Friday, June 3, 2016

Competition In the Indian Ocean

SOURCE:http://www.cfr.org/regional-security/competition-indian-ocean/p37201



Competition In the Indian Ocean

Author: Eleanor Albert, Online Writer/Editor
Updated: May 19, 2016
Asif Hassan/AFP/Getty Images
Introduction
The Indian Ocean is the world's third largest body of water and has become a growing area of competition between China and India. The two regional powers' moves to exert influence in the ocean include deep-water port development in littoral states and military patrols. Though experts say the probability of military conflict between China and India remains low, escalated activities (such as port development and military exercises) and rhetoric could endanger stability in a critical region for global trade flows. But the diverse nontraditional security challenges in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) also offer areas of potential collaboration for China and India, as well as other regional actors.
What is the importance of the Indian Ocean?
The Indian Ocean covers at least one fifth of the world's total ocean area and is bounded by Africa and the Arabian Peninsula (known as the western Indian Ocean), India's coastal waters (the central Indian Ocean), and the Bay of Bengal near Myanmar and Indonesia (the eastern Indian Ocean). It provides critical sea trade routes that connect the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia with the broader Asian continent to the east and Europe to the west. A number of the world's most important strategic chokepoints, including the Straits of Hormuz and Malacca through which 32.2 millions of barrels of crude oil and petroleum are transported per day—more than 50 percent of the world's maritime oil trade—are found in the Indian Ocean Region, which itself is believed to be rich with energy reserves. Nearly 40 percent (PDF) of the world's offshore petroleum is produced in the Indian Ocean, coastal beach sands and offshore waters host heavy mineral deposits, and fisheries are increasingly important for both exports and domestic consumption.


 
Why is the Indian Ocean a source of competition?
China and India are dependent on energy resources transported via the secure sealanes in the Indian Ocean to fuel their economies. India imports nearly 80 percent of its energy, mostly oil from the Middle East, and is due to overtake Japan as the world's third largest energy consumer (behind China and the United States). According to a U.S. Department of Defense report, 84 percent (PDF) of China's imported energy resources passed through Strait of Malacca from the Indian Ocean in 2012. As Beijing and New Delhi press to maintain economic growth, their dependency on the safe transport of resources will likely intensify. China's growing global influence and India's rapid economic rise have heightened the ocean's strategic value. Meanwhile, the United States' rebalance to Asia—shifting from a foreign policy dominated by the Middle East to one more centered on Asia—has also been a contributing factor elevating concern over Indian Ocean security. Diverse security challenges affect the region ranging from natural disasters to concerns over energy security, piracy, and military posturing. 
How are China and India competing in the Indian Ocean?
Both countries have developed initiatives to bolster infrastructure and other connections in the region, which the World Bank describes as among the "least economically integrated." Competition between Beijing and New Delhi is not necessarily overt, but each country is seeking to strengthen ties with smaller regional states to secure their respective security and economic interests.

Beijing's regional vision, backed by $40 billion of pledged investment, outlines its One Belt, One Road plan—combining the revitalization of ancient land-based trade routes, the Silk Road Economic Belt, with a Maritime Silk Road. China's ties with regional states have deepened, including the influx of Chinese capital into construction projects in Bangladesh, Myanmar, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. Since launching counterpiracy operations in 2009, Beijing has become increasingly active in the region. China has also undertaken efforts to modernize its military, particularly its naval deployment capabilities to protect overseas interests like personnel, property, and investments. Experts also argue that Beijing's forays into what is at times described as India's neighborhood are driven by China's excess capacity challenges—incentivizing Chinese firms out of domestic markets to compete in and open new markets abroad.



For its part, India sees itself as the natural preeminent regional power. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has doubled-down on fostering stronger diplomatic, economic, and security ties with IOR maritime states as a means to strengthen India's economy, establish its role a driver of regional growth , and simultaneously diminish China's growing appeal, writes CFR's Alyssa Ayres.


"It is India's neighbourhood that holds the key (PDF) to its emergence as a regional and global power," writes former Indian foreign secretary Shyam Saran. Though Beijing deflects claims of hegemonic aspirations, it identifies security in the IOR as a primary concern for Chinese "core interests." In 2015, a white paper charting China's military strategy indicated a shift of People's Liberation Army Navy to focus on both offshore water defense and open seas protection. Chinese behavior suggests that Beijing seeks to establish a persistent regional maritime presence. It now boasts a semipermanent naval presence through its counterpiracy activities in the Indian Ocean and has more aggressively asserted itself in the Pacific with extensive patrols and land reclamation projects in disputed waters.

"It is India's neighbourhood that holds the key to its emergence as a regional and global power."—Former Indian foreign secretary Shyam Saran

China's ambitions in the region have been described by many scholars by the "string of pearls" metaphor, which holds that China is taking on economic and investment projects with Indian Ocean states to secure ports or places where its military forces could set up naval facilities or at the very least, refueling and repair stations. Chinese experts dismiss this, claiming that China seeks access, not bases, for economic gain. C. Raja Mohan, director of Carnegie India, a regional center of the U.S.-based Carnegie Endowment think tank, argues that as rising powers, China and India's pursuit of partnerships with smaller regional states is inevitable. "Everyone is playing this game,” he says. “Bases is going to be the name of the game in the Indian Ocean, and that game is going to be pretty attractive in the coming years."


Still, "maritime competition between China and India is still nascent and should not be overblown," cautions CFR's Daniel S. Markey in a Contingency Planning Memorandum. Still, he writes that a "tit-for-tat politico-military escalation" is possible in the larger Indo-Pacific, a region spanning both the Indian and Pacific oceans.
 
What fuels China-India tensions?
China-India relations are fraught, colored by historical disputes and the perceived threat to India of China's rise. Tensions have persisted despite overtures by Chinese President Xi Jinping and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Much of the friction stems from a longstanding dispute along a 2,400-mile border in India's Arunachal Pradesh and China's Tibet and the legacy of the 1962 Sino-Indian War along the Himalayan border.


The expansion of a Chinese presence in the Indian Ocean has heightened India's concerns. Beijing says its activities are commercially motivated and intended to better protect its interests and people abroad. However, Brahma Chellaney of the Center for Policy Research (CPR), an independent Indian think tank, argues a ramped up Chinese presence in the Indian Ocean and elsewhere is consistent with Xi Jinping's intention of making maritime power central to achieving Chinese dominance in Asia.


While China's aims are disputed, both sides continue to ramp up military capabilities in the ocean region. China continues to deploy greater numbers of naval forces to support counterpiracy operations in the western Indian Ocean, and invests and sells arms, including tanks, frigates, missiles, and radar, to India's neighbors. Beijing is currently restructuring its military: Xi Jinping announced in September 2015 that the People's Liberation Army would cut 300,000 of its troops to redistribute resources to sea and air capabilities. As China adapts its military force to meet its global ambitions, its posturing has grown bolder. In October 2015, China finalized the sale of eight submarines to Pakistan, and in recent years, Chinese submarines have docked at the Sri Lankan port of Colombo and the Pakistani port of Karachi. More still, Beijing's land reclamation efforts and assertive behavior in the Pacific could bleed into the region, suggest the U.S. Naval War College's Andrew Erickson and Kevin Bond.

"Bases is going to be the name of the game in the Indian Ocean, and that game is going to be pretty attractive in the coming years."—C. Raja Mohan, director, Carnegie India

India is also reinforcing its regional maritime presence. "Activating partnerships and expanding capabilities in the Indian Ocean has been central to our quest for security," said Indian Foreign Secretary Subrahmanyam Jaishankar at the launch of Carnegie India in April 2016. The country has vowed to spend billions to build up its navy, including anti-submarine capabilities, has sent vessels to visit the South China Sea, and called for freedom of navigation and the peaceful resolution of territorial disputes as part of its Act East policy. The construction of military bases, modernized equipment and fleets, new maritime assets, and the expansion of security ties are all part of New Delhi's push to assert itself as the region's leader. Modi initiated the first bilateral India-Australia exercises and India participated in multilateral naval games in the Bay of Bengal with the United States, Australia, and Japan. David Brewster of Australian National University says there is little doubt that despite India's traditional principle of nonalignment, outreach to the United States, Australia, and Japan are calculated moves that could play a significant role in counterbalancing China.
What other countries have strategic interests in the IOR?
Small regional states, such as Bangladesh, Maldives, Myanmar, Seychelles and Sri Lanka, are recipients of both Chinese and Indian aid and investment, primarily for transport and infrastructure development. The majority of their foreign policy ties are determined by what deals can be made to help them meet their national development goals, says Nilanthi Samaranayake of Virginia-based CNA, a nonprofit research and analysis organization.


Global powers from outside of the region also have an interest in maintaining the ocean’s security. The United States operates a naval support facility—Diego Garcia—on UK-leased territory in the central Indian Ocean, while France maintains a presence in the region from Reunion, its Indian Ocean island outpost. Australia has a modern naval force operating in the ocean, and the IOR is increasingly featured (PDF) in defense, national security, and maritime strategies developed in Canberra.
What are transnational concerns in the ocean?
Despite the rise in competition, multilateral cooperation involving China, India, and other states, takes place on issues including piracy, disaster relief, and drug smuggling. The following areas show potential for expanded cooperation:

-- Counterpiracy. Piracy has been costly to ocean-faring traders but global and regional responses have shown success. Oceans Beyond Piracy, a Colorado-based non-profit, estimates that the economic cost of piracy off the Somali Coast amounted to $2.3 billion in 2014, a drop from the estimated $5.7-$6.1 billion loss (PDF) two years prior.





Source: UNITAR-UNOSAT

Counterpiracy efforts near the Gulf of Aden have been the most successful manifestation of regional cooperation. More than eighty countries, organizations, and industry groups participate in operations in the IOR under the auspices of the ad hoc, voluntary Contact Group on Piracy off the Coast of Somalia (CGPCS), created in January 2009 in response to UN Security Council Resolution 1851 (PDF) on Somali piracy and armed robbery at sea. Since military cooperation began, the volume of attacks has shrunk. Yet experts warn that pirates have turned to more sophisticated equipment (PDF) and if naval pressure in the western Indian Ocean is reduced, pirate activity would rise again.
China and India carry out anti-piracy activities independently, deploying naval vessels to escort merchant ships, provide protection, conduct rescue operations, and confiscate contraband. In April, China dispatched its twentieth naval escort task force to the Gulf of Aden. Meanwhile, India has prevented forty piracy attempts and developed an online registration service for merchants to request Indian naval escorts.

-- Search and Rescue. Another recent example of cooperation was the search effort for the Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, which disappeared en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing in March 2014. At the height of operations, twenty-six countries, including China and India, contributed to the search mission. Wreckage believed to be from the flight was discovered in July 2015.


-- Disaster Relief. There is room for growth on humanitarian aid and disaster relief cooperation. After the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami, governments, including Australia, France, India, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Pakistan, the UK, and the United States, participated in extensive relief and rehabilitation efforts (PDF). Separately, China disbursed (PDF) more than $62.2 million in aid, shipped supplies, and dispatched medical and rescue teams. More than a decade later, the IOR's vulnerability to natural disasters and the subsequent effects of climate change could provide impetus for more extensive collaboration.

-- Fisheries. Consumers in Indo-Pacific countries on average obtain 20 to 50 percent (PDF) of their animal protein from fish, and industrial fishing is an important export for smaller countries in the IOR. Regional players identify overfishing and environmental degradation as serious risks to sustainable economic development and food security, but mechanisms to establish sustainable fisheries have not been effective. The Stimson Center's David Michel blames (PDF) challenges to cooperation on the region's existing security architecture: the majority of institutions, such as the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission, only operate at a sub-regional level or focus on specific species.
 
What are the prospects for improved regional governance?
Experts say there is a growing need for an effective regional security architecture, similar to extant mechanisms among major powers in the East and South China seas, to address the IOR's diverse challenges. Regional multilateral organizations, such as the Indian Ocean Naval Symposium (IONS), which facilitates the exchange of military views to enhance communication and transparency across the region's naval forces, do exist. However, experts say IOR members must undergo an extensive region-building project for countries to be willing to act together more effectively.


China and India have expressed eagerness to assume greater responsibility (PDF) in policing maritime global commons and to be recognized as major powers. China's activities are likely to expand in conjunction with its One Belt, One Road initiative, but this does not have to come at India's expense, say some experts. "India is going to have to come to terms with China's entry into the Indian Ocean," states CNA's Samaranayake. New Delhi could also benefit from partnering with Beijing to integrate the region. Broader initiatives like the BRICS Development Bank and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) are also pulling India into to a larger leadership role alongside China.


The biggest challenge to creating coordinated effective action across the Indian Ocean is the lack of institutions of governance that cover the whole space, says CFR's Alyssa Ayres. "It may sound mundane, but institutionalized organizations with a regular diplomatic calendar and senior officials meeting to work on an agenda drive processes of consultation and action."
This Backgrounder is part of a CFR project on the New Geopolitics of China, India, and Pakistan, supported in part by a generous grant from the MacArthur Foundation.

Additional Resources

This 2014 report (PDF) by the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies explores the looming great game in the Indian Ocean.

The map of Asia is being reimagined, from the framework of the Asia-Pacific region into the larger construct of the Indo-Pacific, writes Rory Metcalf of the Australia-based Lowy Institute.

This Stimson Center report (PDF) entitled "Sea Change: Evolving Maritime Geopolitics in the Indo-Pacific Region" identifies the region's challenges and opportunities for enhanced cooperation.

This CFR Backgrounder outlines competing visions to revive ancient Silk Road trade routes to connect Asia and Europe.

The Australian National University's David Brewster analyzes New Delhi's ambitions for strategic leadership in the Indian Ocean Region.

Journalist Wade Shapard investigates a major Chinese-led port project in Colombo, Sri Lanka.

More on this topic from CFR

 
 

View more from   ChinaIndiaRegional Security
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

STORY :They Starved This Baby On Purpose. But Nothing Can Prepare You For THIS…

SOURCE:
http://www.pawmygosh.com/angel-rescue/?utm_source=ddb&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=animals




They Starved This Baby On Purpose. But Nothing Can Prepare You For THIS…

Angel was found purposely starved and on the brink of death. Knowing her survival would take a miracle, Rescue From The Hart took the dying dog in and made a promise to not give up. What happens is unlike anything you’ve ever seen.




Please make a small donation and help us save more lives: http://www.rescuefromthehart.org
Watch Angel receive a standing ovation on Fox’s “All-Star Dog Rescue” on Thanksgiving. Fox – 8pm/7pm

 Check out Angel’s ongoing progress on our FB page:

 https://www.facebook.com/RescueFromTheHart













 

Thursday, June 2, 2016

The Theory Of The Glacial Sarasvati Has Been Given A Quiet Burial

SOURCE:
http://suvratk.blogspot.in/2016/06/the-theory-of-glacial-sarasvati-has.html






                       PROJECT SARASWATI

          :The Theory Of The Glacial Sarasvati
                                Has Been Given A Quiet Burial
                                  POSTED BY
                                                                Rapid Uplift


Thursday, June 2, 2016





The Theory Of The Glacial Sarasvati Has                             Given A Quiet Burial





Something significant went unnoticed and unreported amongst all the hoopla surrounding the recent paper on Harappan civilization and its link to climate change. The theory of the glacial Sarasvati got dumped. The paper does not even mention it as a possible reason for the reduced water flow in the Ghaggar. Based on its geographic description in the Rig Ved the Ghaggar has been equated with the Vedic Sarasvati river.
The glacial river theory proposed that the river Yamuna and the river Sutlej, both glacially sourced from the high Himalaya,  earlier flowed into the Ghaggar. They changed course around 2000 B.C or so to their present day channels. This switch starved the Ghaggar of water and it became a smaller ephemeral river. This theory also accepts that climate change did occur, but the main reason for the apparently sudden water shortage was the changing of course of the glacial rivers.
Until a few years ago, there just wasn't enough detailed work done on the sediment provenance (comparing characteristics of old channel sands of Ghaggar with those of present day Yamuna and Sutlej) and channel chronology of the Ghaggar system to say whether this theory was correct. But work  published in 2012 on
river sediment provenance tied to a chronology and analysis of fluvial landforms have shown that the Yamuna and Sutlej did once flow into the Ghaggar but changed course to their present locations by late Pleistocene-earliest Holocene, thousands of years before the Harappan civilization. Since this work, no new data challenging these results has appeared. Scientists as evidenced by this paper appear to now accept that the Ghaggar was a monsoonal river right through the Holocene.This result has annoyed not only geologists who had proposed the glacial river theory but also supporters of the indigenous Aryan theory. They had used the glacial river theory to time the presence of the Vedic people in the plains of Haryana and Punjab before 2000 B.C. The reasoning was that the Rig Ved describes a mighty Saravati flowing down from the mountains. Hence, it must have been glacially sourced and must have been the present day Ghaggar. The Aryans would have had to have been present in northwest India before the river became less mighty i.e. before 2000 B.C. This according to them destroyed the Aryan Invasion /Migration theory which proposed that the Aryans, who were a Central Asian people, entered India after the Harappan civilization disintegrated.
Where do we stand now in terms of the Aryan question in the light of the new results on the Ghaggar river?Well, in exactly the same place as before! It was always futile to try to link the condition of the river, whether glacial or monsoonal to the question of the origin of the Aryans. The Rig Ved describes a big river. It doesn't really say that it was glacial in origin. If the Aryans had been present in the Punjab and Haryana before around 2000-1800 B.C. they would have seen a larger Ghaggar.

At the same time, this supposed earlier presence of the Aryans in the Harappan realm does not automatically answer the question of their origins. They just as well could have represented an earlier wave of Central Asian migrants who settled in northwest India during the latter stages of the Harappan civilization. For this same reason, the indigenous Aryan theory would not have been strengthened even if the river had turned out to be glacial during Harappan times.

The geological history of the river cannot solve this riddle. A combination of archaeology, deciphering the script and genetics will be required. We await with anticipation the results of the DNA recovered from Harappa age skeletons.

In the meantime, people who tend to read too much into Rig Vedic hymns should accept that the Vedic poets who wrote (
source) -

 
 

"This (Sarasvati river) has shattered mountain peaks with her fast and powerful waves, just (as easily) as one uproots the lotus-stems, let us invoke her,who strikes what is far and near, with holy hymns and prayers"..

and ..

"Whose boundless, impetuous and swift-moving flood gushes forth with a tempestuous roar"

may have been really looking at a brown colored muddy, silty, sluggish river originating in the Siwalik hills.



Put that down to poetic license!











 

GLOBAL CONFLICT TRACKER

SOURCE:http://www.cfr.org/global/global-conflict-tracker/p32137#!/


                 GLOBAL CONFLICT TRACKER




CLICK THE URL BELOW TO OPEN & BROWSE



http://www.cfr.org/global/global-conflict-tracker/p32137#!/

Wednesday, June 1, 2016

पारेकर जी ज़रा धीरे चलना बड़े धोके हैं यह बाबू बिछाई माइन फील्ड में

SOURCE:
http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/oped/cutting-nose-to-spite-face.html





Related :

http://bcvasundhra.blogspot.in/2016/06/man-managementreducing-flab-in-armed.html






                      पारेकर जी  ज़रा  धीरे  चलना 

                                      बड़े  धोके  हैं 

                   यह  बाबू  बिछाई  माइन फील्ड  में 








                                Babuji Dheere Chalna .
                   Bare Dhoke hain 
 ees BABU mine field mein

                 Cutting Nose to Spite Face

                                         By

                             Deepak Sinha



Friday, 27 May 2016
 
 
 To reduce revenue expenditure, look at civilians paid from Defence Estimates, not Services’s non-combat manpower
 
 
The Minister for Defence has recently announced the formation of an 11-member committee, led by Lieutenant General DB Shekatkar (Retd), to look into areas of overlap and convergence within the three Forces — the Indian Army, Navy and Air Force. The committee will also identify areas to “rationalise manpower”, examine possible areas of multi-tasking by troops and suggest ways to “optimise” combat potential by bringing in more technology instead of more boots.
 
 

This is to ensure that the burgeoning revenue expenditure, the monies spent on pay, allowances and pensions among other things, is brought under control so that more funds are available for capital expenditure, especially acquisition of modern weapon systems. As  Bhartendu  Kumar Singh of the Indian Defence Accounts Service points out,  “The Accounts Branch of the Indian Air Force, for example, has 492 commissioned officers and 7,000 men catering to the pay matters of 1,60,000 officers and men in the Air Force. On a competitive note, the same can be provided by 300 people on the civilian side very easily.”

 

[ PLEASE RECHECK- The veterans of IAF are not dependant  on  CDA(PENSIONS) & are catered by the Accounts Branch of the Indian Air Force with the same existing strength.  The strength  of veterans when taken into consideration will make a qualitative difference. THIS IS A RUSE BY THE  " CROOKED MANDARINS"  for  BUREAUCRATIC EMPIRE EMPIRE BUILDING.Remember that left to its own devices, the bureaucracy has no reason to cut back on its own reach or powers of arbitration, and this comes through very strongly in the functioning of the defence ministry, in particular.  - Vasundhra ]

 

 

There can be no two opinions that such a detailed examination is necessary and must be undertaken periodically, except to suggest that the period of three months given to the Committee to complete its task seems grossly insufficient, if it is to do justice to this critical issue.

In fact, one may even suggest that by restricting this examination only to the military, the Defence Minister has not gone far enough.

The reasons for this are not far to seek. The MOD, for example, has sanctioned posts of               5,85,000 civilians, which is more than the active strength of the Pakistan Army.

The MOD spends more than Rs1,000 crore annually on pay, allowances and establishment of the Ministry of Finance personnel who are attached to it.

The civilian-manned Military Engineering Services spends nearly double the amount of the work it does on its own establishment costs.

The Defence Research and Development Organisation only utilizes 39 per cent of its budget on research and development while the remainder is spent on establishment costs.

 
 
The burgeoning pension bill, which is expected to touch Rs60,000 crore this year after taking into account the sanctioning of One-Rank-One-Pension, is another problem. While reduction of manpower will certainly go some way in controlling this issue, the fact is that the per capita expenditure on 25 lakh military veterans and their kin amounts to approximately Rs1.5 lakh annually, while the four lakh civilians paid from the defence pension budget receive an average of Rs5.38 lakh a year, which will shoot up astronomically as and when the Seventh Pay Commission report is implemented.
 
These examples show that priority needs to be given to reducing civilian manpower paid from Defence Estimates, before reducing non-combat manpower of the Services. The fact is that civilian pensions, despite catering to one-fifth the number of military pensioners, make for approximately 36 per cent of defence pensions — and given our difficulties in ensuring employment, even populism suggests it is better to reduce civilians who cost five times more than to reduce the military.

 
On the question capital expenditure being given pride of place in our defence budget to ensure our Forces are adequately equipped, the fact is that this issue is much more than just adequate budgeting. Between eight to 13 per cent of the funds marked for capital expenditure remains unutilised. For 2015-16, this was as high as 13.4 per cent, amounting to returning Rs11,505 crore. This should count as criminal negligence, given the poor state of our weapons and equipment, on the part of those within the military [ read MOD ] responsible for procurement.

 
And this is where the issue gets complicated. The Government always shows its ‘firm commitment’ to national security by allotting adequate funds to the MoD but then manipulates the budget to cater to unforeseen situations. The Finance Minister cannot touch revenue allotments as those are fully committed but, with the active connivance of the MoD (Finance), he takes full advantage of the capital allotment to meet unexpected expenses. All bureaucratic measures are put to good use to delay or derail the procurement process, resulting in vast amounts remaining unspent.
 
Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar is known for his intelligence and clarity of thought but like one of his earlier predecessors, Krishna Menon, he too may find his reputation dented somewhat, if he looks at issues through blinkers and acts in haste. It makes little sense to cut off your nose to spite your face. To start with, instead of setting up new committees, he will do well to implement the report of the Naresh Chandra Committee and the recommendations of the Group of Ministers of AB Vajpayee Government. [ read KARGIL report by Dr Subramanayam ]
 
(The writer is a military veteran and consultant with the Observer Research

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CDS [ PCOSC ] : IT IS A "MOCKERY" OF THE MILITARY SCIENTIFIC SYSTEM




      NARESH CHANDRA COMMITTEE REPORT  MILITARILY CAN BE SUMARISED IN ONE WORD
                       
                                  IT IS A "MOCKERY"
                                                  OF
                    THE MILITARY SCIENTIFIC SYSTEM 


Saturday, April 9, 2016


Govt  Set to Give Permanent Status to Top Post                      in Indian Military 

                                    By

                          Shishir Gupta

The Narendra Modi government is set to create a post of permanent chairman, chiefs of staff committee (COSC) — a four-star officer who will be the single-point military adviser to the Centre — four years after a recommendation by the Naresh Chandra task force on higher defence reforms.
The Narendra Modi government is set to create a post of permanent chairman, chiefs of staff committee (COSC) — a four-star officer who will be the single-point military adviser to the Centre — four years after a recommendation by the Naresh Chandra task force on higher defence reforms.
Top government sources confirmed to Hindustan Times that the process of appointment of chairman, COSC, would begin after Modi’s in-principle approval next week. It is understood that a presentation on higher defence reforms and future air power planning will be made before the PM on April 12. The proposal has already been vetted by the cabinet secretary, national security adviser and defence minister.
“Once the presentation is cleared by the Prime Minister, a formal proposal will be moved for approval in the cabinet committee on security (CCS). The entire exercise should be over in a couple of months,” a senior official said.
The government envisages the permanent chairman to have a two-year tenure and equivalence in rank and protocol with the army, navy and air force chiefs of staff.
Selected on the basis of merit and from any of the three arms, the officer will be responsible for all military hardware acquisition processes, tri-service command in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, cyber command, special forces, and for inculcating “jointmanship” within the forces for optimum utilisation of resources.
A single- point military adviser’s post in the form of chief of defence staff was proposed by the K Subrahmanyam Committee set up by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee gover nment after the 1999 Kargil war.
In 2011, the UPA regime revisited higher defence reforms under a committee led by former cabinet secretary Naresh Chandra. The committee, which submitted its report in 2012, recommended a watered down version of the CDS and called it the PCOSC (permanent chairman of the COSC).
“The whole idea behind appointing a PCOSC is to break down silos within armed forces and create synergy in the fighting force. The problem with the existing separate military headquarters is that there is a turf war between the three wings with each seeing things with its own perspective and requirement,” a senior official said.
(Source- Hindustan Times)


























 

TRERRORISM : TERRORISM IN SOUTH ASIA : THE TALIBAN

SOURCE:

http://www.cfr.org/terrorist-organizations-and-networks/taliban/p35985?cid=marketing_use-taliban_infoguide-012115&cid=nlc-dailybrief-daily_news_brief--link19-20160405&sp_mid=51080421&sp_rid=YmN2YXN1bmRocmFAaG90bWFpbC5jb20S1#!/p35985?cid=nlc-dailybrief-daily_news_brief--link19-20160405&sp_mid=51080421&sp_rid=YmN2YXN1bmRocmFAaG90bWFpbC5jb20S1



                           THE  TALIBAN 



 
 
 
 

A CFR InfoGuide Presentation

The Taliban has outlasted the world’s most potent military forces and its two main factions now challenge the governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan. As U.S. troops draw down, the next phase of conflict will have consequences that extend far beyond the region.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The Taliban was toppled in Afghanistan in 2001 for harboring al-Qaeda, but it has not been defeated. With an estimated core of up to sixty thousand fighters, the Taliban remains the most vigorous insurgent group in Afghanistan and holds sway over civilians near its strongholds in the country’s south and east. It has also metastasized in neighboring Pakistan, where thousands of fighters in the country’s western tribal areas wage war against the government. Now, as the international combat mission in Afghanistan closes, the Taliban threatens to destabilize the region, harbor terrorist groups with global ambitions, and set back human rights and economic development in the areas where it prevails.




Though the Taliban appears unlikely to dismantle the Afghan government and revive its emirate, it poses the most serious challenge to Kabul’s authority even as the United States winds down the longest war in its history and NATO scales back its largest-ever deployment outside of Europe. The insurgents’ resilience calls into question a state-building project that has cost its international backers hundreds of billions of dollars.




The U.S.-led military coalition has suffered nearly 3,500 dead and more than ten thousand wounded. Since 2001, at least twenty-one thousand Afghan civilians have been killed in conflict, and three million people have been displaced, according to the UN refugee agency. Afghan troops and police are dying at their highest rates ever.

The drawdown of international forces from Afghanistan also raises questions about Pakistan’s strategy in South Asia and its leverage over the Afghan Taliban. The insurgents could not have thrived without sanctuary in Pakistan, whose main intelligence service, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) directorate, cultivated them in the 1990s and maintained ties to them after 2001 (PDF). Pakistan has long sought what its military doctrines call strategic depth: an amicable regime in Kabul, to avoid being encircled by its chief rival, India, to the east, and a pro-India Afghanistan to the west.


Along with several foreign militant groups, Pakistani Taliban factions thrived in the sanctuaries along the frontier that the Pakistani military had set aside for the Afghan Taliban. But Pakistan does not control the Islamist militancy it helped enable, and its military is now fighting a movement whose primary aim differs from that of the Afghan Taliban. The Pakistani Taliban has declared Islamabad apostate for aligning itself with post-9/11 U.S. foreign policy and seeks revolution in Pakistan. Under the umbrella Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP, or Taliban Movement of Pakistan), these militants have attacked Pakistani security forces and civilians nationwide.


Thousands of Sunni Islamic militants have established rudimentary bases along the Afghan-Pakistani border. There, they harbor al-Qaeda and affiliated jihadi groups and provide staging grounds for cross-border attacks against international troops and Afghan security forces. The India-oriented terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba, which launched the 2008 attack on the Taj Mahal hotel in Mumbai and is believed to have ties to the ISI, has found refuge there, as has the anti-Shia group Lashkar-e-Jhangvi. These groups are suspected by Western intelligence and Afghan officials of carrying out attacks in Afghanistan, including on U.S. and Indian targets.


In June 2013, Afghan forces assumed responsibility from the international coalition for providing security, a prerequisite for the drawdown of tens of thousands of U.S.-led troops. Also in 2014, a presidential election brought the country’s first peaceful and democratic, if flawed, transfer of power. These developments might undercut the Taliban's claim to mount the preeminent resistance to foreign occuption, but the Taliban justifies the continuation of its armed campaign by asserting the government is illegitimate and un-Islamic, a puppet of the West.


Meanwhile, the persistence of ineffective, corrupt, and often-mistrusted state institutions in Afghanistan and Pakistan, combined with mutual mistrust between the two countries, could give Taliban guerrillas an outsized impact on both countries' security, development, and democratization after the drawdown
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
We believe the war in Afghanistan will come to an end when all foreign invaders pull out of Afghanistan and a holy Islamic and independent regime prevails here.

The Afghan Taliban’s 2014 Eid al-Fitr Communiqué

 
 
 

                      The Rise of the Islamic Emirate

 
 
 
 
Anarchy prevailed in Afghanistan in 1994. The Soviet Union's Red Army had pulled out five years prior, and international support for the anti-Soviet jihad, led by U.S. and Saudi intelligence operatives, waned soon after. Afghanistan, awash in arms, had neither a functioning government nor a productive economy. In the post-Soviet power vacuum, mujahadeen, warlords who had made common cause against Soviet forces, jockeyed for power and spoils, and the government led by the communist People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan collapsed in 1992. Civil war engulfed Afghanistan, leaving appalling carnage but no clear victor.


A small clerical movement emerged to protect residents from the banditry and extortion that had become routine. These vigilantes in western Kandahar called themselves the Taliban, Pashto for “seekers of knowledge.” Their ranks were soon reinforced by thousands of their co-ethnics, Pashtuns educated in Deobandi madrassas, or seminaries, along Pakistan’s western frontier. These madrassas proliferated under President Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq (1977–88) and served some of the millions of Afghan refugees who had been displaced by more than a decade of unrest. They were sponsored by the religious party Jamiat Ulema-e-Islami (JUI), which mobilized its students to take up arms with the Taliban.


The Taliban was welcomed by a war-weary public as it expanded out from Kandahar. The movement established order on the basis of Hanafi Islamic jurisprudence influenced by Pashtun custom, which meshed with the rural mores of southern Afghanistan.


Pakistan assumed a crucial role in cultivating the Taliban. Under the command of Mullah Mohammad Omar, an Afghan ethnic Pashtun who had served as a junior mujahadeen commander during the anti-Soviet jihad, the Taliban swept through southern Afghanistan in 1994. The ISI shifted its support from the major mujahadeen party it had bet on to Mullah Omar's group. Pakistan believed that with ideological and material means of persuasion, including funds and arms, it could manipulate Taliban clerics and thus ensure a stable and acquiescent Afghanistan, as well as secure routes to open trade to the newly independent Central Asian states, writes journalist Ahmed Rashid.


Another outside force of looming importance for Afghanistan was al-Qaeda. Osama bin Laden, the exiled Saudi who had bankrolled and facilitated fighters known as the Afghan Arabs during the anti-Soviet fight, was expelled from Sudan in 1996. He returned to Afghanistan seeking a sanctuary from which he could build up his terrorist group. Mullah Omar protected bin Laden even as the al-Qaeda leader’s international fugitive status grew over the late 1990s. Bin Laden provided resources and technical capacities to the Taliban, and Mullah Omar was won over by his claim to be a righteous mujahid and revolutionary icon, according to researchers who study the Taliban. Some analysts also attribute Mullah Omar's offer of refuge to bin Laden, despite an international bounty, to the obligation under pashtunwali (PDF), the pre-Islamic tribal code, to provide guests unconditional hospitality. (Many members of the Taliban later faulted Mullah Omar’s protection of bin Laden for the U.S.-led invasion that toppled their state.)


Pakistan's ISI likely approved of or facilitated bin Laden’s return to Afghanistan, the congressionally mandated 9/11 Commission found, since some of its Islamist militant proxies who were oriented toward jihad in India-administered Kashmir trained in bin Laden’s camps in Afghanistan.


Once the Taliban captured Kabul in 1996, it declared Afghanistan an Islamic emirate and Mullah Omar its head of state and installed clerics to helm national institutions. With an emphasis on policing morality, the Taliban established the Department for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice, which attempted to enforce its puritanical interpretation of sharia. Police beat Afghans who defied the Taliban’s edicts and mores, including those mandating full beards for men and head-to-toe burqas for women. The Taliban shuttered girls’ schools and forbade women from working, so many women widowed during the anti-Soviet jihad were forced to beg in the streets and many schools were closed for lack of teachers.


By 1998, the Taliban had come to control 90 percent of the country. After nearly two decades of conflict, resources were scarce and Afghanistan remained at the lowest rungs of global human development rankings. Under protocol with the Taliban, the United Nations ran a country-wide humanitarian program in Afghanistan, but came at loggerheads with the regime over restrictions it imposed in the name of Islamization. Taliban-governed Afghanistan became an international pariah for its human rights abuses and refusal to surrender bin Laden and other members of al-Qaeda on international watch lists.


The Taliban’s severe strictures were alien to many Afghans, and after the Taliban captured Kabul, the Northern Alliance became Afghanistan's main military and political opposition. The alliance, led by Ahmed Shah Massoud, drew its support mainly from the ethnic Tajik, Uzbek, and Hazara communities. Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates were the only states to recognize the Taliban regime, and the Northern Alliance held Afghanistan's seat at the United Nations. 


Pressed into a small corner of northern and northeastern Afghanistan, Massoud’s alliance struggled to hold out against the Taliban from 1998 to 2001. Assisting their Taliban protectors, al-Qaeda agents assassinated Massoud two days before the 9/11 attacks that would quickly end the Taliban’s control of Afghanistan.