence in Afghanistan.” He added: “I don’t even know if al-Qaida exists as an organization as it is being spoken about. So all we know is that we have insecurity.” In the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the United States led the invasion to topple the Taliban, which was harboring al-Qaida and its then-leader, Osama bin Laden.

    While weakened, especially after the death of bin Laden at the hands of U.S. special forces in Pakistan in 2011, al-Qaida is still thought to have strong links with the Taliban and other Afghan insurgents. Karzai said Afghans were thankful to foreign forces for being “liberated” in 2001, but complained that since then his countrymen had suffered the most in the fight against extremism. “In the name of the war on terror the Afghan people have paid the greatest price of any. That has not been recognized,” he said.

    While there have been more than 2,000 American military casualties since the invasion of Afghanistan, civilians have borne the brunt of the violence. In the first six months of 2012 alone, more than 3,000 civilians were killed or injured, according the United Nations.

    This number was down 15 percent from a year earlier. Anti-government and coalition insurgents were responsible for 80 percent of the civilian casualties, the U.N. says.

    A suicide bomber, disguised as an Afghan police officer, blew himself up outside a mosque in northern Afghanistan, killing 40 people and wounding more than 50. NBC’s Tazeen Ahmad reports from Kabul.

    Karzai also addressed the issue of graft during the interview, saying there was “no doubt that there is corruption in Afghanistan.” “The bigger corruption is the corruption in contracts,” he added.

    “The contracts are not issued by the Afghan government. The contracts are issued by the international community, mainly by the United States.” In 2010, the country received $6.4 billion in official development assistance, representing more than 40 percent of its gross domestic product, according to humanitarian news site AlertNet. Two-thirds of the funds aren’t channeled through the government because of concerns about corruption and the government’s ability to use the money properly, AlertNet added.

    Afghanistan is tied with Somalia and North Korea at the bottom of Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index 2012. A 2012 United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime report estimated that Afghans paid $2.5 billion in bribes over 12 months, which is equivalent to almost a quarter of the country’s GDP. The international community had fostered graft to keep the Afghan state weak, Karzai said.

    “I’ve come to believe (that) … corruption comes from the United States through contracts and through the corruption in both systems,” he said, adding that the “perception of corruption is deliberate to render the Afghan government exploitable, to weaken it,” he said. “This is something that I have began to believe in firmly now after the experiences that I’ve gained in … working on this issue.”

  • Hamid Karzai To Meet Obama In Washington, Leon Panetta Says

    Hamid Karzai To Meet Obama In Washington, Leon Panetta Says

    KABUL (TIP): Defense secretary Leon Panetta says Afghan President Hamid Karzai has accepted an invitation from President Barack Obama to meet in Washington. Panetta said at a joint news conference with Karzai that the meeting is to be held during the week of January 7. The two leaders will use the meeting to discuss Afghanistan’s future. Karzai said he and Obama will discuss the number of US troops that will remain in Afghanistan after the combat mission ends there in December 2014.

    Panetta also said that a suicide car bomber who staged an attack at the Kandahar Air Base killed one American serviceman and wounded three others. Two Afghan civilians were also killed in the attack Thursday. Taliban spokesman Qari Jusuf Ahmedi claimed responsibility for the attack in an email, saying a suicide car bomber had targeted foreign military vehicles that were stopped near the gate of Kandahar Airfield. It was unclear if the attack had anything to do with Panetta’s unannounced visit to Kandahar Airfield. Kandahar is a huge and sprawling facility that houses more than 20,000 service members from 20 countries and has more than 11,000 civilian contract workers.

  • Leon Panetta In Afghanistan To Meet With Hamid Karzai

    Leon Panetta In Afghanistan To Meet With Hamid Karzai

    KABUL (TIP): US defense secretary Leon Panetta, who has flown to Afghanistan for talks with President Hamid Karzai, says President Barack Obama will decide in the next few weeks how many US troops will after the combat mission ends there. Panetta arrived on Wednesday on an unannounced visit to Kabul to consult with top military commanders as well as confer with Karzai. The visit comes at a difficult juncture in the Western coalition’s efforts to shift more security responsibilities to Afghan forces so the combat mission can end in December 2014. While security has generally improved lately, the Afghan government’s ability to effectively govern and to root out corruption is in great doubt.

    Peace talks with the Taliban are on a back burner. Speaking to reporters earlier Wednesday in Kuwait, Panetta did not reveal what options Obama is considering, but officials have said he may settle on a figure between 6,000 and 10,000 troops. There currently are about 66,000 US troops in Afghanistan. The post-2014 mission is expected to focus on counterterrorism and advising Afghan security forces. Before flying to Afghanistan, Panetta spoke to about 100 US service members inside an aircraft hangar at a desert base west of Kuwait City. He thanked them for their service and emphasized that the US is winding down its involvement in lengthy wars.

  • As I See It:Welcome Change

    As I See It:Welcome Change

    One must congratulate the Government of India for taking the bold step of joining the 138 nations voting ‘Yes’ for the resolution to upgrade Palestine to a non-member observer state in the United Nations.

    What is commendable is that despite India’s recent strategic overtures to the United States and its cooperation with Israel on defense matters, India demonstrated independence and courage in voting for the Palestinians. In the past, while India made some feeble noises in spurts regarding the Palestinians’ cause and about international morality, India’s policy had seen several flip-flops and had lacked boldness. It was the usual customary dubious statements after every incident involving or affecting the Palestinians; the nature and careful wording of the official statements after the fact reflected its spineless foreign policy.

    Gladly, this time it was different. Along with the newly found courage, one hopes that the policy is backed by a firm sense of purpose. This sense of purpose should be revealed in its reaction to America’s actions in Syria, another Arab country. Barack Obama, weighed down by the difficult task of showing results in the domestic economy and particularly in the unemployment rate during his second and last term of presidency, may take cover under results in his foreign policy.

    After his tacit approval of the happenings so far in Syria, he may now plan for a stronger action to dislodge President Bashar Assad. As it is, the effects of the uprising against Assad and the suppression of the unrest by the present Syrian government have been devastating for the people of that country. There is a humanitarian crisis, as US’s ally UK’s prime minister David Cameron has said recently.

    But, it is going to be complicated further by escalating the armed conflict in that country. The first step the US and its allies may take is to deploy surface to air missiles in Turkey, thus dragging the latter into almost a war. Will India show its true mettle by advising its new strategic partner – the US – against any misadventure in Syria? If India believes in the larger issue of peace and justice, it should put it in practice by being able to prevent escalation of the Syrian conflict to Turkey and then its further spread elsewhere. After the George W Bush era, the Americans have agreed, if not very vocally, that the ‘weapons of mass destruction’ theory was a lie. The threat of biological war by Iraq was also an unfounded fear.

    Indian foreign policy had been to keep its lips zipped through the entire episode. It was neither for the Arabs nor against them. Not a good policy for a country that depended so much on the Arab world by importing oil and exporting labor force in large numbers.

    No significant help
    What India got in return was some leniency in the international nuclear power production regime and nuclear reactors that the US and its European allies anyway wanted to sell us during their recessionary times. That a highly risk-prone nuclear power production would not help our energy crunch in any significant way is another matter. Since the fall of Saddam Hussein, the Arab world has seen increasing turmoil and the western world has become bolder in its initiatives in the Arab countries.

    There is a huge room for doubt regarding the genesis of the so-called ‘Arab Spring’. Hosni Mubarak of Egypt was toppled by what seemed like a popular uprising against his rule which lasted over three decades. His replacement, Mohamed Morsi who has enacted draconian laws giving him sweeping powers, does not appear to be any messenger of democracy for the people of that country.

    The effect for the Arab region and the countries nearby has been one of some degree of destabilization. Whatever may have been the demerits of the Hosni Mubarak government, it had an influence in holding the regional countries together. Egypt had a moderating influence in a region that was moving towards increasing fundamentalism. During the entire Tahrir Square movement, India remained a mute spectator, as though a strategy of non-commitment was a prudent policy. It remains unsure even now.

    The fall of and killing of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi of Libya was another sordid saga in which, again, India practiced silence. Gaddafi may have been a dictator, but the situation that has replaced his regime is no better; Libya has not gone any farther after Gaddafi; if any, it has sunk into endless internal squabbles. India did not take any active diplomatic interest to defuse the crisis and better the prospects of the country. Arabs and now Iran are at the receiving end from the western powers that obviously have an eye on the oil resources in this part of the world. Peace, stability and prosperity of that region are in the best interests of India.

    If India does not support their cause out of a sense of helplessness, then the same sense of vulnerability will manifest when it has to deal with the border problems with China and Pakistan and several other issues with Bangladesh, Myanmar, Sri Lanka and Maldives. If an era of toughness and principled stand has indeed commenced for India as indicated in the case of the recent UN vote on Palestine, it is a significant event. India needs to be firm and focused as regards its relations with the outside world. It needs to be candid with its strategic allies like the United States.

  • US House Leaders Demand Meeting on Fiscal Cliff, New Offer from Obama

    US House Leaders Demand Meeting on Fiscal Cliff, New Offer from Obama

    WASHINGTON (TIP): Republican leaders in the US House of Representatives on Wednesday said talks with President Barack Obama to resolve the fiscal cliff are deadlocked, and they demanded a meeting with the president to move the negotiations forward. “Nothing is going on,” in the talks, House majority leader Eric Cantor told reporters, following a meeting with fellow Republicans. “We ask the president to sit down with us.”

    Boehner presented a counter to Obama’s $1.6 trillion plan this week, including $800 billion in new revenue gained from closing unspecified tax loopholes on the wealthy. Obama’s proposal gains revenue in large party from raising tax rates on the wealthy. “I’ll be available at any moment to sit down with the president,” Speaker John Boehner told reporters.

  • Another Indian-American Appointed to Key Administrative Post

    Another Indian-American Appointed to Key Administrative Post

    WASHINGTON (TIP): India-born Vishakha Desai, a leading expert on Asian art, has been appointed by the Obama administration as member of the National Museum and Library Services Board, a key administrative post. The name of the prominent Indian American, who is also president of global non-profit organization Asia Society, figured in the list of appointments to 10 key administration posts announced November 20.

    “I am pleased to announce that these experienced and committed individuals have agreed to join this Administration, and I look forward to working with them in the months and years ahead,” President Barack Obama said in a statement after the announcements. A graduate from Bombay University, Desai completed her MA and PhD from the University of Michigan and later worked at the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston from 1977 to 1990.

    She served as Assistant Curator of Indian, Southeast Asia, and Islamic collections from 1981 to 1990, and simultaneously worked as the Head of Academic Programs from 1981 to 1988. Desai has been a visiting professor at various universities, and was an assistant and associate professor at the University of Massachusetts from 1988 to 1990. Desai was the President of Association of Art Museum Directors from 1998 to 1999, and was on the boards of the Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Leadership Education for Asian Pacifics, Asian University for Women, and the Massachusetts Foundation for Humanities. She is also on the board of The Brookings Institution, and is an advisor and reviewer for the New York City Advisory Commission for Cultural Affairs.

  • U.S. to pursue stable, constructive relationship with China: White House

    U.S. to pursue stable, constructive relationship with China: White House

    WASHINGTON (TIP): The U.S. government will pursue a stable and constructive relationship with China, as part of its strategy of rebalancing to Asia, in order to address diplomatic and economic challenges in today’s world, a senior White House official said on November 15 Speaking at the think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies, Tom Donilon, national security advisor to U.S. President Barack Obama, outlined the reasons and goals of the U.S. Pivot to Asia that the Obama administration began implementing during his first term. Donilon said the rebalancing is a sustained mutli-dimensional strategy, and “a long-term effort to better position ourselves for the opportunities and challenges we’re most likely to face in this century.” Pursuing a stable and constructive relationship is one of the essential elements of the strategy aimed at advancing U.S. national security interests, he said, citing “there are few diplomatic and economic challenges that can be addressed in the world without having China at the table: from North Korea (the DPRK), to Iran, to Syria, to global economic rebalancing and climate change.” “Getting the U.S.-China relationship right is a long-term effort, and we will continue to make this a priority in President Obama’s second term,” he said.

    Noting that there are elements of both cooperation and competition in the U.S.-China ties, Donilon said the U.S. policy has been to seek to balance these two elements in a way that increases both the quantity and quality of its cooperation with China as well as its ability to compete. “At the same time, we seek to manage disagreements and competition in a healthy – and not disruptive – manner,” he added. Donilon said through highlevel consultations with Beijing, such as the Strategic and Economic Dialogue, the U.S. approach toward China has yielded important results that advance U.S. national security interests

    The U.S. has elicited “significant and sustained Chinese cooperation regarding Iran’s and North Korea’s (DPRK) nuclear and missile programs.” On the economic front, the U.S. coordinated with China to jump start the global economic recovery in 2009 and to build the G20 into the leading global economic institution, while the U.S.-China military relations have been gaining momentum, he said. While urging Beijing to assume responsibilities commensurate with its growing global impact and its national capabilities, Donilon said one of U.S. policy goals is “to work with China to strengthen institutions … and enhance the ability of these institutions to address regional and global challenges.” During his speech, Donilon also explained the reasons why Obama chose southeast Asia as the destination of his first foreign trip since winning reelection last week. Obama is set to visit Thailand, Myanmar and Cambodia on Nov. 17-20, during which he will also hold talks with leaders of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and attend the East Asia Summit. “His decision to travel to Asia so soon after his re-election speaks to the importance that he places on the region and its centrality to so many of our national security interests and priorities,” he said.

  • With top brass under scrutiny, Pentagon chief orders ethics review

    With top brass under scrutiny, Pentagon chief orders ethics review

    BANGKOK (TIP): Defense secretary Leon Panetta has ordered the US military’s top brass to look for any gaps in ethics training as he lamented lapses in judgment by officers that could “erode public confidence in our leadership,” a Pentagon spokesman said on Thursday

    Questions over the conduct of US generals has come into sharp focus over the past week as retired General David Petraeus lost his job as CIA director over an affair and General John Allen, who leads the Afghan war effort, was placed under investigation for potentially inappropriate emails with a Florida socialite.

    A Pentagon spokesman told reporters travelling with Panetta in Thailand that development of the defense secretary’s initiative pre-dated the latest scandals. Lesser-known US military leaders have come under scrutiny recently, with one general demoted by Panetta for wasting taxpayer money and another facing accusations including forcible sodomy of a subordinate. “The vast majority of our senior officers takes this responsibility (of leadership) seriously and acts in accord with ethics regulations and training,” Panetta said in a memo to the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, General Martin Dempsey. “Yet, as has happened recently, when lapses occur, they have the potential to erode public confidence in our leadership. … Worse, they can be detrimental to the execution of our mission to defend the American people.” Panetta, in the memo dated Nov. 14, called on Dempsey to work with other military leaders to review existing ethics training programs “to determine if they are adequate to address the concerns I have identified.” He said he would present President Barack Obama an interim report by December 1 with initial results of the review and any recommendations developed by that time. The memo did not list any specific lapses but on Wednesday Panetta announced he was demoting retiring Army General William Ward and would seek to recoup $82,000 in expenses from him.

    Ward was accused of misconduct in travel, misuse of military aircraft and misuse of staff. In one case, Ward took his official plane to Bermuda for an overnight refuelling stop with his wife, investigators found. In another case, Brigadier General Jeffrey Sinclair, a 27-year Army veteran based at Fort Bragg in North Carolina, is accused of 26 violations of military law including forcible sodomy, wrongful sexual conduct, possessing pornography while deployed and conduct unbecoming of an officer.

    The charges stem from allegations of inappropriate behaviour toward four female subordinates and a civilian over the past five years. Sinclair is also accused of claiming more than $4,000 in personal travel as military business expenses.

    Panetta said he knows of no other military officials beyond Allen drawn into the investigation of Petraeus.Panetta said in his memo that the Pentagon has strong rules in place setting standards for personal conduct “and prohibit misuse of taxpayer resources.” He said it is not enough to merely comply with rules, saying military leaders also need to exercise sound judgment. “An action may be legally permissible but neither advisable nor wise,” he wrote.

  • US-India Strategic Partnership Set to Grow in Second Obama Administration

    US-India Strategic Partnership Set to Grow in Second Obama Administration

    The re-election of President Barack Obama is likely to be more promising and fruitful for the growing strategic partnership between India and the United States. During the second Obama administration, his India policies are expected to be upgraded further and there would possibly be more tangible outcomes from policy pronouncements made in the last four years.

    This strategic partnership is based on a foundation of shared values and interests. But due to the different state of their domestic constituencies and regional strategic environments, there could be differences in their understanding and responses on a few issues. That is why it is essential for leaders and policymakers in New Delhi and Washington to develop a deeper understanding of existing ground realities for negotiations on various issues.

    It is evident that India and the United States have been making a move forward. There have been issues in recent times such as defense procurements in India, the Libyan crisis, nuclear liability, outsourcing, allowing FDI in retail sector in India, Iranian nuclear program, Syrian crisis, etc.where India and the U.S. appear to have realized the other’s positions well. This has helped them successfully reduce friction and develop a mutual understanding – which is expected to improve further during Obama’s second term.

    The strategic partnership saw an upward trajectory during the first Obama administration with deepening cooperation in all sectors. It may be suggested here that after Obama’s reelection, there is a need to expedite the implementation process of policy pronouncements made by both New Delhi and Washington in the last four years. This will lead to more concrete outcomes. During the final phase of its first term, the Obama administration announced the re-balancing of its policy towards the Asia-Pacific, recognizing it as “the most rapidly growing and dynamic region in the world”. It appears that the U.S. has realized the need for enhancing its presence in the region so that it can secure its interests and influence.

    As China enhances its economic and military capabilities and becomes more assertive vis-à-vis its neighbors, it is likely that the second Obama administration would be seeking more cooperation with its allies and partners to successfully implement its rebalancing strategy. Also, with this rebalancing, it appears to be assuring its allies and partners in the Asia- Pacific region that it will be working with them to ensure peace and stability. India needs to deeply consider this evolving U.S. policy in the region and should prepare its response to successfully deal with emerging scenarios.

    This rebalancing is also about internal balancing. It is likely that the second Obama administration will be working more closely on domestic issues in the United States so that it can enhance its economic growth as well as national capabilities in sectors such as education, health and energy. This is imperative for the U.S. to deal with any future challenges such as the rise of China.

    India also needs to resolve its internal challenges and strengthen its national capabilities. It is essential to expedite these nation-building processes so that the growth momentum can be upgraded which will lead to a secure and prosperous future for India. During the second Obama administration, India and the United States – the world’s two largest democracies – should also collaborate more closely in their national capability building processes.

  • As I See It : Towards Maturity

    As I See It : Towards Maturity

    New Delhi’s ties with Washington are not problem-free but have evolved enough to weather transitions well. In the run-up to the U.S presidential polls, when bilateral diplomatic activity was expected to taper off, South Block logged as many as a dozen delegations from Washington between September 25 and end-October. Four of these were headed by cabinet minister-level officials.

    Even just a couple of days before the Americans went to the polls, U.S. diplomats landed in Delhi for a trilateral meeting with Japan and the U.S. Simultaneously, senior officials from the Pentagon arrived with a U.S. Navy complement that was to conduct joint exercises with the Indian Navy. “The relationship now is truly institutional in character. Regardless of the transition, the momentum would have continued. With Barack Obama’s reelection, many of the faces will remain the same,” said a senior diplomat.

    That does not mean it is a problem-free relationship. But officials on both sides are beginning to accept that there are some issues on which the two will never agree, and others that have evolved to the point they need to be ramped up to the next level of engagement. Defense is one area where India is keen to push up. Starting from scratch around 2004-2005, U.S. companies have sold $10 billion worth of military hardware to the Indian armed forces in under a decade.

    India is now eager to move to R&D and coproduction but is yet to find the same readiness on the other side. For its part, Washington feels the economic dividend of the India-U.S. strategic partnership has been below expectations although the decision to open the retail sector to foreign direct investment has given it some cause for cheer. India too has its own concerns including the clamping down of work visas for techies and the foot-dragging over access to U.S. fossil fuel.

    One big ticket item that has failed to make much progress is civilian nuclear cooperation. Having done the heavy lifting, the U.S was expecting quick rewards. But the Nuclear Liability Act has put paid to American hopes of quickly setting up multi-billion dollar plants in Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh. With anti-nuclear protests, and the U.S. demanding that the Act should be modified to conform to international legislation, the complication has increased. For India too, the rate of return from the nuclear deal has been negative. Issues remain relating to the transfer of top-end technology to India.

    Many of these are categorized as sensitive or dual use, and the U.S has been unable to help India enter four export control regimes including the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group. In the field of cyber security, the wariness about letting an outside agency get too close to the Indian cyber security set-up has not diminished the eagerness to learn from the U.S, as well as partner it. “After all most of the servers are in the U.S. We need to do a lot more in the area of cyber crime by getting to the stage where they respond to most of our information needs,” said an official. Officials say there is greater convergence on security cooperation, particularly counter-terrorism.

    While India and the U.S. have a meeting of minds on most global trends, whether it is partnership in Africa or beefing up collaboration in maritime security, politically, the biggest divergence is on West Asia. “We don’t want to compete with or undermine the U.S. position in the region but they should learn from us. And what’s most important is that the areas where both differ should not become disagreements or disputes. That is something India has to achieve with the second Obama administration,” said a senior official.

  • ‘Classified Data In Petraeus Lover’s PC’

    ‘Classified Data In Petraeus Lover’s PC’

    WASHINGTON (TIP): A computer used by Paula Broadwell, the woman whose affair with David Petraeus led to his resignation as CIA director, contained substantial classified data that should have been stored under more secure conditions, law enforcement and national security officials said on Wednesday. The contents of the classified material and how Broadwell acquired it remain under investigation, the officials said. But the quantity of classified material found was significant enough to warrant a continuing probe, the officials said. President Barack Obama told a news conference on Wednesday there was no indication so far that any classified information had been disclosed as a result of the Petraeus scandal. As a reserve officer in military intelligence, Broadwell – co-author of a biography on Petraeus – had security clearances that gave her access to classified material, several officials said.

  • CIA director David Petraeus quits over extramarital affair

    CIA director David Petraeus quits over extramarital affair

    WASHINGTON (TIP): David Petraeus, the retired four-star general renowned for taking charge of the military campaigns in Iraq and then Afghanistan, abruptly resigned on November 9 as director of the CIA, admitting to an extramarital affair. The affair was discovered during an FBI investigation, according to officials briefed on the developments.

    They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly discuss the matter. It was unclear what the FBI was investigating or when it became aware of the affair. Petraeus’ resignation shocked Washington’s intelligence and political communities. It was a sudden end to the public career of the bestknown general of the post 9/11 wars, a man credited with salvaging the US conflict in Iraq and sometimes mentioned as a potential Republican presidential candidate. His service was effusively praised on November 9 in statements from both Republican and Democratic lawmakers. Petraeus, who turned 60 on Wednesday, told CIA employees in a statement that he had met with President Barack Obama at the White House on November 8 and asked to be allowed to resign.

    On Friday, the president accepted. Petraeus told his staffers he was guilty of “extremely poor judgment” in the affair. “Such behavior is unacceptable, both as a husband and as the leader of an organization such as ours.” He has been married for 38 years to Holly Petraeus, whom he met when he was a cadet at the US Military Academy at West Point, New York. She was the daughter of the academy superintendent.

    They have two children, and their son led an infantry platoon in Afghanistan. Obama said in a statement that the retired general had provided “extraordinary service to the United States for decades” and had given a lifetime of service that “made our country safer and stronger.” Obama called him “one of the outstanding general officers of his generation.” The president said that CIA deputy director Michael Morell would serve as acting director.

    Morell was the key CIA aide in the White House to President George W Bush during the Sept 11, 2001, terror attacks. “I am completely confident that the CIA will continue to thrive and carry out its essential mission,” Obama said. The resignation comes at a sensitive time.

    The administration and the CIA have struggled to defend security and intelligence lapses before the attack that killed the US ambassador to Libya and three others.

    It was an issue during the presidential campaign that ended with Obama’s re-election on Tuesday. The CIA has come under intense scrutiny for providing the White House and other administration officials with talking points that led them to say the Benghazi attack was a result of a film protest, not a militant terror attack.

    It has become clear that the CIA was aware the attack was distinct from the film protests roiling across other parts of the Muslim world. Morell rather than Petraeus now is expected to testify at closed congressional briefings next week on the Sept 11 attacks on the consulate in Benghazi. For the director of the CIA, being engaged in an extramarital affair is considered a serious breach of security and a counterintelligence threat.

    If a foreign government had learned of the affair, the reasoning goes, Petraeus or the person with whom he was involved could have been blackmailed or otherwise compromised. Military justice considers conduct such as an extramarital affair to be possible grounds for court martial. Failure to resign also could create the perception for the rank-and-file that such behavior is acceptable.

    At FBI headquarters, spokesman Paul Bresson declined to comment on the information that the affair had been discovered in the course of an investigation by the bureau. Holly Petraeus is known for her work helping military families. She joined the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to set up an office dedicated to helping service members with financial issues.

    Though Obama made no direct mention of Petraeus’ reason for resigning, he offered his thoughts and prayers to the general and his wife, saying that Holly Petraeus had “done so much to help military families through her own work. I wish them the very best at this difficult time.” Petraeus, who became CIA director in September 2011, was known as a shrewd thinker and hard-charging competitor.

    His management style was recently lauded in a Newsweek article by Paula Broadwell, coauthor of the biography, “All In: The Education of General David Petraeus.” The article listed Petraeus’ “rules for living.” No. 5 was: “We all make mistakes.

    The key is to recognize them, to learn from them, and to take off the rear view mirrors – drive on and avoid making them again.” Petraeus told his CIA employees that he treasured his work with them “and I will always regret the circumstances that brought that work with you to an end.” The director of national intelligence, James Clapper, said Petraeus’ departure represented “the loss of one of our nation’s most respected public servants.

    From his long, illustrious Army career to his leadership at the helm of CIA, Dave has redefined what it means to serve and sacrifice for one’s country.” Other CIA directors have resigned under unflattering circumstances.

    CIA director Jim Woolsey left over the discovery of a KGB mole and director John Deutch left after the revelation that he had kept classified information on his home computer. Bush sent Petraeus to Iraq in February 2007, at the peak of sectarian violence, to turn things around as head of U.S. forces. He oversaw an influx of 30,000 US troops and moved troops out of big bases so they could work more closely with Iraqi forces scattered throughout Baghdad.

  • Republicans Reconsider Immigration Laws Rethinking in GOP Camp after Hispanic Voters ensured Obama’s Win

    Republicans Reconsider Immigration Laws Rethinking in GOP Camp after Hispanic Voters ensured Obama’s Win

    WASHINGTON (TIP): House Speaker John Boehner and other Republicans in Congress said Thursday, November 8 that they want to consider broad changes to immigration laws next year, after an election in which Hispanic voters turned out in force to help President Barack Obama win a second term. Lawmakers and the White House said their most immediate goal was averting the so-called fiscal cliff, the budget cuts and tax increases set to kick in next year.

    Once that is done, the White House and its allies in Congress have said, a major objective in 2013 is an immigration overhaul that was one of the president’s promises in his first campaign for the White House. Republican leaders say they are also ready to take up the issue. “We understand that we can’t keep kicking this can down the road,” an aide to House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R., Va.), said Thursday. Legislation, the aide said, must include a broader plan for the estimated 11 million people living in the U.S. illegally. “We’re going to address the 11 million people,” the aide added. Mr. Boehner, in an interview Thursday with ABC News, said an immigration overhaul was on his agenda.

    “This issue has been around far too long,” he said. “A comprehensive approach is long overdue, and I’m confident that the president, myself and others can find the common ground to take care of this issue once and for all.” A House Republican leadership aide said lawmakers had absorbed the election results and believe that Republican Mitt Romney’s tough stance on illegal immigration cost him Hispanic votes in the presidential election.

    “But the details are very important and are going to be very hard,” the aide said about potential legislation. “It’s going to take a big commitment from both sides to try and resolve them.” White House officials have made quiet overtures to Republican senators, hoping to find allies in what may prove to be a major legislative battle of 2013. Advocates for revamping the immigration system are trying to arrange meetings with lawmakers, who return to Washington next week for the lame-duck session. They have asked to meet with GOP figures likely to influence the debate, including Mr. Cantor, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) and Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.).

    One question is whether Republicans would support a process to grant legal status or citizenship to those in the country illegally, a move backed by most Democrats but which many Republicans criticize as amnesty. The Republican Party platform, adopted at the GOP convention this summer, opposes “any form of amnesty” for people who intentionally violate immigration law, saying that it “rewards and encourages more law breaking” and puts those seeking to enter the country legally at a disadvantage. Immigration proposals never advanced in the last Congress, with some Republicans saying they were waiting for Mr. Obama to show leadership and others saying they didn’t want to take up the issue. Democrats said they couldn’t find enough Republicans willing to work with them.

    Republicans have often said that Congress should shore up border security before writing new laws concerning those in the country illegally. Exit polls of Tuesday’s election showed that Mr. Romney won less than 30% of the Hispanic vote, a factor in his defeat in Colorado, Virginia and likely in Florida, where he trailed by a margin small enough that the Associated Press on Thursday hadn’t yet declared a winner.

    Mr. Romney had presented himself as an advocate of legal immigration but staked out a position to the right of his rivals during the Republican primaries, criticizing Texas Gov. Rick Perry for supporting in-state college tuition benefits for illegal immigrants and Newt Gingrich for saying some longtime illegal immigrants should gain legal status. He also called for “self-deportation” of illegal immigrants.

  • Barack Obama gets a Second Term: its Implications

    Barack Obama gets a Second Term: its Implications

    The pre-election polls suggested that the 2012 US Presidential Election is a cliff hanger, too close to call. In fact, on percentages it was so, but a look at the final electoral college votes tally suggested it to be a landslide victory in favor of the incumbent president. There was a lot at stake in this important election. Of late, America was drifting too far to the right. During the Reagan presidency, America took a quantum leap towards the religious and financial right. Bill Clinton tried to reverse this trend, but he got a strong rebuff from the right leaning members of both houses of the US Congress. After a disputed and divisive 2000 election, George W. Bush Junior won the presidency and set the clock backward again and as a consequence dragged the nation into its worst recession since the great depression of 1929, 30, 31.

    The day President Barack Obama took his oath for his first term on January 20, 2009, a lot of conservative Americans decided to derail his presidency. The mid-term election of 2010, upset Barack Obama’s apple cart completely. The conservative Republicans came as an avalanche and took control of the lower house of the US Congress. After that election every presidential right or wrong initiative got completely bogged down in the House of Representatives.
    The ultra-conservatives in the American society, spurred by the “Tea Party Agenda” made the 2012 presidential election a referendum on the policies of President Barack Obama. For some time, the president was fighting with his back to the wall. But Obama is a resilient fighter. He decided not to give in tamely. This is how this election warmed up as the costliest presidential election ever. Both sides raised more than a billion dollars each and spent it lavishly.

    Entire sun-belt, barring the large states of Florida, New Mexico and California was completely deep red (meaning solid Republican territory). This area includes the states of North Carolina (15 electoral college votes), South Carolina (9), Georgia (16), Alabama (9), Louisiana (8), Texas (38) and Arizona (11). The Democratic candidates have no chance of winning in this area.

    Entire pot-belly of America consisting of the states of agricultural Mid-West was also deep red, untouchable for the Democrats. This includes Tennessey (11), Kentucky (8), West Virginia (5), Indiana (11), Missouri (10), Kansas (6), Oklahoma (7), Arkansas (6), Mississippi (6), Iowa (6), Nebraska (5), North Dakota (3), South Dakota (3), Wyoming (3), Montana (3), Idaho (3), Utah (6) and Missouri (10). For the Democrats, even this area was unconquerable.
    Similarly for the last few elections, the Republican Party has no chance at winning in California (55), Oregon (7), Washington (12), Illinois (20), New York (29), New Jersey (14), Massachusetts (11), Maryland (10), Delaware (3), Connecticut (7), Rhode Island (4), Vermont (3), Maine (4).

    There are only a handful of states, which are still considered competitive for both parties. These include Virginia (13), Ohio (18), Pennsylvania (20), New Hampshire (4), Michigan (16), Wisconsin (10), Minnesota (10), Colorado (9), New Mexico (5), Nevada (6) and Florida (29).

    President Barack Obama and his spin doctors worked hard for each vote in all these states and eventually ended up winning all these and a winning plurality in the electoral college.

    The groups that voted heavily for the president include 93% of the African Americans, both male and females. 71% of the Hispanic voters also voted for the Democratic Party. Amongst the white young working women Barack Obama got at least 45% votes. In this election, the Jewish community sided overwhelmingly with the Republican nominee Mitt Romney. The Asian Indian community, which constitutes a little more than 1% of the total population voted 88% for the Democratic Party candidates. My own guess is that not more than 33% white males have voted for Barack Obama. In the end game the president got a little more than 50% votes and his Republican challenger Mitt Romney got a little more than 48% votes. If California had not voted decisively for Barack Obama, he might have lost in the popular vote count, but still would have won the presidency, due to obtaining more votes in the all important electoral college.
    This victory is not only of the Democratic Party, but also of the middle-class and the poor. This victory is for the immigration rights of the Hispanics and other ethnic minorities. This victory is for the rights of reproduction of the women, who become pregnant due to rapes or incest. And it is a defeat for those, who want to give tax concessions to the very wealthy who, have been enjoying massive tax breaks for the past twelve years without creating any jobs in America.

    President Barack Obama’s way of raising election funds has been unique in America’s electoral history. Through e-mails, he has been seeking small donations starting from three dollars per head and upwards. Those who were giving money were also committing themselves to supporting his candidature. On the contrary Mitt Romney was raising funds from millionaires and billionaires. They were far fewer in numbers, though capable of donating millions.

    President Barack Obama deserves our congratulations on putting up a brave fight in the face of extremely heavy odds. It may not be incorrect to say that he has snatched a victory from the jaws of defeat.

  • Hard work ahead for re-elected Obama

    Hard work ahead for re-elected Obama

    On November 5, 2008, Barack Obama, an African-American, made history when he was elected the 44th president of the United States. The world’s oldest democracy had finally broken the race ceiling and a ‘man of color’ was set to occupy the White House.

    This year, on November 6, that part of history did not matter. President Obama was re-elected by a convincing majority and will now join the ranks of two-term U.S. presidents. And when he completes his second term in 2016, Obama would still be under 56.

    The challenges for Obama are stark and complex — both in the domestic context and on the external front. On the home front, the economic stasis and related unemployment figures (7.9 percent) will need urgent attention, more so against the backdrop of campaign promises about getting America back on track. The ‘fiscal cliff’ looms large and a divided U.S. Congress will not make for easy or amicable consensus on tax cuts and public spending.

    The foreign and security policy challenges are no less daunting and time critical. For a president who assumed office in January 2009 even as the United States was waging two wars — Iraq and Afghanistan — the radar screen is cluttered, particularly in relation to Asia. Iran looms large and Af-Pak has the 2014 deadline drawing closer.
    The China factor is the overarching presence in the continent and it is no coincidence that Beijing is set to elect its own president, Xi Jinping this week. With a new hand on the tiller, Beijing’s orientation towards the U.S. against the backdrop of the Obama Asian pivot will be the critical determinant in defining the geo-strategic texture of the Asian region.

    While seeking to restore economic vitality in the domestic context, Obama will have to concurrently establish U.S. credibility as a security guarantor with its anxious allies in Asia. Both East Asia and South East Asia are in a dilemma about how best to balance their own relations with an assertive China and a reticent United States. West Asia remains wary with an Arab Spring that has turned into a sullen autumn.

    South Asia is the more intractable nettle for the U.S. given the tenacity of the terror complex that inhabits the Af-Pak swathe and the obduracy of a nuclear armed Rawalpindi which remains inflexible about nurturing the forces of right-wing Islamic religious extremism.

    It merits recall that in March 2009, in his maiden address on this issue, Obama asserted: “We have a clear and focused goal – to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future … to the terrorists who oppose us, my message is the same: we will defeat you.”

    The Abbottabad operation of May 2011 that eliminated Osama bin Laden was one of the major successes in Obama’s first term and played no small role in burnishing the profile of the U.S. president as a competent commander-in-chief. But as Libya demonstrated, the footprint of anti-U.S. sentiment that takes recourse to terror and pre-meditated violence has gone global and the goal of March 2009 may still remain elusive — even after 2014.

    Paradoxically, while China and Japan had good reason to weigh the pros and cons of an Obama or Romney victory, for India either outcome would have seen a continuity in the bilateral relationship. The U.S.-India relationship has moved from prickly estrangement to tentative engagement since 2008 and bipartisan support in the U.S. Congress apropos imparting greater content is widespread.

    While differences over issues like Iran will persist, for India there is comfort in working with an Obama administration that has already invested four years into the fine print of the partnership. Given the fact that India will be preparing for its own general election in early 2014, the next 12 months are the only window left for the UPA government led by Manmohan Singh to pursue the big-ticket issues with the United States.

    New Delhi can derive satisfaction from the reality that it has the comfort of continuity in the White House and has been spared the vagaries of a new U.S. administration getting its own team into place — a process that can be time-consuming and contested. If Manmohan Singh can find the political will to engage with President Obama and pursue the many stalled bilateral initiatives with the United States, hopefully the next year will be more meaningful for a partnership that seems to have been adrift for some time.

    If the campaign trail was a hard slog, the tough part for Obama begins now.

  • Obama becomes 14th US Prez to win a 2nd Term

    Obama becomes 14th US Prez to win a 2nd Term

    NEW YORK (TIP): President Obama won a second term November 6 night and became the 14th US President to win a second term. He promised his thrilled supporters at the victory celebrations in Chicago that for the United States of America “the best is yet to come.” He congratulated his opponent Mitt Romney and said, “In the weeks ahead I am looking forward to sitting down with Gov. Romney to discuss how we can move this country forward.”

    In a victory speech studded with the soaring rhetoric that first drew voters to him in 2008, Obama reminded the electorate what was still on his agenda — immigration reform, climate change and job creation.
    “Tonight, you voted for action not politics as usual.” he told supporters in Chicago. “You elected us to focus on your job, not ours.”

    Obama told Romney supporters that “I have listened to you… you have made me a better president.” He added, “I return to the White House more determined, more inspired than ever.

    The election is a validation, if not an overwhelming mandate, in support of the president’s policies of the last four years, which included a major overhaul of the healthcare system and a drawdown of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
    Top Republican lawmaker John Boehner said on Thursday he would not make it his mission to repeal the Obama administration’s healthcare reform law following the re-election of President Barack Obama.

    “The election changes that,” Boehner, speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, told ABC news anchor Diane Sawyer when asked if repealing the law was “still your mission.”

    “It’s pretty clear that the president was re-elected,” Boehner added. “Obamacare is the law of the land.”
    Obama built a coalition of young people, minorities, and college educated women and won by turning out supporters with a carefully calibrated ground operation to get out the vote in crucial states like Ohio, Iowa and Wisconsin.
    He thanked those who voted “whether you voted for very first time, or waited in line for a very long time — by the way we have to fix that,” he joked.

    He thanked Vice President Joe Biden, whom he called “America’s best happy warrior” and first lady Michele Obama.
    “Sasha and Malia,” he said addressing his two daughters. “You’re growing up to be two strong, smart, beautiful young women…I’m so proud of you. But I will say for now, one dog is probably enough,” he said riffing on his promise of a puppy four years ago.

    Prior to the president’s speech, Mitt Romney conceded gracefully in Boston.

    “I so wish that I had been able to fulfill your hopes….but the nation chose another leader,” Romney told heart broken supporters at his Boston headquarters.

    “I pray the president will be successful in guiding our nation,” Romney said before running mate Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin and their families joined Romney on the podium.

    Obama’s lease on the White House was renewed with a crucial victory in Ohio.

    Celebrations erupted in Obama’s home town of Chicago, in New York’s Time Square and outside the White House, while Romney’s Boston headquarters went mournfully quiet.

    “We’re all in this together. That’s how we campaigned, and that’s who we are. Thank you,” Obama tweeted even before formally announcing his victory.

    After a campaign for the White House and both houses of Congress that cost more than $6 billion, the make up of all three branches remains very much the same as it was before the election. Obama remains in the White House, Democrats retain control of the Senate and Republicans continue to control the House.

    The participants were themselves history making, the first black president running against the first Mormon presidential nominee to make it the general election. But for the most part the election turned not the politics of identity but of the economy.

    The election took place against the backdrop of a slow economic recovery. From its outset, both campaigns knew the race would come down to the economy, and both tried to tailor their appeals to middle class families struggling with inflation and unemployment.

    Obama routinely reminded voters he had inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression and pointed to policies he led, including the auto bailout, and signs of improvement including a drop in the unemployment rate.

    Obama portrayed Romney as an out of touch millionaire intent on helping the rich at the expense of the middle class when they were hurting the most. That impression seemed to stick with voters who nationally said by 55 to 40 percent that they believed the economic system favors the wealthy rather than being fair to most people, according to exit polls.

    The candidates also tangled over health care, abortion, and taxes, leading to a bevy of negative ads.
    The campaign was the most expensive in history, with each candidate raising nearly $1 billion a piece.

  • Al-Qaida in Afghanistan attempting a comeback

    Al-Qaida in Afghanistan attempting a comeback

    NEW YORK (TIP): A diminished but resilient al-Qaida, whose September 11, 2001, attacks drew America into its longest war, is attempting a comeback in Afghanistan’s mountainous east even as US and allied forces wind down their combat mission and concede a small but steady toehold to the terrorist group, says an AP report.

    That concerns US commanders, who have intensified strikes against al-Qaida cells in recent months.

    It also undercuts an Obama administration narrative portraying al-Qaida as battered to the point of being a non issue in Afghanistan as Western troops start leaving.

    When he visited Afghanistan in May to mark the one-year anniversary of the US raid that killed Osama bin Laden, President Barack Obama said his administration had turned the tide of war.

    “The goal that I set to defeat al-Qaida, and deny it a chance to rebuild is within reach,” he said.
    As things stand, however, an unquestionably weakened al-Qaida appears to have preserved at least limited means of regenerating inside Afghanistan as US influence in the country wanes.

    The last US combat troops are scheduled to be gone by December 31, 2014, with security matters turned over to the Afghan government.

    “They are trying to increase their numbers and take advantage of the Americans leaving,” the police chief of Paktika province, Gen. Dawlat Khan Zadran, said through a translator in an interview in October in the governor’s compound.
    He mentioned no numbers, but said al-Qaida has moved more weapons across the border from Pakistan.

    For years the main target of US-led forces has been the Taliban, rulers of Afghanistan and protectors of al-Qaida before the US invasion 11 years ago. But the strategic goal is to prevent al-Qaida from again finding haven in Afghanistan from which to launch attacks on the US.

    Al-Qaida’s leadership fled in late 2001 to neighboring Pakistan, where it remains.

    The group remains active inside Afghanistan, fighting US troops, spreading extremist messages, raising money, recruiting young Afghans and providing military expertise to the Taliban and other radical groups.

    US Gen. John Allen, the top commander of international forces in Afghanistan, has said al-Qaida has re-emerged, and although its numbers are small, he says the group doesn’t need a large presence to be influential.

    US officials say they are committed, even after the combat mission ends in 2014, to doing whatever it takes to prevent a major resurgence.

    The Americans intend, for example, to have special operations forces at the ready to keep a long-term lid on al-Qaida inside Afghanistan.

  • The Nobel Peace Prize for 2012 Is Unquestionable

    The Nobel Peace Prize for 2012 Is Unquestionable

    The peace prize awarded by the Nobel Committee to the European Union in 2012 has outraged and baffled many, and many more have derided it as shameful, absurd, satirical and a joke.

    The reason for derision of the European Union is its heavy debt and the dissatisfaction of some of its members who have threatened to get out of the Union.

    Some have dubbed the European Union a club of hatred and rivalry

    Rivalry and hatred among European nations existed before the European Union came into existence. On the positive side, no two members have come to armed clashes since its inception, whereas in the past seventy years France and Germany fought three wars.

    The European Union was formed after the Second World War to maintain peace. The First World War that ended on November 11, 1918, caused several empires to collapse. In Europe, there was inflation and starvation everywhere. 10 million people perished in the war itself. Almost one generation of young people was lost in war. The demons of the enormous number of economic problems wandered everywhere.

    The social economy was in a shambles. Then there was the death of around 50 million people from the influenza outbreak in the world. In 1939 The Second World War was underway that ended in 1945, killing around 60 million people, flattening cities, and resulting in the Holocaust.

    The area of the European Union is certainly much better now than it was during those wars, and most likely to remain better even if there is another war. Its citizens are suffering, but they are not dying of starvation.

    The European Union is to be congratulated for avoiding armed clashes among its member states. Peace is the absence of violence to settle disputes. Peace is not the absence of problems of political, even of personal nature. Peace is not the abolition of conflicts. Peace is the abolition of the use of violence in relations among the countries. Recognition by the Nobel Committee gives confidence and boost for the survival of the European Union.

    The prize will help the European Union to get rid of some of its debts. The fact that no two members have gone to war against each other demonstrates its success. Moreover the EU has made it possible for its citizens to move around easily within the territories of its members which fosters understanding. The EU was the first of its kind and naturally faces a few situations to adjust by trial and error.

    On the positive side, the EU has sent troops, civilian experts and aid in other forms to around 28 missions abroad. It also is a leading supporter of poor nations. Its part played in the Middle-East conflict is commendable. The EU has promoted democracy and human rights.

    The European Union also provides a blueprint for a democratically-formed parliament of nations that is going to be a reality in some shape sooner or later to avoid wars on the global level.

    I do not find it questionable when the Nobel Committee recognizes the European Union. It is not controversial as it was in 2009 when the Nobel Peace Prize went to President Barack Obama, and others before him. To me peace prize by the Nobel Committee for 2012 is not and should not be questionable.

    It is a right step in the right direction. On the other hand, I find it questionable when the Nobel Committee honors a novelist who belongs to the establishment of a country that is alleged to suppresses human rights, particularly freedom of expression. That is questionable.

  • Al-Qaida still active, says Obama

    Al-Qaida still active, says Obama

    WASHINGTON (TIP): US President Barack Obama has conceded that al-Qaida is still active, despite the fact that its top leadership has been decimated in the last few years. “It’s true that al-Qaida is still active, at least sort of remnants of it are staging in other parts of North Africa and the Middle East,” Obama told the Comedy Central “The Daily Show” in an interview.

    “We’ve been able to do is to say we ended the war in Iraq, we’re winding down the war in Afghanistan, we’ve gone after al-Qaida and its leadership,” he said. Earlier in the day, his spokesman said that al-Qaida remains the number one enemy of the US, even as strength of this terrorist organization has been considerably weakened and many of its top leadership killed.

    “Al Qaida remains our number-one enemy and our number- one foe. That is why we focus so much of our attention on al-Qaida and its affiliates, because the struggle against al-Qaida continues, and the (US) President has been focused on it since the day he took office,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters. “This President, when he came into office, made clear his intention of refocusing our efforts on those who attacked the United States of America and killed Americans on September 11th, 2001. And he has kept that promise,” he said.

    “Our efforts against al-Qaida have inarguably led to success and progress, but the work is not done. Al-Qaida central and a leadership there has been devastated by our efforts and the efforts of our allies,” Carney said.

  • Obama Daughters’ School Evacuated Following Threat

    Obama Daughters’ School Evacuated Following Threat

    WASHINGTON (TIP): The school attended by the US President Barack Obama’s daughters was briefly evacuated following a phoned-in threat of a suspicious bag lying on the campus. The suspicious bag, which created panic in the school for some time among security agencies including the Secret Service was later on was found out to be a child’s back pack.

    “This is an emergency message from Sidwell Friends School. Due to a suspicious phone call, the buildings on the Wisconsin Avenue campus have been evacuated. We will notify you when further information is available,” said the school’s emergency alert system earlier in the day, which was reported by the Washingtonian magazine. The Secret Service and the local police said there was evidence it at any times threatened daughters of the First Family.

    14-year-old Malia and 11-year-old Sasha Obama are students at Sidwell Friends school in Washington DC.

  • Obama and Romney battle in second US presidential debate

    Obama and Romney battle in second US presidential debate

    NEW YORK (TIP): President Barack Obama fought back and Republican challenger Mitt Romney mostly stood his ground in a bruising, argumentative debate three weeks before Election Day.

    With a third and final debate to go, both candidates appeared likely to secure their standing in an already tight race that portends a cliffhanger presidential vote.

    On October 17, both campaigns will continue their focus on battleground states considered crucial to winning the White House. Obama heads to Iowa and Ohio and Vice President Joe Biden campaigns in Colorado and Nevada, while Romney will go to Virginia and running mate Rep. Paul Ryan stops in Ohio

    Tuesday night saw Obama bring the desired energy sought by worried Democrats after the president’s lackluster performance in the first encounter two weeks ago.

    This time, a forceful Obama defended his policies and challenged Romney on shifting positions on key issues while arguing his Republican rival’s proposals would favor the wealthy if elected on November 6. Romney repeatedly attacked Obama’s record, saying millions of unemployed people and a sluggish economic recovery showed the president’s policies had failed. A CNN/ORC International poll indicated that 46% of respondents who watched the debate thought Obama won, compared to 39% for Romney. The result was within the survey’s margin of error, and responses to other questions showed the overall impression was generally positive for both candidates.

    After the first debate on October 3 in Denver, a similar poll showed Romney scored a solid victory in the eyes of more than 60% of respondents. “Most improved — that award goes to Barack Obama,” CNN Senior Political Analyst David Gergen said, comparing the president’s performance on Tuesday to his previous showing. “I think he had a much stronger debate tonight.” Daily Beast’s Andrew Sullivan, who called Obama’s poll numbers after the first debate “devastating,” predicted the president would come “kicking back in the polls” in coming days.

    Erick Erickson, the conservative RedState.com blogger and CNN contributor, thought Romney won the debate based on “clear majorities outside the margin of error” in the CNN/ORC poll who thought Romney would be better for the country on economic issues. In fact, while other areas of the debate may overshadow this point, Romney deftly dispatched Obama on his economic record,” Erickson said, calling it “the one issue that matters.”

    An awkward phrase by Romney in addressing gender pay inequality was creating the most buzz around the debate. Romney said when he was elected governor of Massachusetts, all the applicants for cabinet positions were men, so he sought out women applicants. “I went to a number of women’s groups and said, ‘Can you help us find folks?’ and they brought us whole binders full of women.” Before the debate was over “binders full of women” had a Twitter hashtag, a series of memes on Tumblr, and a Facebook page with over more than 100,000 fans. The phrase was the third-fastest rising search on Google during the debate

    Both candidates walked the floor with microphones in hand at Hofstra University in Hempstead, New York, raising their voices at times and repeatedly challenging each other’s points during the 90-plus minute debate that featured a town hall-style format. Moderator Candy Crowley, the CNN chief political correspondent, tried in vain at times to prevent each candidate from going over allotted time, with Obama speaking for more than three minutes longer than Romney on the night.

    Obama was on the attack from the start, but waited until his final answer — with no chance for Romney to respond — to raise his opponent’s controversial “47%” comments at a fundraiser in May. In remarks made public by a secretly recorded video of the event, Romney described 47% of the country as people dependent on government aid who refused to take personal responsibility.

  • Obama nominates Dunford to head NATO forces in Afghanistan

    Obama nominates Dunford to head NATO forces in Afghanistan

    WASHINGTON: Gen Joseph Dunford, the assistant commandant of the Marine Corps and a combat veteran who led a regiment in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, has been nominated by President Barack Obama as his new commander to International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan. Dunford would replace Gen John Allen, who has now been nominated as next Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), Obama said. Praising Allen for his contribution in the war against terrorism in Afghanistan, Obama said he has personally relied on his counsel and is grateful for his devotion to US national security. “For more than a year, General Allen has served with distinction as the commander of US forces and NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan, seeing us through a critical period in our military efforts and in Afghanistan’s transition,” a statement from Obama said.

    “During his tenure in Afghanistan, General Allen established his credibility with our NATO allies and ISAF partners as a strong and effective military leader,” Obama said. Under Allen the US has made important progress towards its core goal of defeating al-Qaida and ensuring they can never return to a sovereign Afghanistan, Obama said. If confirmed by the Senate, General Dunford will preside over the withdrawal of most of the 68,000 American troops in Afghanistan expected by the end of 2014. General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff, in a statement praised Gen Allen for his successes in Afghanistan. “General John Allen took command in the summer of 2011 as we were arresting and reversing insurgent momentum in key areas throughout the country. He immediately strengthened areas of success, taking them to new levels, while identifying elements of the campaign that required revision,” he said.

    Dempsey said like Allen, Gen Dunford is one of the most experienced and capable leaders in our military and nation. “Intelligent and forthright, Gen. Dunford is one of our most highlyregarded senior officers. He is an infantry officer with more than 35 years of exceptional leadership at every level, including multiple commands and, in particular, command of 5th Marine Regiment during the initial invasion of Iraq,” he said. Allen, he said, achieved remarkable progress in war against terrorism during his stint in the country but noted that much work remains to be done. Allen added his leadership and moral courage to a fight that is as much about will as it is about operations and tactics, he added