84th Annual Academy Awards: ‘Saving Face’ Wins First Oscar for Pakistan

The 84th Annual Academy Awards were presented in Los Angeles on February 26. They were hosted by comedian Billy Crystal.
“The Artist” bagged five Oscars, including best picture, becoming the first silent movie to win Hollywood's highest honors since the original Oscar ceremony 83 years ago. It is the first silent winner since the First World War saga “Wings,” which was named outstanding picture at the first Oscars in 1929.
In the black-and-white comic melodrama category, the best actor award went to Jean Dujardin and the best director to Michel Hazanavicius.
In a night of few surprises, the other top Oscars went to Meryl Streep for best actress for the movie “The Iron Lady,” Octavia Spencer as supporting actress for “The Help.” In a night where first timers and veterans were recognized, Streep became the fifth actor to win three awards, the previous winners being Jack Nicholson, Ingrid Bergman and Walter Brennan. She is now only a step away to match Katharine Hepburn’s four Oscar record.
Christopher Plummer as supporting actor for “Beginners.” The 82-year-old Plummer became the oldest acting winner ever for his role as an elderly widower who comes out as gay in “Beginners.”
The other wins for “The Artist” were for musical score and art direction. Martin Scorsese's Paris adventure “Hugo” also won five Oscars, all in technical categories. Streep's win was her first Oscar in 29 years, since she won best actress for “Sophie's Choice.” She had lost 12 times in a row since then. Streep also has a supporting-actress Oscar for 1979's “Kramer vs. Kramer.”
Woody Allen won the original Screenplay Oscar for “Midnight In Paris”, about a novelist adrift in a romantic reimagining of 1920s Paris. Seventy-six-year-old Allen has been nominated for an Oscar 25 times and this was his fourth win, who won for directing and screenplay on his 1977 best-picture winner “Annie Hall” and for screenplay on 1986's “Hannah and Her Sisters.”
Allen also is the record-holder for 15 writing nominations, and his three writing Oscars ties the record shared by Charles Brackett, Paddy Chayefsky, Francis Ford Coppola and Billy Wilder.
“The Artist”, nominated in 10 categories, also won Oscars for best original score and best costume design.
“Hugo”, with 11 nominations, won five trophies in the technical categories including the Visual Effects, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing, Cinematography and Art Direction but the movie failed to win in the key categories.
First Oscar for Pakistan
A Pakistani short movie on the tribulation and courage of victims of acid attacks won a historic trophy at the 2012 Academy Awards, making its codirector Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy the first from the country to win an Oscar. The movie ‘Saving Face’ by Daniel Junge and Chinoy, the first ever Pakistani movie to be nominated for the prestigious award won the Documentary (Short Subject) Academy.
The movie follows British plastic surgeon Dr Mohammad Jawad, who returns to his homeland to help victims of acid burns and performs reconstructive surgeries on survivors. It also follows the story of a woman as she fights to see that the perpetrators of the crime are imprisoned for life.
The documentary, which is filmed across Islamabad, Rawalpindi and the small towns of Punjab, released in the United States in November. It is due to release in the United Kingdom in March, following which it will be released in Pakistan. Chinoy has also received the Emmy award for her documentary Pakistan: Children of the Taliban in 2010.
Other Winners
"A Separation", directed by Asghar Farhadi, became the first Iranian movie to win the best foreign Oscar trophy. Written and directed by Asghar Farhadi, the domestic drama focuses on a couple going through a divorce and touches on traditions, justice, and male-female relationships in modern Iran. "A Separation" was regarded as the front-runner for the foreign language Oscar after sweeping the awards circuit in Europe and the United States. It also garnered an Oscar nomination for best original screenplay but failed to win in that category. It was the second Iranian film to be nominated for an Oscar, and the first to win.
Johnny Depp voiced "Rango" defeated "A Cat in Paris", "Chico & Rita", "Kung Fu Panda 2", "Puss in Boots" to win Gore Verbinski an Oscar in the best animated category.
Movie editing honours went to Kirk Baxter and Angus Wall for "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo". "Undefeated", by TJ Martin, Dan Lindsay and Rich Middlemas, won the Oscar in the documentary feature category.
"Saving Face", by Daniel Junge and Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy, brought Pakistan its first Oscar in the documentary short category. "Iron Lady" won Mark Coulier and J Roy Helland Oscar trophies in the make-up category. "Man or Muppet" from "The Muppets" won Bret McKenzie a trophy in the original song category.
"The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr Morris Lessmore" by William Joyce and Brandon Oldenburg won in the short movie animated category where as "The Shore" by Terry George and Oorlagh George took home the trophy in the short movie live action category.

Referendum in Syria on New Constitution

Syrians have voted on a new draft constitution aimed at quelling the country’s uprising by ending the ruling Baath Party’s five-decade domination of power, but the Opposition announced a boycott and clashes were reported across the country. The move could keep President Bashar al-Assad in power until 2028. The result is viewed as a foregone conclusion.
Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin issued a strong warning to the West against military intervention in Syria, its longtime ally, but US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made clear there was no enthusiasm in Washington for war.
The International Red Cross and Syrian Arab Red Crescent were still negotiating with Syrian authorities and the opposition in an effort to get aid into strife-torn areas of the embattled city of Homs, where conditions were said to be grim.
The country has 14.6 million eligible voters who were asked to cast ballots on whether they approve or reject the recently drafted constitution in more than 14,000 polling stations around the country.
In regions like the restive central city of Homs, where shelling by government forces has left hundreds dead, or the northwestern province of Idlib and the southern region of Daraa where rebels clash frequently with the security forces, turnout is likely to be minimal.
Antigovernment Protests
More than 5000 people have been killed in Syria's violent crackdown against protesters, the UN rights chief has told the Security Council, recommending that the regime of President Al-Assad be referred to the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity.
Foreign journalists were taken by the Information Ministry to the Damascus neighborhood of Rukneddine and the Damascus suburb of Barzeh that witnessed antigovernment protests in the past months. Few voters were at the polling stations in either area.
Earlier this month, President Al-Assad called for a referendum on the new constitution — which allows for at least a theoretical opening of the country’s political system — as an effort to placate critics and end the 11-month uprising against his rule.
Creating Multiparty System
The new charter would create a multiparty system in Syria, which has been ruled by the Arab Socialist Baath Party since a 1963 coup. It also states that the president, who has been a member of the Assad family since 1970, can only be in office for a maximum of two seven-year terms.
Such changes were unthinkable a year ago, but after the uprising began in March and Assad’s crackdown that killed thousands of people, the vast majority of opposition groups say they accept nothing less than Assad abandoning power.
The two main umbrella opposition groups, the Syrian National Council and the National Coordination Body for Democratic Change in Syria, have called for a boycott. Some groups have also called for a general strike to coincide with the referendum.
In the capital Damascus, where Assad retains support among religious minorities and the business class, many said they were eager to vote.
Party Pluralism
According to a civil servant, “This is a good constitution. It calls for party pluralism and the president can only hold the post for two terms. These did not exist in the past.”
In Barzeh, which recently witnessed intense antigovernment protests, about 20 percent of the shops were closed, apparently in compliance with the calls for a strike. Turnout was very low at a polling station in the area, with a person coming every few minutes to cast a ballot. In Rukneddine, turnout was also low. People cast ballots as they arrived with no need to stand in line.
UN Resolution
The UN General Assembly has already voted 137 to 12 to approve a resolution calling for an immediate halt to President Al-Assad's violent crackdown on dissent.
China, Russia and Iran were among the nations that opposed the text put forward by Egypt and other Arab states that condemned "widespread and systematic violations of human rights" in Syria.
Seventeen UN member states abstained from voting on the resolution, which came just days after Russia and China joined forces to use their veto power to derail a similar text in the UN Security Council.
The International Red Cross and Syrian Arab Red Crescent were still negotiating with Syrian authorities and the opposition in an effort to get aid into strife-torn areas of the embattled city of Homs, where conditions were said to be grim.
Assessment
The only way to resolve the situation in Syria is through a Syrian-led political process, and that means dialog. The Western nations instead switch gears and turn into regime change mode, discouraging dialog, discouraging dialogue within Syria, discouraging dialog between the Arab League and Syria. This is very dangerous.
In fact they make no secret of the fact that they want regime change. In numerous statements you can trace their policy, which cannot be conducive to a political process.
No one wants to see a repeat of Libya in Syria, or of the war in Iraq, which went against a decision by the UN Security Council. Any decision on Syria will require the support and shared responsibility of Moscow to make it legitimate. One suggestion is for Russia to guarantee the interests and security of the minorities in Syria, Lebanon and Egypt, who fear reprisals by the Sunni majority if Al-Assad government (a privileged minority) were to fall. This would be a way for Russia to take a morally correct and a politically promising stance.

Polio Eradication in India: Big Challenge for Government

Additional Secretary, Health Anuradha Gupta has said that India is inching closer to the goal of polio eradication and hopes to be free of the deadly viral infection by 2014. She was pointing to the fact that over 90 per cent environmental samples taken from sewage disposal sites across migration hubs of India to determine the presence of the virus in the air had been found to be negative since November 2010.
She added that India’s success will arguably be its greatest public health achievement and will provided a global opportunity to push for the end of polio.
With oral vaccines, India appears to have achieved what was once thought a Herculean task — decisively breaking the circulation of wild polio viruses that paralyzed countless children. But the use of oral vaccines, which contain live but weakened strains of the virus, can be a bit like riding a tiger. Discontinuing them, without risking a resurgence of polio that would undo all that has been achieved, is going to be a tricky exercise.
The Outbreak
The outbreak response actions were carried out jointly by the Center, State, the World Health Organization’s (WHO)-National Polio Surveillance Project, UNICEF and Rotary along with some stakeholders who identified 36 high risk blocs/municipalities and 222 high risk Gram Panchayats/wards to focus activities on. This was followed by enhanced by coordination by the local administration at all levels and 25 experienced additional Surveillance Medical Officers were deployed at each district for intensive monitoring. The vaccinators and supervisors were imparted training to improve skills trainings to improve skills & performance of vaccinators and supervisors. Approximately 9,096,609 children were vaccinated in January of 2011 which was followed by special immunization rounds on February 6 (990,586), February 13 (1,422,549), February 27 (8,996,193) and the figure remained upwards of 4,100,100 in the subsequent months.
Government’s Initiatives
The federal government is likely to step up surveillance at airports to rule out chances of cases coming in from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Nigeria, where polio is endemic. Thus far, such surveillance is happening only in case of children entering India via rail or road.
Strategies to combat the virus will be discussed at the two-day Polio Summit to be held this weekend. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will open the summit, which will be attended by health ministers of Pakistan and Nigeria.
For India, the challenge is to prevent new polio cases and block imported ones. “We already have surveillance points along borders with Pakistan. These are at Wagah, Attari and in Rajasthan. But we have to create similar surveillance points at airports. Polio can also be imported via air route. We further want to strengthen polio surveillance across borders,” Additional Secretary, Health, Anuradha Gupta said today while briefing reporters about the Polio Summit.
The India Polio Advisory Group, which advises the government on strategy, is meeting on March 16 to flag new challenges.
The summit will celebrate India’s huge polio success - of reduced infection cases, from two lakh annually in 1988 to zero last year. The last child who got wild polio virus 1 was Rukhsar from Howrah. Today, she is a motivator for the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), going door to door, asking parents to get children for polio drops. Rukhsar, infected on January 13, 2011, had never received polio drops.
So far as India’s hopes of eradication go (For WHO’s eradication status, nations must be able to remain polio-free for three consecutive years), they are real.
There has been a new case since Rukhsar’s and results of all environmental samplings have been negative since November 2010.
Environmental samples have been taken from sewage disposal sites in four migration hubs of India — Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata and Patna. This has been done to gauge presence of virus in the air.
In 2009, most Mumbai samples tested positive. But in 2011, all samples across four sites were negative. This means the virus is not circulating in the environment.
In 2009, India had reported 741 cases, half of the global burden of polio. But now, it appears on track to be rid of polio.
For the 12th Plan, the Ministry has sought Rs 4,400 crore as against Rs 5,500 crore sought in the previous plan. This because of lesser burden, Gupta explained.
Globally, however, Rotary International projects a deficit of $520 million for the polio eradication initiative.
Facts About Polio
* Last wild polio virus 1 case: January 13, 2011 (Howrah, West Bengal)* Last wild polio virus-3 case: October 22, 2010 (Pakur, Jharkhand)
*Last wild polio virus 2 case: October 1999 (Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh)
*Last polio-positive case came to surface after environmental sampling in November 2010
*Polio drops given to 17.4 crore children in one round.

Instability in Syria: West Asia Crisis Continues

Russia won a promise from Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on February 7 to bring an end to bloodshed in Syria, but Western and Arab nations acted to isolate Assad further after activists and rebels said his forces killed over 100 in the city of Homs. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, representing a rare ally on a trip to the Syrian capital – Damascus –other states are shunning, said Russia now wanted to resolve Syria's crisis in line with an Arab plan. Moscow and Beijing vetoed in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC).
The Russian mediation failed to slow a rush by countries that denounced the Russian-Chinese veto three days ago to corner Syria diplomatically and cripple Assad with sanctions in hopes of toppling him and encouraging reforms to avert chaos in a region straddling major fault lines of Middle East conflict.
Earlier on February 5, Russia and China joined forces in a double veto to knock down a Western-Arab UNSC Resolution backing an Arab League plan for President Al-Assad to step aside. The other 13 council members voted in favor of the resolution, which would have said that the council "fully supports" the Arab League plan aimed at ending 11 months of bloodshed as Syria has sought to crush an anti-Assad uprising.
Both Moscow and Beijing do not agree with the Arab League’s approach, which was supported by the US and its West European allies. The opponents of the resolution wanted a consensus to be arrived at before taking it to the Security Council which was not possible. The two Asian giants fear that once they approve of the UN intervention to resolve the crisis in Syria, a sovereign nation, tomorrow the method can be used against them also. But they are not justified in going against the will of the Syrian masses. As the world has seen, dictators like Al-Assad have no regard for people’s aspirations for democracy. They can kill any number of people to perpetuate their autocratic rule. What happened in Libya, Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen is before all of us to see.
At present, Russia and China both believe they were deceived into abstaining rather than using their veto. Although Moscow has sought to distance itself from the brutalities of the Assad regime, which is now using heavy weapons against protesters, the February 4 veto is a shot in the arm for Damascus. But the US approach, which has included strident calls for President Assad to go, does not open a path for an urgent political solution to the violence either. One of the problems is that the opposition to the regime is severely fragmented.
In November 2011, the Arab League has suspended Syria until President Al-Assad implements an Arab deal to end violence against protesters, and called for sanctions and transition talks with the opposition. The League has long been seen by tens of millions of people throughout West Asia and North Africa as toothless and a puppet of the despots, dictators, and absolute monarchs who comprise the majority of its governments. This time 18 of the 22 members voted for the proposal at an emergency meeting in Cairo, with three — Syria, Yemen, and Lebanon — voting against and Iraq abstaining.
Killings of Innocent People
Syrian forces unleashed a barrage of mortars and artillery on the battered city of Homs, sending terrified residents fleeing into basements and killing more than 300 people in what appeared to be the bloodiest episode in the nearly 11-month-old uprising. However, the Syrian Government denied the assault. It said the reports were part of a “hysterical campaign” of incitement by armed groups against Syria.
There were signs that the bombardment in Homs, Syria's third largest city, was in response to moves by army defectors to solidify their control in several neighborhoods. There were reports that defectors set up new checkpoints in several areas, and two activists from Homs said defectors attacked a military checkpoint in the Khaldiyeh District and captured 17 soldiers. The activists spoke on condition of anonymity to protect themselves from retaliation.
Ongoing Protests
Undoubtedly, the worst news of all is that this probably means that Syria is heading down into the same kind of hell that Lebanon went through in its fifteen-year civil war (1975-90).
The Syrian protests began as a brave attempt to emulate the non-violent revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt. The Assad regime would kill people, of course, but if the protesters stood fast and refused to kill back, ultimately the regime’s support would just drain away. Non-violence was doubly important in the Syrian case, because if it were a violent revolution various minorities would feel gravely threatened.
However, the non-violent strategy has foundered on the rock of Syria’s sectarian and ethnic divisions. Sunni deserters from the Army started fighting back, and all the other communities took fright. Now it’s a civil war in which the regime has the heavy weapons but the Sunni Arabs have the numbers.
India’s Decision
By going along with the vetoed UNSC Resolution on Syria, India primarily expressed its disappointment with the continued prevarication by the Assad government in implementing the political package of reforms it promised late last year and over several incidents of armed assault on peaceful protesting congregations since discontent engulfed the country in 2011.
Hardeep Puri, India's permanent representative in the United Nations, read with his explanation of vote, showed that New Delhi was upset at the winding up of the Arab League's observer mission in Syria but it differed widely from the Arab League's prescriptions, reflected in the draft resolution. Unlike the Arab League and the draft resolution, India did not ask for multiparty elections in a time frame or the freedom of movement sought all over the country for a wide range of actors from AL observers to the international media and humanitarian organizations.
India has demonstrated its capacity to take a clear stand on any regional or global issue. It is not a question of going along with the US and the rest of the West. India has to play its own independent role to protect its interests in West Asia.
Need of the Hour
Syria is just as complex a society as Lebanon, although we can still hope that the war does not go on as long. And it’s entirely possible that the Assad regime, whose senior ranks are mostly drawn from the Alawite minority (only 10 percent of the population), has deliberately chosen civil war. Better that than surrender power and expose the Alawites to the vengeance they fear from all those whom they have ruled for the past 40 years.
The Western countries have only themselves to blame for alienating what could have been powerful and influential allies in this terrible and protracted crisis. Russia's unwillingness to go along with a US-led process stems, in large measure, from its anger at western conduct over Libya. The UNSC Resolution of March 2011 imposed only a no-fly zone but served, in reality, as a cover for North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)'s aim of violent regime change in Syria.
The Syrian National Council (SNC) is at odds with both the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and the National Coordination Committee (NCC). Moreover, with the regime in Syria drawn from the 10 per cent Alawite Shia minority, Sunni extremist groups have jumped into the fray. The P-5 and Arab League, along with India, Brazil and South Africa, must go back to the drawing board and come up with a new plan of action that can end the violence and set the stage for a Syrian-led political solution.
Country’s Brief Facts
Modern Syria gained its independence from France in 1946 but has lived through periods of political instability driven by the conflicting interests of these various groups. From 1958-61 it united with Nasser's Egypt, but an army coup restored independence before the Alawite-controlled pan-Arab Baath (Renaissance) party took control in 1963. It rules to this day.
The Baath government has seen authoritarian rule at home and a strong anti-Israeli policy abroad, particularly under former President Hafez al-Assad. In 1967 Syria lost the Golan Heights to the Israelis, while civil war in neighboring Lebanon allowed it to extend its political and military influence in the region.
Syria pulled its forces out of Lebanon in 2005, having come under intense international pressure to do so after the assassination of Lebanese former premier Rafik Hariri. A UN report implicated Syrian and pro-Syria Lebanese officials in the killing.
The government has dealt harshly with domestic opposition. Tens of thousands are reported to have been killed in the crackdown on the 1982 uprising of the Muslim Brotherhood in Hama. In 2011 security forces used tanks, gunfire and mass arrests to try crush anti-government street protests inspired by the Arab Spring that toppled the leaders of Tunisia and Egypt.

Mutiny in Maldives: President Nasheed Resigns

The first democratically elected president of the Maldives resigned on February 7 and was replaced by his vice president after the police and army clashed in the streets of the island nation amid protests over the arrest of a top judge.
Keeping the uncontrolled situation in view, President Mohamed Nasheed stepped down after a police mutiny described as an “attempted coup”, capping weeks of upheaval. Mutiny by sections of the police and the army forced President Nasheed to quit. Vice President Mohamed Waheed, who previously worked as a top UNICEF official and clashed with Nasheed over the chief justice’s detention, was sworn in as president.
The resignation of President Nasheed marked a stunning fall for the former human rights campaigner who defeated the nation's longtime ruler in the country's first multiparty election.
Beginning of Crisis
The dramatic day began in the early hours when a group of policeman refused orders to break up an anti-government protest. It is said that members of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) were assaulted by officers, who later took over the state television station.
Nasheed had been facing increasingly violent street protests and a constitutional crisis ever since he got a judge arrested on January 16, after accusing him of being ‘in the pocket’ of his predecessor Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, who had ruled for 30 years before Nasheed was swept to power in 2008 as the first democratically elected President of Maldives.
Gayoom’s Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) had called for the overthrow of the government and for citizens to launch a jihad against the President. The Gayoom government had arrested Nasheed 27 times and imprisoned him for six years in all while agitating for democracy.
The situation turned ugly on February 7, with sections of the police and the army joining protesters in the capital Male and taking over the state-owned TV channel. Soon thereafter Nasheed announced that he was stepping down so that the government did not have to use force against Maldivians.
The street protests began with the arrest of the Chief Justice of the Criminal Court of Maldives, Abdulla Mohamed, on January 16, forcing the government to seek assistance from the UN as well as from the Commonwealth, for a team of legal experts to visit the country and help resolve the impasse.
The government had accused Judge Abdulla of being in complicity with criminals. “The opposition has been inciting people and spreading hatred to mobilise activists on the ground; the inflammatory speeches and incitement to violence is not something that the government can condone,” Maldivian Foreign Secretary Mohamed Naseer, who was in Colombo in the last week of January, had said.
The opposition PPM denied allegations of extremism. A PPM official in the Maldives claimed that violence during the protests had been instigated by vigilanttes unleashed by the government, many of whom hard-core criminals released from prison under a special program called ‘second chance.’
The islands are located strategically to the south west of India and straddle what is called the 9 degree channel of sea lane of communication. Indian warships patrol the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of the islands as a goodwill gesture. The nation is within India’s sphere of influence and Indian Navy maintains regular contact.
Genesis of Problem
The issue came to a boil in mid-2010, when opposition members forced a deadlock by blocking all legislation. Stirring the pot continuously were a range of actors, from President Gayoom's half-brother, who heads an opposition party, to Islamists, who accused Nasheed of diluting the official religion. In the past few weeks, Male saw protests by Islamic radicals, who vandalised a mural presented by Pakistan to commemorate the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) summit in November 2011 as “un-Islamic”, and a Buddha statue gifted by Sri Lanka.
The opposition had also accused Nasheed of being anti-Islamic. Nasheed had swept to power in 2008 , pledging to introduce ‘full democracy’ to the low lying islands (1,200 of them, mostly uninhabited and none more than six feet above the sea level) and campaigning passionately on the dangers of climate change and rising sea levels.
India’s Stance
India has acted wisely by keeping out of the political tumult in the Maldives, and allowing events to take their own course. Entirely different circumstances dictated India's 1988 decision to send commandos to prevent a coup against Gayoom by Sri Lankan Tamil militants hired by his Maldivian opponents. In the present instance, any intervention to help Nasheed remain in power would have served neither him nor India well.
As many as 30,000 Indians in Maldives are said to be safe. Nasheed had sought military intervention by India to foil the ‘coup’. But while the India had flown in paratroopers and commandos in 1988 to foil a coup-attempt in Maldives, this time the Indian Government made it plain that it did not want to interfere.
Nevertheless, New Delhi can do without a radical Islamist state in its immediate neighborhood. India should have played a more pro-active role in helping Nasheed to tide over the crisis. This is in sharp contrast to former Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi acting decisively to thwart a coup in Maldives in 1988.
Brief Profile of New President
Hassan, who was educated at Stanford University in California, was the first television anchor in Maldives history and the first person shown live when local TV went on the air in 1978, according to his official biography.
According to Hassan’s biography, he became a top education official in the country, but eventually left under duress after getting elected to Parliament and incurring the ire of the autocratic government ruling in the 1990s. He joined UNICEF and rose to be its representative in Afghanistan, helping rebuild schools and provide health services after the fall of the Taliban.
Assessment
The present crisis that has engulfed Maldives is a manifestation of the simmering battle for control over the country’s politics and administration between Nasheed, who was elected President in 2008 when the first free and fair election was held in 2008, and his predecessor, Gayoom, a ruthless autocrat. Behind the facade of anti-Nasheed protests that have succeeded in unseating him lurks the ugly face of radical Islamists.
They have been eyeing power for some time now and the protests came as a golden opportunity for them to stage their version of the ‘Arab Spring’. Already, there are signals of Maldives adopting fanaticism as state policy. This does not augur well for India.

Nuclear Non-Proliferation Resolution

The Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) have always been in focus since more than a decade. The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) had already unanimously adopted a resolution asking all non-NPT states to join the treaty.
The 15-member council, while urging “other states” outside the NPT to join the controversial treaty as “non-nuclear states” to help rid the world of atom bombs, also urged all countries to sign and ratify the CTBT and refrain from conducting atomic tests. India has not signed the CTBT yet.
The Security Council had adopted a Nuclear Non-Proliferation Resolution. Through this resolution, the Security Council had called upon all nations to sign the NPT. The countries that have not so far signed it have been asked to do so. Under this treaty a ban has been imposed on making nuclear bomb in the future.
The “other states”, which were not named in the resolution, were a clear reference to Pakistan and India, which have not signed the NPT, but are known to have atomic arsenals, and Israel, which neither confirms nor denies having nuclear arms but is believed to have a sizeable stockpile of warheads.
The resolution also calls for talks on drafting a treaty to ban the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons. The mandate of the council came when it approved the resolution 1887 that calls on countries that have not signed the nuclear NPT “to comply fully with all their obligations”. The resolution will strengthen the NPT.
India’s Stance
A convergence of international factors — political, economic and military — has led to a situation where correct and timely decisions on the treaty can enhance India’s standing as a nuclear weapon state as well as brighten its economic prospects.
The reverse is also true. It is, therefore, important that the ongoing debate in the country on the CTBT is set on the right parameters.
Hitherto, the debate has been fudged by hangovers from the past. The NPT and CTBT have criss-crossed, their lines of distinction blurred in public perception. Another term in current international lexicon, the Fissile Material Cut Off Treaty (FMCT), adds to the confusion.
Little is understood about the FMCT and the clout that India could wield by a correct posturing on this treaty, which is still in the making. Even more than the substance of these treaties — distinct in themselves — it is the history surrounding them that has influenced opinion in this country. It would be in order, therefore, to have a glimpse of this history and a closer look at what these treaties mean to India.
India has decided to affix its signature on the treaty. India has refused to abide by the Security Council resolution asking all non-NPT nations to sign the pact, saying it cannot accept the “externally prescribed norms or standards” on issues that are contrary to its national interests or infringe on its sovereignty. India said it could not join the NPT as a non-weapon country even as it reiterated its commitment to no testing and no-first-use besides non-discriminatory universal non-proliferation.
The Indian Air Force chief recently expressed apprehension of a possibility of a nuclear attack on India. In the past also India was asked to sign the NPT, but it declined to do so pleading that unless and until nuclear-weapon nations destroy their nuclear arms, the treaty would be useless. Now, India has yet again refused to sign the NPT. At that time India stated that some other nations are in possession of nuclear weapons, hence it will need to make its own nuclear weapons for the sake of self-defense because in view of the need of self-defense it is not advisable to sign the NPT.
Now, India, once again declining to be a signatory to the treaty, vehemently opposed the UN security calls. It pleaded: "We cannot implement the regulations thrust upon other nations, for these impinge upon the sovereignty and national interests." It will not be in the country's interests to accept such decisions.
India has already taken a categorical stand not to make first use of the nuclear weapons to which it is completely committed. India's permanent representative at the United Nations, Hardip Singh Puri, has in a communication to Susan Rice of Security Council raised questions on its role in the implementation of international treaties.
India’s refusal to sign the NPT is based on unexceptionable grounds of national security. While Pakistan has been a ‘rogue state’ which has fuelled nuclear proliferation by sharing its know-how for making nuclear weapons with China, North Korea, Libya and Iran, India has had an absolutely clean record of eschewing both proliferation and aggressive intent. It is this country’s misfortune that it is flanked by a nuclear-armed China which has had expansionist designs in the past and a hand-in-glove nuclear Pakistan which is most untrustworthy and sinister. If, in the circumstances, India seeks to retain its right to stay nuclear to deter its recalcitrant neighbors, it can hardly be faulted. India’s stand that the nuclear weapon states must work towards total disarmament to carry conviction is also perfectly legitimate.
There has been an important transformation after Pokhran II: India is now unambiguously a weapon state, with transparent and credible nuclear weapon capability. The thermonuclear test, backed by advanced Indian nuclear technology, further uplifted India’s status, completely changing India’s situation vis-a-vis the CTBT. Hurdles to India to being a full signatory to the CTBT are not per se in the draft of the treaty as such but in the continuing shadow cast by the NPT. In the event, the right course would be for India to declare its adherence to the CTBT unambiguously, while reserving the final step of signing and ratifying to an assurance from the United States — and others — that in implementation of CTBT, India’s nuclear status will be equal to the five recognized weapon powers.
Demand for Amendment to NPT Treaty
Simultaneously, eight nations of the world, including India, have demanded an amendment in the NPT treaty. The Security Council has unanimously adopted a resolution on nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation. The resolution passed by 15-member SC that the remaining nations should sign the NPT. The resolution adopted under the leadership of the United States, China, and Russia also has affirmed it.

Many nations, including India have not signed the NPT. The plea put forward by them is that developed nations have built their nuclear weapon reserves and the NPT is being thrust upon other nations, which is absolutely unjustified. The question arises whether countries in possession of nuclear weapons will not browbeat countries that do not have such weapons. For instance, Pakistani rulers in the past have been holding out, lamenting nuclear attacks on India.
Obama’s Indication
US President Barack Obama first signaled his dedication to the cause of the NPT at Prague way back in April 2009. While stressing non-proliferation, and indicating his preference for reducing the US stockpile of nuclear weapons, the US leader revealingly also said, "Make no mistake: As long as these weapons exist, the United States will maintain a safe, secure and effective arsenal to deter any adversary, and guarantee that defence to our allies." This underlines that the US proposes one set of standards for itself, and another for India. This country’s long-held position has been that it is in favor of comprehensive nuclear disarmament, and that non-proliferation is not a substitute for this. President Obama is yet to offer disarmament as an attainable goal.
So long as that remains the case, it will continue to be on the wrong side of political morality. India too has been lax in not publicly countering the American stance under Obama right after Prague. It has also been remiss on another count. After the passage of UNSC Resolution 1887, its official view is that it won’t sign the NPT as a non-nuclear weapons state, whose obligations are of a different order under the NPT from those who have come on board as nuclear weapons states. This is at variance with this country’s original stance that the NPT ought to be rejected on grounds of being an inequitable arrangement that allows nuclear weapons only in the hands of a few.
Even now, India has voiced the apprehension that it is faced with a threat from Pakistani terrorists that intend to carry out a nuclear offensive against India because it is apprehended that some of the nuclear weapons of Pakistan have found their way to Al-Qaida and other groups. The United States had stated that Pakistani terrorists pose a big threat to India.
Even as the United Nations desires to make the world free of nuclear weapons as per the secretary general, it is high time to move forward. India has declined to sign the NPT, saying that it will not do so until nuclear weapon nations destroy their nuclear weapon reserves. The Indian stand is fully justified.
In varying degrees, the five NPT weapon powers are unwilling to give up their superior status which finds no place in the CTBT as such. A new brand of doublespeak nuclear diplomacy is at work. China wants India and Pakistan to give up their nuclear weapon status, citing a Security Council resolution, while France and Russia are veering round to de facto acceptance of India's nuclear weapon status provided this country accedes to the CTBT. The US, the decisive power in creation of the global non-proliferation regime, is mid-way.

India, China Agree To Eliminate Piracy

Keeping persistent threats from pirates operating off the coast of Somalia in view, two Asian giants – India and China – have agreed to cooperate with each other, roping in Japan to tackle piracy.
This is the first working relationship on the high seas between the Indian Navy and China’s People Liberation Army (Navy). The two armies have so far worked under an agreement to patrol land borders and also follow a protocol when faced with each other on the disputed Line of Actual Control. The Naval arrangement started a month ago and has provided more safety and better utilization of resources. It is a working-level meeting (on the high seas) to ensure effective communication and operations.
Independent Anti-Piracy Patrols
Warships from India, China and Japan have been deployed independently. Their role is conducting independent anti-piracy patrols in the internationally recognized transit corridor — a 480 nautical mile (approximately 890 km) long area in the Gulf of Aden. The 92-km wide corridor starts at the confluence of the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden and extends eastwards toward the Arabian Sea.
The three have so far not been part of the Combined Task Force-151, essentially a North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)-led force for anti-piracy, and nor are they part of the Eunavfor, another grouping of European countries along similar lines. Merchant ship operators have been keen that nations like India, China and Japan that are not part of the big groupings and operate independently, should cooperate among themselves as their standalone warships would then be of greater help in tackling piracy.
Transit Corridor
India has a warship on duty in the transit corridor since October 2008. China has two warships and a fleet tanker that replenishes supplies while the Japanese also have two warships along with a maritime reconnaissance plane based in Djibouti, close to Somalia.
To facilitate sharing of information, a counter-piracy platform exists and that is named Shared Awareness and Deconfliction (SHADE). It meets on a quarterly basis at Bahrain and has a convoy coordination group that provides merchant ships with naval warship protection. All navies that send warships to escort merchant vessels are extended members of SHADE. Its primary aim is to ensure effective coordination and de-confliction of military resources and operations in combating piracy.

State of Indian Economy: GDP Pegged at 8.4 Per Cent

The Central Statistical Organization (CSO) has released the quick estimates of national income. According to the CSO, the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth estimates for 2010-11 slightly lower to 8.4 per cent from 8.5 per cent projected earlier.
The country's GDP in 2010-11 at factor cost at constant prices (2004-05) grew by 8.4 per cent over the previous year. The services sector expanded by 9.3 per cent. The agriculture sector grew by 7 per cent as against 1 per cent in 2009-10. The rate of growth of industry was 7.2 per cent as against 8.4 per a year ago.
Rate of Investment
The savings rate is placed slightly lower at 32.3 per cent in 2010-11 as against 33.8 per cent in 2009-10, the fall was mainly due to a decrease in financial savings of the household sector. The gross domestic capital formation or the rate of investment is placed at 35.1 per cent in 2010-11 as against a level of 36.6 per cent in the previous fiscal.
The savings rate in 2010-11 has declined from 2009-10. The major reason for the decline is due to decrease in the rates of financial savings of household sector from 12.9 percent to 10 percent and the private corporate sector from 8.2 percent to 7.9 percent. However, the rate of savings of the public sector has increased to 1.7 percent in 2010-11 as compared to 0.2 percent in the previous year.
The growth numbers for 2010-11 seem robust when compared to the Finance Ministry's estimates for the current fiscal and the next (2012-13). With hopes of improvement in governance and speedier reforms, the ministry expressed confidence that economic growth in 2012-13 would edge up from a tad over 7 per cent during the current fiscal.
Reducing Subsidies
C. Rangarajan, chairman of the Prime Minister's Economic Advisory Council, stressed on the need to focus on reducing the overall level of subsidies as a proportion to GDP through an appropriate road map to reach the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) target of 3 per cent of GDP.
He underscored the difficulty in keeping fiscal deficit within the targeted 4.5 per cent during the current financial year but stressed on the need to keep it close to the targeted level to gain credibility.
Rangarajan also expected the GDP growth rate to be in the range of 7-7.25 per cent during 2011-12 as against the 8.4 per cent registered a year ago, given the industrial slowdown and the global economic crisis. Emphasizing that some segments of the economy were influenced by external factors, Rangarajan feared that should the European situation worsen it would affect the country's growth adversely. The global situation had affected the balance of payments situation and the rupee due to reduced inflow of capitals.
Rangarajan, however, expected the economic outlook to be better in 2012-13 with inflation and interest rates settling down to lower levels. He expected inflation to come down to 7 per cent by March-end.

India-France Defense Pact: New Delhi's Biggest Decade Deal

Dassault Aviation, a French company, has bagged the mega $10.4-billion (Rs 54,000 crore) contract to supply 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) that will give the Indian Air Force (IAF) — which is eagerly looking to replace its ageing fleets of MiGs and other fighter jets — a much-needed shot in the arm.
The original estimated cost of the deal was around Rs. 42,000 crores ($10.4 billion) in 2007, but there are indications this could escalate to between Rs. 80,000 crores to Rs. 90,000 crores (about $16-18 billion). But no official figures are available as cost negotiations are yet to begin. India will now compare its “benchmark price” at current costs to the cost at which the French are prepared to sell, and will try to scale down the French bid. Only if these talks with Dassault fail will negotiations start with “L2” (second-lowest bidder) — EADS Eurofighter.
Bidding Battle
A fierce bidding battle was witnessed between Dassault’s Rafale and European consortium Eurofighter’s Typhoon to clinch what has been billed as the mother of all defense deals. Finally, it was the twin-engine, delta wing Rafale, which emerged as the lowest bidder today.
The French firm Dassault Rafale has emerged as the lowest bidder and cheaper than its European rival EADS (maker of Eurofighter) in the tender and will be offered to supply the aircraft to the IAF.
The representatives of Dassault here were informed about the development in the morning and further negotiations on price will be held with them in the next 10-15 days.
The Rafale is used by the French Air Force and Navy and was deployed during the recent France-led NATO strikes on Libya. The final order could eventually go up to 200 aircraft as there is a provision for increasing the number of jets by 50 percent without any price hike. According to the Request for Proposal (RFP), the winner of the contract will have to supply 18 of the 126 aircraft to the Indian Air Force in 36 months in a fly-away condition from its facilities and the remaining would be produced at HAL facilities in Bangalore. The contract is likely to signed at the end of this fiscal in March or early next fiscal.
About Rafale
The Rafale, currently the main French Air Force combat aircraft, is known as an “omnirole” fighter capable of multi-role functions like air-to-ground precision strikes, nuclear strikes, anti-ship attacks, reconnaissance, close air support and air defense. The aircraft is equipped with smart sensors and rocket-boosted air-to-ground precision guided weapons with laser guidance systems, long-range missiles, anti-ship missiles and air-to-air missiles. Dassault says the Rafale was used with great success in French combat ops in Afghanistan and Libya.
Rafale is a twin engine jet and can perform various roles like offensive and defensive manoeovres besides air to air and air to ground missions. MIG-21(250 planes) and MIG-29(70 planes) are operationallydefensive and a multi-role aircraft like Rafale will reduce the number of types of aircraft flown at present by the IAF. There are more than 27 different types in the IAF inventory thereby increasing the complexity in maintenance and having separate production lines for different aircraft.
Of the 126 aircraft that will be acquired, 18 will come in “flyaway” condition in three years, while the remaining 108 will be built by state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd in the next seven years with technology transfers. The contract is expected to be signed in the next five months.
Dassualt Aviation’s Mirage-2000 fighter is already being used by the IAF for the past two decades. The product was picked up on the basis of it being the Lowest Bidder (L1), a decision arrived at after complex calculations, including the life-cycle costs. The two aircraft were chosen from a list of six, including U.S. Boeing (F/A18) and Lockheed Martin (F-16), Russian MiG-35 and Swedish Saab (Gripen), in April 2011.
Six companies, including American F-16 and F-18, Russian MiG 35, Swedish Saab Gripen alongwith Eurofighter and Dassault Rafale were in the race in the beginning. But in April 2011, the Defense Ministry shortlisted Dassault and EADS, evicting the American, Russian and Swedish bids. The process was started with the issuing of a global tender in 2007 after which all the six contenders were subjected to extensive field evaluation trials by the Indian Air Force at several locations across the globe.
Strategic Development
The IAF would reach its sanctioned strength of 42 squadrons by 2022 — it now has 34 squadrons — and commercial bids for the 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft should be opened by month-end.
To shore up its offensive and defensive capabilities and operate all types of aircraft along the border with Pakistan and China in the north and north-eastern regions, the IAF planned to expand the Nyoma advanced landing ground in Leh district of Jammu and Kashmir. The proposal was awaiting Cabinet approval.
The IAF hoped to plug the gaps in surveillance in the mountainous region by 2016-17, installing Low Level Lightweight Radars. It planned to expand the Kargil runway, so that it could operate heavy and tactical lift transport aircraft such as C130J Super Hercules and C-17 Globemaster.
The IAF would procure six more C130J Super Hercules, which would be based in the Charbatia airbase in Orissa, catering for the eastern region so far as the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.