<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1618401887945" alt="South Korea, a front runner for Quad+?" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin participated in another kind of bilateral “two-plus-two” (foreign and defence ministerial) meetings in Japan and South Korea in March.
The visits marked the “first Cabinet-level, in-person, overseas travel of the Biden-Harris administration,” which came in power early this year. Displaying the priorities of US towards the Asia-pacific region, this was also the first meeting with US’ Asian allies.
The visit was subsequently followed by the first-ever Quad summit, virtually between US and its <a href="https://policharcha.com/article/internationalrelations/a08b9462-ab09-4d42-be8f-040db0beb017/importance-of-indopacific-in-the-new-multipolar-world-order?fbclid=IwAR0gP06Dvw_-VHrQ7yOZra81nk2k2N28musvpOPxYSjOgrcP4PO2H9sO2AM" target="_blank">Indo-pacific</a> partners i.e. India, Japan, and Australia, signifying the crucial nature of visits to South Korea and Japan.

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1618401964955" alt="South Korea, a front runner for Quad+?" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

Statement by Seoul said, “the ROK-US Alliance serves as the linchpin of peace, security and prosperity on the Korean Peninsula and the <a href="https://policharcha.com/article/internationalrelations/a08b9462-ab09-4d42-be8f-040db0beb017/importance-of-indopacific-in-the-new-multipolar-world-order?fbclid=IwAR0gP06Dvw_-VHrQ7yOZra81nk2k2N28musvpOPxYSjOgrcP4PO2H9sO2AM" target="_blank">Indo-Pacific region</a>,” while statement from Tokyo read, “the US-Japan Alliance remains the cornerstone of peace, security, and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region.”
The US traditionally described its alliance with Seoul as the linchpin of peace and prosperity only in Northeast Asia and the Korean Peninsula.
Now the noticeable difference in the relations between Seoul and Washington is a change of theatre as South Korea seems to have accepted the reality that the US prioritising the Indo-pacific region in its foreign policy. Seoul knows that US’ position is unlikely to change due to the arrival of a bigger threat than North Korea in the region, People’s Republic of China.
Japan and the United States are committed to promote a free and open Indo-pacific and rules-based International order, and Korea will provide more weight to its ‘New Southern Policy’ focused on India and Southeast Asia to co-operate with the US and allies. China does not seem to be a threat to Korea’s interest, at least not at the level where Seoul would redirect its resources to contain Beijing, like Quad.
<ins>Why is South Korea reluctant to join the Quad?</ins>
The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue resurrected after a fallout among countries a decade ago due to the China’s growing power in the region, but South Korea is not a party to Quad despite being a thriving democracy, promoter of free market, and most importantly, a treaty ally with the US in the Indo-pacific region.

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1618402046676" alt="South Korea, a front runner for Quad+?" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

Coronavirus pandemic, further, strengthened the idea of Quad to even convert it into alliance on the lines of NATO. The South Korean President Moon in the meeting with President Trump in 2017 said that, “Japan initiated the free and open Indo-Pacific idea, and it does not seem right for South Korea to join in the plan.”
The left-leaning Moon Jae-In government came to power after former President Park’s impeachment which resurfaced the colonial period issue in the domestic politics, and resultantly worsening the bilateral ties between the Japan and South Korea, two neighbours in East Asia Sea.
<ins>South Korea and Japan</ins>
In October 2018, the Supreme Court of South Korea affirmed the right of a group of Korean citizens to sue three Japanese companies for damages stemming from forced labour subjected upon Korean nationals in mining factories during the 1910–45 Japanese occupation to which Japan responded that the issue was settled back in the 1965 Japan-Korea normalisation treaty.
According to the said treaty, Tokyo agreed to pay and provide loans as compensation. The Supreme court ruling reversed course by asserting that the 1965 treaty was a political agreement between governments and did not preclude the rights of individuals to sue the companies for damages.
The ruling did not bode well with Japan, and a spillover effect was seen in other areas that created geopolitical tensions between the nations. In response, Japan removed South Korea from its “white list” in 2019 that restricted Seoul to import sensitive Japanese goods, including chemicals used for making key products such as flat-screen televisions and semiconductors.
South Korea retaliated by taking Japan off its “white list” for fast-track trade status, marking the beginning of the trade spat between both the countries. In that same year, South Korea threatened to walk out from the General Security of Military Intelligence Agreement (GSOMIA), a pact signed between Tokyo, Seoul, and Washington for the effective sharing of intelligence related to North Korean ballistic missile developments.
<ins>South Korea and United States</ins>
The Trump administration rejuvenated Quad to confront and contain China. US masqueraded behind the concepts of free and open pacific and rules-based order to make the Quad legitimate and acceptable to countries.
To some extent, principles proposed by US to align with nations can be true, but deep-down the strategic reason for Quad 2.0 is China.
US and its allies are looking for measures to curb the expansionist China policies – be it in Himalayas (Doklam confrontation with India), Senkaku Islands (dispute with Japan), political meddling in Australia, an existential threat to Taiwan due to China’s dominance in South China Sea, Beijing’s malicious activities in the region infringing sovereignty of neighbouring nations, and obviously the trade war with the United States.
These issues, directly or indirectly, threatened the national interest of the US, and in all cases, China was on the on the opposite side of spectrum making it an adversary. Seoul, though, does not see it that way as its foreign policy do not allow it to confront China or participate in the grouping formed in the wake of rise of expansionist China. Seoul was concerned that Quad could grow as anti-China coalition which would make the Quad as a part of zero-sum game, and from the perspective of Seoul, economic and security interests of South Korea would come at stake if it joined the Quad.
South Korea has already witnessed the wrath of China in economic sphere when it agreed to install a US THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defence) anti-missile battery in July 2016 after the speculations that North Korea had tested the ballistic missile with Nuclear warheads creating a survival threat to the South Korea.
Beijing went ballistic after this move of South Korea just few miles off its coast, stating that system’s radars could snoop on its own defences and speculated that system was installed to intimidate China. A barrage of verbal broadsides was unleashed, but with China now being South Korea’s leading trade partner, a more damaging weapon was unsheathed – economic retaliation, though under-reported at present, this dynamic continues to impact Korean business to this day.
Trump came to power on the promises that it would put American interests first and foremost, especially, the economic interest. The ‘America first’ campaign rhetoric took shape as soon as he entered into White House. On the first day in office, Trump announced that US would no longer remain participant to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and then, President Trump’s absence from the ASEAN summit in November of 2018 sent strong doubts related to US’ commitment to the region.
Similarly, Trump’s threats on imposing tariffs on Japanese automobiles were particularly unsettling for Japan which was perceived negatively among Korean businesses as they fear that US could also direct the guns of protectionist policies towards Seoul which could hurt its economy that was already facing China’s wrath.&nbsp;
There were initial tensions raised due to the then presidential candidate Donald Trump’s rhetoric on making sure allies pay their share of the burden and talks on allowing South Korea and Japan to develop their own nuclear weapons. In addition to the ‘make them pay’ rhetoric, the withdrawal of troops in Syria adds to the uncertainty in US commitment to its allies.
South Korea felt that US could abandon it in the need of an hour. The USA had also halted the annual military exercise it holds with South Korea, then resuming the drill in a modified and smaller-scale in April 2019. South Korea had serious commitment issues with the US during Trump-era and amidst all these, joining Quad Plus could have been prove last nail in the coffin.
Trump administration made enormous efforts to pressurise South Korea to take concrete steps with regard to China. Steps which would align with US interests; notably, ban on Huawei’s 5G technology to establish in South Korea. The security alliance between Seoul and Washington spilled over to economic sphere in trump period beginning the tiresome cycle of pressure and resistance which discorded the crucial alliance for US in Asia-pacific region.
The Moon government, representing the left-liberal ideology, believed that US was compelling Korean Government to work in the favour of the former’s national interests, and not on the mutual interests.
US pressured Seoul to pursue policies based on America-first approach which was infringement on the national sovereignty and direct threat to the autonomy of Seoul in taking decisions in international relations. The widening fissure in the US-South Korea alliance throughout the Trump era serves as a valuable lesson to the Biden administration that pressuring Seoul is counterproductive.
<ins>Shift from Trump-Era to Biden-Era – Bid for more stability</ins>

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1618402317140" alt="South Korea, a front runner for Quad+?" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>


The Joe Biden administration do not see the Quad as grouping to contain China in classical terms, but as a coalition of like-minded countries supporting a market economy across nations, and rules-based Indo-Pacific.
This was reiterated by the fact that ‘China’ was not even mentioned once in the joint statement after the first-ever Quad summit in March 2021. In some scenario, if Quad expanded, that would be a grouping based on shared values. Therefore, the common ground would not be explicitly to “confront China”, but to “establish institutional rules-based order.”
The re-joining to WHO on the first day in office, and serious commitment towards climate change indicate that China would be priority for Biden administration, and even for Quad, but not before the aforementioned issues – a proposition that Seoul can support.
In fact, last year South Korea did not hesitate to join ad hoc Quad+ meetings focusing on sharing knowledge about the COVID-19 pandemic. These meetings also involved New Zealand and Vietnam, two other countries usually discussed as potential Quad+ members, along with Indonesia.
In other words, past experience suggests that the Quad+ would focus on cooperation among its members and involve several countries with a more nuanced approach towards China. If the Biden administration builds on this template, this would work well for South Korea.
South Korea have bitter relationship with Japan that could be resolved if Biden administration would increase its commitment with both the countries, militarily and economically. This would impede the fear of abandonment arise during Trump administration and consequently, will make South Korea less dependent on China. In the contentious military-security realm, South Korea would likely play it very safe, but room for co-operation is not totally absent.
-------------------------
Follow us on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/PoliCharcha" target="_blank">Facebook</a> and <a href="https://www.instagram.com/policharcha" target="_blank">Instagram</a>, and subscribe to our <a href="http://t.me/policharcha" target="_self">Telegram channel</a>.

South Korea, a front runner for Quad+?

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1615369762269" alt="Situation worsens in Yemen with mounting Proxy Wars in Middle East" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

In the latest developments, which seem like another episode of counterattacks happening since 2015 between the Houthi rebels and Saudi-led military coalition in the Yemen Civil War, Houthis have targeted the Saudi’s capital Riyadh with ballistic missiles and drones, as confirmed by Saudi state television.
Houthi Rebels’ spokesperson threatened that their operations will continue and become more hostile against enemy forces until external powers cease the siege on Yemen. Houthi rebels escalated the attacks on Saudi Kingdom implementing their strategy to capture the Saudi-backed Yemeni government’s last bastion, Marib, in the northern Yemen, where rebel positions were pounded by defensive forces using air strikes sponsored by Kingdom.
The attack was thwarted by Saudi as it destroyed a bomb-laden drone launched towards border city Khamis Mushait in south-west Saudi. The latest series of events have made chances of de-escalation almost negligible, and to make matters worse, have led Saudi-led military coalition to be more aggressive. This would just increase the pile of bodies on ground.
Based in Sa’dah (city in North-West Yemen), Ansar Allah, which is also known as the Houthi Movement, has battled for power with the internationally recognised Republic of Yemen Government (ROYG).
ROYG has been aided militarily by Saudi Arabia, and, until its 2019 troop withdrawal, the United Arab Emirates. As of late 2020, the epicentre of fighting has been around the Yemen’s northern governorate and the city of Marib, which is one of the last Yemeni areas under the control of the ROYG. Marib also contains Yemen’s modest oil and gas reserves.
The Houthis have been pressing ROYG forces along three fronts, but Saudi airstrikes have somewhat slowed Houthi advances. Tribal forces aligned with the ROYG also have stymied the Houthis from seizing Marib city. Several of these local tribes have strong ties with Saudi Arabia, and have co-ordinated with Saudi forces to repel the Houthi offensive. The Houthis have suffered several notable casualties, including one Hezbollah-trained Houthi commander, who was a close confidant of Houthi leader Abdul Malek al Houthi.
<ins>Yemen War - How did it start and who are the Houthis?</ins>

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1615369881912" alt="Situation worsens in Yemen with mounting Proxy Wars in Middle East" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

Rise of pro-democracy movements, also referred to as Arab Spring, in 2011 witnessed the toppling of power in several West Asian and North African countries – a region also called Middle East by western scholars.
One such country was Yemen where President Ali Abdullah Saleh was dethroned after ruling unified Yemen for over two decades. President Saleh’s resignation destabilised the de facto balance in the country which further created local centres of power by various internal militant groups. Most of these groups were formed by tribal population which took up arms to maintain their authority and autonomy. This led to multiple armed conflicts that torn the country apart and eroded central governance in Yemen.
The Houthi rebellion, consisted of majorly Shiite rebels, raised up against Sunni government, demanding lower fuel prices, and a change in regime. Dismayed by seeing the demands not meeting, the Houthis allied with parts of the Yemeni military and stormed the capital, Sana’a. They took control of the capital, forcing the internationally recognised government into exile which further started the Yemen’s civil war in 2014.
In 2015, after the negotiations between Houthis and government failed, rebels seized the presidential palace leading President Abd Rabbu Mansour Hadi to resign. This was followed by a military campaign launched by Saudi Arabia with other gulf states to eliminate the Houthis forces using air strikes and economic isolation using US’ logistical and intelligence assistance in order to restore the government.
A UN brokered peace deal talks stalled in the summer of ’16 between Houthis and Yemeni government. Former president Saleh, ousted in 2011, joined hands with Houthis to form a “political council” to govern Sana’a and much of northern Yemen against a common enemy. The co-operation, however, could not even last longer than a year.&nbsp;
Saleh broke with the Houthis, and announced to fight against them along with his followers, mostly the tribal clans around Sana’a, but Saleh’s forces got defeated in mere two days. Death of Saleh eliminated the main political competitor of Houthis in the north Yemen which gave more legitimacy to the rebel forces to rule and fight against Yemeni government.
<ins>Iran and US proxy war</ins>
The dissolution of territorial integrity of Yemen and subsequent collapse of state institutions created the geo-political implications which paved the way for international actors to enter into the war through supporting different factions fighting in the Yemen.
The situation alarmed the United States and other actors in the international community which feared that state failure may empower transnational terrorist groups active in the region and they will try to destabilise the vital international shipping lanes near Bab-el-Mandeb strait. The Bab-el-Mandeb strait, after Straits of Hormuz and Malacca, is one of the world’s busiest chokepoints in terms of volume of crude oil and petroleum liquids transported through each day.
The US was more concerned about the role Iran will play to increase its regional power by supporting Houthis and destabilise the region as the collapsed state would provide an opportunity to Iran to threaten Saudi Arabia’s borders, which is a strategic ally of the US in the Middle East.&nbsp;
The Houthi movement is a predominantly Zaydi Shia revivalist political and insurgent movement, whose history goes back to 740 CE when Zaydis revolted against Caliphate. Zaydis believed that the Caliphate is corrupt, and to this day, they hold that it is their religious duty to rebel against unjust rulers.&nbsp;
Zaydism is an offshoot of Shia Islam which gives the historical and cultural reason to Iran – the de facto leader of Shiite Islam of the world – to support the Houthis in conflict, apart from taking geo-strategic advantages.
The Houthis have fought six wars in northern Yemen against their Sunni-dominated central government after 2004 under the leadership of Houthi family which revived the Houthi movement by forming the Yemeni governorate of Sa’dah (in the mountainous district of Marran). They also became politically active by propagating the anti-government agenda while successfully mobilising the aggrieved population in a war-torn and neglected north.
The Houthi uprising originally began to end the Saudi-backed efforts to marginalise Zyadi communities and beliefs, but its scope and ambition expanded in the wake of Arab Spring. Subsequently, the movement turned into an anti-establishment one, and eventually wanted to overthrow the Saleh regime.
On the other side, apart from re-establishing the friendly regime in Yemen, Saudi Arabia has another reason to enter into the War.
During the Cold War, Saudi Arabia’s leaders supported northern Yemeni Zaydis as a bulwark against nationalist and leftist rivals, and engaged in proxy war against Egypt-backed Yemeni nationalists during the 1960s.
The revolutionary, anti-Saudi ideology of the Houthi movement, which emerged in the 1990s after the unification in 1990, presented new challenges. The rebellion even fought the civil war in 1994, and came under the rule of strongman Saleh who once described governing his nation’s myriad of tribal groups, militant groups, and alliances as “dancing on the heads of snakes.”
In 2009, Saudi Arabia launched a three-month air and ground campaign in support of the Yemeni government’s Operation Scorched Earth which ended with Saudi Arabia agreeing to the cease-fire with Houthis in 2010 after losing the lives of 133 soldiers.
Saudi Arabia believes that Houthis are the frontline warriors, who are not fighting for their own cause only, but in a broader context, embody what Iran seeks to achieve across the Arab world i.e. the cultivation of armed non-state, non-Sunni actors to pressurise the Iran’s adversaries politically and militarily like Hezbollah in Lebanon to counter Israeli interests.

Also read: <a href="https://policharcha.com/article/internationalrelations/cfc0ae61-5817-41fd-a0b4-c5106b1cff2d/bidens-chance-to-stabilise-usiran-relations-post-trumpera" target="_blank">Biden’s chance to stabilise US-Iran relations post Trump-Era</a>&nbsp;

Iran is supporting the Zyadi-Shia Muslim Houthis by providing critical expertise and equipment to assist the Houthi missile program that targets the Saudi cities, military bases, and oil facilities. Houthis fired cruise missiles into Saudi territory and damaged a Saudi Aramco oil distribution station in Jeddah in November 2019, a major port located on Saudi Arabia’s western coast. Without Iran’s assistance, it was highly unlikely for Houthis to fight the war with Saudi-led military coalition, which was armed with highly advanced US arms technology.
Apart from motivations Iran had, it is the only internationally recognised nation-state to recognise the Houthi government to exert its influence in Sana’a.

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1615370070248" alt="Situation worsens in Yemen with mounting Proxy Wars in Middle East" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

There is another conflict going inside Yemen War far from North and Houthis which directly involves the US strategic interest. The stronghold of non-state actor called Al-Qaeda in certain areas of Arabian Peninsula concerns Washington. Al-Qaeda is considered by the US to be the most dangerous militant franchise which attacked USS Cole off Yemen’s port city of Aden, killing 17 American sailors. This is the same terrorist organisation that carried out 9/11 attacks, the biggest on American soil.
From George Bush to Trump, every US President was directly or indirectly involved in conflicts on the land of Yemen. US soldiers were present during Saleh’s regime in Yemen, involving directly. Washington sold bombs and fighter jets to Saudi Arabia that Kingdom used against Houthi insurgency to aid the Yemeni-governmental forces, involving indirectly.
Obama administration in 2015 offered USS targeting assistance to Riyadh’s command and control that was supposed to minimise the civilian casualties, but it did not and eventually, Obama rolled back the program, but Trump resumed the assistance to Saudi in war efforts by selling weapons worth of billions of dollars.
<ins>The Collapsed State</ins>
Beyond geo-strategic concerns, the collapse of Yemeni institutions during wartime has exacerbated poor living conditions in the most impoverished Arab country, leading to what is now considered the “world’s worst humanitarian crisis.”
<ins>Look at some figures which will do justice with above statement.</ins>
UN estimated that war has killed 1,30,000 people since it began, including 15,000 civilians. 22 million Yemenis are in dire need of humanitarian assistance, eight million are at the risk of famine, and a cholera outbreak has affected over a million people.
Innumerable children are suffering from malnutrition, and every faction involved in the conflict have violated human rights and international humanitarian law. Infrastructure is the first casualty in the war as the Saudi-led coalition’s continuous air strikes have heavily damaged Yemen’s infrastructure, including a crucial seaport, and important bridges as well as hospitals, sewage facilities, and civilian factories.
Crucial services on which population have depended for their subsistence are gone, destruction is the only thing one can see standing on the ground which has undermined the country’s already weak economy. Repeated closure of airports and crucial sea ports by different parties, whoever holds the control, have made it harder for humanitarian organisation to bring in and distribute aid, and fly wounded Yemenis for treatment.
Cholera, a bacterial infection spread by water contaminated with feces, got the fertile environment to turn lives of Yemenis miserable. First world countries do not acknowledge these diseases as it is not life-threatening disease for them, but the third world, especially the war-torn countries, are the hub of such type of diseases which are killing more people than war itself. The world community, international institutions, and the so-called super powers are watching silently while Yemen is burning to ashes.&nbsp;
Again, the United Nations has called the situation the world’s largest humanitarian crisis for a reason. With more than 10 million people who require immediate assistance, the situation can become even worse, if necessary steps are not taken by the involved parties.&nbsp;
<ins>Trump-Era actions led to prolonged War</ins>
In the last hours, Trump State Department designated the Houthis, backed by Iran, as Foreign Terrorist Organisation (FTO). This move was more of a political act, than a technical one, to create a roadblock for coming administration to reverse the decision as removing the designation is a very difficult political and bureaucratic process.
The designation of FTO comes with the certain implications. Branding the Houthis as terrorists would be an attempt to block the Biden administration and international community to conduct dialogue of any kind with them. The reality is the Houthis control most of northern Yemen, so it is better to deal directly with them than to live in denial.
Having more outside contact with the rebels will help alternative voices to influence them. It will also hamper the efforts of humanitarian relief organisations to get food and medicine to Yemeni civilians living in the territory that the rebels’ control.
<ins>Conclusion</ins>
Positive side is Trump-era has gone and new administration in the White House has decided to end the US support for Kingdom’s war in Yemen. This move conveys that Trump’s open support to Riyadh was a matter of the past, and Biden administration is here to end the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, but it will not be easy road to walk.
President Biden’s move to end support to Saudi is to pressurise Riyadh to back out its military coalition forces from Yemen, just like in the summer of 2019, UAE unilaterally pulled out its ground forces facing a perceived threat from Iran, and receiving international criticism of its conduct in Yemen.
However, later Biden has made a point to say the US would “continue to support and help Saudi Arabia defend its sovereignty and its territorial integrity and its people” which indicates that current Biden administration is no mood to abandon its historical ally in the Middle East.&nbsp;
The only way to end this “lose-lose” battle, to end the famine staring on Yemen, to end the misery of millions of people stuck in this endless conflict, and to end this permanent war is that Saudi-led military coalition should end the blockade and initiate talks with Yemen’s multiple rebel factions.

Situation worsens in Yemen with mounting Proxy Wars in Middle East

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1614953193426" alt="History of Myanmar: Transformation from Military rule to Disciplined Democracy." style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

The military once again hold the reins in Myanmar. Citing constitutional provisions that give the military control in national emergencies, on February 1, army officers had detained government leaders, including state counsellor and popular national leader Aung San Suu Kyi. An announcement on military television said the move was in response to “fraud” during last year’s general election. A spokesman said power has been handed to the army’s commander-in-chief, General Min Aung Hlaing, who would hold power for one year, and after which there would be new elections.
<a href="https://policharcha.com/article/internationalrelations/3d515a59-a107-451d-8e0d-8806375eaba6/india-needs-to-be-cautious-about-china-while-dealing-with-myanmar" target="_blank">Why this event has become a geopolitical issue worth creating instability in the South Asian region? </a> Is it the debate all about military rule being ‘bad’ and democracy ‘good’? China termed the coup as ‘cabinet reshuffle’, while Biden’s statement took us back to the debate between military regimes and democracy (in American terms).
<ins>West Imposition?</ins>
President’s Biden first response in the aftermath of coup in Myanmar displays US’ historic desperation to impose, rather than peacefully propagate democracy on every nation-state present on the world map. He announced that he will sanction Myanmar’s military leaders for staging a coup in South Asian country, and said “we are going to impose strong exports controls. We are freezing US assets that benefit the Burmese government, while maintaining our support for health care, civil society groups, and other areas that benefit the people of Burma directly.”
Throughout the western world, but particularly and most obviously in the United States, political rhetoric and practice are based upon four seemingly unexceptionable propositions:
<ol>
<li>Democracy is an intrinsically good thing.</li>
<li>It has the truest democracy.</li>
<li>It is morally legitimate to impose democracy on others.</li>
<li>It can effectively do so.</li>
</ol>
What are these above mentioned propositions denote or try to convey to the world? Democracy is inherently good, but is US entitled to impose it on others? Or perhaps US thinks itself to be the truest democracy, so it has some right to dictate it to others?

Also read: <a href="https://policharcha.com/article/nation/203170c0-7305-4852-99d5-91fe035d8189/breakdown-of-preamble-of-indian-constitution-meaning-of-democracy" target="_blank">Meaning of democracy in Indian context</a>&nbsp;

United States assumes that it represents the apotheosis of democracy when it has some basic flaws in its democratic system – citizens of the United States do not directly elect their head of the State, meaning it does not have a direct mandate of the majority; resources required to run for office effectively disbar the majority from a political career as politics is a costly business; media and corporate interests, biases, propagandas control the electoral process and outcome in American politics to a very large extent. Apparently, these conclusions stand far away from any plausible notion of rule by the people and for the people.
Democracy is a polymorphous concept which may take numerous forms and in each case be equally a bona fide instance of democracy just like gardening or teaching. Gallie (1955) long ago termed democracy as “equally contested” concept, and what constitutes a true democracy is forever open to argument.
There are no prior grounds for assuming that the particular form of democracy that takes place in the United States (or anywhere else) is ‘truer than’, ‘more democratic than’, or ‘superior to’ various other forms that it has taken historically or takes today in other places.&nbsp;
Does it mean democracy is an abstract concept floating around the world since the Athenian democratic city-state in ancient times, and since the establishment of American constitution, or with the end of French revolution in modern times?
Do nation-states politically democratised just to go with the flow because western nations adopted it? Or the economically powerful, the so-called first world, give these nation-states a chance to enter into the club?
Obviously No! There is a minimal descriptive content that sets limits on what can count as democracy, but countries like US still vouch for it, and sometimes even go to war to establish this political system.
More or less ‘democracy’ means ‘government by the people or by their elected representatives, who are accountable for their actions’. This assertion is contrasted with a government led by either an individual ruler or a minority group which in either case is not answerable to the people as a whole. It is an assumption that individual leader does not or inadequately represent the whole population, violate the rights of one community for others, curtail basic human rights to remain in the power, is not regularly accountable to public, and influences the state’s institutions maliciously.
These assumptions are arrived from historical examples in reality, and not just the perception of reality, but believing that a political system of one-man rule equates to a military regime, and one such example is Myanmar, or what US still calls, Burma.
<ins>Military Regime</ins>

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1614953862669" alt="History of Myanmar: Transformation from Military rule to Disciplined Democracy." style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

Military regime, in layman terms, defined as a ‘system of government governed by the military’, is a form of authoritarian rule, but is distinguished from both democracy, and other forms of authoritarianism.
Robert Dahl’s concept of polyarchy has suggested the “procedural minimum” definition of democracy which includes four key attributes – free, fair, and competitive elections, full adult suffrage, broad protection of civil liberties (freedom of speech, press and association), and the absence of non-elected “tutelary authorities” that limit the governing power of elected officials.
The political system in which militaries wield the “tutelary powers” or “reserved domains”, but still accept the democratic game can be articulated to be a “tutelary democracy”. It is a system in which no channel exist for oppositional forces to legally contest for executive power. A closed authoritarian regime evolves where democratic institutions does not exist. A hegemonic regime pertains to a system in which formal democratic institutions exist on paper, but are nothing more than a façade, and that is the category in which military regimes falls.&nbsp;
The military regimes can be distinguished on the basis of the level of intervention. In the direct military regime, military forms the government while in the quasi-civilian regimes, military holds political hegemony with a civilian window dressing.
According to Nordlinger, the extent of power of the armed forces, and their political &amp; economic goals define the level of military intervention. He distinguishes three ideal types of military rule.
<ul>
<li>Rulers – Military dominate the regime, control large segments of political and economic aspects of society, and it “intend to bring basic changes in the distribution of power by eliminating all existing power centres”</li>
<li>Guardians – Military control the government from backstage, and informally holds the governmental powers.</li>
<li>Moderators – Military does not hold important offices leaving them to civilian politicians, but maintains veto power over certain policies.&nbsp;</li>
</ul>
The longevity of military rule in Myanmar is a function of regime’s preparedness to use lethal force against its opponents with total impunity, and regime’s assiduousness in rewarding its supporters along with its tight control over the economy to grant military and other elites some concessions against its own labyrinthine restrictions and rules on economic activity.
<ins>Myanmar and Tatmadaw</ins>
The Burmese army, established in 1942, also known as Tatmadaw preceded the existence of an independent state. Army became politicised during the freedom struggle against colonisers, becoming a liberating force. It could retrospectively assume the role of guardian of the Burmese state, and bulwark of national independence.
After the departure of Britishers in 1948, Burma was established as a democratic State according to its constitution, but Tatmadaw got deeply involved into civil politics. Even after accepting supremacy of a civilian government, army gradually expanded its political role. The outbreak of ethnic, secessionist, and communist rebellion triggered the institutional modernisation of the armed forces leading to the increased assertiveness of the Burmese military which out-paced the capacities of civilian arm of the government. The military took over the administrative functions, and acquired the significant chunk from national budget (one-third to half) to save the Burma from going through the process of Balkanization.&nbsp;
Late 50s witnessed the turbulent times for politics of Burma when factionalism increased within the ruling Anti-Fascist Peoples Freedom League (AFPFL). This subsequently led to a split in the party creating instability in the parliamentary system.
General Ne Win urged the civilian government of Prime Minister U Nu to temporarily transfer power to the armed forces which acted as a “Caretaker Government” from 1958 to 1960. This also developed praetorian ethos in the officer corps grounded in the belief that military functions is more effective than its civilian counterparts.
The military brought out some changes at the organisational, operational, and ideological level. It adopted new ideology which defined the role of military in broad national security terms as being responsible for the defence of the national objectives of establishing “peace and the rule of law”, “democracy”, and “socialist economy”. This prepared the groundwork for the “new professionalism” of the Burmese military. It expanded its business activities into the banking sector, construction industry, and fishing, and became the most powerful business organisation in the country.
The “Caretaker Government” handed back the power in February 1960 to the then Prime Minister U Nu, but this honeymoon period did not last long as General Ne Win staged the first Coup d'état in the history of Burma, bringing together high-ranking army officers, and eliminating their civilian counterparts once and for all.
The military was “compelled” to intervene to safeguard the nation from secessionist forces trying to disintegrate the country. Democracy allows dissent to freely propagate, looking for peaceful resolution through dialogue and deliberation, whereas the military rule do not allow this process called “democratic”.
U Nu’s decision to make Buddhism the state religion, calls by ethnic groups for greater autonomy, and secession from the union had laid the groundwork for the intervention of the military to save the country from disintegration.
After ’62, military prevented the emergence of any autonomous centres of influence through the means which termed as ‘un-democratic’. By the same means which shaped the perception that military juntas are malicious to the society, and cannot support the people’s will.
This disadvantage of military regimes, give countries like US the chance or perhaps an excuse to intervene in any country in the name of establishing democracy, or to impose sanctions if the country do not comply to democratic values.
General Ne Win formed a Revolutionary Council, abolished the 1947 constitutions, dissolved parliament, and banned all political parties to name a few “means”. The military regime nationalised the economy under the banner of the “Burmese way of Socialism”, and cut all ties to the outside world. It had also set up its own Leninist party called the Burmese Socialist Programme Party (BSPP), which ran the country unchallenged for over 25 years.&nbsp;
Military regimes thrive on repression; any unbiased examination of military regimes in any country can lead to this conclusion. It is more or less a consistent reality. Myanmar military regime was also no different which has remained in place with the readiness to swiftly and brutally supress dissent.
The coup that installed the military, for the first time, was no doubt relatively a bloodless affair as military cited national security danger, but in the intervening year the regime was quick to put down challenges to its rule with violence. Such suppression has existed as a routine part of everyday life, manifested in an all-pervasive surveillance apparatus.
As of April 2011, Human rights watch reported that there were over 20,000 political prisoners in Myanmar; most of them have been incarcerated and given lengthy sentences under biased legal proceedings and are frequently subjected to torture. Outside of the prisons, the people of Myanmar face limits to their freedom of movement, both domestically and internationally.
Meanwhile, the flow of information is greatly restricted. The press is subject to tight censorship, and the country's perfunctory education system is little more than a vehicle of indoctrination for the military's interpretation of Myanmar’s history. Myanmar's universities were broken up long ago, and their faculties were geographically dispersed to prevent student concentration and activism.
1988 events of widespread uprisings when many thousands of demonstrators were killed or imprisoned or fled the country after Military came hard-handily to suppress the dissent. The events revealed one of the most dangerous faces of military regimes through the episodes of state-sponsored military violence against its own dissenting citizens.
UIS’ (UNESCO Institute for Statistics) data centre suggested that Myanmar’s state spending on education was the lowest in the world in 2000 with a little more than 0.57 per cent of GDP. This showcased another characteristic of military regimes which democratic countries accuse them of.&nbsp;
The military returned to civilian rule only after it succeeded in designing a political system that safeguarded its own core interests. The political changes fell short of a genuine democratic transition, since the military remains fully in control of the political system after having successfully manipulated the 2010 elections. Additionally, it has managed to orchestrate this transition process at every single stage. The military has continuously restricted political space so that oppositional forces have virtually no room to manoeuvre.
<ins>Disciplined Democracy</ins>
Officially announced in the late 2003 by General Khin Nyunt, the military’s roadmap to “disciplined democracy” envisioned the installation of a new political system step by step. Beginning with the reconvening the National Convention to finalise the Constitution’s basic principles which were introduced at the 1993 National Convention. Like the first National Convention (1993–1996), the second was “marred by a lack of inclusiveness, heavy restrictions on public debate, and little input by the participants into the final product”, including the two main opposition parties – the NLD and the Shan National League for Democracy (SNLD).
The new constitution enshrined military control, codified the military’s leading role in the participation of the state which was finalised in February 2008, and was formally approved by the national referendum – apparently a highly manipulative one.
Although it established a multiparty democracy allowing for elections for national and regional assemblies, the military still maintained the dominant role in the years to come. Of all regional and national parliament seats, 25 per cent are reserved for the military, and security-related ministries like, defence, border affairs, and home affairs were also bagged by the military.
Military controls the whole security related matters, and is a fully autonomous organisation which is neither subjected to judicial and legislative control, nor accountable for its actions, both publically and judicially.
The transition to “disciplined democracy” has also been accompanied by a wave of privatisation measures where 271 state-owned companies have reportedly been sold to former head of the state, Than Shwe’s closest cronies such as Thay Zar, Zaw Zar, and Chit Khaing, the Myanmar Times reported. While the military conglomerates have got weakened in this process, Than Shwe’s informal influence has been consolidated.
Altogether, the influence of the military conglomerates in the economy remains considerable. The generals’ transition ensured a return to civilian rule without relinquishing the de facto military control of the government. The military would still remain the arbiter of power in the country, though it has created new political institutions that might develop some autonomy of their own in the future.
Even before the latest coup, the military’s withdrawal from power did not mean a retreat into the barracks, but rather a further institutionalisation of military control. The military has managed to establish a competitive authoritarian regime, in which it remained the arbiter of power.

History of Myanmar: Transformation from Military rule to Disciplined Democracy

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1612959127830" alt="Biden’s chance to stabilise US-Iran relations post Trump-Era. Iran Nuclear deal and JCPOA" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

After the turbulent four years of American foreign policy under Trump administration with high level of unpredictability that created havoc in the world politics, US President Biden has pledged to reverse several of the previous administration’s decisions, beginning with the Iran Nuclear Deal, popularly known as Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
Not only Trump’s foreign policy, but also domestic policies were guided by Trumpism – a new theoretical ideology denoting Trump’s idiosyncratic actions without realising their detrimental effects. This mind-set forced the political scholars to denote the four years of trump in White House as Trump-Era, indicating that these four years caused as much damage to America’s foreign policy as it did to the established world order.
The unilateral withdrawal by former President Trump from JCPOA strained the already terrible relations between Iran and US, therefore, Biden’s path to restore the Obama-period nuclear deal would be extremely difficult.
President Biden is eyeing an urgent restoration of the Iran Nuclear Deal, while US’s new National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan has suggested that a faster timeline than the administration has previously outlined is being framed.
“We are going to have to address Iran’s other bad behaviour, malign behaviour, across the region, but from our perspective, a critical early priority has to be to deal with what is an escalating nuclear crisis as they move closer and closer to having enough fissile material for a weapon,” Sullivan said. “And we would like to make sure that we re-establish some of the parameters and constraints around the program that have fallen away over the course of the past two years,” he added.
<ins>What is JCPOA? A brief history</ins>
After the intensive and lengthy diplomatic talks for years amidst the continuous animosity between Iran and the western countries, at dawn of July 14, 2015 a news broke which everybody on either side of hemisphere were hoping. Final details of the JCPOA or Iran N-deal were finalised. The accord was notable in the history of nuclear proliferation, and the deal was considered an agreement that could change the dynamics in the Middle East.
It provided hope to citizens of the world that differences can only be resolved through diplomacy, and not by wars. One such citizen was Iran’s Foreign Minister Javed Zarif who had tweeted back in 2015, “#IranDeal is not a ceiling, but a solid foundation. We must now begin to build on it.”&nbsp;
The Iran nuclear agreement, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), is a landmark accord reached between Iran and five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), along with Germany – collectively known as P5 + 1.
It had gone into effect in January 2016, and imposed restrictions on Iran’s civilian nuclear enrichment program. During the regime of former monarch Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Iran had committed to forgo the development of nuclear weapons, and even signed the Non-proliferation Treaty sponsored by Nixon administration.&nbsp;
Though after the overthrow of Reza Shah Regime, which was an ally of US in the Middle East as per the Baghdad Pact, and the subsequent 1979 Islamic revolution, which established Ruhollah Kheominei’s Islamic clergy regime, the leaders of Iran who were hard-liners against US and western powers on the ideological basis tried to secretly pursue the nuclear technology.
Under JCPOA terms, Iran agreed to dismantle much of its nuclear program, and open its facilities to more extensive international inspections in exchange for billions of dollars’ worth of sanctions relief. Iran has suffered from a dizzying and complex set of international economic sanctions as punishment for its nuclear development by the western powers prior to the deal. The deal in the nutshell was that the sanctions would be lifted in exchange for the tight restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program. The provisions of the deal formed as such that it would make functionally impossible for Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon till the accord remains in place.

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1612959313444" alt="Biden’s chance to stabilise US-Iran relations post Trump-Era. Iran nuclear deal and JCPOA." style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

<ins>Trump’s JCPOA withdrawal</ins>
Riding on the anti-Iran and anti-JCPOA rhetoric, Donald Trump campaigned on the promises to dismantle the Iran nuclear accord, referring to it as “the worst deal ever.” An electoral victory in 2016 allowed the Trump administration to fulfil its promise, and thus, it changed the dynamics of Middle East for the worse.
In May 2018, Trump unilaterally withdrew from the Iran nuclear accord, thanks to Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu consistent lobbying against the deal from the beginning. Regional players like Israel and Saudi Arabia provided a strong backing to Trump administration for the withdrawal from the deal which would further weaken Iran’s influence in the region.
“This was a horrible one-sided deal that should have never, ever been made,” a grim-faced Mr. Trump said in an 11-minute address from the Diplomatic Reception Room of the White House. “It did not bring calm, it did not bring peace, and it never will,” he added.

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1612959398758" alt="Biden’s chance to stabilise US-Iran relations post Trump-Era. Iran nuclear deal and JCPOA." style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

These steps in compliance with accord foreclosed the Iran’s pathways to build nuclear weapons. Trump insisted that the limits placed on the Iran’s nuclear fuel production according to the deal were inadequate. The administration presented no evidence that Iran was not complying with its obligations, but the former president called the deal as “worst deal ever” due to the couple of reasons. Firstly, Trump had a contention with the provisions of ‘sunset clauses’ – the deal is not permanent, the limits were to expire in 2030. Secondly, the deal does not address the threat of Iran’s ballistic missiles development or its malign behaviour in the region. Iran supports militant groups like Hezbollah in Lebanon which is principal enemy of the Israel, a known US ally.
<ins>Consequences of withdrawal</ins>&nbsp;
After withdrawing from agreement, US re-instated all the sanctions it had waived as part of the nuclear accord. Therefore, US re-impose oil sanctions, and new sanctions against the Central Bank of Iran, crippling the national economy while Iran complied with provisions of the deal and kept restricted its development of nuclear capability for next one year.
Iran accused the United States of reneging on its commitments, and faulted Europe for submitting to US’ unilateralism. The withdrawal not only increased geopolitical tensions with Iran, but also strained the transatlantic relations with European allies, undermining their positions in the deal which came into effect to hold Iran accountable.&nbsp;
Trump’s strategy to confront Iran, and bring it back to the table to negotiate the total dismantle of its nuclear program – eliminating sunset clauses – and address its malign activities was to impose maximum pressure to gain maximum leverage ahead of diplomatic discussions while avoiding a military entanglement in the future. This is popularly known as ‘maximum pressure’ strategy.&nbsp;
JCPOA provided a highly intrusive inspection regime to check Iran’s compliance with the agreement, but Trump’s maximum pressure campaign has failed to produce concessions from Iran, let alone bring it to the negotiation table for discussion on the Iran’s other malign activities.
The nuclear deal provided the P5+1 with greater inspection and accountability tools to ensure Iran is not foraging on the path of building nuclear weapons. Provisions of the deal would have made almost impossible for Iran to violate the agreement without facing serious blow from all the countries including European powers, which are still the participants in the deal. The deal would also have given greater international legitimacy to US to use hard power against Iran if the latter had resumed the nuclear program.
Pressure from multilateral sanctions successfully brought Iran to the negotiating table, but US retaliatory unilateral sanctions have failed to produce a replacement agreement or stop Iran from ramping up its nuclear program.
In response to the United States’ withdrawal from the JCPOA, and subsequent re-instatement of nuclear and other sanctions, Iran has steadily reduced its compliance with the JCPOA.
Iran increased its uranium enrichment, advanced centrifuges, and stockpile size. Moreover, maximum pressure has failed to stop Iran from supporting proxies that further destabilise the region.
The provocations from both sides increased the tensions between Iran and US. Many political scholars had even predicted a Middle East war after the tanker blast incident in Persian Gulf in mid-2019. The list of Iranian provocations in the same year also goes long, beginning from the downing of an American drone, mine attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz, and a cruise missile strike on Saudi oil facilities.
On the nuclear front, Iran’s slow but steady effort to shrink its breakout timeline raises alarm bells in Western capitals without provoking an American or Israeli military strike on its nuclear facilities.&nbsp;
The assassination of Qassim Suleimani, a top Iranian military commander, in January 2020 was the peak of these provocations on the either side which followed the downward spiralling effect pushing the region to the brink of a catastrophic war amidst the coronavirus pandemic. Subsequently, the assassination of eminent scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh in November worked as a fuel in the confrontation.&nbsp;
<ins>Conclusion</ins>
Despite the welter of conflicting actions and statements coming from senior Iranian leaders in recent times, it seems that Tehran would welcome a quick return to the JCPOA by the incoming Biden administration.
However, Iran appears to be signalling that the opportunity to do so will be brief, and if the United States does not immediately resume compliance with the terms of the original agreement, that window will close quickly and perhaps permanently. Although such compliance must be verified, a US return to the JCPOA is the best way to incentivise Iran to comply with the deal.
The Biden administration’s best approach will be to pursue complementary near-term and long-term strategies simultaneously to bring Iran back into compliance with the limits on its nuclear program, while raising the stakes of Tehran’s adventurism in the region and paving the way to a follow-on agreement.
The JCPOA offers the best path for the United States to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons, and it was working until the withdrawal. The reality today is much starker, and Iran is closer to building a nuclear weapon. The steps Iran has taken in violation of the JCPOA, however, are reversible — Iran can return to compliance with the deal.
The only way to achieve another agreement in the future — including one that addresses Iran’s ballistic missile program and other security threats Iran poses — is for the United States to return to the JCPOA and implement its part of the deal. Re-joining the JCPOA advances US national security, restores US credibility, and should be a top priority for the Biden administration.

Biden’s chance to stabilise US-Iran relations post Trump-Era

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1585214973554" alt="Myths about Corona busted" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

As the nation goes on a lockdown for 21 days to curb the spread of Covid-19, there are still various myths circulating in the media about the virus. From ‘thermal scanners can detect the virus’ to ‘only aged and children can be diagnosed with Covid-19’, there are numerous such assertions with very little or no relation with the virus.
These unsubstantiated claims create doubts among the masses that can result into a panic situation, which is the last thing a country needs. It is advisable to be aware of such myths and work smartly towards containing the spread of this virus.
Only thing we can do is take preventive measures to limit the spread of the virus. Social distancing is proven to be the most effective way to stay safe. Maintaining cleanliness also offers a solid protection from the virus, so you should wash your hands frequently and take a bath daily.

<ins>Some myths and doubts about Covid-19 are as follows:-</ins>

MYTH 1: Covid-19 can be transmitted through mosquito bites
FACT: Being a respiratory virus, Corona is transmitted when an infected person coughs or sneezes and the water droplets generated enter the body of another person. According to the Union Health Ministry, Coronavirus CANNOT be transmitted through mosquito bites. There have been no evidence to suggest that can be transmitted through mosquitoes.

MYTH 2: Only people with symptoms can transmit the virus
FACT: ANYONE can transmit the virus. As symptoms takes 2-10 days to show, a person having the virus can transmit it without knowing about the symptoms.
Moreover, people can be just the carriers of the virus. Simply put, a person NOT infected with the virus CAN also transmit the virus to others. A person becomes infected when the virus enters the body. The virus can be found on your hands, face, or any other exposed body part and can be transmitted from there as well.

MYTH 3: Thermal scanner can detect the infected people.
FACT: Thermal scanner can detect if a person has fever or not. Though one must consult a doctor immediately, having a fever does not mean that the person is infected with the coronavirus. Other conditions such as seasonal flu can also result in fever.&nbsp;
Moreover, the scanners cannot detect persons who have the virus and not the fever as it takes 2-10 days for symptoms to show. Therefore, initially an infected person would not develop a fever and hence will not come in the scanner’s radar.

MYTH 4: Getting COVID-19 is a certain death
FACT: Out of the people diagnosed with Covid-19, about 80.9% had mild cases, according to a study published by the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention. About 13.8% reported severe illness which means they needed supplemental oxygen due to shortage of breath, and 4.7% were critical which means that they faced an organ failure. The data also suggests that around 2.3% of the infected people died because of virus.
So, even if you are showing symptoms or are diagnosed with it, there is no need to panic. You can let the concerned authorities know about your situation and help will be provided.

MYTH 5: Facemasks offer the ultimate protection&nbsp;
FACT: Any disposable face mask is unlikely to prevent the virus from getting in your respiratory systems as it is not equipped to block tiny viral particles. N95 and N99 respirators offer a better protection, but are not easily available and it requires special training to fit them properly. Masks, if not fitted properly, can let water droplets enter through the air gaps.&nbsp;
It is advisable to wear masks if you are experiencing any symptoms of the infection or taking care of someone infected with the virus.

MYTH 6: COVID-19 cannot be transmitted in areas of hot and humid weather
FACT: The COVID-19 virus can be transmitted in ALL AREAS, including areas with hot and humid climate, reports WHO. The virus has so far been transmitted in the areas with hot and humid weather as warmer countries such as Australia and Singapore are also getting affected. Also, it can be transmitted in cold weather.
However, according to various studies, hot conditions might slow down the spread of virus but will not halt it.&nbsp;

MYTH 7: Eating garlic and consuming alcohol can prevent Coronavirus.
FACT: Garlic is a healthy food that contains some antimicrobial properties and boosts the immune system, but there is no evidence which shows that Covid-19 can be cured by eating garlic. The Health Ministry also said that consuming alcohol does not prevent Coronavirus.

MYTH 8: Coronavirus affects only aged people and children.
FACT: People of ALL AGES can be affected by COVID-19. People above the age of 60 are more vulnerable to become ill with the virus due to their pre-existing medical conditions such as asthma, diabetes, and heart problems. When it comes to children, they are more at risk because of their under developed immunity. WHO suggests people of all ages to take preventive measures to protect themselves from the virus.

Misinformation about Covid-19 – Myths busted

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1583660737301" alt="International Women's Day" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

Throughout the history, there have been many women who broke barriers and overcame constraints to make the world a better place. From social work to politics, from being a CEO to a sports person, from the field of science to the place we call home, women have excelled in every sphere.
This International Women’s Day, we honour some women who inspire many to break barriers like they did. Bringing you stories of invaluable works of some of the women we call Shero.

<ins>Dr. A. Seema</ins>

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1583660860936" alt="Dr. A. Seema" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

Nari Shakti Award winner, Dr. A. Seema, a scientist at Centre for Materials for Electronics Technology, Kerala, came up with a chip-embedded-bra that can detect breast cancer. Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women in India, and what’s more frightening is that 50 percent of the patients do not survive.
According to one stat, every 30 minutes a woman in India dies due to breast cancer. Looking at the situation, Dr. Seema and her team at CMET started working on this project in 2014. Finally after much efforts, they invented a Bra that has embedded chips of dimension 1mm-1mm-1.5mm (length-width-depth), called as probes.
These probes help in producing thermal images of cancerous cells, if any and thus identify the cancer at initial stages. The test takes 15-30 minutes to complete after which information from the probes is extracted.
Dr. Seema says that they have struck a number of targets in single stroke. The product is cost effective and can be available to common public at an affordable price of INR 200. It is also radiation proof and can be used by women of every age group. Till now the other option was Mammography, which was advisable for women above the age of 40 only. The mammogram machine costs more than 3 crore, whereas this new system can come under only 8000 rupees.&nbsp;
No doubt it is a magnificent invention, especially in a developing country like India where women health is not taken proper care of.

<ins>Thinlas Chorol</ins>

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1583661052132" alt="Thinlas Chorol" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

Raised in the beautiful terrains of Takmachik, Ladakh, Thinlas Chorol was born to a farmer family who later got awarded with Government’s Nari Shakti Awards, and UN’s Women Transforming India in 2018. After class 10th, she joined SECMOL’s (Student’s Educational and Cultural Movement of Ladakh) travel agency, Around Ladakh with Students (ALS) where her job was limited to guide the tourists to monastery and cultural places.
When ALS had stopped functioning, Thinlas got depended on freelancing but it did not help her case as the prejudice of ‘woman not being able to endear a physically demanding job’ was still letting most of the jobs slip out of her hands.&nbsp;
Thinlas did not step back and decided to pursue a mountaineering course at Nehru Mountaineering Institute in 2007, and subsequently took a diploma in wilderness and leadership skills at National Outdoor Leadership Skills.
Finally, She hit back with all here experience, qualification, and knowledge, and founded Ladakhi Women’s Traveling Company, which is owned and operated solely by women.
Her pioneering work allowed her to empower many rural young girls and needy women to get employment. Soon her company became favorites among female tourists. Today, LWTC constitutes of 30 women personnels who share different roles in the organization.

<ins>Dr. Shweta Rawat</ins>

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1583661168923" alt="Dr. Shweta Rawat" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

Dr. Shweta Rawat was awarded with National Award Young Woman Showing Excellence through Application of Technology for Societal Benefits by the President of India, Ram Nath Kovind on the occasion of National Science Day on February 28.
She has a PhD in Anthropology from University of Delhi, and is currently working for the Defence Institute of Physiology and Allied Sciences (DIPAS), DRDO as scientist.
Alongside her team, Dr Rawat has developed a full body protector called Prabla, specific to female anatomy. So far women personnel have been subjected to use heavy and oversized full body protectors designed for men. Her team collaborated with Rapid Action Force (RAF) to develop this gear for the female troops deployed in riot control work.&nbsp;
Anthropometric data was used while designing these gears and it ensures protection of vital organs and covers all vulnerable parts of the female body like the rib-cage, back of the arm, inner calf, thigh and groin. The gear also has specific properties, such as anti-stab, anti-puncture, flame retardant and acid resistance. The gear is available in all sizes and uses the same material as that used in male body protectors. It is designed to better suit the female body and provide the female troops with higher flexibility, mobility and comfort.

<ins>Kamala Surayya</ins>

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1583661258889" alt="Kamala Surayya" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

Regarded as “the mother of Modern Indian English Poetry” by The Times, Kamala Surayya was born in the Malabar district of British India (today’s Kerala) in 1934. She was a poet and a writer who brought up the issues of female experiences about menstruation, puberty, sexuality, child marriage, and infidelity. She touched the issues which existed but were unacknowledged. Her honesty made it difficult for the society to digest her content but she continued to be herself, unapologetically.
Kamala had picked up the zeal to become a poet at a very early age. It was in 1960s when she began making her name known, courtesy of popular works like The Summer in Calcutta, The Descendants, and various poems in Malayalam language. It was then she started using her popular pen name, Madhavikutty.&nbsp;
In 1973, in a series of columns in Malyalam, together considered as her autobiography, Ente Katha (later published in English as My Story), Kamala produced her ‘best work’ as well as something, which in her words ‘ruined her life’. The autobiography is considered today a classic for its openness and daringly bold nature, but at that time became a controversial subject.
The situation was such that Kamala had to shift to Maharashtra from Kerala. Seeing the outrage she famously quoted, “people are not hurt but they are pretending to be hurt in order to prove their innocence”.&nbsp;
She was nominated for Nobel Prize in Literature in 1984, and has received many honors, notably Kendra Sahitya Academy, Pen Asian Poetry Prize, and Asian World Prize for Literature.&nbsp;
Kamala converted to Islam in 1999. She died in 2009 at the age of 75.

<ins>Durgabai Deshmukh</ins>

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1583661397632" alt="Durgabai Deshmukh" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

Durgabai Deshmukh is hailed as the mother of social work in India. She was a skilled lawyer, a prominent freedom fighter, an advocate of women's rights, and a propagator of social welfare.
She was born on July 15, 1909, in Andhra Pradesh, to a middle-class family. At 8 years old, she was married off to a wealthy zamindar. At 15, with the support of her father and younger brother, she divorced her husband.
In 1921, when Gandhi visited Kakinada for a Town Hall gathering where she arranged a meeting between him and the local Devadasi and Muslim women community to discuss their plight. Subsequently, Deshmukh quit school, protesting against the imposition of English in education and vouched to wear only hand-spun khadi along with her family.&nbsp;
She was arrested from 1930 to 1933, spending a year in solitary confinement. During her time in prison, she was exposed to unfair treatment of women in prison and decided to pursue criminal law. She was accepted in Madras Bar in 1942 and fought to curb the wrongful convictions and unjust treatment of women in prison.&nbsp;
As a member of the Constituent Assembly, she defended women's property rights under the Hindu Code Bill. She also advocated the establishment of family courts. She was inducted in the Planning commission as an incharge of social welfare.
Deshmukh became the first chairperson of the Central Social Welfare Board (CSWB) in 1953 and the National Council on Women's Education, established in 1988. She also founded Andhra Mahila Sabha that still functions today with 28 branches including colleges, schools, and hospitals. She has been awarded Padma Vibhushan, UNESCO Award for outstanding work in the field of literacy, Nehru literacy Award and Paul G. Hoffman Award, among others.

Her excellence is Our progress - Celebrating #OurShero on Women's Day

<img src="https://api-discussion.policharcha.com/1627395048693" alt="Jal Jeevan Mission: More than 6L schools get tap water" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

Within ten months of its inception the 'Jal Jeevan Mission' has made tap water available in 66% of schools, 60% of Aanganwadi centres, and 69% of gram panchayats and community healthcare centres (CHCs) in rural India, the Union ministry of Jal Shakti claimed.
The ministry also informed that despite the pandemic, the mission achieved a 100% success in delivering clean tap water to all schools and Aanganwadi centres in nine states and a Union Territory.&nbsp;
“In less than ten months since the launch of this campaign, tap water has been made available in 6.85 lakh (66 per cent) schools, 6.80 lakh (60 percent) Anganwadi centres and 2.36 lakh (69 per cent) Gram Panchayats and Community Healthcare Centres (CHCs) for drinking and cooking mid-day meal, 6.18 lakh schools have tap water in toilets/urinals and 7.52 lakh schools have tap water for handwashing facility", said a statement from the ministry.
The statement also named the states and UT which achieved 100% success in providing clean tap water to the grassroots. “In Andhra Pradesh, Goa, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Punjab, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, and the Union territory of Andaman &amp; Nicobar Islands, provision of clean tap water supply in all schools, ashramshalas (residential schools), and anganwadi centres has been made," the ministry’s statement said.
The issue of clean drinking water to Anganwadi centres, Ashramshaalas, and schools gained fresh momentum when the Indian Government launched this campaign of ensuring clean tap water supply to these institutions on October 2, 2020. This was to be a 100-day campaign to achieve 100% coverage, and provide potable piped water supply for drinking and cooking purposes as well as tap water for hand washing and in toilets in every school, anganwadi, and ashramshala or residential tribal school.
<ins>The mission</ins>
On the independence day of 2019, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced the 'Jal Jeevan Mission' which aimed at ensuring piped water supply to every rural household by 2024. The Rs 3.60 lakh crore worth mission aims at working with the states to ensure its success. The formation of Jal Shakti Ministry was announced in July 2019 to address water related issues in the country.
Jal Shakti Ministry states the objective of this mission as, "providing Functional Household Tap Connection (FHTC) to every rural household by 2024. The programme focuses on service delivery at household level, i.e. water supply on a regular basis in adequate quantity and of prescribed quality on a regular and long-term basis."
The Jal Jeevan Mission is based on a community approach to water. According to the Government, the mission will include information, education, and communication as key components. The mission is meant to create a people's movement for water, making it everyone’s priority.
The ministry in its statement also talked about the advances made in the sector since the commencement of the mission.
“On 15 August 2019, at the time of launch of the Jal Jeevan Mission, out of 189.8 million rural households in the country, only 32.3 million (17%) had tap water connections. Despite the Covid-19 pandemic and lockdown disruptions, Jal the Jeevan Mission provided 45.7 million tap water connections in the last 23 months. As a result, today (till July 17), 78 million (41.14%) households have tap water supply. Goa, Telangana, Andaman &amp; Nicobar Islands, and Puducherry have achieved 100% household connections in rural areas and have become ‘Har Ghar Jal’", the statement added.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi also acknowledged the advances made in the past two years in providing rural households with clean tap water. On the independence day of 2020, he addressed the issue standing in front of the Red Fort, "today, I am happy to share that every day we are able to provide piped water connection to over one lakh households. And in the last one year, we have been able to provide tap water to 2 crore families, especially to the tribals living in the forests and far-flung areas. A huge campaign has been launched. And I am glad that today ‘Jal Jeevan Mission’ has created an environment of healthy competition in the country. There is a healthy competition among the districts, among the cities, and also among the states. Everyone is hoping that the Prime Minister’s dream of ‘Jal Jeevan Mission’ is accomplished at the earliest in their respective areas."
<ins>The need of Jal Jeevan Mission</ins>
India, like many other countries in the world, is feeling the heat of Climate Change. Due to immense population and better access because of improving technology, the groundwater is being pumped out more than it ever was. The same reasons are responsible for the contamination of natural water sources.
According to the NITI Aayog's Composite Water Management Index (CWMI) 2018, 21 Indian cities could face Day Zero in the coming years. The report also observed that 75% of Indian households do not have access to drinking water on premise, and about 84% rural households do not have piped water access. Unsafe drinking water is the root cause of water-borne diseases like diarrhoea, dysentery, cholera, typhoid, etc.
Despite the advances made so far, the road ahead remains long and tedious. The Hindu reported on July 26 that still 35% of government schools do not have access to tap water. The pandemic has slowed down the pace of the mission as it has only added tap water access in about 50,000 schools and 40,000 anganwadis since March 2021, when the second wave started intensifying.

Jal Jeevan Mission: More than 6L schools get tap water

<img src="https://api-discussion.policharcha.com/1627394380602" alt="All you need to know about the Pegasus Spyware" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>


The Pegasus spyware is a military-grade surveillance software developed and sold by an Israeli firm called the NSO. According to the NSO group, the spyware is sold to vetted, verified, and authorised states and state agencies to fight terrorists and law enforcement situations.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<ins>What Information Pegasus Can Access?</ins>
Once the device is affected with the malware, the attacker can gain entire control of the device, and the infected device becomes a tapping and tracking equipment.&nbsp;
Pegasus spyware not only gives the attacker the user’s private chats, phone conversations, contacts, and email, but also uses the device’s GPS feature to track the location of the user. It can send the attacker the user's private data stored on the device such as passwords, calendar events, and even end-to-end encrypted messages. It also gives the attacker control over the device's microphone and video camera.&nbsp;
Antivirus software might not offer total protection from the Pegasus spyware as the latter only sends scheduled updates to the command and control server, i.e. the attacker. This helps in avoiding detection from antivirus software that might have been installed on the user’s device, and from forensic analysis. The malware can also be deactivated by the attacker remotely, if deemed necessary, making it incredibly hard to detect if a phone was ever or is still infected by the malware.&nbsp;
<ins>What makes the Pegasus Spyware so infectious?</ins>&nbsp;
Generally, malwares needs to be clicked on by the user; like opening an email where the malware is embedded. So, it generally warrants an interaction between the malicious software and the user.&nbsp;
However, that is not the case with the Pegasus spyware. It allows the attacker to use a series of ‘network injections’ to install the malware on someone’s phone, without needing any interaction by the user. Allowing for a ‘zero click’ attack on anyone.&nbsp;
One such way is its push-message option, which includes messages from an already installed app on the phone, making the target device load the malware covertly, without having to interact with the user of the device.&nbsp;
The Pegasus spyware only needs someone’s phone number to carry out its ‘network injection’, the rest is automated by its system. NSO, the firm responsible for creating the malware, has confirmed that this feature of ‘zero-click’ infection makes the Pegasus spyware unique.&nbsp;
<ins>Who has access to the spyware?</ins>&nbsp;
The NSO only sells the spyware to the vetted state and state agencies to assist in national security and law enforcement investigations. The firm has also clearly mentioned that the NSO group does not operate the Pegasus system, and that it can only be deployed by a government operator.&nbsp;
The spyware can only be deployed against one phone number at a time. Therefore, the tool is not designed for mass surveillance, as clarified by the NSO group.
The Pegasus spyware is sold in the form of a licence to the State or its agency, and its price depends on the contract between the firm and the agency. Reports suggest that the cost of one licence can be as high as Rs 70 lakh which allows you to track multiple smartphones. According to 2016 estimates, for tracking 10 people the NSO group would charge a steep price of Rs 9 crore, which includes an installation fee Rs 3.75 crore, and Rs 4.84 crore to hack 10 devices.&nbsp;
<ins>The Pegasus Project</ins>&nbsp;
Project Pegasus is a collaborative investigative journalism project by 17 news organisations from around the world, along with Paris-based journalism non-profit Forbidden Stories, and Amnesty International, a human rights group.&nbsp;
Forbidden Stories and Amnesty International got hold of a leaked list of 50,000 contact numbers which were ‘potential surveillance targets’ of the Pegasus Spyware. These included contact details of heads of state, journalists, and human rights activists.&nbsp;
The list is supposed to be of those, who according to NSO’s clients were potential targets. According to the NSO, its clientele goes across 60 intelligence, military, and law enforcement agencies in 40 countries which they refuse to name.&nbsp;
The list does not tell us who asked the Israeli firm to put a number on the list. Yet it has been identified that a large number of the contact information are from 11 countries namely, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Hungry, Kazakhstan, Mexico, Morocco, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Togo, and India.&nbsp;
The list is only a list of ‘potential targets’, which means that all contacts have only ‘probably’ been infected by the virus. One cannot be sure if a contact has been infected until and unless agencies make a proper forensic investigation on the instrument.&nbsp;
Amnesty International, however, sampled some of the devices related to the contact information and found that attempts were made on a few of the contacts while some were successfully hacked.&nbsp;
In India, there has been a major roar on social media, and even in the parliament. With many contacts of opposition leaders, and political functionaries showing up on the leaked list. Out of which some were Rahul Gandhi, who had two of his phone numbers listed as potential targets, one added in 2018 before the General Election, and one after the polls, in 2019.&nbsp;
Political strategist Prashant Kishore, who in recent years has become popular in the political context of India, helping many parties win some important state elections, recently winning in Bengal, also had his number show up on the list. Forensic reports suggested unsuccessful attempts in 2018, again in April 2021, a day before the last phase of the Bengal election, and a third, possibly a successful attempt in June and July 2021.&nbsp;
Chief Minister of Bengal Mamta Banerjee, who won the last State assembly election in a close battle against the saffron forces, has also been indirectly targeted as her nephew, and close political aide, Abhishek Banerjee along with her private secretary were featured on the list.&nbsp;
Ashvini Vaishnaw, BJP minister and the current Minister of Railways, and his wife also showed up on the list for having been targeted in 2017, when he was yet a part of the BJP cadre.&nbsp;
Another BJP minister who was targeted was the Minister of State for Jal Shakti, Prahlad Singh Patel. Not just his number was feature on the list, but so did his wife’s and 15 other close associates.&nbsp;
Beyond political actors, people related to the case involving Ranjan Gogoi, the ex-Chief Justice of India, and the charges of sexual harassment levelled against him. Over 11 phone numbers of the staffer and her close relatives, who had complained against the erstwhile CJI were also present on NSO’s list.&nbsp;
Ashok Lavasa, a member of a three-man election commission, was also selected as the potential candidate for surveillance.&nbsp;
Project Pegasus found that 40 journalists were targeted from India for surveillance, reported the Wire, who is the Indian partner to the collaboration of 17 news organisations involved in bringing the Pegasus story to light. The leaked data includes the numbers of top journalists at big media houses like the Hindustan Times, including executive editor Shishir Gupta, India Today, Network18, The Hindu, and Indian Express, reported The Wire.&nbsp;
Besides Delhi-based Kashmiri journalists, and a prominent civil society activist critical of official policy towards Jammu and Kashmir, more than 25 people from the Kashmir Valley were selected as potential targets of intrusive surveillance between 2017 and mid-2019, reported The Wire.
<ins>Who is to be blamed?</ins>&nbsp;
According to the reports by the NSO, they have strictly maintained that they will not name their clients. However, they confirmed in their “Transparency and Responsibility” report that they sell their product to only approved, verified, and authorised state and state authorities, specifically to be used for national security, and major law enforcement-driven investigation.&nbsp;
The first finger points at the Israeli firm which has violated human rights concerns of multiple members of civil society for their clients, whoever it might be. The presence of such technology is already a concern for the right to privacy of human rights, and it becomes the firm duty to stop its product from being misused, as they themselves suggest.&nbsp;
The Pegasus Project at no point suggests that the spyware has not been put to use in relevant situations, yet the list that has been leaked is shocking, considering the names it contains –journalists, activists, and well known political actors.&nbsp;
The other question is obviously who is the client then? In India, many fingers have been pointed towards the incumbent BJP Government. The reason, one might ask is the fact that the NSO has repeatedly confirmed that their clients are majorly state or agencies of it. Secondly, the question is also about a fortune that using the service from NSO involves. Lastly, and probably the one which holds the allegation much stronger, is the people who have been targeted and the time of when they were added to the list.
Most involve adversaries to the BJP, most evidently people like Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, Prashant Kishore who have fought against the BJP in many elections. Some who have been vocal in their criticism of the parties rule since 2014, like Hany Babu, a professor at the University of Delhi, and accused in the Elgar Parishad case, and many more who have been accused in the case have featured on the list. In such a case, it is most definitely a serious violation of the human rights of the Indian citizenry by its state.
Such allegations only remain as speculation as no evidence of the Modi Government involvement has been traced, but the government response not being a concrete one has only put fuel to such theories.&nbsp;
Yet another theory that is being speculated is that some other state agency has identified, and is tracking and snooping on Indians, which means that country has huge national security looming over its head.&nbsp;
The West Bengal Government led by Mamata Banerjee, whose close acquaintances names have been on the list, has now set up a panel of retired to probe the Pegasus phone-hacking scandal. Mamata Banerjee has also previously been very vocal about how much the “surveillance state” is a threat to the democracy of the country, asking the opposition to unite ahead of the 2024 elections.&nbsp;
A petition has also been filed in the Supreme Court, seeking a court-monitored probe by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) into the reports of alleged snooping by government agencies using Israeli spyware Pegasus over journalists, activists, politicians, and others. The petition filed by advocate ML Sharma, says Privacy is an “essential component of dignity and agency”, asking the judiciary to protect the people’s right to privacy.&nbsp;
<ins>The Government response to the reports and allegations</ins>
The Government responded to the questionnaire sent by the consortium of journalists. The Ministry of Information Technology, under the newly appointed minister Ashwini Vaishnav, posed that it has already answered the questions that were asked.&nbsp;
It pointed to an RTI that was filed raising the questions on the government involvement with NSO groups Pegasus Project. The Ministry claimed that it was sufficient to deny any claims of association of the Government of India with the NSO group. Yet the RTI response that the Government cites does not deny the purchase of the Pegasus spyware or even that it was not considering doing so. The response to the RTI instead read “In this regard, it is informed that no such information is available with the CPIO [Central Public Information Officer].”
The Government also mentions in its response that it has well-established protocols, which are followed while intercepting communication which includes sanctions and supervision from high ranked officers, making sure such procedure is done with the due process of law, and only for the national interest.&nbsp;
The Government also pointed to the allegation of the use of Pegasus on Whatsapp by the Indian Government where all the parties denied the use of Pegasus in the Supreme Court. Yet it should be noted, even at that time, the erstwhile Minister of MieTy, Ravi Shankar Prasad had never categorically denied or confirmed the purchase of Pegasus by the government, only saying “no unauthorised interception” were made.
It is also interesting to point out that, soon after Whatsapp denied any breach of its software by Pegasus in Indian courts, the company filed a lawsuit against the NSO group for helping government spies break into the phones of about 1,400 users across four continents, in the US courts.
The Government of India pointing to such instances suggested that the current breaking news reports are just another fishing ploy to malign the government without any “concrete basis or truth associated with it whatsoever.”

All you need to know about the Pegasus Spyware

<img src="https://api-discussion.policharcha.com/1624537717922" alt="Ordnance Factory Board: Need for corporatisation & protest against it" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

The decision of the Union Government to corporatise Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) into seven Public Sector Undertakings has brought together factory workers of Left, RSS, and Congress in unison to protest against it. The unlikely combination, on June 20, said in a joint circular that they will serve the notice for an indefinite strike on July 1, and commence the nationwide strike on July 19 against the Government’s decision.
All India Defence Employees’ Federation (AIDEF) of Left unions, Bhartiya Pratiraksha Mazdoor Sangh (BPMS), an arm of RSS-affiliate Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh, and Indian National Defence Workers’ Federation (INDWF) of the Indian National Trade Union Congress organised a virtual meeting on June 20.
“The meeting took a very serious note of the manner in which the government has dismantled the ordnance factories and sabotaged the future of the committed workforce of these factories. The meeting also expressed its serious concerns of various violations by the government", said a joint statement by the group. The joint statement also talked about taking the legal route against this decision.
This article will be explaining about these reforms, protests against which have surprisingly cut across ideological differences.
<ins>Ordnance Factory Board</ins>
OFB is a group of 41 factories, nine training institutes, three regional marketing centres, and five regional controllers of safety, working under the Department of Defence Production in the Defence Ministry. Often called the "Fourth Arm of Defence", the Board is the second largest Defence Equipment Manufacturer in Asia, and the largest in the country. Their products include civilian and military-grade arms and ammunition, explosives, propellants and chemicals for missiles systems, military vehicles, armoured vehicles, optical devices, parachutes, support equipment, troop clothing, and general store items. Beside the Armed Forces, these factories also serve Paramilitary Forces and Police Forces. OFB is the world's largest government-operated production organisation, and the oldest such organisation in India. Its history dates back to more than 200 years.
The corporatisation plan aims to subsume all the 41 units into seven PSUs, which means the end of the OFB.
<ins>The Reforms</ins>
On June 16 this year, the Union cabinet approved the corporatisation plan which will end the current OFB, and convert it into seven totally Government owned PSUs with professional management like the Hindustan Aeronauticsl Limtited (HAL). It would mean that the organisation will cease to be a government department, and will be converted into a corporate entity. The Government claims that this restructuring will transform the organisation in to a productive and profitable asset.
The plan, which had been in the pipeline for almost two decades now, has got a decisive push under the current Government. At least three committees on Defence reforms set by the governments between 2000 and 2015 had recommended the corporatisation. Modi Government listed this plan in their list of 167 transformative idea to be implemented within 100 days of re-election. The Government last year announced it officially, and on June 16 the plan got the approval from Cabinet. Experts see this as a big and much needed reform in the defence manufacturing sector.
Under the seven entities, there will be an Ammunition and Explosives Group, which would be mainly engaged in production of ammunition of various caliber, and explosives with huge potential to grow exponentially, not only by way of Make in India, but also by manufacturing for the world.
The Vehicles Group would mainly engage in production of defence mobility and combat vehicles such as tanks, trawls, armoured personnel carriers, and mine-protected vehicles.
The Weapons and Equipment Group would be mainly engaged in production of small arms, medium and large caliber guns, and other weapon systems.&nbsp;
There will also be a Troop Comfort Items Group, an Ancillary Group, an Opto-Electronics Group, and a Parachute Group.
These entities are expected not only to fulfil the domestic demand, but also to aim at exploring new markets outside the country.
<ins>The need for reforms</ins>
As mentioned above, multiple committees on defence reforms had recommended this change. There have been complaints about OFB's poor quality products, delayed timelines, and lack of technological advancements. The military has also complained that the cost is also high (though OBF takes no profit for its supplies to it).
With the China challenge rising, India has looked to acquire more weaponry, and this reform is another step in that direction. There was also friction between armed forces and the OFB over accidents due to military equipment failures last year.
“This restructuring is aimed at transforming the ordnance factories into productive and profitable assets, deepening specialisation in the product range, enhancing competitiveness, improving quality, and achieving cost efficiency,” an official had told media on the advantages of this reform.
This change is expected to double OFB’s turnover to approximately $4 billion by 2025, and in the process, address concerns about the quality of its products.
<ins>Why are workers protesting?</ins>
The strange trio of worker unions of Left, Congress, and RSS have been against the proposed reforms right from the announcement of it. Initially, they announced an indefinite strike from October last year, but the strike was postponed as talks with Chief Labour Commissioner were launched. Now, after the Cabinet's consent, the associations have again announced their idea of indefinite strike. The nationwide strike is planned to start from July 19.
About 80,000 workers engaged with OFB fear job loss. Another apprehension clouding their mind is that this reform will eventually lead to privatisation of this sector.&nbsp;
Despite stiff opposition from labour unions, Government has went ahead with the reform, which many experts see as a much needed change in the defence manufacturing industry.
-------------------------
This article is written by Gaurav Thakur

Ordnance Factory Board: Need for corporatisation & protests against reforms

<img src="https://api-discussion.policharcha.com/1624411966214" alt="A look at India's nuclear energy programme" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

The latest report by Swedish think tank Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) revealed that the global nuclear weapon deployment is on the rise for the first time since the end of the cold war. The researchers said the trend was worrisome.
"The overall number of warheads in global military stockpiles now appears to be increasing, a worrisome sign that the declining trend that has characterised global nuclear arsenals since the end of the Cold War has stalled," SIPRI researcher Hans M Kristensen said.
According to the report, 90% of the total nuclear arsenal remains with the cold war rivals i.e. Russia (former USSR), and the USA. The report also says that three countries, namely China, Pakistan, and India are rapidly modernising and boosting their nuclear arsenal. In this piece, we will be taking a look at India's Nuclear Power Program.
Although the word ‘Nuclear’ can be associated with mass destruction, ‘Nuclear Energy’ has a far wider meaning than just that. In the current scenario, in which the world is struggling with rising temperatures and the problems associated with it, experts look at Nuclear Energy as an alternative to the current energy system.&nbsp;
Developed countries like the US, and the EU are aiming for Carbon Neutrality, while developing countries like India are also under pressure to announce their net zero carbon emission plans. India is heavily reliant on traditional sources such as coal for its energy requirements. The demand for energy is going to increase further, and that is why India is desperately seeking alternatives. Though risky in other ways, Nuclear Energy does not emit CO2, and that makes it one of the options for India as it looks to reduce its carbon emissions in the future.
<ins>The program</ins>

<img src="https://api-discussion.policharcha.com/1624412052707" alt="A look at India's Nuclear Energy Programme" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

As on September, 2020, India has 22 operating nuclear reactors across the country, and their combined capacity totals 6.7 GW. This is about 2% of India's total energy demand. Though the number might look small, it has taken India a long time to reach this point. All of this started in the late 1940s under the supervision of Dr. Homi J Bhabha, who is also called the father of India's Nuclear Program.
The ambitious program was launched under the leadership of India's first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. The Government of India established the Department of Atomic Energy, in 1954, with the sole responsibility of looking after the program. India had to devise a strategy to maximise its resources as it had very limited Uranium, but Thorium was present in abundance in the country. Thorium, however, in its natural state, cannot be used as a fuel. After a series of reactions, it needs to be converted into its usable “fissile” form. Therefore, a three stage plan was conceived with the installation of natural uranium reactors in the first phase, followed by fast breeder reactors in the second phase, using plutonium from the first generation reactors with either uranium-238 or thorium in the blanket, and eventually followed by reactors based on the self-sustaining Thorium-Uranium-233 cycle.
The first break came in 1974 when India tested a fission device. The Government of that time called it a ‘peaceful' Nuclear Explosion. The tests were condemned globally. Due to the global eye, India could not carry on with follow up tests. These tests invited international sanctions which barred India from buying nuclear technology and materials from outside. The limited Uranium availability, and these sanctions crippled India's pace. Moreover, India could not invest too heavily in it since it was a still a less developed country. Since late 1990s, however, the program got a decisive push.
As India industrialised itself, it also helped in accelerating India's nuclear program.
The unexpected nuclear tests in Pokhran in 1998 which were again followed up by US sanctions were the result of this acceleration.
The programme, nevertheless, got a new lease of life with a turning point in India-US relations under then American President George W.Bush. The negotiations resulted in Indo-US nuclear deal of 2008 or less commonly known as the 123 agreement.
The deal allowed India to import uranium, and enter into collaboration with other countries to build reactors. This freedom has ushered a new era in India's Nuclear energy plans that has allowed us to move rapidly in the last decade.
<ins>The Present</ins>
India is lobbying hard to get a membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). The NSG is a multilateral export control regime, and a group of nuclear technology supplier countries that seek to prevent nuclear proliferation by controlling the export of materials, equipment, and technologies which can be used to manufacture nuclear weapons. India portrays itself as a responsible nuclear power by pointing towards its 'No first use policy', and its positive record in non-proliferation.
<ins>The future</ins>
The current Government has been quite vocal about India's plan to shift towards renewable energy sources from the currently used traditional sources. According to Planning Commission's report of 2006, India plans to generate 26 GW of energy by the year 2022, and increase it to 57 GW by 2032.
India is also under pressure to reduce its carbon emissions. Though its per capita carbon emissions are on the lower side, due to the huge population, India consumes a lot of energy. It is going to become the third highest energy consumer by 2030, according to the International Energy Agency.
Therefore, to make sure it's dependence on carbon emitting sources remains stable or goes down, India plans to increase its nuclear capacity to 63 GW by 2032, according to Ravi Grover, Vice-Chancellor of the Homi Bhabha National Institute, by building roughly 60 reactors. If successful, it would make India the world's second-biggest nuclear energy market after China.
Although the question remains, is it possible?
<ins>Hindrances to Projects</ins>
India's way to nuclear success was slow, but the scientific brilliance of Bhabha and other scientists, combined with the political will made sure it was steady. The country overcame many obstacles in its journey. Though the deal with the US eased out things, hindrances still remain.
There is a risk. The riches of nuclear power come in pair with the hazards of radioactivity. The world saw the damages caused by nuclear disasters of Chernobyl, and more recently of Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant. After the Fukushima incident, India too witnessed protests against some of the proposed nuclear plans.
While Nuclear energy solves the problem of CO2 wastes, it created a problem of its own – the radioactive waste. Experts are still contemplating about more effective ways of waste dumping. The usual pattern is to dig hundreds of meter deep into the ground, and dispose the waste down there, but certain apprehensions still remain.
The Uranium availability will always remain one of the major limitations to India's nuclear ambitions. The relaxation of sanctions through the N-deal has helped India to source the highly valuable material, but it is still not in sync with India's ambitious requirements.
India has huge thorium reserves which could potentially power its thorium reactors for hundreds of years to come. This forms the basis of its plans for the third stage, the large-scale deployment of thorium reactors. However, thorium technology continues to be a long-term goal, rather than an immediate option for the country. There is also the question of safety and security. No country in the world has yet demonstrated a viable and commercial thorium reactor programme.
Additionally, the nuclear power sector in India has witnessed its share of controversies and protests over issues of land ownership, location, as well as the safety &amp; security of power plants in the event of natural or man-made disasters. These have also contributed to the time and cost overruns of India’s nuclear power projects.
<ins>The privatisation push</ins>

<img src="https://api-discussion.policharcha.com/1624412620353" alt="A look at India's Nuclear Energy Programme" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>


Current Government's love for privatisation has been on full display since they were re-elected. The Government is willing to bring in more and more private players in every field including the nuclear energy programme.
On May 26, the Department of Atomic Energy announced its plan to construct its first research reactor based on PPP model. It also stated that private entities that are willing to invest in the construction of the reactor and its processing units will get exclusive rights to process and market the radioisotopes produced in the reactor.
<ins>Indo-Russian Nuclear Cooperation</ins>
India has civil nuclear agreements with 14 countries, but Russia has always held a position of great value in India's Nuclear Program. Before the India-US Nuclear deal of 2008, India could not trade the raw materials needed for Nuclear Energy creation, since it was not a member of NSG. India is not a member of NSG still or a signatory to Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT), but the 2008 deal has made things easy for it. Before that, one of the major partners for India in this field was the Soviet Union.
India had signed agreements with Soviet Union as early as the 1960s. India was provided with heavy water by the USSR after Canada abstained from doing so because of the tests of 1974.
Throughout the 1990s, when India’s engagement with the global nuclear market was minimal, Russia remained a key supplier of nuclear fuel to India. When the NSG came up in 1974 in response to India's nuclear tests, the only country that kept assisting India was the USSR. Russia is still very important part of India's future nuclear energy programs.
It is fair to say that Russia has been a prominent partner for India in the field of nuclear energy, but it is also collaborating with China at a large level.
-------------------------
More on that, in the next article. Watch this space for more.&nbsp;

A look at India's Nuclear Energy Programme

<img src="https://api-discussion.policharcha.com/1624278419298" alt="उत्तराखंड का संवैधानिक संकट - बन सकता है भाजपा का संकट मोचन" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

आज जबकि प्रदेश में विधानसभा चुनाव केवल 6-7 महीने दूर रह गए हैँ, भाजपा के लिए एक ऐसी सांप-छछूंदर की स्थिति खड़ी हो गयी है कि उस से ना निगलते बन रहा है ना उगलते।
दरअसल मामला है गैर विधायक मुख्यमंत्री तीरथ सिंह रावत के विधानसभा का सदस्य बनने का। पिछले काफी समय से चल रही मुख्यमंत्री बदलने मांग पर जब अंततः भाजपा हाई कमांड ने निर्णय लिया तो बहुत से नामों पर मंथन चिंतन करने के बाद भाजपा ने एक बार फिर से अपने चिर परिचित अंदाज में रेस में चल रहे सभी प्रत्याशीयों को दरकिनार करते हुए अप्रत्याशित निर्णय लिया और एक ऐसे व्यक्ति को मुख्यमंत्री बना कर सभी को चौंका दिया जो कि मुख्यमंत्री बनने की रेस में जाहिरी तौर पर कहीं शामिल ही नहीं थे।
हालांकि व्यक्तिगत तौर पर देखा जाये तो मुख्यमंत्री बने तीरथ सिंह रावत ना सिर्फ साफ सुथरी छवि वाले, ईमानदार और पार्टी के कर्मठ कार्यकर्ता हैँ, बल्कि एक सांसद के नाते, पार्टी के पूर्व प्रदेश अध्यक्ष के नाते, और प्रदेश सरकार के पूर्व मंत्री के नाते उनकी प्रशासनिक क्षमताओं पर भी कोई प्रश्न चिन्ह नहीं था।
कुम्भ का सफल संचालन हो (जितने समय भी चल पाया) या कोविड से निपटने में राज्य सरकार की भूमिका हो, उन्होंने दोनों में एक बेहतर भूमिका निभाई। लेकिन प्रशासनिक पकड़ बनाने में वे थोड़े कमज़ोर साबित हुए।
-------------------------

<iframe width="100%" height="300" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/o2OXlgp-UV8" frameBorder="0"></iframe>
-------------------------
असली समस्या तब खड़ी हुई जबकि संवैधिनक अनिवार्यता के चलते उनके विधानसभा मे चुन कर आने के ऊपर संदेह के बादल मंडराने लगे। मुख्यमंत्री बने रहने के लिए उनको 9 सितम्बर से पहले विधानसभा का सदस्य बनना परम आवश्यक ही नहीं, संवैधानिक बाध्यता भी है। लेकिन यहाँ उनकी निजी सलाहकार मण्डली के साथ साथ चुनाव मशीन की उपाधि से अलंकृत भाजपा हाई कमांड से भी एक भारी चूक हो गयी। सर्वोत्तम परिस्थिति तो यह होती कि मुख्यमंत्री बनते ही पहले से खाली हुई ‘सल्ट’ विधानसभा से उनको चुनाव लड़वा कर विधानसभा का सदस्य बनवा दिया जाता। लेकिन उस चूक का कारण था कि तब भाजपा यह सोच रही होगी कि ‘यमकेश्वरर’ या किसी और सीट से वर्तमान विधायक का इस्तीफा करवा के उनको चुनाव लड़वा दिया जायेगा।
लेकिन तब भाजपा के रणनीतिकारों ने इस बात पर ध्यान नहीं दिया कि 10 मार्च 2021 को तीरथ सिंह रावत जी जिस प्रदेश की कमान संभाल रहे हैँ उसकी विधानसभा का कार्यकाल 23 मार्च 2022 को समाप्त होने जा रहा है। यानि कि उनको किसी भी विधायक से 23 मार्च से पहले पहले इस्तीफा करवा के मुख्यमंत्री के लिए सीट खाली करवा लेनी चाहिए थी।
हालांकि इस बात से अनभिज्ञ प्रदेश भाजपा की टीम और केंद्रीय नेतृत्व उनके लिए ‘गंगोत्री’ के विधायक गोपाल सिंह रावत की कोरोना से हुई मृत्यु के कारण खाली हुई सीट पर उनको चुनाव लड़ाने की तैयारी में जुटा है, जबकि लोक जनप्रतिनिध्त्व अधिनियम 1951 की धारा 151(A) के चलते यह चुनाव करा पाना चुनाव आयोग के लिए संभव ही नहीं है।
इस धारा का अध्ययन करें तो आप पाएंगे कि अगर कोई विधानसभा सीट जिस तिथि पर रिक्त हुई है, उस तिथि और विधानसभा के कार्यकाल सम्पूर्ण होने में एक साल से कम का वक़्त है तो वहाँ पर उपचुनाव नहीं करवाया जा सकता।
अभी हाल ही में सन 2018 में जब कर्नाटक की तीन, और आँध्रप्रदेश की 5 लोकसभा सीटों पर उपचुनाव होना था तब चुनाव आयोग ने कर्नाटक की तीनों लोकसभा सीटों के लिए तो अधिसूचना जारी कर दी, लेकिन आँध्रप्रदेश की 5 सीटों के लिए उसने कोई चुनावी प्रक्रिया शुरू नहीं करी, तब विपक्षी पार्टियों द्वारा खूब हो हल्ला मचाया गया कि चुनाव आयोग भाजपा को फायदा पहुँचाने के लिए कर्नाटक मे तो चुनाव करवा रहा है, लेकिन आँध्रप्रदेश में चुनाव कराने से बच रहा है।
तब चुनाव आयोग द्वारा 9 अक्टूबर 2018 को एक प्रेस विज्ञप्ति जारी की गयी, जिसमें उसने इसी लोक जनप्रतिनिध्त्व अधिनियम 1951 की धारा 151(A) का हवाला देते हुए बताया कि कर्नाटक की लोकसभा सीटें मार्च माह में रिक्त हुई थीं और आँध्रप्रदेश की सीटें मई माह में रिक्त हुईं, अतः लोकसभा के कार्यकाल के पूरा होने में एक साल से कम समय बचा होने के कारण आँध्रप्रदेश की लोकसभा सीटों पर चुनाव करवाया जाना संभव नहीं।
ऐसे में अब उत्तराखंड की विधानसभा के कार्यकाल पूरा होने से एक साल से भी कम समय बचे होने के कारण (गंगोत्री विधानसभा 22 अप्रैल को रिक्त हुई) अब यहाँ कोई उपचुनाव संभव नहीं।
ऐसे में अगर चुनाव आयोग कोई नुक्ता निकाल कर यहाँ चुनाव कराने का रास्ता निकालता भी है तो विपक्षी पार्टियों द्वारा इसे निश्चित रूप से अदालत में खींचा जायेगा जिसके चलते उसका परिणाम कुछ भी निकले, भाजपा केंद्रीय नेतृत्व की बहुत छेछा लेदर होगी।
<ins>भाजपा के लिए यह आपदा में अवसर बन सकता है</ins>
अब ऐसे में सवाल यह उठता है कि एक बार फिर से मुख्यमंत्री बदलने से क्या भाजपा को फ़ज़ीहत नहीं होगी? तो दृष्टिकोण व पोलीचर्चा का ऐसा मानना है कि संवैधानिक मजबूरी का हवाला देकर भाजपा बहुत आसानी से इस मामले को नया मोड़ दे सकती है। साफ बच कर निकल सकती है। और पूरी शक्ति के साथ एक बार फिर से आने वाले विधानसभा चुनाव में अपनी पूरी ताकत झोंक कर पुनः अपनी सरकार बना सकती है।
इस आपदा में भाजपा के लिए अवसर यूं भी बन सकता है कि जिस सामाजिक, जातिगत, और प्रादेशिक ताने-बाने को वह ठीक नहीं कर पाई थी, वह इस अवसर का लाभ उठा कर उस समय रह गयी इस कमी को दूर कर सकती है।

<img src="https://api-discussion.policharcha.com/1624278663469" alt="उत्तराखंड का संवैधानिक संकट - बन सकता है भाजपा का संकट मोचन" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

<ins>भाजपा के पास विकल्प क्या क्या हैं?</ins>
<ul>
<li>केंद्रीय मंत्री रमेश पोखरियाल निशंक&nbsp;</li>
<li>सांसद अजय भट्ट&nbsp;</li>
<li>मदन कौशिक</li>
</ul>
उत्तराखंड जैसे पर्वतीय राज्य में जहाँ मदन कौशिक के लिए पहाड़ी ना होकर एक मैदानी नेता होना उनकी स्वीकार्यता को कम करता है, वहीँ निशंक को इस वक़्त केंद्रीय मंत्रिमंडल से हटाकर प्रदेश में लाना तर्कसंगत नहीं होगा।
ऐसे में अगर ऊपर लिखी गयी दोनों बातों को आधार बना कर निर्णय लिया जाये तो संसद सदस्य अजय भट्ट एक स्वाभाविक पसन्द बन कर उभरते हैं क्योंकि वह ब्राह्मण और कुमाऊं दोनों अनिवार्यताओं को पूरा करते हैँ।

<ins>भाजपा आलाकमान अजय भट्ट को मुख्यमंत्री बनाती है तो प्रदेश अध्यक्ष और मुख्यमंत्री दोनों ब्राह्मण समाज से हो जायेंगे।</ins>
<ins>उसके लिए अगर तीरथ सिंह को मुख्यमंत्री की जिम्मेदारी से मुक्त करके प्रदेश अध्यक्ष बना दिया जाये तो ब्राह्मण /ठाकुर के साथ साथ गढ़वाल /कुमाऊं दोनों समस्याओं का सफल समाधान हो सकता है।</ins>
<ins>इस से ना सिर्फ तीरथ सिंह रावत जी का सम्मानजनक पुनर्वासन हो जायेगा, बल्कि भाजपा के मुख्यमंत्री बदलने के फैसले/मजबूरी पर इस मुद्दा बनाने को तैयार बैठी कांग्रेस और आम आदमी पार्टी के मुँह पर भी ताला लग जायेगा।</ins>

अब देखना दिलचस्प होगा की चुनाव मशीन भाजपा का थिंक टैंक क्या रास्ता निकालता है।

उत्तराखंड का संवैधानिक संकट - बन सकता है भाजपा का संकट मोचन

<img src="https://api-discussion.policharcha.com/1624270356695" alt="All you need to know about the Mehul Choksi case" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

In the latest chargesheet filed by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against fugitive Diamond Merchant, Mehul Choksi, it has added 'destruction of charges' to the already long list of charges. CBI has accused Choksi of cheating, forgery, falsifying accounts, criminal conspiracy, and bribery under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The first chargesheet, filed back in 2018, accused Choksi and 21 other individuals in the case.
The latest supplementary chargesheet is expected to be shared with authorities, and the High Court of Justice in Dominica in a bid to bring Choksi back from the Caribbean islands. Choksi, the main accused in 13,500 cr Punjab National Bank scam, currently remains arrested in Dominica where he is facing charges of illegal entry.
<ins>What's happening in the Carribbean?</ins>
Mehul Choksi mysteriously disappeared from the islands of Antigua and Barbuda on May 23. Antigua and Barbuda is a country in the Eastern Caribbean. Choksi was an Antiguan citizen since 2018. His disappearance initiated a political clash in Antiguan Parliament as the opposition slammed the Prime Minister of Antigua and Barbuda, Gaston Browne, by accusing him of collaborating with India.
Probe to find him was launched soon by Antiguan authorities. While many expected him to move out to Cuba, he turned up in Dominica, another island group about 180 kilometres away from Antigua. He was arrested in Dominica on the charges of illegal entry. Indian authorities soon sent a private plane with a team of 8 officials to facilitate his extradition back to the country, but the matter remains in the Eastern Caribbean Court as of now. India has no extradition treaty with Dominica.
-------------------------
Also read: <a href="https://policharcha.com/article/internationalrelations/dad8167e-ee83-4094-add6-2c496ac628a5/extradition-laws-in-india-vijay-mallyas-case?fbclid=IwAR3GwyJkmBn8f8epCyLIXMjIaAtDMxdeoaSwC0djNZr8xCwKp_TkeuLX-HI" target="_blank">Extradition laws in India</a>&nbsp;
-------------------------&nbsp;
Some reports suggested that Mehul Choksi had fled Antigua fearing his extradition to move out to Cuba. India has extradition treaty with 50 countries, but Cuba is not one of them. According to these reports, Choksi's plans failed and he ended up in Dominica. Choksi's lawyers have refuted all these claims stating that Choksi was abducted from Antigua, and was forcefully brought to Dominica after being honey trapped by a woman. According to his lawyers, the businessman was a friend of that woman for six months now, and she with some other men had abducted him on May 23, and brought him to Dominica on a yacht. They also say that the people on Yacht appeared to be Indian and Antiguan officials.
The High Court of Justice Commonwealth of Dominica has currently issued a stay order on his repatriation from the country. Indian authorities are expected to face a lot of hurdles in the extradition process.
<ins>The citizenship saga</ins>
The citizenship of Mehul Choksi is expected to make things tougher for Indian authorities. Choksi's lawyers claim that he is no longer a citizen of India as India does not allow a person to have double citizenship. According to Indian laws, as soon as a person acquires the citizenship of another country, he/she ceases to be an Indian citizen.&nbsp;&nbsp;
“Any citizen of India who by naturalisation, registration, otherwise voluntarily acquires, or has at any time between the 26th January, 1950 and the commencement of this Act, voluntarily acquired the citizenship of another country shall, upon such acquisition or, as the case may be, such commencement, cease to be a citizen of India,”. Section 9 of Indian Citizenship Act, 1955, states.
India has argued that it has not yet cancelled Choksi's Indian citizenship. "Choksi submitted an application to the Indian mission in Guyana in 2018, renouncing his citizenship, but Home Ministry advised consular office in India to 'consider rejection of his declaration of renunciation', citing various deficiencies", said an affidavit filed by the Indian authorities in the Dominican court. The affidavit argues that since Choksi has not contested this decision in India, he remains an Indian citizen.
Indian authorities have also said that since Choksi obtained Antiguan citizenship by 'fraud', the claim regarding his citizenship cancellation cannot be maintained. Choksi's lawyers termed this affidavit as "uncalled for."
Mehul Choksi obtained an Antiguan citizenship in 2017 under its Citizenship by Investment Program some weeks before his departure from India. He has been in Antigua since then. Antiguan authorities have also been attempting to cancel his citizenship, and even his Antiguan citizenship's matter is in court. Choksi also claimed that he was brutally beaten Indian and Antiguan during his abduction. He also shared pictures of bruises over his body with red eyes. These injuries have added another layer in this case.
The politics in both the islands is also playing its role. Antigua and Barbuda's Prime Minister Gaston Browne has been quite vocal about his willingness to support Indian cause. He told ANI in an interview that Choksi will not be allowed to enter Antigua. He also urged Dominica to directly send him to India rather than sending him back to Antigua, where he will enjoy legal protection due to his citizenship.
The opposition party in Antigua has not been happy with Browne's stance. He has accused the Prime Minister of collaborating with India to send an Antiguan citizen out of his country.
There are also reports that the Opposition party in Antigua and the Dominican Government are planning to help Choksi's cause in return of political funding. According to local media of Antigua, the businessman is trying to build local political support for himself.
<ins>The scam</ins>
Diamond Merchants Neerav Modi and Mehul Choksi allegedly cheated Punjab National Bank (PNB) by availing credits worth more than ₹7000 cr from foreign banks on the basis of fraud Letter of Understanding (LoU) issued by PNB staff which were siphoned by them. The higher level officials of Brady House branch of Mumbai in PNB had full knowledge of the fraudulent transactions.
An LoU is a guarantee given by an issuing bank to Indian banks having branches abroad to grant short-term credit to the applicant.
Choksi combined with bank officials to get 165 LoUs and 58 FLCs (Foreign Letters of Credit) by fraud, according to the latest chargesheet. CBI suspects a total of 347 fraud LoUs and FLCs between 2014 and 2016.
Before the scam gained public knowledge, Choksi moved out of India. Indian authorities, since then, have been trying to bring him back to the country. Nirav Modi is residing in London while his partner in crime was staying in Antigua all this while.

All you need to know about the Mehul Choksi case

<img src="https://discussion.policharcha.in/1619704390798" alt="After initial hiccup, Indo-US partnership back on track" style="float:none;height: auto;width: auto"/>

The second wave of Coronavirus has hit India harder than the first one, marking over 3 lakh Covid positive cases per day over the last week. The overwhelming second wave has crumbled the healthcare system of India, and has almost negated the efforts we had put in to tackle the first wave.
The last thing the Indian Government wanted in this phase of pandemic, when oxygen is a luxury to citizens of the country, is a bilateral relations hiccup with one of its strategic ally, the United States.
After the initial setback in which the White House had maintained silence over the request by Serum Institute of India to lift restrictions from the export of raw materials required to manufacture Covishield, US has decided to come to the aid of India.
At the official level, External Affairs Minister, S Jaishankar had raised the matter before his US counterpart last week as the situation got out of hand in India. The Indian ambassador in Washington had also taken up the issue to lift restrictions imposed on the export of critical raw materials and equipment.
It was after a telephonic conversation between the Indian NSA, Ajit Doval, and his American counterpart, Jake Sullivan that some normalcy prevailed.
“The United States is determined to help the people of India. We will continue to stand together in our shared battle against COVID-19,” Sullivan said in a tweet as the White House declared that the US will aid India in this time of need and will send supplies to India immediately.
The US has agreed to deploy not only the required raw materials for vaccine manufacturing, but also the other supplies needed for better management and protection against the disease.
Supplies worth more than $100 million will be sent to India. According to the White House, the Biden administration is shipping 1,100 cylinders, 1,700 oxygen concentrators, 1.5 crore N95 masks, around 10 lakh testing kits, and 20,000 treatment courses of Remdesivir by Thursday, and more will come in the next week.
<ins>Background</ins>
Major vaccine manufacturer of India, Serum Institute, which is manufacturing the Covishield Vaccine, import raw materials from the United States where Biden administration has curbed the export of raw materials to fulfil the domestic demand.
Last year in November, Biden was elected as the US President, whose election campaign promise was that his administration will provide as many as 100 million vaccination shots to American people in first 100 days in office.
One of the two main American Covid-19 vaccine manufacturer, Pfizer Inc. cut short its vaccine target by half in the same month citing shortage of raw materials. The pharma company had planned to produce over 1.2 billion mRNA Covid-19 vaccine shots in 2021, but due to the raw material shortages in the US and Europe, it reduced the target by half which would directly affect the promise made by Biden in election campaign.
As a result, the United States invoked the Defense Production Act (DPA) in February this year in order to deal with a shortage of critical medical supplies during the coronavirus pandemic as well as to accelerate the production of vaccine.
Passed in the aftermath of WWII, the law gives the executive branch – President being its head – substantial powers. The act enables the US President to direct private companies to prioritise orders from the federal government, and to allocate materials, services, and facilities for national defence purpose.
In the crux, this War-era law provides the President significant authority to control industries within the country. Before Biden invoked the law to speed-up the vaccination efforts, previous administration under Trump also used the law to limit exports of medical goods, and increase production of critical supplies last year.
<ins>Developments from last week</ins>
India is being devasted by a horrific wave of Covid-19, mere months after it was noted as an odd exception to the global chaos, having suffered relatively few cases and deaths through the winter.
India is now recording more infections per day – as many as 3,50,000 – than any other country has since the pandemic began. India’s rapid deterioration is now attracting global concern due to the pictures coming from the land.
The worsening situation in India has increased the demand of Covid-19 vaccine as nationwide lockdown would slide the country again into deep economic and internal migration crisis.
The ‘no response’ from the White House over the weekend raised some serious questions in policy circles in India on continuing the alliance and trusting the United States as a strategic partner.
The US State Department spokesperson responded in the press conference when asked about lifting embargo on raw materials, and said, “What I will say broadly is that the US, first and foremost, is engaged in an ambitious and effective and, so far, successful effort to vaccinate the American people, and it’s not only in our interest to see Americans vaccinated, it’s in the interests of the rest of the world to see Americans vaccinated.”
This statement reinforced the attitude of US foreign policy makers that American lives are far more important for them. Trump is out of the office, but his ‘American First’ attitude is here to stay.
Last year, when pandemic hit the world, the most effected country in the world was the US, and on the President Trump’s request India lifted the ban on the export of two key drugs, Hydroxychloroquine and Paracetamol, which proved to be effective in mitigating symptoms of Covid-19.
Last week, when India was facing a dire situation, US did not reciprocate the actions, despite already vaccinating a considerable number of its population and sitting on close to 40 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine in the stockpile, a stockpile which they are not even using. The frictions in bilateral relationship during the worst health crisis of the century could have had long lasting effects if the repair work had not been done.&nbsp;
The silence of the top US leadership on this matter did not go down well in New Delhi, especially against the backdrop of the agreement on vaccine production and delivery at the first virtual summit of Quad leaders in March.
The Biden-Modi call came a day after US NSA Jake Sullivan dialled his counterpart NSA Ajit Doval Sunday. Biden in a tweet said that, “just as India sent assistance to the United States as our hospitals were strained early in the pandemic, the United States is determined to help India in its time of need.”
This came after criticism of Washington over its delay in responding and its earlier cold shoulder to a request for lifting the freeze on export of raw materials linked to vaccine manufacturing.

After initial hiccup, Indo-US partnership back on track

One year has gone so fast, and though initially it felt like the impact of the pandemic will be devastating for India, we are sitting at a much more comfortable position.
From capacity building in our medical infrastructure, to confidence building in our vaccination programme, we have come a long long way in just a span of one year.
.
Everybody came together to fight the virus and minimise its effects. Special thanks to the health care workers, and frontline heroes who not only gave us a chance to survive this adversity, but also positioned us at the lead in the fight against Covid.
.
Economy took a hit, but is steadily getting back on track. Migrants workers were the ones to face the brunt of the disorder that prevailed earlier. The migrants' situation could have been handled more efficiently.
.
What are your thoughts? What we could have done differently? Are you happy with the efforts of the Government? How did the pandemic changed the dynamics of the working culture? Anything else you want to comment about?
Be sure to add your views in the comments.

On this day last year, the first case suspected for Covid-19 infection was reported in India in Thrissur district of Kerala.

<a href="/hashtag/BJP">#BJP</a> is working really hard in West <a href="/hashtag/Bengal">#Bengal</a>, can they win?

What do you think about the upcoming #Bengal assembly elections?

Already world is dealing with Covid19.

But China is using this 'opportunity' to engage in creating complications across its borders, whether land with India or sea, in South China Sea.

Now it has fulfilled Bangladesh's long term demand of reduction in tariffs, and that too by 97%! The timing couldnt be perfect.

Where is China headed to?

How realistic is our this thought that we should Boycott Chinese Products in response to the Dragon's aggression across the border?

Wallet vs Bullet

As we all are aware about the "Vande Bharat Mission" Exercise, known as the World's biggest expatriation exercise of the world, taking off today. What ae your opinions on this?
Do you think this is the correct step, correct timing to start something like this as we already know that the COVID19 cases in India are soaring rapidly. This expatriation might bolster the Pandemic and could give catastorphic results. I am sharing some of the main points below.
1. The mission is all about bringing stranded Indians from abroad.
2. 64 flights over 1 week to repatriatestranded Indians.
3. 14,800 Indians from 12 countries to be brought back in phase1.

Is it the correct step and time for THE REPATRIATION EXERCISE of the Indians from U.A.E?? 

would like to know what you feel is the setting root for such crimes?

I am more than active on twitter and it has actually helped me to find out more from different perspectives and do research. In India right now internet is provided at a very cheap rate for everyone , so less than thankfully many labourers have the connection. Now a new trend which has commenced is low grade small movies from few production houses like fliz,gupchup etc where in they have started to show similar adult movies or porn being a welcomed route. It just doesn't need any acting skills and their is nothing in it except of the scenes and they are readily available over the net. Mixed with the languages used in songs and movies along with individual albums these days, that is degrading the humans and more so the females.
Isn't it the time to get in some strict actions in place now as even many such other atrocities like domestc violence and rapes have always played a key role in degrading the life of woman in our nation. ?

Boys locker room

There has been a lot of discussion on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/pmcares?source=note&epa=HASHTAG" target="_blank"><a href="/hashtag/pmcares"><a href="/hashtag/pmcares"><a href="/hashtag/pmcares">#pmcares</a></a></a></a> .Some say it is a replica of <a href="https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/pmnrf?source=note&epa=HASHTAG" target="_blank"><a href="/hashtag/PMNRF"><a href="/hashtag/PMNRF">#PMNRF</a></a></a> and others are questioning its transparency and use.
Some Facts:
1. <a href="https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/pmnrf?source=note&epa=HASHTAG" target="_blank">#PMNRF</a> was introduced to bring back people displaced from Pakistan and contribute a small portion towards medical treatment. <a href="https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/pmcaresfund?source=note&epa=HASHTAG" target="_blank"><a href="/hashtag/pmcaresfund">#pmcaresfund</a></a> is just about <a href="https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/covid19?source=note&epa=HASHTAG" target="_blank"><a href="/hashtag/covid19"><a href="/hashtag/covid19">#covid19</a></a></a>.
2. Relief funds set up state government don't fall under CSR Donations - <a href="https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/companiesact?source=note&epa=HASHTAG" target="_blank"><a href="/hashtag/companiesact">#companiesact</a></a> Act,2013. Ironical when the party which placed it now questions it knowing that it will need an amendment to change it.

3.Contribution of funds to <a href="https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/sdma?source=note&epa=HASHTAG" target="_blank"><a href="/hashtag/SDMA">#SDMA</a></a> will be taken as <a href="https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/csr?source=note&epa=HASHTAG" target="_blank"><a href="/hashtag/CSR"><a href="/hashtag/CSR">#CSR</a></a></a> Expenditure. Why are some states complaining and politicising it rather than asking the corporates to contribute under it and avail <a href="https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/csr?source=note&epa=HASHTAG" target="_blank">#CSR</a> Benefits under prevailing law??
4. States get 41% share of the revenue under 15th Finance Commission so it's time they chip in because the way I see, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/pmcares?source=note&epa=HASHTAG" target="_blank">#pmcares</a> is doing what it is supposed to.
5. <a href="https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/pmcares?source=note&epa=HASHTAG" target="_blank">#pmcares</a> will be audited by independent auditors. <a href="https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/pm-cares-to-be-audited-by-independent-auditors/articleshow/75112792.cms?fbclid=IwAR0UARVDu33NvYzBfgDSwwyDeGFBtcuXcIydiFX9vVbbwLTZon8BF5TL_lA" target="_blank">https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/pm-cares-to-be-audited-by-independent-auditors/articleshow/75112792.cms</a>

Isn't it high time we forget the <a href="https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/religion?source=note&epa=HASHTAG" target="_blank"><a href="/hashtag/religion">#religion</a></a> and <a href="https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/party?source=note&epa=HASHTAG" target="_blank"><a href="/hashtag/party">#party</a></a> based bias and unite as a nation. Or does it require more <a href="https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/covid19?source=note&epa=HASHTAG" target="_blank">#covid19</a> deaths for us to finally stop politicising everything?

When will we unite as a nation by keep religion and politics aside?

India is one of the fastest growing major economies in the world, has the largest young workforce, most densely populated country (and the largest consumer market).&nbsp;

BUT is it sufficient?

As, on the other side:
1. We are still lacking the basic infrastructure to support large scale manufacturing. As we are still largely dependent on our service sector and primary sector, and have over the years grown in these two primarily ,leaving our manufacturing capabilites underdeveloped ?

2. Is our young huge workforce "skilled" also?

3. Do we have simple Economic, Labour &amp; Corporate laws in place to permit easy entry, exit &amp; working of the firms/corporate?

4. Are our Income tax laws favourable for foreign countries for setting up manufacturing facilities in India?

5. Do we have proper transportation network for movement of goods within india and for export outside india? Like: Dedicated freight corridors, Developed Ports, ICDs (Inland Container Depots) etc.

6. Are our export clearances easy &amp; whether our FTP(Foreign Trade Policy) is really making impact for increasing exports?

On this day last year, the first case suspected for Covid-19 infection was reported in India in Thrissur district of Kerala.

What do you think about the upcoming #Bengal assembly elections?

Where is China headed to?

Wallet vs Bullet

News & Articles