Hyderabad: A superb all-round performance helped India cruise to a six-wicket win in the third One-Day International (ODI) against Sri Lanka and clinch the five-match series 3-0 at the Rajiv Gandhi International Stadium here Sunday.
Set a target of 243 runs, India coasted to victory in 44.1 overs, winning with 35 balls to spare. Opener Shikhar Dhawan played a stellar knock (91) and forged useful partnerships with Ajinkya Rahane (31) and Ambati Rayadu (35) to lead India to victory.
Skipper Virat Kohli also contributed with a solid 53, in the process becoming the quickest batsman to reach 6,000 ODI runs, taking only 136 innings to reach the feat. Pacer Umesh Yadav (4/53) wrecked Sri Lanka’s top order earlier in the day to help set up the triumph.
India approached their run chase in the right spirit, giving nothing away despite chasing a small target against a mediocre attack.
Dhawan was in hot form, hitting the ball superbly and dictating the proceedings. He was ably supported by Rahane and Rayudu. Kohli carried on the momentum after their departure to smoothen the road to victory.
Dhawan called upon his wide range of shots to give the opponents no ray of hope, becoming the fastest Indian and fifth fastest to reach 2,000 ODI runs, in just 48 innings.
But just when victory was in sight, first Dhawan and then Kohli fell. But that could do nothing to change the outcome of the match.
In the afternoon session, Sri Lanka rode on the back of a brilliant century from veteran Mahela Jayawardene to put up a total of 242.
Jayawardene, who struck his 17th century, was well supported by Tillakaratne Dilshan (53) at the start but, after the latter got out, no other batsman gave much support to Jayawardene. In the end, the visitors, who elected to bat, were bowled out for 242 in 48.2 overs.
Sri Lanka got off to a poor start after opener Kusal Perera (4) was caught behind on the sixth ball of the innings. Another veteran Kumar Sangakkara perished for a duck two runs later, leaving his team tottering at 7/2.
However, the 37-year-old Jayawardene showed his hunger for runs to score a well-planned 118 to bring up his 12,000 runs in ODI cricket. He caressed 12 boundaries and hit one six in his 125-ball innings.
Though opening batsman Dilshan was slow, he gave good support to Jayawardene to take his team out of trouble and strike a solid 105-run third wicket partnership which was eventually broken when Dilshan was caught off Ambati Rayudu.
Thereon, the tables turned for the visitors who could not forge big partnerships as Jayawardene kept running out of partners. The right hander, in order to accelerate the scoring, was stumped by India wicketkeeper Wriddhiman Saha with the team total at 225.
Seekkuge Prasanna contributed 29 runs lower down the order to take the visitors’ total to 242 before Sri Lanka were bowled out.
Pacer Umesh Yadav and left arm spinner Axar Patel were the pick of the Indian bowlers picking up four and three wickets, respectively.
New Delhi/Bengaluru: Recent changes made and proposed to India’s environment and land acquisition policies strike at the right of communities to be consulted on decisions affecting them, Amnesty International India said today.
India’s Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) has in recent months weakened requirements for public consultation with communities affected by mining and other infrastructure projects, and sought to dilute provisions mandating the free, prior and informed consent of Adivasi (indigenous) communities.
The Ministry of Rural Development has suggested changes to land acquisition laws that seek to dilute consent requirements and discard social impact assessments. Public consultations over changes to key environmental laws have been largely superficial.
“Many corporate-led infrastructure projects could severely affect the rights of communities to clean air, water, health, livelihood and a healthy environment. The people most affected by these projects must have a say in whether and how they go forward,” said Aruna Chandrasekhar, Business and Human Rights Researcher at Amnesty International India. “Attempts to shut these communities out of the decision-making process are short-sighted and counter-productive.”
“Some of the amended laws also fall short of international standards on consultation and consent, and could further marginalise vulnerable communities who seldom have a voice in decisions taken around their lands and resources.”
“Instead of carrying forward the previous government’s efforts to dismantle safeguards on consultation, authorities must strengthen and enforce existing laws.”
Public consultations with affected communities
On 30 May 2014, the MoEFCC issued an executive memorandum stating that existing coal mines with a production capacity of up to 16 mtpa (million tonnes per annum) would not need to conduct public hearings with project-affected communities before expanding their capacity by up to 50 per cent. Public hearings are mandated as part of the environmental clearance process for certain projects under the Environment (Protection) Act. They are the only existing formal means of consultation under Indian law for both indigenous and non-indigenous project-affected communities.
On 28 July, the Ministry extended the exemption from conducting public hearings to mines with a capacity above 16 mtpa seeking to expand their capacity by up to 5 mtpa. On 2 September, the Ministry issued another memorandum, exempting mines with a production capacity of over 20 mtpa seeking to expand capacity by up to 6 mtpa from conducting public hearings.
On 25 June, the Ministry amended its Environment Impact Assessment notification of 2006, which details the process by which environmental clearances are granted. The amendment made certain categories of projects, including irrigation projects which required less than 2000 hectares of land, exempt from requiring environmental clearances, and therefore exempt from needing to consult affected communities.
“The right to consultation must not be seen as a roadblock to projects, but as an integral part of the development process,” said Aruna Chandrasekhar. “The Ministry must require public hearings and environmental impact assessments to be conducted for all projects that could impact people’s lives, livelihoods or environment.”
Indigenous communities’ rights
Under India’s Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act – also referred to as the Forest Rights Act – any use of forest land for non-forest purposes requires the prior consent of the concerned gram sabhas (village assemblies), and documentary evidence that all individual and community claims over forest and community lands under the Act have been settled.
In recent months, authorities have sought to dilute these requirements. On 4 July 2014, the MoEFCC wrote to all state governments stating that documentary evidence of settlement of claims would no longer be required for proposals for prospecting in forest land.
On 28 October, the Ministry wrote to state governments stating that in cases where there were no recent census records of the presence of tribal communities and plantations had been categorized as ‘forests’ after 13 December 1930, gram sabha consent and documentary evidence of settlement of claims would not be required for forest land to be used for non-forest purposes.
The letter suggested that there could technically be no ‘Other Traditional Forest Dwellers’ – another category of indigenous communities – living in these forests. Under the Forest Rights Act, these communities need to have lived in and depended on forest lands for at least three generations prior to 13 December 2005, dating back to December 1930.
However the Act makes no distinction between plantations and other forests, and its definition of ‘forest land’ does not refer to a date of classification. The Ministry’s narrow interpretation of ‘forest land’ would therefore affect the rights of Other Traditional Forest Dwellers living in these forests to consultation and free, prior and informed consent.
Media reports also suggest that the government is planning to do away with the consent requirement for projects located outside ‘scheduled areas’ – certain Adivasi regions identified under the Constitution as deserving special protection.
“India must uphold its obligations under international and Indian law to protect the rights of indigenous communities over their lands and territories, and ensure that their free, prior and informed consent is sought on matters affecting them,” said Aruna Chandrasekhar.
Land acquisition
In July 2014, the Ministry of Rural Development wrote to the Prime Minister’s Office proposing a number of amendments to the flawed but progressive Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, which came into force on 1 January.
The changes proposed included diluting or doing away with provisions requiring the consent of 70 per cent of families where land was sought to be acquired for public-private partnership (PPP) projects and 80 per cent for private projects. The Ministry also recommended that social impact assessments mandated by the Act be restricted to only large projects or PPP projects as they ‘might delay the land acquisition process’.
Other changes proposed include reexamining the Act’s definition of ‘affected families’ eligible for resettlement and rehabilitation to exclude those who don’t own land but whose livelihood is affected by land acquisition.
The Act excludes several important industries – including coal mining by the state – from its ambit, and states that the central government shall make it applicable to these industries within one year of its commencement. However, the government has not taken any known measures in this regard.
“Authorities must not rush to amend a law which has barely been implemented on the ground. Instead, they must ensure that its provisions are strengthened and extended to all people affected by any project, and explicitly prohibit forced evictions in all circumstances,” said Aruna Chandrasekhar.
Consultations on legal reform
On 29 August 2014, the MoEFCC set up a committee to review key environmental laws, including India’s Air Act and Water Act, and “recommend specific amendments…to bring them in line with current requirements to meet objectives” within three months. However the committee’s mandate, while broad, remains vague, and its consultations have provided limited opportunities for public participation. The committee has conducted consultations in only urban centres so far, which have been largely inaccessible to many project-affected communities across the country.
A consultation held in Bangalore in September, which was attended by Amnesty International India, ended before schedule, and members of the public were not given sufficient time to provide feedback. The MoEFCC has invited suggestions and comments from members of the public. However these suggestions can only be made online, and at one point were restricted to under 1000 characters.
“A review of important environmental laws that will have long-lasting implications on millions of people must not be done in haste or in a perfunctory manner,” said Aruna Chandrasekhar. “It must involve consultations with a wide-range of stakeholders, especially from affected communities, in a manner that is transparent, meaningful and inclusive.”
At present when you are reading this letter, there are many things going on this world. Some are becoming a everyday story and adding just another day in one’s life, some are there and contributing to where history is being created and recorded and even some others, with people like you who are reading this article and now will know about this part of history, where a lady, popularly known as Iron lady of Manipur, is entering in 15th year of her fast that is in the common interest of people of Manipur and within the larger objective of humanity and justice, and therefore rare in one of its kind.
Just like you, I am also a mute spectator of this history that is mixed with pride and sadness for me. It is a pride for reasons because I am able to live in this year of history where I can witness such a non violent historic and heroic struggle of an individual who herself became an invincible, immoral and a movement within herself. Sad, because I wish and pray of its end through the fulfilling the demand of Repeal AFSPA by government. I, at present cannot do much, but probably the least that I can do is to share my sentiments with you and to devote myself in solidarity.
At a time, when you are reading this article, I am sitting in solidarity fast in support of Irom Sharmila, in the same city where she is under arrest. Common supporters like myself, activists and students are also sitting in solidarity with her. While I think that I may not be able to meet and to speak to you all, I feel that this article (that is mostly in the form of letter) may reach to some of you for sure and through this way, I can convey ing my solidarity with your struggle.
I would like to convey the sentiments of all fellow countrymen also who thinks and speaks for your rights and justice, I would like to convey sympathy of our mothers and sisters to your families and I would like to tell you that you that we believe that together we will get the rights and justice in coming time.
I also see it as a time, when in my view, more than our worries about Irom Sharmila’s fast, government should be in fear to see the changing time when now it is another year that has come to add itself in counting of longest fast and probably longest non violent struggle for a demand. It should be a matter of worry for a democracy like India that history is being written of its ignorance and deviating decisions of undemocratic behavior, history will remember the contradiction and biased behavior of governments of this democracy.
People who are subjected to AFSPA are just any common people of other parts of India. On the other hand, armymen who are working with AFSPA powers are also like any other human being but with skilled trainings of armed systems like any other army has. The Government must think that how it is trying to create a rift between army and people with such a mechanized law that do not consider humanity and rather treat people like any object, they (army men) can play with. It cannot be said to be fair or beneficial in anyway.
On the other hand, people within the army, should also think about the same reasons that how they hear stories and see the things in unbiased ways of any killings, fake encounters and even rapes and they must think that how all such victims are also a larger part of their family and how there could be various reasons and moments that the lives could be saved and might not be necessarily lost. Our dear army men and the whole army commands must also understand that how people of Manipur or North East or any other part cannot be enemy of them and even the ‘region’ cannot be a reason of any such enmity. There are examples where people from these regions contribted well for the Indian defence system and other forms of social and national causes. In fact, from the government to army to judiuciary to people, everyone must take it as a clear point that opposing AFSPA just meant to opposing a particular policy and extra ordinary powers and it has no concern of any personal or professional enmity among the people and army. It is the same as people in non AFSPA imposed areas are against the extra ordinary leisure, facilities and corruptions of bureaucrats and politicians and it is no where oppose of bureaucrats and politics.
It is not an easy task that Irom Sharmila is doing. For the courts, when it was an ‘attempt to suicide’, for Irom Sharmila, probably it was one of the ‘reason’ to ‘live’. She is not aimless like many of us are. Unlike us, she has a reason and thought process and a decided goal for her life. Putting the life on fast with all known intention, motivation and clear objective towards making a society more humane, cannot be said as attempt to suicide, instead it is something that we all need in our lives.
With my heartiest salute to this living legend of Non Violence and brave people of all AFSPA imposed areas With the sense and determination of making our society more humane, more civilized With the demand from Government to Repeal AFSPA from all regions.
Ravi Nitesh is Core Member: Save Sharmila Solidarity Campaign and founder: Mission Bhartiyam
Caste hierarchy is the major obstacle to the goal of social justice and it continues to be a major obstacle to social progress even today. There are many a theories, which have tried to understand its origin. The latest in the series is the attempt of RSS to show its genesis due to invasion of Muslim kings. Three books written by RSS ideologues argue that Islamic atrocities during medieval period resulted in emergence of untouchables and low castes. The books are “Hindu Charmakar Jati”, “Hindu Khatik Jati” and “Hindu Valmiki Jati”.
The Sangh leaders claimed that these castes had come into existence due to atrocities by foreign invaders and did not exist in Hindu religion earlier. According to Bhaiyyaji Joshi, number two in RSS hierarchy, ’shudras’ were never untouchables in Hindu scriptures. ’Islamic atrocities’ during the medieval age resulted in the emergence of untouchables, Dalits. Joshi further elaborated, “To violate Hindu swabhiman (dignity) of Chanwarvanshiya Kshatriyas, foreign invaders from Arab, Muslim rulers and beef-eaters, forced them to do abominable works like killing cows, skinning them and throwing their carcasses in deserted places. Foreign invaders thus created a caste of charma-karma (dealing with skin) by giving such works as punishment to proud Hindu prisoners.”
The truth is contrary to this. The foundations of the caste system are very old and untouchability came as an accompaniment of the caste system. The Aryans considered themselves superior, they called non-Aryans krshna varnya (dark skinned), anasa (those with no nose), and since non-Aryans worshipped the phallus, they were considered non-human or amanushya. (Rig Veda: X.22.9) There are quotes in the Rig Veda and Manusmriti to show that low castes were prohibited from coming close to the high castes and they were to live outside the village. While this does not imply that a full-fledged caste system had come into being in Rig Vedic times, the four-fold division of society into varnas did exist, which became a fairly rigid caste system by the time of the Manusmriti.
Untouchability became the accompaniment of the caste system sometime around the first century ad. The Manusmriti, written in the second–third centuries ad, codifies the existing practices which show with utmost clarity the type of despicable social practices that the oppressor castes were imposing upon the oppressed castes. The first major incursions of Muslim invaders into India began around the eleventh century ad, and the European conquests of India began in the seventeenth–eighteenth centuries.
Over time, the caste system became hereditary. The rules for social intercourse as well as establishing marriage relations were laid down by the caste system. Caste hierarchies also became rigid over time. The shudras began to be excluded from caste society, and ‘upper’ castes were barred from inter-dining or inter-marrying with them. Notions of ‘purity’ and ‘pollution’ were enforced strictly to maintain caste boundaries. Shudras became ‘untouchables’. It is this rigid social division that Manu’s Manav Dharmashastra (Human Law Code) codified.
Golwalkar, the major ideologue of RSS ideology defended it in a different way, ‘If a developed society realizes that the existing differences are due to the scientific social structure and that they indicate the different limbs of body social, the diversity (i.e. caste system, added) would not be construed as a blemish.’ (Organiser, 1 December 1952, p. 7) Deendayal Upadhyaya, another major ideologue of Sangh Parivar stated, ‘In our concept of four castes (varnas), they are thought of as different limbs of virat purush (the primeval man)… These limbs are not only complimentary to one another but even further there is individuality, unity. There is a complete identity of interests, identity, belonging… If this idea is not kept alive, the caste; instead of being complimentary can produce conflict. But then that is a distortion.’ (D. Upadhyaya, Integral Humanism, New Delhi, Bharatiya Jansangh, 1965, p. 43)
Social struggles to oppose this system and the struggles to escape the tyrannies of caste system are presented by Ambedkar as revolution and counter-revolution. He divides the ‘pre-Muslim’ period into three stages: (a) Brahmanism (the Vedic period); (b) Buddhism, connected with rise of first Magadh-Maurya states and representing the revolutionary denial of caste inequalities; and (c) ‘Hinduism’, or the counter revolution which consolidated brahman dominance and the caste hierarchy.
Much before the invasion of Muslim kings, shudras were treated as untouchables and were the most oppressed and exploited sections of society. The rigidity and cruelty of the caste system and untouchability became very intense from the post-Vedic to Gupta period. Later, new social movements like Bhakti, directly, and Sufi, indirectly, partly reduced the intensity of the caste oppression and untouchability. This doctoring of the history by Sangh ideologues is motivated by their political agenda and tries to hide the truth.
Batting first, Indian Openers Ajinkya Rahane and Shikhar Dhawan scored tons to take India to 363/5 in 50 overs. The home team then defeated Sri Lanka by 169 runs in the first ODI. Photo: PTI
Cuttack: India defeated Sri Lanka by 169 runs in the first of the five match ODI bilateral series which kick-started at Cuttack yesterday.
Angelo Matthews won the toss and considering the dew factor, opted to bowl first. His decision looked good until the 20th over as the openers added only 90 runs , though both were given a life by Sangakkara.
It was in the 21st over bowled by Randiv, back into the side after 3 years, that things started to turn around. First it was Rahane who reached his 50 off 61 deliveries and then it was Dhawan’s show. He paddle swept the 3rd delivery to the boundary and in the next, reverse swept the bowler to bring 100 of the partnership. Not wanting to tail behind Rahane, he hit the bowler for a six to bring up his 50 in 65 deliveries.
With both the batsmen in full flow, the Indian team took the batting power play in the 24th over. The flood gates opened and each and every bowler on sight were dealt without mercy as boundaries were scored at will. The 2nd over of the power play bowled by Gamage yielded 15 runs while Matthews was taken apart for 18 runs in the 28th over. The Indian batsmen scored 62 runs in the power play overs and 105 between the 20th and 30th over.
Rahane was the first to reach his century in 99 deliveries while Dhawan reached it in the next over with a majestic six off 96 deliveries, his last 64 runs coming in just 35 deliveries. This was the first time after 2003, that both the Indian openers scored a century . The pair was separated only at the end of the 35th over with the score at 231 which consisted of 27 boundaries and 5 sixes.
Raina, playing his 200th ODI, scored a quick fire 52 off just 34 deliveries to keep up the scoring rate and in the process completed 5000 ODI runs. Quick wickets slowed down the rate, but it could not stop the Indians post 363 runs in 50 overs.
Chasing a mammoth score of 364 at a scoring rate of 7.3 RPO from the offset, Sri Lanka had a huge task ahead of them . India had a set back early on as Varon Aaron, bowling at speeds in excess of 150 had to leave the field after bowling just 4 overs. Thankfully it did not create a huge impact as by then the dangerous Dishan was back in the hut and Sri Lanka had just scored 39 in the first 10 overs. They lost wickets at regular intervals and with Sangakkara falling cheaply for 13, it was left to Jayawardane and Matthews to rescue the team.
Jayawardane was dismissed for a well made 43 off just 36 deliveries but his dismissal with the score at 130/5 with a required rate of 9.36 was a bit too much for the tail enders to achieve. The team folded in the 40th over with the score on 194 giving the Indians a huge 169 run victory. Ishanth Sharma was the pick of the bowlers as he scalped 4 batsmen giving away only 34 runs in his 8 overs while AR Patel bowled well to pick 2 wickets.
Scorecard India: A. Rahane c Jayawardene b Randiv 111, S. Dhawan b Priyanjan 113, S. Raina lbw b Randiv 52, V. Kohli c Perera b Randiv 22, A. Rayudu c Perera b Gamage 27, W. Saha (not out) 10, A. Patel (not out) 14. Extras (lb 5, w 7, nb 2) 14. Total (for five wickets in 50 overs) 363.
Sri Lanka: U. Tharanga c Dhawan b Ashwin 28, T. Dilshan c Saha b Yadav 18, K. Sangakkara c Saha b Sharma 13, M. Jayawardene c Kohli b Patel 43, S. Prasanna c Rahane b Patel 5, A. Mathews c Patel b Raina 23, S. Priyanjan c Saha b Sharma 12, T. Perera c Sharma b Yadav 29, S. Randiv b Sharma 5, G. Prasad c Saha b Sharma 0, L. Gamage (not out) 0. Extras (lb 4, w 13, nb 1) 18. Total (in 39.2 overs) 194.
Bridgetown: The West Indies Cricket Board (WICB) will have to cough up nearly $42 million in order to stave off a lawsuit from the Board Of Control For Cricket In India (BCCI), stemming from the abandoned tour of India last month.
Indian authorities Friday told the WICB that its losses as a result of the abandoned one-day and Test tour had been estimated at $41.97 million, and gave the regional board 15 days in which to come up with a plan of compensation, reports CMC.
The BCCI had announced two weeks ago it would seek compensation from the WICB for losses sustained as a result of the cancelled tour, and followed through with formal correspondence to the Antigua-based organisation Friday.
Media rights make up the bulk of the losses with the BCCI estimating them at just over $35 million, while ticket sales account for around $2 million and the title sponsorship from Micromax estimated at $1.6 million.
The BCCI has also factored in losses in kit sponsorship from Nike, team sponsorship, in-stadia sponsorship and stadium concessionaires, in the compensation package.
“The BCCI calls upon the WICB to formally inform the BCCI, in writing, of the steps it intends to take to compensate the BCCI towards the losses quantified above as well as those losses yet to be quantified by the BCCI in relation to the cancelled WICB tour,” said the letter, signed by BCCI secretary Sanjay Patel.
“In the event the BCCI does not receive such a proposal in acceptable terms, within a period of 15 days from receipt of this letter, please note that the BCCI has peremptorily instructed its attorneys to initiate steps for recovery of the losses by filing appropriate legal proceedings against the WICB in the appropriate Indian court and you may treat this notice as a formal demand in that regard.”
Imran Khan, the WICB’s corporate communications manager, confirmed the WICB had received the BCCI letter but opted not to comment further.
In detailing its losses, the BCCI said the cancelled tour had resulted in “adverse financial ramifications” and accused the WICB of having “complete disregard” for legal commitments.
“The consequences on the BCCI of not delivering a scheduled home tour to its members, sponsors, broadcasters and the fans are multi-fold and crippling,” the BCCI letter said.
“The BCCI is faced with huge revenue losses, a loss of reputation and is at risk of losing valuable commercial partners. The consequences of cancellation of a committed home tour during the biggest festival season.
“Diwali in India is a monumental disaster for the BCCI. It is during this season that our partners derive the most value from their rights. Our broadcaster had committed to its advertisers during this season and on account of your actions, is facing a severe crisis the effects of which are felt by the BCCI.
“The BCCI holds the WICB responsible and liable for all such consequences and intends to enforce its rights to seek compensation from the WICB to the fullest extent permissible in law.”
Noting the figures outlined were “tentative and constitutes an approximation of the losses that BCCI is able to quantify at this time”, the Indian board said any other losses would be communicated to the WICB at a later date.
The BCCI also informed the WICB it was formally suspending all bilateral relations until the legal issues were resolved.
Indian authorities were furious after the West Indies players quit the tour following the fourth ODI in Dharamsala, with an ODI in Kolkata and Twenty20 in Cuttack remaining.
The three-Test tour, scheduled to bowl off Oct 30, was also scuppered.
The Windies players were protesting new playing contracts which they argued would have resulted in up to a 75 percent reduction in their earnings.
New York: Reiterating its traditional policy of not using nuclear weapons first and not targeting non-nuclear weapons nations, India has offered to enter into agreements incorporating the two principles while ruling out joining the non-proliferation treaty.
“As a responsible nuclear power India has a policy of credible minimum deterrence based on a No First Use posture and non-use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapon states,” Ambassador D.B. Venkatesh Varma said Monday. “We are prepared to convert these into bilateral or multilateral legally binding arrangements.”
Varma, the Indian Permanent Representative to the Conference on Disarmament, was speaking at a meeting of the UN General Assembly Committee on Disarmament and International Peace.
While New Delhi is “unwavering in its commitment to universal, non-discriminatory, verifiable nuclear disarmament”, he said, “there is no question of India joining the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) as a non-nuclear weapon state.” That would require New Delhi unilaterally giving up its nuclear weapons.
On another matter impacting the restriction of nuclear weapons, Varma offered New Delhi’s qualified support to the Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT) negotiations.
“Without prejudice to the priority we attach to nuclear disarmament, we support the negotiation in the Conference on Disarmament of an FMCT that meets India’s national security interests,” he said.
Such a treaty would stop the making of materials that could be used in nuclear weapons.
Reintroducing a draft resolution on a Convention on the Prohibition of the Use of Nuclear Weapons, he criticised countries with nuclear weapons coverage that have repeatedly voted against the proposed measure since it was first introduced in 1982.
Varma expressed “regret that a sizeable minority of member states – some of them nuclear weapon states, some with nuclear weapons stationed on their soil and others with alliance partnerships underwritten by policies of first use of nuclear weapons – have voted against this resolution”.
And, “for reasons that are difficult to understand, some member states which are today in the forefront of efforts to highlight the humanitarian impact of use of nuclear weapons have also voted against this resolution”.
Reflecting the concern of the international community to the dangers from terrorists, Varma said India will be introducing again a draft resolution on “measures to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction”.
Participating in the debate, Pakistan called for the development of an international non-proliferation system “through policies that are equitable, criteria-based and non-discriminatory”.
In what may be seen as an indirect criticism directed at India, Yasar Ammar, a third secretary in Pakistan’s UN mission, said, “There should be no exceptionalism or preferential treatment driven by motivations of power and profit.”
The US has an agreement with India on civilian cooperation in nuclear field and because New Delhi has not signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, it required a waiver from the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), an international body that deals with trade in nuclear materials and technology.
Pakistan wants a similar agreement with the US, which has been cool to it because of Islamabad’s record of transferring nuclear technology.
India has the support of the US, Russia, Britain, and France for joining the NSG. Pakistan opposes India’s membership if it is not extended to it also.
Saudi Arabia has unleashed an economic war against selected oil producers. The strategy masks the House of Saud’s real agenda. But will it work?
Rosneft Vice President Mikhail Leontyev; “Prices can be manipulative…Saudi Arabia has begun making big discounts on oil. This is political manipulation, and Saudi Arabia is being manipulated, which could end badly.”
A correction is in order; the Saudis are not being manipulated. What the House of Saud is launching is“Tomahawks of spin,” insisting they’re OK with oil at $90 a barrel; also at $80 for the next two years; and even at $50 to $60 for Asian and North American clients.
The fact is Brent crude had already fallen to below $90 a barrel because China – and Asia as a whole – was already slowing down economically, although to a lesser degree compared to the West. Production, though, remained high – especially by Saudi Arabia and Kuwait – even with very little Libyan and Syrian oil on the market and with Iran forced to cut exports by a million barrels a day because of the US economic war, a.k.a. sanctions.
The House of Saud is applying a highly predatory pricing strategy, which boils down to reducing market share of its competitors, in the middle- to long-term. At least in theory, this could make life miserable for a lot of players – from the US (energy development, fracking and deepwater drilling become unprofitable) to producers of heavy, sour crude such as Iran and Venezuela. Yet the key target, make no mistake, is Russia.
A strategy that simultaneously hurts Iran, Iraq, Venezuela, Ecuador and Russia cannot escape the temptation of being regarded as an “Empire of Chaos” power play, as in Washington cutting a deal with Riyadh. A deal would imply bombing ISIS/ISIL/Daesh leader Caliph Ibrahim is just a prelude to bombing Bashar al-Assad’s forces; in exchange, the Saudis squeeze oil prices to hurt the enemies of the “Empire of Chaos.”
Yet it’s way more complicated than that.
Sticking it to Washington
Russia’s state budget for 2015 requires oil at least at $100 a barrel. Still, the Kremlin is borrowing no more than $7 billion in 2015 from the usual “foreign investors”, plus $27.2 billion internally. Hardly an economic earthquake.
Besides, the ruble has already fallen over 14 percent since July against the US dollar. By the way, the currencies of key BRICS members have also fallen; 7.8 percent for the Brazilian real, 1.6 percent for the Indian rupee. And Russia, unlike the Yeltsin era, is not broke; it holds at least $455 billion in foreign reserves.
The House of Saud’s target of trying to bypass Russia as a top supplier of oil to the EU is nothing but a pipe dream; EU refineries would have to be reframed to process Saudi light crude, and that costs a fortune.
Geopolitically, it gets juicier when we see that central to the House of Saud strategy is to stick it to Washington for not fulfilling its “Assad must go” promise, as well as the neo-con obsession in bombing Iran. It gets worse (for the Saudis) because Washington – at least for now – seems more concentrated in toppling Caliph Ibrahim than Bashar al-Assad, and might be on the verge of signing a nuclear deal with Tehran as part of the P5+1 on November 24.
On the energy front, the ultimate House of Saud nightmare would be both Iran and Iraq soon being able to take over the Saudi status as key swing oil producers in the world. Thus the Saudi drive to deprive both of much-needed oil revenue. It might work – as in the sanctions biting Tehran even harder. Yet Tehran can always compensate by selling more gas to Asia.
So here’s the bottom line. A beleaguered House of Saud believes it may force Moscow to abandon its support of Damascus, and Washington to scotch a deal with Tehran. All this by selling oil below the average spot price. That smacks of desperation. Additionally, it may be interpreted as the House of Saud dithering if not sabotaging the coalition of the cowards/clueless in its campaign against Caliph Ibrahim’s goons.
Compounding the gloom, the EU might be allowed to muddle through this winter – even considering possible gas supply problems with Russia because of Ukraine. Still, low Saudi oil prices won’t prevent a near certain fourth recession in six years just around the EU corner.
Reuters / Hamad I Mohammed
Go East, young Russian
Russia, meanwhile, slowly but surely looks East. China’s Vice Premier Wang Yang has neatly summarized it; “China is willing to export to Russia such competitive products as agricultural goods, oil and gas equipment, and is ready to import Russian engineering products.” Couple that with increased food imports from Latin America, and it doesn’t look like Moscow is on the ropes.
A hefty Chinese delegation led by Premier Li Keqiang has just signed a package of deals in Moscow ranging from energy to finance, and from satellite navigation to high-speed rail cooperation. For China, which overtook Germany as Russia’s top trading partner in 2011, this is pure win-win.
The central banks of China and Russia have just signed a crucial, 3-year, 150 billion yuan bilateral local-currency swap deal. And the deal is expandable. The City of London basically grumbles – but that’s what they usually do.
This new deal, crucially, bypasses the US dollar. No wonder it’s now a key component of the no holds barred proxy economic war between the US and Asia. Moscow cannot but hail it as sidelining many of the side effects of the Saudi strategy.
The Russia-China strategic partnership has been on the up and up since the “epochal” (Putin’s definition) $400 billion, 30-year “gas dealof the century” clinched in May. And the economic reverberations won’t stop.
There’s bound to be an alignment of the Chinese-driven New Silk Roads with a revamped Trans-Siberian railway. At the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit last month in Dushanbe, President Putin praised the “great potential” of developing a “common SCO transport system” linking “Russia’s Trans-Siberian railway and the Baikal-Amur mainline” with the Chinese Silk Roads, thus“benefiting all countries in Eurasia.”
Moscow is progressively lifting restrictions and is now offering Beijing a wealth of potential investments. Beijing is progressively accessing not only much-needed Russian raw materials but acquiring cutting-edge technology and advanced weapons.
Beijing will get S-400 missile systems and Su-35 fighter jets as soon as the first quarter of 2015. Further on down the road will come Russia’s brand new submarine, the Amur 1650, as well as components for nuclear-powered satellites.
Reuters / Hamad I Mohammed
The road is paved with yuan
Presidents Putin and Xi, who have met no less than nine times since Xi came to power last year, are scaring the hell out of the “Empire of Chaos.” No wonder; their number one shared priority is to dent the hegemony of the US dollar – and especially the petrodollar – in the global financial system.
The yuan has been trading on the Moscow Exchange – the first bourse outside of China to offer regulated yuan trading. It’s still at only $1.1 billion (in September). Russian importers pay for 8 percent of all Chinese goods with yuan instead of dollars, but that’s rising fast. And it will rise exponentially when Moscow finally decides to accept yuan under Gazprom’s $400 billion “gas deal of the century.”
This is the way the multipolar world goes. The House of Saud deploys the petrodollar weapon? The counterpunch is increased trade in a basket of currencies. Additionally, Moscow sends a message to the EU, which is losing a lot of Russia trade because of counter-productive sanctions, thus accelerating the EU’s next recession. Economic war does work both ways.
The House of Saud believes it can dump a tsunami of oil in the market and back it up with a tsunami of spin – creating the illusion the Saudis control oil prices. They don’t. As much as this strategy will fail, Beijing is showing the way out; trading in other currencies stabilizes prices. The only losers, in the end, will be those who stick to trade in US dollars.
Pepe Escobar is the roving correspondent for Asia Times/Hong Kong, an analyst for RT and TomDispatch, and a frequent contributor to websites and radio shows ranging from the US to East Asia.
On the Lauran Flanders show, Arundhati Roy was asked her views on the Nobel peace prize:
Arundhati Roy:
“Look, it’s a difficult thing to talk about because Malala is a brave girl and I think she has now started speaking out against US invasions and bombings that are going on.
“But certainly… as an individual, it is very difficult to resist great powers trying to co-opt you and, trying to use you in certain ways, and she’s only a kid, you know, and she cannot be faulted at all for what she did, but certainly the great game is going on, you know.
“And, of course, the idea of an Indian and a Pakistani being given…sharing the Nobel prize does have to do with global politics and it does have to do with the fact that until the 1990s, Pakistan and America were allies. Now, with all the trouble in Pakistan, the US is trying to step back from that marsh and look for firmer ground, in India.
“So we are at the receiving end of the kiss of death, if you like, and so both the begums now, Pakistan and India, have to be in the sheikh’s harem. You know, they have to be both be…
“I am not…this should not be taken as if I am criticising the individuals at all, but when the great game is at play, then they pick out people…all of us, I am aware of… at least you have to be aware of it…”
Srinagar: On 7th September, 2014 Kashmir witnessed the worst disaster of the century when the summer capital of Jammu & Kashmir got submerged. Rajbagh, Shivpura, Indra Nagar, Jawahar Nagar and Bemina were the worst hit. Water levels rose upto 18 feet in these areas. People were shocked and unable to understand how to save their life. But as we say life has its own ways, people started marching towards these areas and tried to rescue people and bring them out of these submerged houses.
In the state government, except the Chief Minister & DGP everyone else was trying to save himself and his family. I reached Srinagar airport on 5th September and on the same day on directions of Home Ministry two NDRF teams had reached Srinagar airport. Mubashir Bukhari, Dy. SP JK police was briefing them about the situation. NDRF was clueless about the topography of the area and in Kashmir we still don’t have Google maps updated so you can understand how tough it would have been for this police officer to brief them. But anyhow NDRF teams were sent to the destination.
On 7th September when water started entering Srinagar city, locals, NDRF teams and some J&K policemen started rescue operation. On the morning of 8th September, we saw big fleet of helicopters of IAF pressed in the rescue operation. Whenever there is any natural calamity, I have never seen that rescue operations are done by government only, in most of the cases, during rescue operation locals do more work than government machinery and same happened in Kashmir..
Air Force, Army did tremendous job in rescuing people. I Saw army without any hesitation taking people in their vehicles and people also getting into these vehicles without any hesitation. This was the Kashmir which I had seen in my childhood when army and public were friends, though after 1990 everything changed. Till 9th of September everything was going on peacefully but on 10th I again saw anti army voices raising especially in non flood hit areas. I was wondering what happened suddenly, why are people against the army? Why are people saying army is rescuing only non-Kashmiris? Then I realised the battery of journalists who had come with IAF fleet were just showing rescue operation of army and not of the locals. Unfortunately, these reporters were just showing the interviews of only those people who were from outside, this reporting gave the impression that government is only trying to rescue non Kashmiris which was not true. Though few channels did commendable job by taking messages of people stranded in the flood to their families but all these efforts were wasted by some editors for reasons well known to them. This was the time when media could have played the constructive role and tried to narrow down the gap between localities and Army.
Worst was when few channels started playing visuals of stone pelting on security forces in 2010 and rescue operation. I didn’t understand what they were trying to tell people of Kashmir by showing these pictures. Didn’t the media spoil the work done by army and IAF and didn’t this reportage allow people to raise questions.
There were lot of stories which these journalists could have done. Boat owners taking thousands for few kilometers. Thieves trying to sneak in these submerged houses and some heroic jobs of local people.
I am a journalist and fortunately or unfortunately i was in Kashmir during these floods and witnessed as how some media reportage not only spoilt the work done by government but widened the gap between Kashmiris and the government.
