What I am getting at is not that one should only wear expensive clothes. But wearing one’s best professional attire to work is expected. If you are serious about your career then you need to take personal grooming a little more seriously. Here are some fun tips which will not only get heads to turn, but will also add an extra edge to your confidence and enthusiasm.

NEAT FOOTWEAR

Walking to office in flip-flops, crocs or worn-out footwear is not acceptable, no matter what designation you hold. If you are not comfortable in professional shoes and stilettos all day, carry a change of flipflops but don’t be caught as though you just got out of bed and into work.

SMART FORMALS

If you don’t have a formal wardrobe, it’s time you made one. Investing in your attire is an investment in your career. Upgrade your style as you move up. Don’t buy by what your designation demands; always keep your standards three rungs above your current position. No matter what, your wardrobe must include smart formals for daily wear, at least one smart formal for party wear and one smart formal for a board meeting. You may not see the need today, but when the day arrives you may not have the time, money or accessibility to dress up for the occasion.

ACCESSORISE

Accessories add zing to your appearance. Cuff links over button-up sleeves, earrings to match your clothes, a branded watch, neatly painted nails, a scarf to go with your shirt, all add an extra spark to your dressing and make you stand out.

SMELL GOOD

Investing in a deodorant, perfume and even some tic tac is a good way to keep yourself smelling fresh. There is no greater turn off than body odour and bad breath.

Where I have found slack in personal grooming, I have also found a slack in self confidence. When people take their appearance and their grooming seriously, it shows up in their attitude, and reflects in the way they talk and the way they think about their goals. Don’t let your designation decide your dressing for you; let your grooming be led by your vision. Put your best foot forward in everything you do, including your appearance.

(The author is CEO/chief facilitator of PKTS)

Article Courtesy – Economic Times

There are times, however, when the U.S. military has considered this 17-square-mile atoll of coral and sand in the middle of the Indian Ocean one of the most valuable pieces of real estate on Earth.

A British Territory, Leased to the United States

The Portuguese explored Diego Garcia in the 1500s (it is named for a Portuguese navigator). Between 1814 and 1965 it was a territory of Mauritius. It then became part of the Chagos Archipelago, which belonged to the newly created British Indian Ocean Territory. In 1970, the island was leased to the United States, and developed as a joint U.S.-UK air and naval refueling and support station during the cold war. Located in the middle of the Indian Ocean and out of cyclone range, it was ideal for keeping an eye on the Soviet Union.

A Strategic Air Base

Diego Garcia proved to be critically important as a refueling base during the 1991 Persian Gulf War, and during Operation Desert Fox, it served as a base for B-52 bombers, which on Dec. 17, 1998, launched nearly 100 long-range cruise missiles aimed at Iraq. Beginning on Oct. 7, 2001, the United States again used Diego Garcia when it launched B-2 and B-52 bombers attacks against Afghanistan. In the current British and American-led war against Iraq, Diego Garcia has once again played a crucial strategic role.

The fact that Diego Garcia is more than 3,000 miles south of Iraq, and just a shade closer to Afghanistan, has not posed the logistical problems one might expect. According to the U.S. Air Force, B-52s have an “unrefueled combat range in excess of 8,800 miles.”

The Military Base Today

In 2006, about 40 British and 1,000 U.S. military personnel, and 2,400 support workers of various nationalities (primarily Filipino and Sri Lankan) reside there. A number of al-Qaeda suspects are thought to be held and interrogated on the island (although the U.S. military will not confirm this), including Hambali (Riduan Isamuddin), the leader of the Asian terrorist group Jemaah Islamiyah, responsible for the 2002 terrorist bombing in Bali.

Forced Removal of the Indigenous Inhabitants

Although Diego Garcia once had a small native population, the inhabitants, known as the Ilois, or the Chagossians, were forced to relocate (1967–1973) so that the island could be turned into the U.S. military base. Most of the roughly 1,500 displaced Chagossians were agricultural workers and fisherman. Uprooted and robbed of their livelihood, the Chagossians now live in poverty in Mauritius’s urban slums, more than 1,000 miles from their homeland. A smaller number were deported to the Seychelles. About 850 islanders forced off Diego Garcia are alive today, and another 4,300 Chagossians have been born in exile. A 2003 60 Minutes segment and a 2004 documentary by Australian journalist and filmmaker John Pilger, Stealing a Nation, have done much to publicize the little-known plight of the islanders.

The Chagossians’ Search for Justice

The Chagossians have turned to the British courts to fight for the right to return to their homeland. In 2000, a British court ruled that the order to evacuate Diego Garcia’s inhabitants was invalid, but the court also upheld the island’s military status, which permits only personnel authorized by the military to inhabit the island. The Ilois also sued the British government for compensation, but in Oct. 2003 a British judge ruled that although the Chagossians had been treated “shamefully” by the government, their claims were unfounded.

A Further Setback

To further thwart the Chagossians’ claims—and as a result of strong pressure from the U.S., which has cited security reasons for keeping the islanders from returning—the British government issued an “Order of Council” in 2004, prohibiting islanders from ever returning to Diego Garcia. This archaic, centuries-old royal prerogative permitted the Blair government to overrule the 2000 High court verdict.

Vindication

But in May 2006, the High Court in London ruled that the Chagossians may in fact return to other Chagossian islands, and offered a withering assessment of the British conduct in the case, calling it “outrageous, unlawful and a breach of accepted moral standards.”

“The suggestion that a minister can, through an Order in Council, exile a whole population from a British Overseas Territory and claim he is doing so for the ‘peace, order and good government’ of the Territory is repugnant.”

American Resistance

The Chagossians have accepted that they cannot return to Diego Garcia because of the U.S. airbase, but this new verdict paves the way for the islanders to move elsewhere in the Chagos archipelago, to the Salomon islands and Peros Banhos, which are more than 100 miles from Diego Garcia. The U.S., however, is opposed to anyone other than military personnel and their employees living anywhere in the Chagos archipelago, asserting that security will be compromised. According to a State Department official, Lincoln Bloomfield Jr., allowing civilians in the archipelago could potentially lead to “terrorists infiltrating the islands.” Having finally triumphed in a hard-won and lengthy legal battle, the Chagossians now find themselves at loggerheads with the world’s superpower.

A nuclear-weapon-free zone (NWFZ) is a specified region in which countries commit themselves not to manufacture, acquire, test, or possess nuclear weapons. Five such zones exist today, with four of them spanning the entire Southern Hemisphere. The regions currently covered under NWFZ agreements include: Latin America (the 1967 Treaty of Tlatelolco), the South Pacific (the 1985 Treaty of Rarotonga), Southeast Asia (the 1995 Treaty of Bangkok) Africa (the 1996 Treaty of Pelindaba) and Central Asia (the 2006 Treaty of Semipalatinsk).

Article VII of the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), which entered into force in 1970, affirms the right of countries to establish specified zones free of nuclear weapons. The UN General Assembly reaffirmed that right in 1975 and outlined the criteria for such zones. Within these nuclear-weapon-free zones, countries may use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.

Each treaty establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone includes a protocol for the five nuclear-weapon states recognized under the NPT-China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States-to sign and ratify. These protocols, which are legally binding, call upon the nuclear-weapon states to respect the status of the zones and not to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against treaty states-parties. Such declarations of non-use of nuclear weapons are referred to as negative security assurances. However, the five nuclear-armed countries have at times signed and ratified a NWFZ protocol and declared conditions reserving the right to use nuclear weapons in certain scenarios against parties to a nuclear-weapon-free zone. For instance, the United States signed the protocol for the African nuclear-weapon-free zone in April 1996 with a declaration that it would reserve the right to respond with all options, implying possible use of nuclear weapons, to a chemical or biological weapons attack by a member of the zone. None of the nuclear-weapon states have signed the relevant protocol for the treaty creating a zone in Southeast Asia because of concerns that it conflicts with the right of their ships and aircraft to have freedom of movement in international waters and airspace. The other three zones do not explicitly rule out the transit of nuclear weapons by nuclear-weapon states through the zones, and the general practice of nuclear-weapon states is not to declare whether nuclear weapons are aboard their vessels.

In addition to nuclear-weapon-free zones, there are treaties, which are not covered by this fact sheet, banning the deployment of nuclear weapons in Antarctica, Mongolia, on the seabed, and in outer space.

Basic Elements of Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaties

Duration: The treaties are to remain in force indefinitely. Yet, each treaty includes a withdrawal option for states-parties. With the exception of the Treaty of Tlatelolco, which simply requires three months’ advance notice before a withdrawal can take effect, all the NWFZ treaties require 12 months’ advance notice for a state-party to end its treaty obligations.

Conditions: None of the treaties can be subjected to conditions by its non-nuclear-weapon states-parties.

Verification: Each state-party adopts comprehensive safeguards administered by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which verifies that states-parties are not pursuing nuclear weapons illicitly. The Central Asian NWFZ goes a step further in requiring that states in the region adopt the IAEA’s Additional Protocol, which provides for expanded monitoring.

Territory Covered: Each zone applies to the entire territories of all of its states-parties. Territory is understood to include all land holdings, internal waters, territorial seas, and archipelagic waters. The Latin American treaty also extends hundreds of kilometers from the states-parties’ territories into the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, but the nuclear-weapon states, citing their freedom at sea, assert that this does not apply to their ships and aircraft that might be carrying nuclear weapons. A dispute also exists over the inclusion of the Chagos Archipelago, which includes the U.S. military base at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, as part of the proposed African nuclear-weapon-free zone. Neither the United States nor the United Kingdom recognizes Diego Garcia as being subject to the Pelindaba Treaty.

Background

Initial efforts to create an area free of nuclear weapons began in the late 1950s with several proposals to establish such a zone in Central and Eastern Europe. Poland offered the first proposal-named the Rapacki Plan after the Polish foreign minister-in 1958. The Rapacki Plan sought to initially keep nuclear weapons from being deployed in Poland, Czechoslovakia, West Germany, and East Germany, while reserving the right for other European countries to follow suit. The Soviet Union, Sweden, Finland, Romania, and Bulgaria also floated similar proposals. All these early efforts, however, floundered amidst the U.S.-Soviet superpower conflict, although the Rapacki Plan would serve as a model to the nuclear-weapon-free zones that were eventually set up in other regions of the globe.

The Treaty of Tlatelolco (Latin America and the Caribbean)

Opened for signature: February 14, 1967
Entered into force: October 23, 2002[1]
States-parties: 33 total; Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and Grenadines, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Uruguay, and Venezuela.
Protocol ratification by nuclear-weapon states: Protocol II (negative security assurances) ratified by China, France, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the Soviet Union.[2]

The Treaty of Rarotonga (South Pacific)

Opened for signature: August 6, 1985
Entered into force: December 11, 1986
States-parties: 13 total; Australia, Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu.
Protocol ratification by nuclear-weapon states: Protocol II (negative security assurances) ratified by China, France, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union.[2] Protocol III (ban on nuclear testing in the nuclear-weapon-free zone) ratified by China, France, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union.[2]

The Treaty of Bangkok (Southeast Asia)

Opened for signature: December 15, 1995
Entered into force: March 27, 1997
State-parties: 10 total; Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam.
Protocol ratification by nuclear-weapon states: None.

The Treaty of Pelindaba (Africa)

Opened for signature: April 11, 1996
Entered into force: July 15, 2009
States-parties: 28 total; Algeria, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cote d’Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea, Kenya, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mozambique, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, South Africa, Swaziland, Togo, United Republic of Tanzania, and Zimbabwe. Signatories that have not ratified the treaty are: Angola, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Cape Verde, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Djibouti, Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt, Eritrea, Ghana, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Niger, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sao Tome & Principe, Sudan, Tunisia, Uganda and Zambia, as well as the area known as the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic.
Protocol ratification by nuclear-weapon states: Protocol I (negative security assurances) ratified by China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom. Protocol II (ban on nuclear testing in the nuclear-weapon-free zone) ratified by China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom.

Central Asian Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty

Opened for signature: September 8, 2006
Entered into force: March 21, 2009
States-parties: 5 total; Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan.
Protocol ratification by nuclear-weapon states: None.

Source : www.armscontrol.org

Whether it’s a high-profile tech company like Yahoo!, or a more established conglomerate like GE or Home Depot, large companies have a hard time keeping their best and brightest in house. Recently, GigaOM discussed the troubles at Yahoo! with a flat stock price, vested options for some of their best people, and the apparent free flow of VC dollars luring away some of their best people to do the start-up thing again.

Yet, Yahoo!, GE, Home Depot, and other large established companies have a tremendous advantage in retaining their top talent and don’t. I’ve seen the good and the bad things that large companies do in relation to talent management. Here’s my Top Ten list of what large companies do to lose their top talent :

1. Big Company Bureaucracy. This is probably the #1 reason we hear after the fact from disenchanted employees. However, it’s usually a reason that masks the real reason. No one likes rules that make no sense. But, when top talent is complaining along these lines, it’s usually a sign that they didn’t feel as if they had a say in these rules. They were simply told to follow along and get with the program. No voice in the process and really talented people say-check please.

2. Failing to Find a Project for the Talent that Ignites Their Passion. Big companies have many moving parts — by definition. Therefore, they usually don’t have people going around to their best and brightest asking them if they’re enjoying their current project or if they want to work on something new that they’re really interested in which would help the company. HR people are usually too busy keeping up with other things to get into this. The bosses are also usually tapped out on time and this becomes a “nice to have” rather than “must have” conversation. However, unless you see it as a “must have,” say adios to some of your best people. Top talent isn’t driven by money and power, but by the opportunity to be a part of something huge, that will change the world, and for which they are really passionate. Big companies usually never spend the time to figure this out with those people.

3. Poor Annual Performance Reviews. You would be amazed at how many companies do not do a very effective job at annual performance reviews. Or, if they have them, they are rushed through, with a form quickly filled out and sent off to HR, and back to real work. The impression this leaves with the employee is that my boss — and, therefore, the company — isn’t really interested in my long-term future here. If you’re talented enough, why stay? This one leads into #4….

4. No Discussion around Career Development. Here’s a secret for most bosses: most employees don’t know what they’ll be doing in 5 years. In our experience, about less than 5% of people could tell you if you asked. However, everyone wants to have a discussion with you about their future. Most bosses never engage with their employees about where they want to go in their careers — even the top talent. This represents a huge opportunity for you and your organization if you do bring it up. Our best clients have separate annual discussions with their employees — apart from their annual or bi-annual performance review meetings — to discuss succession planning or career development. If your best people know that you think there’s a path for them going forward, they’ll be more likely to hang around.

5. Shifting Whims/Strategic Priorities. I applaud companies trying to build an incubator or “brickhouse” around their talent, by giving them new exciting projects to work on. The challenge for most organizations is not setting up a strategic priority, like establishing an incubator, but sticking with it a year or two from now. Top talent hates to be “jerked around.” If you commit to a project that they will be heading up, you’ve got to give them enough opportunity to deliver what they’ve promised.

6. Lack of Accountability and/or telling them how to do their Jobs. Although you can’t “jerk around” top talent, it’s a mistake to treat top talent leading a project as “untouchable.” We’re not saying that you need to get into anyone’s business or telling them what to do. However, top talent demands accountability from others and doesn’t mind being held accountable for their projects. Therefore, have regular touch points with your best people as they work through their projects. They’ll appreciate your insights/observations/suggestions — as long as they don’t spillover into preaching.

7.Top talent likes other top talent. What are the rest of the people around your top talent like? Many organizations keep some people on the payroll that rationally shouldn’t be there. You’ll get a litany of rationales explaining why when you ask. “It’s too hard to find a replacement for him/her….” “Now’s not the time….” However, doing exit interviews with the best people leaving big companies you often hear how they were turned off by some of their former “team mates.” If you want to keep your best people, make sure they’re surrounded by other great people.

8. The Missing Vision Thing. This might sound obvious, but is the future of your organization exciting? What strategy are you executing? What is the vision you want this talented person to fulfill? Did they have a say/input into this vision? If the answer is no, there’s work to do — and fast.

9. Lack of Open-Mindedness. The best people want to share their ideas and have them listened to. However, a lot of companies have a vision/strategy which they are trying to execute against — and, often find opposing voices to this strategy as an annoyance and a sign that someone’s not a “team player.” If all the best people are leaving and disagreeing with the strategy, you’re left with a bunch of “yes” people saying the same things to each other. You’ve got to be able to listen to others’ points of view — always incorporating the best parts of these new suggestions.

10. Who’s the Boss? If a few people have recently quit at your company who report to the same boss, it’s likely not a coincidence. We’ll often get asked to come in and “fix” someone who’s a great sales person, engineer, or is a founder, but who is driving everyone around them “nuts.” We can try, but unfortunately, executive coaching usually only works 33% of the time in these cases. You’re better off trying to find another spot for them in the organization — or, at the very least, not overseeing your high-potential talent that you want to keep.

It’s never a one-way street. Top talent has to assume some responsibility as much as the organization. However, with the scarcity of talent — which will only increase in the next 5 years — Smart Organizations are ones who get out in front of these ten things, rather than wait for their people to come to them, asking to implement this list.

Source: – Forbes.com

A thing that will change the economic landscape of the world for ever. That is the dream many forefathers of South Asian independence dreamed in early twentieth century. Observing that time for South Asian Union in terms of economic integration had come, India today said the barriers among SAARC countries would have to fall to allow the region’s development and voiced confidence about SAFTA coming into force from January next. External Affairs Minister K Natwar Singh, said South Asia could draw inspiration from regional bodies like the European Union and ASEAN for economic integration and advocated a time-bound project-oriented approach by SAARC nations towards achieving developmental goals. “All of us in South Asia are aware that the idea of a South Asian Union in the realm of economic integration is one whose time has come. We are in danger of missing the bus if we do not recognise this reality,” he said after releasing a book “South Asian Union” authored by senior journalist Ranjit Kumar. For development of the region, he said, barriers of geography, trade and mindset would have to fall. “Today, in the age of IT revolution, many barriers will break down,” he said. “The EU shows how countries which have been at war with each other over the last eight to ten centuries can bury their hatchets in the common pursuit of peace and prosperity,” the External Affairs Minister said. Noting that two-thirds of the world trade today takes place through regional economic groups, he said “South Asia can certainly draw inspiration from EU as it can from other successful regional groupings like ASEAN, North Atlantic Free Trade Area (NAFTA) and South Africa Development Community.”

2008: Stability and Human Rights Concerns

By the beginning of 2008, Russia could claim to have stabilized. Although separatist militants continue their attacks, they are small and intermittent. However, stability has come at a high price, according to human rights observers. In order to maintain his rule, Kadyrov has reportedly made torture, murder and rape substantial elements of his effort to keep order

• People’s Republic of China
• Republic of China (Taiwan)
• Philippines
• Vietnam
• Malaysia
• Brunei

The Spratly and Paracel archipelago are two groups of uninhabited islands located within the South China Sea, which are subject to a complex territorial dispute involving the surrounding countries. The interests of different nations include acquiring fishing areas around the two archipelagos, the exploitation of crude oil and natural gas beneath the Spratly Islands, and the strategic control of a core position. Along with territorial land claims on the islets, the disputes also involve the territorial waters of the various countries within the region. The nine-dotted line drawn by China which marks its claim covers around three-fourths of the total area of the South China Sea.

BACKGROUND:

The area is potentially rich in oil deposits. The Ministry of Geological Resources and Mining of the People’s Republic of China estimated that the South China Sea may contain 17.7 billion tons of crude (compared to Kuwait with 13 billion tons). In the years following the announcement by the ministry, the claims regarding the South China Sea islands intensified.However, other sources claim that the proven reserve of oil in the South China Sea may only be 7.5 billion barrels, or about 1.1 billion tons. The South China Sea is dubbed by China as the “second Persian Sea”. The state-owned China Offshore Exploration Corp. planned to spend 200 billion RMB (US$30 billion) in the next 20 years to exploit oil in the region, with the estimated production of 25 million metric tons of crude oil and natural gas per annum, at a depth of 2000 meters within the next 5 years.

On March 11, 1976, the first Philippine oil company discovered an oil field off Palawan Island (island within the South China Sea belonging to the Philippines). These oil fields supply 15% of annual oil consumption in the Philippines.

However, none of the countries claiming the Spratly Islands have granted concession offshore to avoid provoking a crisis. In addition, since the territorial dispute is not yet resolved, international oil companies have not made commitments.

The abundant fishing opportunities within the region are another motivation for the claim. In 1988, the South China Sea is believed to have accounted for 8% of world fishing catches, a figure that has grown since then. There have been many clashes in the Philippines with foreign fishing vessels (including China) in the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone. China believes that the value in fishing and oil from the sea has risen to a trillion dollars.

The area is also one of the busiest shipping routes in the world. In the 1980s, at least 270 merchant ships used the routeeach day. Currently, more than half the tonnage of oil transported by sea passes through it, a figure rising steadily with the growth of Chinese consumption of oil. This traffic is three times greater than that passing through the Suez Canal and five times more than the Panama Canal.

 2011 agreement

On 20 July 2011, the PRC, Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, the ROC and Vietnam agreed to a set of preliminary guidelines which would help resolve the disputes. The agreement was described by the PRC’s assistant foreign minister, Liu Zhenmin, as “an important milestone document for cooperation among China and ASEAN countries”. Some of the early drafts acknowledged aspects such as “marine environmental protection, scientific research, safety of navigation and communication, search and rescue and combating transnational crime”, although the issue of oil and natural gas drilling remains unresolved.

Chinese objection to Indian naval presence and oil exploration

On July 22, 2011, the INS Airavat, an Indian amphibious assault vessel on a friendly visit to Vietnam, was reportedly contacted 45 nautical miles from the Vietnamese coast in the disputed South China Sea. The ship was contacted on open radio channel by a party identifying itself as the Chinese Navy and stating that the ship was entering Chinese waters.A spokesperson for the Indian Navy explained that as no ship or aircraft was visible, the INS Airavat proceeded on her onward journey as scheduled. The Indian Navy further clarified that “[t]here was no confrontation involving the INS Airavat. India supports freedom of navigation in international waters, including in the South China Sea, and the right of passage in accordance with accepted principles of international law. These principles should be respected by all.

In September 2011, shortly after China and Vietnam signed an agreement seeking to contain a dispute over the South China Sea, India’s state-run explorer, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) said that its overseas investment arm ONGC Videsh Limited had signed a three-year agreement with PetroVietnam for developing long-term cooperation in the oil sector and that it had accepted Vietnam’s offer of exploration in certain specified blocks in the South China Sea^.In response, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu, without referring to India by name, stated as follows:

“China enjoys indisputable sovereignty over the South China Sea and the island. China’s stand is based on historical facts and international law. China’s sovereign rights and positions are formed in the course of history and this position has been held by Chinese Government for long. On the basis of this China is ready to engage in peaceful negotiations and friendly consultations to peacefully solve the disputes over territorial sovereignty and maritime rights so as to positively contribute to peace and tranquillity in the South China Sea area. We hope that the relevant countries respect China’s position and refrain from taking unilateral action to complicate and expand the issue. We hope they will respect and support countries in the region to solve the bilateral disputes through bilateral channels. As for oil and gas exploration activities, our consistent position is that we are opposed to any country engaging in oil and gas exploration and development activities in waters under China’s jurisdiction. We hope the foreign countries do not get involved in South China Sea dispute.”

An Indian foreign ministry spokesman responded, “The Chinese had concerns, but we are going by what the Vietnamese authorities have told us and [we] have conveyed this to the Chinese.”The Indo-Vietnamese deal was also denounced by the Chinese state-run newspaper Global Times.

Retrenchment

In October 2011, China’s Global Times newspaper, published by Communist Party organ People’s Daily editorialized on South China Sea territorial disputes under the banner “Don’t take peaceful approach for granted”. The article referenced recent incidents involving Philippines and South Korea detaining Chinese fishing boats in the region.

गत २१ सितम्बर को सुप्रीम कोर्ट को डा. स्वामी द्वारा सौंपे गए अभिलेखों में ३० जनवरी, २००८ का वह अभिलेख भी है जिसमें चिदम्बरम ने खुली निविदा के बदले “पहले आओ, पहले पाओ” की ए. राजा की नीति का अनुमोदन किया था। ध्यान देने की बात है कि इस नीति के कारण ही दोनों अपनी मनपसन्द कंपनियों को २-जी स्पेक्ट्रम का इच्छित भाग आवंटित कर पाए जिसके कारण देश को पौने दो लाख करोड़ रुपयों का घाटा उठाना पड़ा। २-जी स्पेक्ट्रम घोटाले का एक बड़ा हिस्सा राजा के अतिरिक्त चिदंबरम को भी प्राप्त हुआ था, जिसे उन्होंने विदेशी बैंक में जमा किया। इन्टरनेट पर जारी सूचना के अनुसार (Rudolf Elmer, 2.8.11, Port 9999 SSL enabled, IP 88.80.16.63) विदेशी बैंक Rothschild Bank AG के खाता संख्या 19sub में चिदंबरम के नाम से ३२००० करोड़ रुपए जमा हैं जबकि ए. राजा के विदेशी खाते में मात्र ७८०० करोड़ रुपए जमा हैं। प्रधान मंत्री अभी भी उन्हें बेदाग बता रहे हैं। चिदंबरम यदि मंत्रिपरिषद से त्यागपत्र दे देते हैं, तो अभी जेल जाएंगे और नहीं देते हैं अगली सरकार जेल भेजेगी।

सुब्रह्मण्यम स्वामी ने २-जी घोटाले में तीसरे और सबसे बड़े लाभार्थी के रूप में कांग्रेस अध्यक्ष सोनिया गांधी के नाम का खुलासा किया है। उनका कहना है कि कुल घोटाले की ६०% राशि सोनिया जी और उनके रिश्तेदारों के पास गई है। सोनिया जी की बहनें, अनुष्का और नाडिया – प्रत्येक ने १८००० करोड़ रुपए पाए। उन्होंने दिनांक १५.४.११ को २०६ पृष्ठों की एक याचिका (Petition) उपलब्ध प्रमाणों के साथ प्रधान मंत्री के समक्ष दायर की है जिसके द्वारा उन्होंने सोनिया जी के खिलाफ़ मुकदमा चलाने की गुजारिश की है। उन्होंने सन १९७२ के बाद सोनिया जी द्वारा अवैध धन कमाने और भ्रष्टाचार के विवरण मज़बूत साक्ष्यों के साथ दिए हैं। स्विस पत्रिका Schweizer Illustriete (अंक ११.११.९१) का संदर्भ देते हुए यह रहस्योद्‌घाटन किया है कि उस समय यूनियन बैंक आफ़ स्विट्‌ज़रलैंड (UBS) के राजीव गांधी के खाते में २.२ बिलियन डालर जमा थे और सोनिया जी के खाते में १३००० करोड़ रुपए। प्रधान मंत्री कार्यालय से उनकी याचिका का कोई उत्तर प्राप्त नहीं हुआ है, होगा भी नहीं। हमारे ईमानदार प्रधान मंत्री सब कर सकते हैं लेकिन सोनिया जी की नाराजगी नहीं मोल ले सकते। कुर्सी और अस्तित्व का सवाल जो है।

एक वर्ष पूर्व तक सुब्रह्मण्यम स्वामी को गंभीरता से नहीं लेने वाले उनके आलोचक भी अब उनकी बातों में गहराई तलाश रहे हैं। २-जी मामले में डा, स्वामी ने जिसपर भी ऊंगली उठाई है, उस पर घोटाला साबित हुआ है। राजा, मारन, चिदम्बरम की पोल तो खुल गई है, अब सोनिया जी की बारी है।

धुन के पक्के डा. स्वामी ने असंभव से दीखने वाले अनेक कार्य अकेले किए हैं जिसे कई संगठन मिलकर भी नहीं कर सकते थे। लोकनायक जय प्रकाश नारायण की संपूर्ण क्रान्ति से प्रेरणा प्राप्त बनी जनता पार्टी को जब उसके सारे घटक दलों ने छोड़ दिया, सुब्रह्मण्यम स्वामी ने अकेले उसका झण्डा पकड़े रखा। वे आज भी संपूर्ण क्रान्ति के लिए प्रतिबद्ध जनता पार्टी के राष्ट्रीय अध्यक्ष हैं। पूर्व प्रधान मंत्री अटल बिहारी वाजपेयी के आह्वान पर वे हार्वार्ड युनिवर्सिटी, अमेरिका में प्रोफ़ेसर की नौकरी छोड़कर दिल्ली आए और तात्कालीन जनसंघ को सुस्पष्ट स्वदेशी आर्थिक नीति दी। इन्दिरा गांधी की तानाशाही और आपात्काल का उन्होंने प्रखर विरोध किया। सरकार ने उन्हें गिरफ़्तार करने की बहुत कोशिश की लेकिन उन्हें गिरफ़्तार नहीं किया जा सका। चमत्कारिक रूप से उन्होंने सरकारी गुप्तचर एजेन्सियों को छकाते हुए इमरजेन्सी के दौरान एक दिन संसद की कार्यवाही में भाग भी लिया। बाहर निकलने पर उनको गिरफ़्तार करने की मुकम्मिल तैयारी थी लेकिन पता नहीं वे किस रास्ते से बाहर निकले कि पुलिस हाथ मलती रह गई; वे गिरफ़्तार नहीं किए जा सके। इमरजेन्सी की समाप्ति तक भूमिगत रहकर उन्होंने देशव्यापी आन्दोलन चलाया था। १९९०-९१ में चन्द्रशेखर की सरकार में केन्द्रीय वाणिज्य एवं विधि मंत्री की हैसियत से राष्ट्र के लिए आर्थिक सुधारों का पहला ब्लू प्रिन्ट डा. स्वामी ने ही तैयार किया था जिसे पूर्व प्रधान मंत्री नरसिंहा राव ने भी अनुमोदित किया। नरसिंहा राव उनकी प्रतिभा से इतने प्रभावित थे कि उन्होंने दलगत राजनीति से उपर उठकर उन्हें लेबर स्टैन्डरड्स और इन्टरनेशनल ट्रेड कारपोरेशन का अध्यक्ष बनाया। नरसिंहा राव, मनमोहन सिंह और सुब्रह्मण्यम स्वामी की तिकड़ी ने ही भारत में आर्थिक सुधारों की नींव डाली। इसमें सर्वाधिक उल्लेखनीय भूमिका डा. स्वामी की ही थी। प्रधान मंत्री मनमोहन सिंह ने कुछ ही महीने पूर्व इस तथ्य को स्वीकार किया है।

डा. सुब्रह्मण्यम स्वामी देश की विदेश नीति, आन्तरिक सुरक्षा, आतंकवाद, आर्थिक नीति, भ्रष्टाचार और व्यवस्था परिवर्तन पर स्पष्ट राय और विचार रखते हैं। वे चीन के साथ भारत के अच्छे संबन्धों के सदा से पक्षपाती रहे हैं। इसके लिए उन्होंने चीनी भाषा सीखी। आज भी इसके लिए वे कार्यरत हैं। सन १९८१ में अपनी चीन यात्रा के दौरान उन्होंने चीन के राष्ट्राध्यक्ष डेंग ज़ियाओपिंग से भेंट की और दोनों देशों के नागरिकों के मध्य विश्वास बहाली के लिए तिब्बत स्थित कैलाश-मानसरोवर तीर्थ को भारतीयों के लिए खोलने का आग्रह किया। डा. स्वामी के तर्कों और बातचीत से प्रभावित हो डेंग ज़ियाओपिंग ने फौरन सहमति दी और तत्संबन्धी आदेश जारी किए। इस तरह हिन्दू तीर्थयात्रियों के लिए वर्षों से बन्द पड़ी कैलाश-मानसरोवर कि यात्रा का दुर्लभ स्वप्न पूरा हो सका। डा. स्वामी ने तीर्थयात्रियों के पहले जत्थे का नेतृत्व भी किया और १९८१ में ही कैलाश-मानसरोवर की यात्रा भी की।

भारत और श्रीलंका के बीच समुद्र से होते हुए सामुद्रिक जल परिवहन के लिए भारत सरकार ने सेतु समुद्रम शिपिंग चैनेल परियोजना को मंजूरी दे दी। इस परियोजना के पूरा होने पर हजारों वर्ष पुराने श्रीराम सेतु का नष्ट हो जाना निश्चित था। कई हिन्दू संगठनों ने इस परियोजना का विरोध किया लेकिन हमारी तथाकथित धर्म निरपेक्ष सरकार को हिन्दुओं की धार्मिक भावनाओं की परवाह ही कब रहती है, सो परियोजना पर काम आरंभ हो गया। डा. स्वामी ने सन २००९ में इस परियोजना को रोकने के लिए सीधे प्रधान मंत्री को पत्र लिखा। हमेशा की तरह प्रधान मंत्री कार्यालय से कोई उत्तर नहीं आया। कभी हार न मानने वाले स्वामी ने सुप्रीम कोर्ट में गुहार लगाई। वहां से उन्हें स्टे मिला और इस तरह श्रीराम सेतु, जिसके अस्तित्व की पुष्टि नासा ने भी की थी, नष्ट होने से बच गया। अदालतों में अपने मामलों की पैरवी के लिए डा. स्वामी कोई वकील नहीं रखते। वे स्वयं बहस करते हैं जबकि उनकी पत्नी सुप्रीम कोर्ट की नामी वकील हैं।

अपनी बेबाकी और साफ़गोई के लिए प्रसिद्ध डा. स्वामी के विचार कभी अस्पष्ट नहीं रहे। कश्मीर के लिए बनी धारा ३७० की समाप्ति के लिए वे कल भी प्रतिबद्ध थे, आज भी हैं। श्रीलंका के आतंकवादी संगठन लिट्टे के वे मुखर विरोधी रहे हैं। वे महात्मा गांधी की तरह किसी भी तरह के धर्म परिवर्तन के धुर विरोधी हैं। एक जुझारू राष्ट्रवादी होने के नाते वे इस बात के पक्षधर हैं कि बांगला देश से आए करोड़ों अवैध नागरिकों को बसाने के लिए बांगला देश का कुछ हिस्सा भारत से संबद्ध कर लिया जाय। इस समस्या का यही समाधान है। भारत में इस्लामी आतंकवाद के प्रखर विरोधी डा. स्वामी के पास इस समस्या के समाधान के लिए ठोस समाधान है। उन्हें कुछ लोग घोर हिन्दूवादी और हिन्दू तालिबान का नेता कहते हैं। उनपर कई बार अराष्ट्रीय तत्वों द्वारा जानलेवा हमले भी हो चुके हैं लेकिन इन सबसे अप्रभावित डा, सुब्रह्मण्यम स्वामी अपने सिद्धान्तों और आदर्शों पर अडिग रहते हुए राष्ट्र कि सेवा में अहर्निश लगे हैं। उन्हें सर्वधर्म समभाव में अटूट श्रद्धा और विश्वास है। उनका अपना परिवार इसका सबसे बड़ा और प्रत्यक्ष प्रमाण है। उनकी पत्नी डा. रुखसाना स्वामी पारसी हैं। उनकी दो बेटियां हैं – गीतांजली स्वामी और सुहासिनी हैदर – एक दामाद मुस्लिम है। उनका ब्रदर इन ला यहूदी है और सिस्टर इन ला ईसाई।

भारत से भ्रष्टाचार के समूल उन्मूलन के लिए पूर्ण रूप से प्रतिबद्ध डा. सुब्रह्मण्यम स्वामी के भगीरथ प्रयास के कारण ही भारत के इतिहास के सबसे बड़े घोटाले २-जी स्पेक्ट्रम स्कैम का पर्दाफ़ाश हुआ। अन्ना हजारे और बाबा रामदेव के आन्दोलन की पृष्ठभूमि डा. स्वामी ने ही तैयार की। भ्रष्टाचारमुक्त भारत के निर्माण के लिए डा. सुब्रह्मण्यम स्वामी के योगदान को कभी विस्मृत नहीं किया जा सकता। भारत के सभी राजनीतिक संगठन एकसाथ मिलकर भी इस संघर्षशील योद्धा का मुकाबला नहीं कर सकते।

Nobel-prize winning author VS Naipaul once described it as the place where “civilisation ends”.

But all is not lost, perhaps. We discover five areas where Bihar might consider itself to be ahead of other Indian states.

WOMEN POWER

Bihar is the only state in India to have 50% of places in local municipal bodies reserved for women.

Babita Devi
Babita Devi says she feels empowered (Pics: Prashant Ravi)
Babita Devi, a thirty-something mother of two children, is one of the beneficiaries of this positive discrimination in a male-dominated society where women have traditionally lived and worked on the margins.

The wife of a small farmer, Mrs Devi defeated 19 contestants to win the civic election in her area and become a municipal representative.

Now she works to keep her neighbourhood clean and improve its sanitation.

“For the first time in my life I have got respect and attention from my family and society. It feels good,” she says.

The present government in Bihar, run by the Janata Dal (United) and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), began the policy of reserving half of local municipal body seats for women.

Today half of the 262,000 elected councillors to local municipalities in the state are women.

“The 50% reservation for women in civic bodies is not only empowering women but educating them to a great extent,” says social scientist Dr Shaibal Gupta.

SPEEDY TRIALS

Fast track courts in Bihar have convicted and sentenced more criminals than courts in any other Indian state in the past 18 months.

Dev Nath Yadav, Samajwadi Party member for Fulparas constituency was sentenced life in a speedy trial
Politicians have been sentenced after speedy trials
The government launched speedy trials to rid the state of its “most lawless” taint – there is a murder every two hours, a rape and kidnapping reported every six hours and a bank robbery every day in the state, according to police records.

Between January 2006 and May 2007, a total of 11,665 criminals were convicted through speedy trials and sent to prison.

More than 2,500 were sentenced to life, and 21 others given the death penalty.

Critics of the speedy trials express concerns about the quality of evidence and justice being dispensed in such a short time in a country where court cases typically drag on for years.

The fastest judgement in Bihar was delivered by a court in 13 days flat from the date of the incident.

Politicians across party lines have also been tried through speedy trials.

“The idea is to stem Bihar’s burgeoning crime wave. It has been a great success,” additional director general of police Abhayanand says.

A local advocate, Soni Srivastva, says speedy trials make sense “if all steps from filing charges to the trial are conducted properly”.

SPECIAL COPS

Bihar is the only state in India where retired soldiers are being hired as policemen to stem the crime wave.

A retired soldier turned policeman in Bihar
There are 5,000 ex-soldiers in the special force
They mostly comprise the “special auxiliary police” force – about 5,000 retired soldiers were hired last year and sent to help police various districts.

Since then this special force has earned plaudits for controlling crime and taking on Maoist rebels.

The force has earned praise from Prime Minister Manmohan Singh who has asked other states to emulate the model.

“Its been hugely successful in checking crime. The forces are called in whenever there are law and order problems,” says Mr Abhyanand.

The government is planning to hire another 11,500 ex-soldiers soon to bolster the force. On average about 100 of these soldiers-turned-policemen have been deployed in each district.

CASH COW

Bihar has a long and tortuous history of chronically unprofitable state-owned companies and their unpaid employees taking their lives.

Sudha diary cooperative
Business is booming for the milk co-operative
But Sudha, a dairy co-operative, is a shining exception and one of the most successful exercises of its kind in India.

Launched in 1993, the co-operative’s revenues from a range of milk and milk products has risen from $73.5m in 2001-2002 to $136m today. The co-operative has 6,000 outlets covering 84 towns in the state.

More than 260,000 milk farmers in the state are members of the co-operative, and a private bank has even launched a pension scheme for them.

Now Sudha has begun “exporting” milk to other Indian states like Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Jharkhand and Delhi.

“Regular payments to milk farmers and viable economic relationship with them has led to Sudha’s grand success,” says Atish Chandra, chief of the co-operative.

MODEL TAXES

Did you know that a simplified tax system conceived and launched in Bihar is now being emulated by Sri Lanka and various African countries and has been lauded by the United Nations?

A tax collection drive in Patna
Tax methods have been made simpler
Introduced by the municipality of Patna, the state capital, in 1993, the tax system, locally known as the “Patna model of taxation” simplifies property tax rates on the basis of the local area and use of property.

“It is very methodical,” municipal commissioner Rana Awadhesh says.

“Using this model, the state can collect a large amount of tax money with less effort from officials and tax payers.”

Property is classified according to its location, construction, use (residential or commercial), and rates fixed accordingly.

States like Karnataka, Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Tamil Nadu and Madhya Pradesh have adopted the same property tax model.

The UN was so impressed by the taxation model that it gave a $30,000 award to Bihar for introducing this method.

Copenhagen has been named the world’s best city to live in by the lifestyle magazine Monocle, the greenest city in Europe by Siemens and the city with the happiest people by Der Spiegel.

The Cycle Secretariat of Copenhagen’s Technical and Environmental Administration contributes towards making Copenhagen one of the world’s premier bike cities. In the City of Copenhagen, Andreas Røhl is known as the cycle boss. He is head of the Cycle Secretariat – a part of Copenhagen’s governmental Traffic Department. The secretariat is testament to the fact that the City’s cycle infrastructure has a high priority. The main focus of the secretariat is on creating secure and safe roads and initiating commuter routes to make it more attractive for people in the suburbs to get out of their cars and go by bike instead.

There are many good reasons for giving bikes high priority at the expense of other forms of transportation in Copenhagen. ”The bike is a flexible and fast form of transportation. Good conditions for cyclists simply make it easier for Copenhageners to go from A to B. The bike is an integral part of a sustainable city because it’s healthy for the cyclist and for all of us living in the city,” says Andreas Røhl.

The bike does not only provide flexibility for the individual cyclist, better availability and a safer city. Continuous investment in biking is also healthy for the economy. ”Bikes actually bring in a lot of money to the local and central government – a fact, which is often ignored. In a city like Copenhagen, bikes are the most economically efficient form of transportation. The city saves a lot of money because so many use the bike instead of a car or public transportation”.

FACTS about biking in Copenhagen

• Every day, people in Copenhagen ride a total of 1.2 million kilometres on their bicycles. That’s an impressive 30 times around the world by bicycle each and every day – and it includes the 37% of commuters who choose to ride a bike to work or school in the city.

• On the streets with the heaviest bicycle traffic there are more than 35,000 cyclists a day

• 37% of commuters going to work or school in Copenhagen go by bicycle – (for people both living and working in Copenhagen the number is 55%)

• 80% of the Copenhageners who cycle during the summer also cycle during the winter

• A majority of Copenhageners say they use bicycles because it is easy and fast

The City of Cyclists

• Riding a bicycle in Copenhagen is safe. The infrastructure is designed to accommodate cyclists, and other road users are more than used to cyclists

• Copenhagen has 350 kilometres of cycle tracks segregated from road level, lots of kilometres of cycle lanes and more than 40 kilometres of green cycle routes cutting through the city.

• Along main traffic arteries the traffic lights are timed and linked in cyclists’ favour during rush hours (‘Green Waves’ for cyclists)

• Every taxi in Copenhagen has a rack for two bicycles.

Source - http://www.ambnewdelhi.um.dk/en/servicemenu/News