SOURCE:
http://voiceofdharma.org/books/civilization/

Hinduism and the Clash of Civilizations

By David Frawley (Vamadeva Shastri)

American Institute of Vedic Studies

PO Box 8357, Santa Fe NM 87504-8357

                             Foreword

                             By

             Aidan Rankin, Ph.D.

I first became aware of David Frawley’s work earlier this year when I was at the University bookshop in Bloomsbury, near to my London home. It used to be called Dillon’s and owned by a long-established and worthy firm. Now it is Waterstone’s, a thrusting ‘success story’ of modern entrepreneurship. No longer a traditionally British bookshop, staffed by friendly amateurs, Waterstone’s has all the characteristics of a giant American emporium: glossy, squeaky-clean and staffed by indifferent, overworked students. Like its American counterparts, it is replete with self-help guides for stressed male executives and bitter, miserable career women, both products of a disturbed society. In the basement, a bar serves caffe latte, chocolate muffins and a bewildering variety of fruit juice. Waterstone’s, in other words, is a microcosm of the global monoculture, that spiritual and economic malaise which Frawley so incisively explores. Yet beneath all the gloss, there persist many of the qualities of a fine English bookshop, where rich gems of scholarship of scholarship and wisdom come to unexpected light, just as rich traditions of spiritual insight still withstand the modern Fetich of the market.

                                             Preface

Hinduism and the Clash of Civilizations continues the line of thought introduced in my earlier books. Arise Arjuna: Hinduism and the Modern World (1995) articulated the need for Hindus to stand up and project their tradition in order to face the current cultural and religious challenges assaulting them on every side. My subsequent book, Awaken Bharata: A Call for India’s Rebirth (1998), emphasized the need for a new intelligentsia, an ‘intellectual kshatriya’ or intellectual warrior class to handle these challenges in a systematic way.

 

Over time it became clear that such an intellectual movement requires a school of thought, a world-view as its proper foundation. Naturally, an intellectual kshatriya should be trained in a Vedic or dharmic school of thought. Therefore, the present volume arose to articulate the greater Hindu world view—the perspective of the Hindu mind on the current civilizational challenge, which is not only a cultural assault on India but a churning within all cultures throughout the world. Today as a species we stand at a critical juncture, before either a new age of global harmony and world spirituality or a possible global catastrophe from a voracious materialistic civilization out of harmony with nature.

 

 

The wisdom of the Hindu tradition, rooted in universal consciousness, can be a great aid in helping us move in the right direction, but it is seldom brought into the picture even in India. Hinduism is now a global force as the third largest religion in the world, the largest non-biblical belief, and the largest of the pagan, native or indigenous religions. Therefore, a Hindu voice not only on spiritual but also on cultural issues is necessary to provide a balanced view on the global situation today.

Hindu or Indic ideas are now present in most countries in the world today, generally in a dynamic way through Yoga, Vedanta or Vedic sciences like Ayurveda. However, there is little recognition of the overall civilizational perspective behind them. Most of the focus is on a spiritual side of these traditions and the broader civilizational concerns are ignored. While Christian, Islamic and western secular points of view are readily available on most issues, the Hindu view is seldom recognized and does not have corresponding spokespersons or information outlets in the world forum. Hence the need of the present volume to encourage the projection of such a Hindu perspective.

The current clash of civilizations is not merely a commercial or religious encounter. It is an encounter between the schools of thought, the way of thinking that each civilization represents. Each civilization has its own language, logic and history of ideas that shape and mold its perceptions and actions. When civilizations clash it is first at this level of ideas and beliefs. In the present world context, the Hindu or Indian (Bharatiya) idea of civilization and culture is overlooked. If Hindus enter into debate, it is in the context of the western school of thought, which is not sympathetic to or even aware of the logic of Hindu ideas or how the Hindu mind works. Like players in a game that has rules they don’t understand, the Hindu cause seldom comes out well.   

 

Therefore, Hinduism must project its entire dharmic view, its unique vision of the universe, God and humanity, rather than simply respond to side issues framed by the western mind. It must articulate its own critique of civilization, including that of western civilization, which modern Hindu thinkers like Aurobindo or Gandhi so eloquently expressed. There is also an older, comprehensive and well-articulated Indian school of thought through the Vedas, Sutras, Puranas, Tantras and Shastras and a related literature on consciousness and dharma through Buddhist and Jain traditions as well. But these are often out of date and don’t consider the changed circumstances of the world today. Hence my emphasis on the need for a ‘New Indic School of Thought’, specifically on the need for new ‘Vedic schools’, developing and articulating the older dharmic traditions of India to meet the new circumstances today.

 

A new Western dharmic school of thought is also important, taking the insights of the Indic school and applying them in the western context. Ultimately, a new global dharmic school of thought is the goal. Hopefully, the new Indic School of Thought can provide a model and a starting point for it.

While Hinduism and the Clash of Civilizations is a sequel my earlier books, it brings in new themes that neither Awaken Bharata or Arise Arjuna addressed. It has a more futuristic vision and a constructive as well as critical side, outlining a Hindu vision for the entire world. It not only seeks to remove obstacles but also sets forth ideas and models for a new creation—a new age of consciousness on Earth initiated by a revival of Vedic wisdom and culture.  

 

Naturally, I was always asked how I, as someone born in the West, was able to take up this cause or write such books. For this reason, I wrote How I Became a Hindu: My Discovery of Vedic Dharma (2000). That recent book is also relevant to the current title. Hinduism and Clash of Civilizations also supplements my books on ancient India like Gods, Sages and Kings, the Myth of the Aryan Invasion, Vedic Aryans and the Origins of Civilization (with N.S. Rajaram), and the recent the Rigveda and the History of India. However, the present volume focuses on the background philosophical and cultural issues behind the historical concerns examined in detail in these other works.

 

Besides history, the book examines Vedic Science, including its relationship with modern science, which I have not addressed significantly in previous titles. It touches the subject Vedanta, which was explored in my book Vedantic Meditation: Lighting the Flame of Awareness. Hinduism and the Clash of Civilizations, therefore, has a broad scope and looks to the future as well as to the past, to spiritual as well as cultural issues.

 

The book is divided into three sections. The first surveys the challenges of India and Hinduism today and its scope for the future. The second examines the clash between western intellectual culture and the spiritual and intellectual culture of India. It highlights why an independent Indic School of Thought is required, not just an Indic perspective in the current world dominant western school.

 

The third section suggests principles and main lines for a new Indic/Vedic school of thought. I have separately discussed in Vedanta, Yoga, Ayurveda and Vedic astrology in specific books on these topics. The purpose of their discussion here is relative to their place in a new school of thought, not to delineate their approaches in detail.

Some chapters have appeared as articles in various publications in India like the Times of India, Vedanta Kesari, the Advent, the Organizer, Naimisha Journal etc.

I have rewritten these to fit in with the flow of the book and avoid unnecessary repetition. I would like to thank various individuals who have stimulated my thought in the book including Subhash Kak, N.S. Rajaram, Aidan Rankin, Michel Boutet, Ram Swarup, Swami Dayananda, J.C. Kapur, and many young Hindus, both individually and in different groups and organizations.

Jai Durga!

 

Dr. David Frawley (Pandit Vamadeva Shastri)

 

July 2001

 

                            ___________________

 

Hinduism and the Clash of Civilizations

By David Frawley (Vamadeva Shastri)

American Institute of Vedic Studies

PO Box 8357, Santa Fe NM 87504-8357

_______________

 

Copyright �, Dr. David Frawley 2001

Published by Voice of India

2/18 Ansari Road

Delhi, India 110 002

*

Table of Contents

 

Foreword by Aidan Rankin

Preface

 

Part I � India, Hinduism and the New Century

I.1. The Goddess Durga, Mother India as the World Mother

I.2. India and the Coming Century

I.3. The Reemergence of the Hindu Mind

I.4. Hinduism and the New Millennium

I.5. India at a Crossroads

I.6. The Crisis in the Psyche of India

I.7. Western Monoculture and Indic Pluralism

I.8. Religious Exclusivism, Racism and Colonialism

I.9. The Hindu Response to Globalization

I.10. The Hindu View of Society and its Global Relevance

 

Part II � The Need for a New Indic School of Thought

II.1. The Need for New Indic School of Thought

II.2. New Western and Global Dharmic Schools of Thought

II.3. The Need for a New Buddhi Shakti (Spiritual Force for the Intellect)

II.4 Indic Civilization, a Light for the World

II.5. Multinational Corporations and Global Education

II.6. The Spiritual Divide in Vedic Scholarship

II.7. Western Indology versus the Indic Tradition: The Intellectual Clash of Cultures

II.8. The Need to Rewrite Indian History

II.9. The Indian or Bharatiya Ideal of Education

II.10. The Myth of the Hindu Right

 

Part III � Foundations of a New Indic School

III.1. Vedic Knowledge and the Coming Planetary Age

III.2. Consciousness and Mind in the Vedic Tradition

III.3. Vedanta, the Foundation of the Indic School of Thought

III.4. Vedic Yoga, the Oldest Form of Yoga

III.5. Ayurveda, the World�s Medicine for the Next Millennium

III.6. Vedic Astrology: Space Age Science or Superstition

III.7. Solar Power and the Gayatri Mantra

III.8. Outline of a New Vedic School

 

P L A [AIR FORCE ] : Beijing Develops New Long Range Bomber as Part of 'Transformation' Process

SOURCE:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/china/2016/china-160902-sputnik01.htm?_m=3n%2e002a%2e1808%2eka0ao00b2h%2e1nut

Beijing Develops New Long Range Bomber as Part of 'Transformation' Process

Sputnik

In-Depth Coverage

 

 

 02  Sep 2016

Chinese Air Force chief Ma Xiaotian told state media Friday that China is developing a new long-range bomber as part of an initiative to modernize the country's military.

At an Air Force Open Day, Ma told the Global Times that China's capabilities in striking distant targets has increased, and that more development is forthcoming.


"We are now developing a new generation of long-range bomber, and you'll see it in the future," he said, giving no further details.


Ma's announcement comes a year after Beijing revealed a next-generation H-6K strategic bomber. Armed with DH-20 land-attack cruise missiles, the new bomber has the ability to strikes targets as far away from the Chinese mainland as Australia.
The aircraft has flown patrols over the South China Sea, the center of a regional dispute, as well as numerous training missions over the Western Pacific.


China has recently intensified research into new military technology, including anti-satellite missiles, aircraft carriers and submarines, causing some anxiety in Washington and throughout the region, as this indicates a more aggressive approach to the South China Sea issue and other conflicts.
A newly-developed Chinese Y-20 large-transport aircraft was put into service in July. The Chinese Air Force is also developing stealth fighters, a marked change after years of using Russian aircraft duplicates. The Y-20 currently uses a Russian engine.


The US Defense Department, in its annual report on Chinese military issues, said that despite a languid economy, China will likely maintain its current rate of defense spending.


US deputy assistant secretary of defense for East Asia, Abraham M. Denmark, said in a statement, "From 2006 to 2015, China's officially disclosed military budget grew at an average of 9.8 percent per year in inflation-adjusted terms," adding, "The true expenditure, DoD estimates, in terms of total military-related spending for 2015, exceeded $180 billion in 2015."


For its next generation of cruise missiles China is moving to develop advanced automation and artificial intelligence. Wang Changqing, of the China Aerospace and Industry Corporation, told the China Daily newspaper, "We plan to adopt a 'plug and play' approach in the development of new cruise missiles, which will enable our military commanders to tailor-make missiles in accordance with combat conditions."


Ma called the developments a part of the Air Force's "transformation" process, with a focus on quality instead of sheer numbers.

© Sputnik









           Chinese Bomber Aircraft - Hongzhaji

             [ http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/aircraft-bomber.htm ]



  

Tu-2 Tu-4 H-5 H-6 H-7 H-8 H-9 Qing-6 Be-6SH-5 JL-600

Bombers are aircraft used to bomb forward areas, strategic rear areas and targets at sea. According to their weights, bomb loads and ranges, they can be divided into light bombers (or short range bombers), medium bombers (or medium range bombers) and heavy bombers (or long range bombers). They can also be divided into strategic bombers and tactical bombers according to their operational missions.

The bombers were first used in the First World War. Most of them were retrofitted from reconnaissance aircraft and could carry a small amount of bomb loads. The bombers were widely used during the World War II. The four-engine heavy bombers also appeared at that time. The high subsonic jet bombers were developed in 1950s and the supersonic medium range strategic bombers in 1960s . During 1970s the USA and the Soviet Union developed strategic bombers with speed higher than Mach number 2. These supersonic strategic bombers could penetrate into enemy's territorial air in supersonic speed at high altitude or in high subsonic speed at very low altitude.
A policy of active defence was adopted by China in its national air defence so that the light bombers and medium bombers have also been developed while the stress of the aircraft development was placed on the fighters.
After 1950s the Chinese aviation industry planned to develop the bombers step by step. Two enterprises for development and production of bombers (also transports and helicopters) and two design institutes for design of land based and water based bombers were respectively established and the corresponding infrastructure was constructed. The H-5 light bomber and the H-6 medium bomber with its derivatives were produced and the water-based SH-5 was developed on our own. Through all these activities a technical team of bomber development was tempered and a moderate production capacity formed. China had then basically the ability to develop light and medium bombers.
When the trial production of H-5 started in the Harbin Aircraft Factory in 1963, the only technical documentation available was the document of old and incomplete design drawings for overhauling 11-28 aircraft provided by the Soviet Union. The factory carried out repeated tests and computations on aircraft strength and aerodynamic performance; test flight was carried out by Air Force aircraft and gained plenty of data. 13,637 pieces of improvement and supplementary drawings, 40% of the total, for the complete aircraft were created; major modifications were carried out on aircraft wing structure, tail section structure, front cover and feeding guide rail; WP5A engine was used instead of WP5; more than 60 types of domestically supplied products like turret etc. were fitted on the aircraft. All these helped improve the workability and tactical performance of this type of aircraft. During the manufacture, all process documents were prepared by the factory and more than ten thousand sets of tools and fixtures were designed and manufactured. After three years hard work, this aircraft was successfully trial produced at last in 1967 and the stable batch production followed soon.
Development of other aircraft such as H-6 was carried out almost at the same time of that of H-5 bomber. That was the first time for China to manufacture medium range jet bomber with 75 tons take-off weight. The Number of parts, the complexity of structure, and the technical difficulty and engineering work of this aircraft all exceeded that of any other previous aircraft. When it was trial produced in 1964, the factory only had the incomplete Soviet Tu-16 aircraft technical documents. Xi'an Aircraft and Engine factories fully relied on their own efforts to make up strength calculation documents and their design documents were more than 15,400 pieces; they successfully modified its fuselage, vertical tail, nose landing gear and fuel drain system and prepared all process sheets by themselves. During installation of assembly jigs, new technology of optical telescope and micrometer rods were first used to overcome matching and coordination difficulty of large aircraft trial production and successfully broke through the thermal and cold manufacturing difficulties of large wing sliding rail, aluminium alloy beam, main landing gear and armor plate etc.. High risk and more difficult test like fuel dump at high altitude was also conducted during trial production.
In the process of aircraft trial production, the Special Commission of the Central Committee issued an order to modify an original type of H-6 for the mission of transporting and delivering atomic bomb, which should be arranged simultaneously with the trial production of H-6 and, materials and equipment needed were to be produced in China as an urgent task. The modified H-6 aircraft successfully fulfilled the mission of delivering atomic bomb test first ever in China on May 14, 1965, which won telegrams from the CCCPC and the State Council. Premier Zhou Enlai met and dined in the Great Hall of the People with the persons and representatives of relevant organizations who had rendered great service, including representatives of the Ministry of Aviation Industry and Xi'an Aircraft Factory.
Successful development of H-5 and H-6 bomber aircraft indicated that in the field of aircraft design and manufacture, China's aviation science and technology had entered into a new stage - a big step towards independent aircraft design and development; Chinese aviation scientific and technical people not only concentrated on learning and simulating but also had capability of understanding, appraising and improving, which was undoubtedly a kind of practical effective exercise for future independent development.
After the decommissioning of Hong Xian-5 bombers (Chinese copy of the famous Soviet IL-28), the only representative of the Air Force bombers remaining was the Xian Hong-6 medium bomber. Aircraft production H-6 terminated on the grounds that they were not able to overcome a modern air defense and is guaranteed to deliver the bomb targets. Some Hong-6 bomber planes were modified in favor of its use as a tanker.
Hong-6 K-6 and M missile modifications are intended to fulfill two main objectives, namely: for nuclear strikes against strategic targets which are within the theater of operations; and for the destruction of the U.S. Navy on the distant approaches to the waters of Taiwan. It is planned that they will strike groups numbering from the squadron to a regiment. Their actions may be provided AWACs aircraft and cover-jammers. Launches of cruise missiles will be conducted out of range of antiaircraft and enemy fighter aircraft.
By the end of 2013, the Air Force consisted of about Hong-6 recent modifications. In parallel with the modernization and development of Hong-6, Chinese experts conduct intensive research and development to create a new generation of strategic bombers H-8 and h-10. According to U.S. sources in the construction of both bombers, there are many elements borrowed from the US aircraft B-2 Spirit and F-117. This is due, in particular, the fact that Chinese designers have copied some of the developments in the field of American stealth technology Stealth, thanks to Chinese intelligence, notably design documentation for the B-2, as well as the study of fragments of the F -117 stealth fighter that Yugoslav air defense downed, which were subsequently transferred to China.

IAF [ HEPTRS ] Ready for Takeoff: India's First Helicopter in Years Performs Test Flight

SOURCE:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/india/2016/india-160906-sputnik02.htm?_m=3n%2e002a%2e1811%2eka0ao00b2h%2e1nye



IAF [ HEPTRS ] Ready for Takeoff: India's First Helicopter in Years Performs Test Flight

In-Depth Coverage

 



06  Sep 2016
India urgently needs around 400 light utility helicopters for its armed forces. Russia and India have agreed to manufacture Kamov-226 LUHs in India and a detailed agreement likely to be signed very soon.

In what could provide a major relief to India's armed forces, Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) has conducted a flawless first technical flight of the much-awaited Indian-built Light Utility Helicopter (LUH) in Bengaluru. The helicopter took off at 12:10 hours and was in the air for 15 minutes at HAL's facilities.

"This is the third indigenous helicopter product from the stables of HAL after ALH and LCH. Apart from the replacement of [India's] ageing fleet of Cheetah/Chetak [helicopters], LUH is expected to capture a sizeable share of both the domestic and international market," reads a statement released by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited.

The LUH has a maximum All-Up-Weight (AUW) of 6,944 pounds, when fitted with a 750 kW Safran HE Ardiden-1U engine. It has range of 217.48 miles with a seating capacity of six passengers plus two pilots. The Army and Air Force together have committed to purchasing 187 LUHs. India's armed forces can use this helicopter in reconnaissance, transport, cargo load and rescue operations. The helicopter can operate from sea level to the high altitudes of the Himalayas

HAL plans to build the infrastructure for manufacturing the helicopter in phases, and the first helicopters are slated to be built in 2018. A separate manufacturing unit will be set up in Tumakuru; its cornerstone was laid by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in January this year.

Due to its lack of modern light utility helicopters, India had lost 50 army personnel since 2010. A report presented before the Parliament said, "of the 181 Cheetah/Chetak helicopters held by the Army, 51 were 40 years or older and 78 were between 30-40 years old."

The Indian military is projected to need over 1,000 helicopters of various types within the next 10-15 years.

Further Reading

Light Observation Helicopter (LOH) 2003 - Army Aviation Corps RFP 2008 - LOH - HAL 2008 - LOH - Kamov Ka-226 Eurocopter AS 550 C3 Fennec Kamov Ka-226 Dhruv ALH P

Kamov Ka-226 Light Observation Helicopter (LOH)

One big project facing problems is the one for 197 light helicopters for over Rs 3,000 crore, with Russian Kamov Ka-226T pitted against Eurocopter AS 550 C3 Fennec after the technical evaluation. Acquisition of these 197 helicopters was to be followed by the indigenous manufacture of 187 similar ones by Hindustan Aeronautics to replace the ageing Cheetah and Chetak fleets of Army and IAF.

The HAL Cheetah helicopter units were used for observation, liaison and SAR duties. Army (and IAF) Cheetahs regularly support Indian Army troops at altitudes in excess of 24,000+ feet. The first Turbomeca TM 333-2B2-powered Cheetah was successfully test flown in January 2003, with a significant number of these helicopters likely to be fitted with this more powerful engine in order to modernise the Army Aviation Corps. Pushpinder Singh Chopra, in a June 2001 AW&ST issue, said a Light Observation Helicopter (LOH) program would replace the Cheetahs that HAL has built for the Army and Air Force.

Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) proposed development of a Light Utility Helicopter (LUH) of 3 ton class and Medium Lift Helicopter (MLH) of 10 ton class to complete the full range of helicopters. Both the IAF and the Army have projected a requirement for 187 LOHs, of which most would go to the Army. All these would be delivered during the 11th (2007-2012) and 12th (2012-2017) Defence Plans. As of 2008 the Army would get 133 light utility helicopters and the Air Force would get 64 of them. The Air Force version of the aircraft would be called Light Utility Helicopter while for the Army it would be known as Light Observation Helicopter

                2008 - Light Utility Helicopter

In July 2008, in a major drive to modernise the armed forces and expand its aviation wing, the Defence Ministry issued a request for proposal (RFP) to procure 197 helicopters. From the 197 helicopters — 131 were for the Army Aviation and the rest 66 for the Air Force. Besides, another tender for Naval Utility Helicopters, under which 56 were to be bought.
The armed forces would modernise their helicopter fleet by 2010 by replacing the age-old Cheetah and Chetak, which had been in service for last 40 years. It was expected that the public sector Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) would develop the remaining 115 helicopters. The proposed procurement is worth Rs. 3000 crore. HAL would undertake the maintenance of these helicopters on a transfer of technology (ToT) basis. It has assured that it would develop the same type of platforms in five to seven years and would fulfill the rest of the requirements. The trials would end by 2009 and the induction of 197 helicopters would take place by 2010.
Six foreign companies would bid for the helicopter deal. The companies were Bell (US), Eurocopter, Augusta Westland (Italy), Rosobornexport (Russia), MD Helicopters (US) and Sikorsky (US). The total number of helicopters may increase from 312 to 384 units due to a new requirement for a large number of heavy-lift helicopters.
By November 2011 there was a proposal for procurement of 187 Light Utility Helicopter (LUH) under design and development project undertaken by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL).
European defence major Eurocopter wrote a letter to Army chief Gen VK Singh in February 2012 expressing "concern" over delays in finalising the deal for procuring 197 light helicopters for the defence forces. "We take this opportunity to express our concern regarding the time frame for the very important programme, for which the RFP was issued in July 2008. "The technical evaluation process has now taken over 38 months and has not yet been concluded due to reasons which are unknown to us," Eurocopter told the Army Chief in the letter.
Rosoboronexport, the sole Russian intermediary for exports and imports of weapons and military equipment, issued a press release 13 February 2012 confirming that the Russian Ka-226T light helicopter would soon defeat its European counterpart the AS550 C3 Fennec, manufactured by Eurocopter, in the tendering process to supply 197 reconnaissance and surveillance helicopters for the air force and land forces of the Republic of India. “All the test phases have been completed, and the examination of bidders’ proposals is at the concluding stage,” the company’s press office reported.
The marked advantage of the Russian proposal was its “cumulative” effect: the excellent Ka-226T rotary-wing aircraft is offered as a package with an offset programme that was attractive for the Indian side, this document says. First, under the offset programme Rosoboronexport, together with companies of the Russian Helicopters holding, proposed to set up joint production of sub-systems and components for the Ka-226T, and subsequently to set up assembly of these machines in the Republic of India. Second, it proposed joint development of new modifications of the Ka-226T. And third, this program would enable the two countries – which are strategic partners – to move towards full-scale industrial cooperation in the field of helicopter building.
In January 2014, the Central Bureau of Investigation registered a case against a Brigadier working with Army Aviation Corps for allegedly fudging trial flight records of these helicopters.
The ministry of defence on 29 August 2014 cancelled the Rs 6,000 crore / $1-billion tender to buy 197 light utility helicopters in which Airbus Helicopters AS550 was competing with Kamov’s Ka-226T. It was the second time the light helicopter tender was cancelled by India. From the 197 helicopters — 131 were for the Army Aviation and the rest 66 for the Air Force. Besides, another tender for Naval Utility Helicopters, under which 56 were to be bought, too, got cancelled.
The government decided to allow domestic players to manufacture the helicopters. The Defence Acquisition Council chaired by Defence Minister Arun Jaitley put the acquisition under the “Buy and Make Indian” category, allowing the Indian industry to make the helicopters under a joint venture with a foreign manufacturer.
As Russian President Vladimir Putin arrived in India on 11 December 2014, Prime Minister Narendra Modi invited him to participate in the $3 billion light-utility helicopters project, a signal that he expected India-Russia ties to go beyond ordinary buyer-seller relationships. The project would also be the first big-ticket "Make in India" initiative in the defense sector.
Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said "There are two contracts - one on the Mi-17, in which they (Indian side) really need, and the second - the Ka-226T is a big contract to build on the territory of India". The Russian Ka-226 was competing with the European AS550 Fennec in the Indian tender for the supply of nearly 200 light multi-purpose helicopters.
The Defense Acquisition Committee (DAC) on May 13, 2015 accepted Russia’s offer to build 200 Ka-226T light-utility helicopters under the Make in India initiative. The cost and other moralities are being worked out. Around 50 Ka-226Ts may be imported off the shelf to address immediate IAF and Army Aviation Corp (AAC) requirements. HAL would likely license produce the aircraft in India with the Gurgaon based SUN Group, which has a tie-up with Russian Helicopters, manufacturing main Ka-226T parts in India, including fuselage, column and main rotor.
New Delhi was ready to co-produce with Russia some 200 Ka-226 helicopters in India, Russian Minister of Trade and Industry Denis Manturov said 01 December 2015. "India is ready for joint cooperation of this modification [Ka-226T] of the helicopter in terms of co-production in India in an amount of at least about 200 units," Manturov told Rossiya-24 TV channel.
India planned to buy Russian light multipurpose helicopter Ka-226T and then will speak about their co-production on the territory of this South Asian country. This is stated in an official statement 04 December 2105 by the Indian Ministry of Defence.
"The Council for Defence Procurement approved the feasibility of the request for the purchase and the subsequent joint production of helicopters Ka-226T for the Army and the Air Force in India," - said the defense establishment. Exactly how many helicopters India can purchase was not specified, but the "possible initial order of approximately 50 machines.... Just in the first stage we can talk about 200 Ka-226T, including purchased ready-made and a joint venture in India".
The proposal on the joint production of Ka-226T was discussed for the first time at the meeting of Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi and Russian President Vladimir Putin during his visit to New Delhi in December 2014. Then the sides noted that the joint venture may produce helicopters, including for export to third countries.
Speaking in Moscow 24 December 2015 after talks with President Vladimir Putin, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said “We have laid the foundation of the future character of this strategic partnership ... The intergovernmental agreement on manufacturing of Kamov 226 helicopters in India is the first project for a major defense platform under the 'Make-in-India' mission, it is rightly with our most important defense partner.”
Moscow would set up a production line for the light helicopters, which will supply the Indian military and eventually Russia. Out of 200 Kamovs, some 60 will be made in Russia and the remaining will be assembled and manufactured in India under the public private partnership mode. State-run Hindustan Aeronautics Limited is the lead for the Indian side.














  

7 CPC : SOME IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR THE BENEFIT OF ESM COMMUNITY

SOURCE: CURTSEY - EX-SERVICEMEN WELFARE

http://ex-servicemenwelfare.blogspot.in/



SOME IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR THE BENEFIT OF ESM COMMUNITY

As received.

 

With Respect to the last para of the  trail mail, I would like to quote.

Few statements  which has been made by the CGDA and PCDA pensions during pension adalat  at Parvanoo . Due to quoted as understood by some veteran who had attended the meet there.

A statement as such made by CGDA certainly carry a lot of prior inputs to us  and  There is a rethink on the  date  on which the basic is to be taken (is it 1/1/2006 or is it Jul 2014/31 Dec 2015  for  deriving the new pension as per 7CPC wef 1/1/2016.

From the  CGDA's statement itself it comes out that the multiplication factor (FF) of 2.57 has to be changed to 2.89 for accommodating the OROP basic in the 7CPC implementation .

This gives us food for thought and few more bashings on inevitables/virtual realities :

Read through a fwd on CGDA/PCDA discussions at Parvanoo quoted below :

Message as received. Message as received is received is forwarded.

Today I went to Tarn Taran to attend the pension adalat. It was possibly the first time the highest ranking officers came. It was organised by 7 Inf  Div. 

The CGDA, Mr Kohli who belongs to Naushara Pannuan, about 15 km from Tarn Taran. CGDA (PENSIONS) and CGDA WESTERN COMD were present. 

Had an opportunity to spend 20 minutes with the CGDA. Issues discussed as under.

1. 7 CPC pension award. Most, including myself were under the impression that our pensions go up by 2.57 times the pension as on 31 Dec 15. The CPC award is 2.57 times 01 Jan 2006. Now this works for civilians. Not for Faujis. I was left clueless. Anyway the MoD and MoF are in the final stages of resolving the complication. According to him if we are to get the equivalent of 2.57 times as for civilians we should get 2.89 times of 2006 pension. Hence the problem. 

2.  33 Year pension case is also having similar problems for us. Civilians have no problems because their pay is based on pay bands and pensions also accordingly. In our case earlier last 10 months average and after 2006 pay in last rank or last pay drawn. 

To be honest i wish I had deeper knowledge of these complicated issues.

However this is in the final stages of govt approval. The tables will again take time at cgda. Reason we got increases in 2006, 2009, 2012 and OROP in 2014. All these have to be factored when arriving at arrears since 2006.

Office of DPDO is under winding up process. 

The staff of cgda has come down from about 28000 to 19000. 

Since computerization has made things easier and all individual data is with cgda pensions, the office of DPDO will be wound up slowly. 

Some sort of help desks will come up which are easily accessible where just the problem is fed and the pcda will answer the query.

Brig Inder Mohan Singh

(Source- Via gp e-mail from Col Latif Vadakkayil  (Retd)

  

How to Fix the United Nations

SOURCE:http://time.com/4473978/united-nations-kevin-rudd-reform/

      Former Australian PM Kevin Rudd:

               How to Fix the United

                              BY

                    Kevin Rudd

                

Aug. 31, 2016

                          

Bloomberg—Bloomberg via Getty ImagesKevin Rudd, foreign minister of Australia, speaks during the 65th annual United Nations General Assembly at the UN in New York, U.S., on Saturday, Sept. 25, 2010. The General Debate portion of the General Assembly runs until Sept. 29. Photographer: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The UN is still important, but it needs to be reformed for a new age

In an age of a fracturing political support for the European Union, the re-birth of American isolationism, the growing international political confidence on the parts of both Russia and China, the daily threat of violent jihadism and a chronically weak global economy, deep questions have arisen about the long-term durability of what we continue to blithely refer to as the “post-war global order.”


The uncomfortable truth is that many of the assumptions underpinning the current order are under profound challenge. Geopolitically, U.S.-China and U.S.-Russia relations are more unstable than they have been in a quarter of a century, even as Russia-China relations have rarely been closer.


Geoeconomically, despite the Chinese economic slowdown, China remains on track to surpass the U.S. as the biggest economy in the world sometime next decade—the first time since the reign of Britain’s King George III that a non-western, non-democratic, non-English speaking country has occupied this position.

Meanwhile the dynamics of globalization, driven by finance and technology, are compounding in speed, intensity and complexity. On the one hand, this is generating greater demand for effective global governance, in areas such as finance, terrorism and climate change. But on the other we are confronted by a new range of counter-globalization forces, from those who aren’t benefiting from globalization, expressed as rampant nationalism, protectionism and xenophobia. Politicians like Donald Trump, Nigel Farage, and Marine Le Pen are just the most notable of several such manifestations around the world.

This is turn is producing a crisis of the nation state itself, caught in a new no-man’s land between this combination of centripetal and centrifugal forces being generated by the “globalization of everything,” with the state itself rendered increasingly powerless. The resulting political alienation of the citizenry has, in turn, been compounded by nearly a decade of poor global growth, high unemployment and even worse, chronically high youth unemployment, both in the developed and developing worlds. People now see their states are increasingly useless in dealing with their real problems.

All this is before a further quantum disruption arises from the next generation of technological change, in particular in the mass application of artificial intelligence, and the emergence of “jobs-free” growth across a growing number of industries. We have barely begun to calculate the full domestic and international impact of this profound economic change. We will need to recalibrate the idea of a viable “social contract,” both within and between states, if we are to maximize the prospects of poverty alleviation, greater equality and long-term political stability.


Finally there is our collective date with demographic destiny. Global population is projected to increase by one third by mid-century, and in parts of the world that are already the least politically stable, and most economically vulnerable. And all this in an employment-starved world, sowing the seeds for a new wave of political extremism, religious fundamentalism and the mass movements of peoples seeking better and more secure lives elsewhere.

Most challenging of all, this extraordinary cocktail of strategic, political, economic, social and technological change is unfolding all at once. Neither our national, nor our international institutions are capable of the effective action necessary to deal with these challenges. In fact, as the demand for effective global governance becomes stronger, the actual supply of such governance has rarely been weaker.


So what can be done? We cannot wave a magic wand and expect the state of great power relations to suddenly improve. Nor can we simply release pious statements railing expecting governments to resist the politically seductive, albeit economically destructive, temptation of the new protectionism, re-open the arteries of global trade and rebuild global growth. Even less can we call a halt to technological innovation, not least because of the remarkable good it also delivers humankind. But what we can do is act to improve the effectiveness of the creaking institutions of global governance that we do have at our disposal, because these are the very mechanisms that are available to us to sustain a working global order, a rules-based system and through them respond to the major challenges of our time.


Principal among these is the United Nations, now 70 years old, the core of what remains of the multilateral system. Its in danger of drifting into global irrelevance. But despite the deep skepticism that now surrounds the institution’s effectiveness, the UN still matters, and matters more than we think, because it remains the formal corner stone on which much of the current global order rests—whether we happen to be conscious of that reality, or not. In fact, it’s because the UN has become such a comfortable part of the international furniture, we tend to take it for granted, and we’ve allowed it to drift.


While the UN is not broken, it is in real trouble, as states increasingly bypass it when looking for solutions to major global problems. But if through a combination of political indifference and benign neglect, the international community does allow the UN to slowly “die the death of a thousand cuts,” we would rapidly become aware of the gaping hole it would leave in the current order, as states began reverting to the sort of unilateral, aggressively bilateral, or Darwinist behaviors we thought we had consigned to an earlier age. Its therefore worth recalling what the UN uniquely offers the international community, and why it is worth defending and strengthening for the future:

1. An agreed Charter containing global norms and procedures which could never be renegotiated in the current age;
2. An entrenched principle of multilateralism, based on the sovereign equality of states, that provides a global decision-making process, that benefits smaller and middle powers who collectively make up more than 90% of the international community;
3. A source of unchallenged global legitimacy;
4. A unique claim to universality;
5. A vast system of international law, norms and dispute resolution mechanisms and procedures, covering domains from terrorism to telecommunications.
6. A unique capacity for collective action on threats to international peace and security, ranging from sanctions to authorised armed intervention.
7. A capacity for collective action on sustainable development, from poverty to climate;
8. A capacity to act rapidly and at scale to natural, or man-made, humanitarian disasters;
9. A unique global convening power to deal with new global challenges as they arise;
10. A capacity for the UN, through the Secretary General, to take initiatives on its own account, to deal with intractable global problems.

These do not of themselves solve the deep problems now confronting the global order. But if properly harnessed, they represent a mechanism for doing so, drawing afresh on this extraordinary list of institutional strengths. And this in turn will require the next secretary-general to implement far-reaching reforms to radically improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the UN, to convince member states that, properly empowered, the UN can make a measurable difference in solving the great global problems for which purpose it was established in the first place.


The Hon Kevin Rudd, a former Prime Minister of Australia, president of the Asia Society Policy Instiute in New York, Chair of the International Commission on Multilateralism, and author of

UN2030 – Rebuilding Order in a Fracturing World

















 

IESM : IESM IS NOT POLITICAL & "JUMLAS" WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED BUT CHALLENGED .

SOURCE: IESM

'Vinod Gandhi' via IESM_Group <iesm_group@googlegroups.com>	10:39 AM (3 hours ago)
to yahoogroups, yahoogroups, REPORT, Inderjit, Fauji, Ravindra, Exservicemen, Exservicemen, Anil

Dear Members

IESM has been taking up the issues, which concern welfare of ESM, strongly with Govt. OROP is one of the main issues. IESM had started RHS and agitation at JM for approval of OROP which was passed by Govt in their budgets in Feb 14 by UPA Govt and then in July 14 by NDA Govt. NDA Govt finally released OROP on 7 Nov 15 but it was truncated OROP and is not as per approved definition of OROP. IESM continued with the agitation at JM to press for full OROP. It is very important to note that Govt had never issued any clarification as to why did Govt not release full OROP. Only Govt can answer this question. ESM will ask this question in assembly elections in Punjab, Uttar Khand and UP and then in next general elections in 2019. Govt will have to give a reply to get ESM votes.  

However on the suggestion of Defence Minister that Govt cannot be forced to remove anomalies in OROP with the gun of agitation pointing at head of the Govt. IESM in consultation with ESM decided to temporarily suspend RHS on 29 Apr 16 to confirm that ESM do not want confrontation with Govt and would be happy to create a congenial atmosphere for talks. ESM are disappointed with the Govt because Govt is refusing to engage JM with talks even after suspension of RHS.

It is noteworthy that the BJP Govt won with clear majority in General elections in May 2014 because of  swing created by ESM vote in favor of BJP. ESM reserve their right of franchise and vote for a party which will solve ESM problems and will fulfill the promises given to ESM and public.

 

 

Jumlas will not be accepted now.  

Some ESM have got together and have decided to register a political party in the name of FOUJI JANATA PARTY.  This is only to ensure that fouji vote and their family vote is united under one umbrella and is used to create a pressure gp to demand welfare from the political parties. 

No one can deny independence of franchise and IESM is first to ensure that every ESM is free to align with any party and vote as per his choice/conscience. The underlying principle here must be that ESM vote must benefit ESM family and should not be used for personal aggrandizement. However effort to unite ESM vote under one umbrella will continue. 

The organizers of FJP have requested Maj Gen Satbir Singh and leaders of agitation at JM to help them in unifying the ESM vote bank under one umbrella to ensure that it is used for benefit of ESM. Maj Gen Satbir Singh has consented to guide FJP at this crucial time. Maj Gen Satbir Singh has issued a clarification that he personally will not seek any favors from any party and will not contest election till full approval of OROP. His clarification is pasted below.

It is very unfortunate that some ESM and some ESM groups, instead of appreciating/joining unity efforts of FJP,  have started a campaign against unity move. The reasons are not difficult to understand. These desperate ESM and ESM groups/have already aligned with some political party and hence are opposing the unity move. These desperate groups are only looking for their personal aggrandizement and hence misleading the ESM. These groups have also started a vilification campaign against Maj Gen Satbir Singh and organizers of JM. Some of the mails published in Sanjha Morcha blog and some of the mails/statements of other individual ESM/gps are part of this vilification campaign against JM agitation and its organizers. ESM are requested to remain vigilant and befitting reply to these self centered ESM and ESM gps. 

Environment would have noticed that IESM/UFESMJM has never issued any statement against any individual ESM, ESM gp or any other ESM party. 

In view of above background following clarification is

 

issued by IESM.

This is with reference to a news item appearing in Jalandhar and statement appearing in a blog called "Sanjha Mocha' regarding establishing a political party called FAUJI JANTA PARTY (FJP). The aim of the FJP is to unite ESM vote bank and use ESM vote bank for welfare of ESM. For this purpose FJP may contest the forthcoming Punjab, Uttar Khand and Uttar Pradesh elections in 2017 by fielding suitable ESM with proven track record and proven honesty. This exercise could be carried out in conjunction with main line pol parties and other like minded groups.

Some ESM and ESM groups are issuing statements against IESM and JM agitation implying involvement of JM and its leaders in politics and political process. These statements are baseless and are completely denied by IESM.

This is to categorically and unequivocally deny any such involvement of IESM and members of the governing body of IESM in any political activity. In this respect clarification issued by Maj Gen Satbir Singh Chairman IESM, Advisor UFESM JM and Advisor FJP is given below

 

 

 

 

CLARIFICATION

 

 

 

17 Aug 2016

 

Dear Friends,

 

1. I find that rumours are being spread that IESM is going political and the funds donated for the OROP Protest Movement will be used for political purposes.

 

 

2.     I wish to reiterate, emphasise and confirm the following:-

(a)     IESM is not rpt not going political .  However, some members of the Defence Fraternity have formed a Political Party by the Name Fauji Janta Party (FJP) to restore the Izzat and Status of the Soldiers and play its rightful role in the governance of the Nation.

(b)    No funds donated for the OROP Movement will be spent on any Political Activity.

(c)    I or any member of the Governing Body of IESM will not fight the Political Election till the OROP Movement is in progress.

(d)    The members of the Defence Fraternity who have formed the FJP have however requested me to guide them in their efforts.  I have informed them that I would be available for any advice when asked for.

3.  This is for your information and further circulation to the members of Defene Fraternity.

        With regards,
 

Yours Sincerely,
 

Maj Gen Satbir Singh, SM (Retd)
Chairman Indian Ex-Servicemen Movement (IESM)
Mobile: 9312404269, 01244110570Email:satbirsm@gmail.com

 

Regards

Gp Capt VK Gandhi VSM

Gen Sec IESM

OROP is our right. Dilution in OROP will NOT be accepted.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/439033406123068/

 

IF YOU SEE SOMEONE WITHOUT A SMILE GIVE HIM ONE OF YOURS.