How will RCEP Benefit Member Nations and What Does India’s Exit from the Trade Pact Mean (r)

             Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership

                           [ https://youtu.be/SYyigbIaBKY ]

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is a proposed free trade agreement (FTA) between the ten member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) (Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam) and its six FTA partners (China, Japan, India, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand)

RCEP | Why India quit RCEP | What is RCEP  

                                            [ https://youtu.be/cwwmPa4Jn20 ]

India Out Of RCEP, Message To China? | India Development Debate

                          [ https://youtu.be/GKeimzfKOWI ]

 Why RCEP Retreat gets more Political Consensus than  Balakot & Creative Destruction of Capitalism

                            [ https://youtu.be/VA5F4Q3r1ZU ]

                                =================================================

 

SOURCE:

https://theprint.in/theprint-essential/how-will-rcep-benefit-member-nations-and-what-does-indias-exit-from-the-trade-pact-mean/545701/?fbclid=IwAR3Nrk5wtDumnfXMcSZI5xVeNaM3423EkqOe7MuvF5Emq2O2XTyNxaIbF9g

File photo of PM Modi at the RCEP Summit in Thailand in 2019 | @narendramodi | Twitter

How will RCEP Benefit Member Nations and What  Does India’s Exit from the Trade Pact Mean 

                                       By

                      KAIRVY GREWAL 

15 Asia-Pacific nations have signed the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. It covers over 2.2 billion people and accounts for 30 per cent of the world's economy.

 

17 November, 2020 

After eight years of negotiations, 15 Asia-Pacific nations have finally signed the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), hailed as one of the biggest free trade deals in history. It covers over 2.2 billion people and accounts for 30 per cent of the world’s economy.

India chose to opt out of this trade agreement that was signed Sunday (15 November) among 10 Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) members — Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam — and their six trade partners — Australia, China, Japan, South Korea and New Zealand.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi had in November last year said the decision to not be a part of RCEP was guided by the impact it will have on the “lives and livelihood of all Indians, especially vulnerable sections of the society”.

ThePrint explains what RCEP represents, how it was conceived and ways in which this trade pact will benefit member nations.

How it Started

The RCEP was first proposed at the 19th ASEAN meet in November 2011 with an aim to create a consolidated market for the 10 member countries and their trade partners.

The guiding principles of RCEP state, “The objective of launching RCEP negotiations is to achieve a modern, comprehensive, high quality and mutually beneficial economic partnership agreement among the ASEAN member states and ASEAN’s FTA (free trade agreement) partners.”

It aims to create a “liberal, facilitative and competitive investment environment” in the Asia-Pacific region.

The RCEP was later also conceived by the ASEAN members and China as a response to the US-led Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) — later renamed as Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership — after America opted out of this deal in 2017. The key features of TPP included comprehensive market access, regional approach to commitments, inclusive trade, regional integration, and addressing new trade challenges.

The TPP was established during US President George Bush’s term. President Donald Trump had, however, pulled out of the deal saying it was a “potential disaster” for America and will harm manufacturing in the US.

What is expected of RCEP

The RCEP is expected to eliminate a series of tariffs on imported products for the member nations in the coming 20 years. The agreement also includes rules on intellectual property, telecommunications, financial and professional services, and e-commerce .

Speaking to ThePrint, Radhika Pandey, consultant, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy, said, “The intent is that it will lead to trade creation because the countries that are part of the RCEP will progressively lower tariff rates, so that will lead to an increase in trade.”

Many signatories of the RCEP already have FTAs with each other. But Deborah Elms, from the Asian Trade Centre, has been quoted as saying, “The existing FTAs can be very complicated to use compared to RCEP.”

This is because businesses with global supply chains might face tariffs even within an FTA if their products contain components that are made elsewhere.

However, under RCEP, member nations would be treated equally. It would also incentivise companies in member nations to look at the trade region for suppliers.

Does RCEP benefit all?

Even though the intent of RCEP is to create trade and lower tariff rates for all members, experts worry that not all countries will benefit equally.

Sujit Dutta, distinguished fellow at Vivekananda International Foundation, and editor, National Security quarterly journal, told ThePrint, “Only some of the countries will gain from joining RCEP. China is eating into many of the other countries’ industrial products, it remains uncertain on what this would mean for smaller countries.”

He added, “Stronger economies like Singapore have a lot to gain. But, for other smaller countries, it is an unequal relationship. China is too big for these countries.”

Dutta also pointed out that large-scale trade agreements are now “losing their sheen”. This is because they are based on different currencies whose valuations have an unequal effect in different countries.

Rajat Kathuria, director and chief executive, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, also maintained that China will stand to benefit more in comparison to other countries, both in terms of imports and exports.

“China being a big market is going to redirect its economy towards more consumption. There are going to be greater imports into China. Once you have greater imports, there is going to be greater value to consumers, that’s something India missed out on,” Kathuria told ThePrint.

The Peterson Institute for International Economics has estimated that by 2030 RCEP may be able to increase global national income by $186 billion annually. It could also add 0.2 per cent to the economies of member nations.

Why did India pull out of RCEP?

On 4 November last year, India announced its decision to not join RCEP. This came amid concerns that elimination of tariffs would open India’s markets to imports, which in turn could harm local producers. The decision also reflected PM Modi’s clarion call for an Atmanirbhar Bharat.

Pandey explained that India’s strategy was to protect its domestic industries from Chinese imports. “India had suggested some remedial measures. For instance, if imports rise beyond a threshold they should be allowed to impose some kind of barriers. But, the other member countries of RCEP didn’t agree to it.”

“The present form of the RCEP agreement does not fully reflect the basic spirit and the agreed guiding principles of RCEP . It also does not address satisfactorily India’s outstanding issues and concerns. In such a situation, it is not possible for India to join the RCEP agreement,” PM Modi had said at the RCEP Summit in Bangkok last year.

The other member nations have, however, maintained that the doors will always remain open for India’s participation in the RCEP. Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsein Loong had said that the country has joined the trade pact “in hoping that India too, will be able to come on board at some point”.

According to Karthik Nachiappan, research fellow, Institute of South Asian Studies, National University of Singapore, RCEP also did not improve the material standing of Indian firms in sectors like agriculture, manufacturing and electronics.

India’s metal producers, he said, stand to lose from greater competition having already been buffeted by previous FTAs with Southeast Asian countries. “In terms of agriculture, firms producing commodities like dairy, pepper, coconuts and cardamom will face pressures from both high-end producers like Australia and New Zealand, and also like-minded competitors in ASEAN, which is the case for Indian rubber,” he wrote.

N.R. Bhanumurthy, professor of economics at the National Institute of Public Finance and Policy, said, “We don’t have strong databases to understand and negotiate a good trade deal with regard to some of the commodities. When price fluctuations happen then no one knows what will happen to the price of imported commodities, particularly in case of agricultural commodities.”

“The problem is that it is very difficult to increase the export of agricultural commodities while their imports can be increased very easily,” he added.

Did India lose out by not joining RCEP?

The Chinese state media had claimed that India’s decision to not join RCEP was a “strategic blunder” to the country’s economic growth.

Kathuria maintained that India could have gained from being part of the RCEP, in terms of welfare improvement for consumers. “We have lost out on getting greater access if we are negotiating with other markets,” he said.

He also explained how even during negotiations with member nations of RCEP, India’s focus had been on the disruption caused to manufacturing and homegrown producers rather than what it meant for consumers. “Now, all that discussion has been overshadowed by the border conflict with China… In this case, I would say that politics has been a significant factor in our decision to stay out of RCEP,” Kathuria added.

Pandey, meanwhile, said protection and promotion of domestic industry should be temporary. “Not being part of any trade creation group should be temporary. But going forward, this strategy of hindering access ultimately harms the country as a whole in the long term.”

“Some kind of temporary relief to domestic industry is fine and can be given because China is one established monopolist player,” she added.

Global trade would also have increased if India would have been a signatory because it is a market for textile and dairy products, said Pandey. “We have a huge population, a huge market, we have a sizeable share of GDP. That’s why they have left the door open for India to sign later.

New Strategic Sichuan-Tibet Railway Link To Strengthen Border Defense – Analysis (r)

 SOURCE;

https://www.eurasiareview.com/10112020-new-strategic-sichuan-tibet-railway-link-to-strengthen-border-defense-analysis/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+eurasiareview%2FVsnE+%28Eurasia+Review%29

Train passes on railway in Tibet

Analysis

New Strategic Sichuan-Tibet Railway Link To Strengthen Border Defense 

                                By

                     Prof Ashok Tiku*

Railway upto SHIGATSE (Xigaze) is complete. All tunnels and bridges upto Nyingchi are complete . Nyigchi to be commisoned  by December 2022 and Chumbi Valley under planning

 

November 10, 2020

Chinese President XI is calling for expediting the construction of the new railway line connecting Lhasa with Chengdu to strengthen border defense.

China announced its intention to connect Tibet with another new railway line  — the Sichuan-Tibet railway line to protect China’s borders.  On the eve of starting the construction of this new route, Chinese president said (Xinhua Nov 9) that the new route will be key to safeguarding China’s national unity and consolidating border stability and called for building the railway line expeditiously by “concentrating resources “ for its completion. 

Recently China Railway announced the bidding results for the construction of two tunnels and one bridge, as well as the power supply project for the Ya’an—Linzhi         ( Ya’an-Nyingchi) section of the Sichuan-Tibet Railway. This will be the second railway line connecting Tibet with China and will shorten the travel time to Lhasa from 48 hours to just 13 hours. The  Sichuan-Tibet railway line starts from Cheng du, the capital of Sichuan province and the  new addition  Ya’an-Nyinngchi section will be 1,011 kms long, and includes 26 stations when completed — taking Chinese railway right up to the disputed boundary with India. The cost of the project is estimated at 319.8 billion yuan.

It would be interesting to recall that China started the railway survey of linking Lhasa with China in late 80s and the survey team had submitted three links for railway connectivity with Tibet:

1. Connecting Lhasa with Chengdu, Si-Zang raiway
2. Connecting Lhasa with Kunming, Yun-Zang raiway
3. Connecting Lhasa with Germu, Qing-Zang railway

The expert committee had recommended the first and second options for connecting Lhasa with China as against the Qing-Zang railway third option, as these two options were shorter, cheaper and easier to build.

Nevertheless, the then-CMC did not approve it on security considerations arguing that these railway lines run close to the Indian Border and would pose a security challenge. As such, it hence preferred the circuitous, the longest, and costliest, as well as the hazardous route, that passes through the high altitude point of 5,072 meters, for safety and security concerns to connect Lhasa with Germu along the Qing-Zang line 

Chengdu, has always served as a vital gateway city to Tibet in southwest China. Currently, the supplies from Chengdu to Lhasa come via the Chengdu-Lhasa train (Z322), covering 3,070km across 5 provinces, with a total duration of 36:18hrs. Now this distance can be covered by this short direct route train in only 13 hrs. The new line will pass through Linzhi located close to Indian border in Arunachal Pradesh .

The Qing-Lhasa line at1,956 kms long (Xi Ning-Germu 815 kms, Germu-Lhasa 1,142kms) opened in 2006  and has now been extended to Shigaze (280 kms) to link later with Yadong, and Kathmandu and finally to Lumbini close to the India-Nepal border. The project planned in 2008 is now expected to be completed in 2025, but construction costs (US$ 300 million) remain a worry as the line faces hurdles because of the terrain.

The proposed Kerung-Kathmandu linkup is part of BRI project entering Nepal in Rasuwan district and will eventually link it with India. The feasibility report for this additional link was prepared in late 2018 and technically a tough project as 98% of the line in Nepal passes through tunnels and bridges with about five stations. Tracks are to be built on steep terrain and the line climbs from an altitude of 1,400M in Kathmandu to 4,000M in Tibet, costing 28 billion yuan. Although only one third of the total length falls on the Nepal side, it had to account for half the costs due to  difficult terrain conditions in Nepal. It was supposed to reach Kerung (Tibet) by 2020, but has supposedly been delayed and pushed to 2025.

The Nepal-China cross border railway was listed as part of trans-Himalayan connectivity network at the BRI forum Beijing (April 2019). The cost and profitability of the project is a cause of concern as Nepal has a trade deficit with China of $12.8 (2019) equal to nearly half of Nepal’s GDP. Nepal’s exports to China fell by 30% (2019) and the train will have to run practically empty from Nepal unless India also joins this network.

The new railway route linking Lhasa with Cheng du is strategically of utmost importance facilitating speedy mobility of forces from Cheng du to Tibet and other border regions near Indian border. President Xi’s intervention to expedite construction reflects the importance that China attaches to this project. However, what is worth noting is that China had earlier warned India and expressed concern on building the Twang railway link (1-4-2017) linking Twang with the Indian railway network.

*Prof Ashok Tiku, is a Senior China Analyst with 45 years of experience.

Self-reliance in Defence needs Shift in Priority (r)

SOURCE:

https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/comment/self-reliance-in-defence-needs-shift-in-priority-171930

ENSURE QUALITY: The use of technology is tilting the balance in favour of the gun.

Self-reliance in Defence Needs  

               Shift  in Priority 

                           By

Lt Gen Harwant Singh (retd)

                               [Former Deputy Chief of Army Staff]

In the import of defence equipment, we have been paying additional money for the transfer of technology clause and yet have never been able to fully absorb it and consequently could never take it forward. We even failed in the field of reverse engineering. The recent DRDO move to raise the limits of advance payment and award contracts through the procurement manual is hardly a push for self-reliance.

India imports 70 per cent of its defence weapons and equipment. An import lobby has existed, which on the one hand has controlled the development of weapons and equipment within the country and on the other, gained from imports. Earlier, most weapons and equipment came from the USSR, where no information about any wrongdoing by the buyer ever leaked. 

Internally in India, no misdeed was ever brought to light.

In two cases where malpractices had occurred to strike deals for the import of equipment, information linked to bribery was leaked from only the two countries that provided the equipment, one being the Bofors gun and the other Agusta Westland helicopters.

          In both, the names of the defence secretaries surfaced. 

In the case of Bofors, the defence secretary could not be charge-sheeted as he had been moved to a Governor’s post, placing him beyond the reach of law and in the case of Agusta Westland helicopters, the defence secretary was re-employed as CAG and his arrest now awaits clearance from the Defence Ministry, even while he is a retired person, though in this case,ONLY the Air Chief was also (WAS) charge-sheeted.

Development of weapons and equipment is at the core of Atmanirbhar Bharat and ‘Made by India’ forms its essence. It is possible to create capabilities within to meet the military’s requirement, provided we bring about changes to the existing set-up. Here, the thrust should be initially towards ‘Make in India’, followed by ‘Made by India’, rather than merely ‘Make in India’ by foreign companies.

India has enough entrepreneurial potential and technical skills and if given the required incentives, it can measure up. The setting up of production facilities by foreign companies should, as far as possible, be joint ventures with Indian entities.

Fifty-seven DRDO establishments, 11 defence public sector undertakings (PSUs) and 41 ordnance factories have been in existence for over six decades and yet the Indian military continues to depend on imports. Before any attempt to promote indigenous production is made,

we need to examine as to why own efforts made by the DRDO, defence PSUs and the Ordnance Factory Board have fallen short of meeting the military’s requirement.

In the import of defence equipment, we have been paying additional money for the transfer of technology clause and yet have never been able to fully absorb it and consequently could never take it forward. We even failed in the field of reverse engineering. The recent DRDO move to raise the limits of advance payment and award contracts to the second lowest bidder (if the lowest bidder backs out) through the procurement manual is hardly a push for self-reliance.

For long, there has been a demand for an independent science audit of the DRDO and other defence establishments. Internal ‘expert panels’ can hardly be expected to come up with radical changes, which run counter to the interests of MoD, whose turf these are. Even the Director General Qualitative Assurance (DGQA) forms part of the same set-up. Consequently, the quality of products from these establishments has remained indifferent.

While a few of these DRDO and other establishments have done reasonably well, such as those dealing with missile technology, most others have little to their credit.

A science audit should be over within three months and those who have failed to accomplish anything worth while should be sold out to the private sector. Given top-of-the line equipment with these establishments, private entities will make a good start.

When the USSR broke up, China took 2,000 scientists from there. This did contribute to China getting to its present state in high-end technologies.

[ At the end of WW II Russians also took an undisclosed number of GERMAN scientists in captivity with a view to exploit their talent - Vasundhra )

What is not fully realised in India is that in this equation between the ‘gun’ and the ‘man behind the gun’, the balance is fast tilting in favour of the gun. Already, artificial intelligence, robotics, drone technology and cyber tech have brought about a sea change in warfare.

While we did away with the ‘licence & permit raj’, what was left out was the issue of ‘clearances’ and curtailing the predatory functioning of the ‘inspector’. Clearances involve traversing through the bureaucratic jungle. So, in place of ‘ease of doing business’, one needs ‘grease for doing business’ in India. A single window leads to many more windows. These hassles made many industries shift from India to China. 

[ Can  INDIA'S  ambitions to become are achievable   or will just remain a "DREAM" 

One foreign company did find a solution by appointing a bureaucrat as company chairman, who could not only cut red tape but also corner all future tax benefits by getting to know of such plans years before the official announcements.

Most equipment being produced in India still has imported content. Therefore, effort is needed to move into high-tech zone. Given the current geostrategic environment and developments in the Indo-Pacific and Himalayas, Quad countries and others are willing to give India access to high-end technologies, and it must make the most of such possibilities.The Chief of Defence Staff, General Bipin Rawat, is well off the mark when he advocates the lowering of General Staff Qualitative Requirement (GSQR ) to 70 per cent. Perhaps he is not aware that technology has come to play a dominant role in warfare and as it is, 68 per cent of the military’s equipment is of the vintage category. In framing the GSQR, what could be considered is that the DRDO be involved to an extent, so that it could initially produce Mark-1 of the weapon/equipment to be followed by Mark-2 which must fully measure up to the required performance parameters.

For Atmanirbharta in defence, resetting of the existing set-up on the following lines is called for:

a) Complete science audit and based on it, 50 per cent of DRDO, defence PSUs and ordnance factories should be sold out to the private sector. The next review of the balance of these establishments be carried out after five years; 

b) Secretary, Defence Production, should be a defence services officer;

c) DGQA should come under the CDS;

d) A few selected DRDO establishments, defence PSUs and ordnance factories should be headed by defence services officers. The Navy has done better by adopting this system;

 e) Factories should be relocated closer to where weapons and equipment are required to be deployed to reduce transportation expenses;

 f) Do away with the single vendor system, including for ordnance factory products.

The proposal to convert the Ordnance Factory Board into Ordnance Factory Corporation Limited as being suggested will be a half-way house, leaving the military still dependent on a single vendor and products of indifferent quality. 

KASHMIR POLITICS Despite strong words, a Biden-Harris administration is unlikely to change US position on Kashmir There are few expectations in the Valley.(R)

SOURCE

https://scroll.in/article/978599/despite-strong-words-a-biden-harris-administration-is-unlikely-to-change-us-position-on-kashmir

KASHMIR POLITICS

Desphite strong words, a Biden-Harris administration is unlikely to change US position on Kashmir

There are few expectations in the Valley. 

By

                                       Ipsita Chakravarty

If United States President Donald Trump takes time off from golfing to concede the election, the country will soon have a Democrat government. Observers in the Indian establishment may have greeted this news with mixed feelings.

Trump had come to power in 2016 declaring he was a “big fan of Hindu” and a “big fan of India”, comments that chimed well with the Bhartiya Janata Party government at the Centre. Four years of high-octane camaraderie between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Trump followed. Earlier this year, Modi even endorsed a second “Trump Sarkar” while the visiting president maintained a tactical silence on India’s new citizenship laws and human rights violations in Kashmir. The awkward moment came a few months later, when Trump breezily offered to mediate between India and Pakistan to sort out tensions between the two.

The Biden-Harris campaign has been different in tenor, especially when it came to human rights in Kashmir. In 2019, soon after the Centre stripped Jammu and Kashmir of special status under Article 370 and split it into two Union Territories, Harris did not mince words. “We have to remind Kashmiris they are not alone in the world,” she said. “We are keeping a track on the situation. There is a need to intervene if the situation demands.”

In the Biden campaign’s agenda for Muslim Americans, India’s National Register of Citizens and Kashmir featured in the list of threats to Muslim populations across the world. “In Kashmir, the Indian government should take all necessary steps to restore rights for all the people of Kashmir,” said the campaign agenda. “Restrictions on dissent, such as preventing peaceful protests or shutting or slowing down the Internet, weaken democracy.”

Despite these strong words, the US stance on Kashmir is unlikely to alter with a change of guard in the White House.

US in Crisis

As political scientist Paul Staniland pointed out, “The US is in a massive political crisis that won’t end even when Biden takes power.” Which means, the old priorities are unlikely to change, especially after an election fought largely on domestic issues.

First, the need of the US to find a counterweight to China in the region. While Indian and Chinese forces are massed along the frontier in Eastern Ladakh, Washington and Beijing fight for control in the South China Sea and Taiwan. The US has also viewed China’s drive for primacy in the economic and technological realms with growing alarm. A Biden administration might not pursue Trump’s aggressive trade war with China and is likely to seek cooperation in other spheres. But it will not be radically different in its impulse to contain China. “The last thing a domestically beleaguered US administration facing the rise of China has any appetite for would be a major diplomatic offensive in South Asia,” said Staniland.

Second, Indian markets remain important to American firms. Despite the shrinking of the Indian economy, even in March, top US diplomats were urging Indian markets to open up. Last year, the US notched up $34 billion in exports to India, and that’s not counting what Indians spend on US technology, travel and other services. Though it is far behind China, India’s markets have an outsized presence compared to its economy.

Staniland also added that Indian coverage of the Kashmir statements overestimated US domestic-political interest in South Asian politics: “On Kashmir specifically, it’s largely fallen out of the US media compared to summer/fall 2019.”

A paramilitary soldier guards a street in Srinagar. Credit: Tauseef Mustafa/AFP

Indifferent Valley

Indeed, American interest in the region has long faded. According to this article by Arun Joshi in Greater Kashmir, in the 1990s, the White House and the US State Department kept a close watch on the daily violence in the Valley. US diplomats made regular visits to the Valley and Frank Wisner, then US ambassador to India, developed personal relationships with Kashmiri politicians, including the separatist Hurriyat leadership. Since then, the diplomatic visits have dwindled. In a post 9/11 world, the US has been distracted by other wars.

This waning interest is also reflected in public discourse in the Valley. According to popular mythology in Kashmir in the heyday of the militancy, Delhi was known as the “markaz”, or power centre pulling strings. Islamabad was another “markaz”. The US was the ultimate “markaz” dictating operations. This time, as news of Trump’s defeat trickled in, a few political parties in Kashmir issued statements, expressing the hope that the “politics of polarisation” was over and that the Biden-Harris government would focus on the “wrongs that are being done” in Kashmir.

But the wider public appears to have to have shrugged it off, even though the president’s anti-Muslim policies had made him unpopular in Kashmir. China’s incursions in Ladakh gave rise to far greater interest and some black humour in the Valley.

Few expect much from the change at the White House. After the sweeping changes of 2019, Joshi notes, “Kashmiris were in shock over the silence of the world. Now it does not shock them anymore.”

A fine balance

While the White House may remain tight-lipped, there may be more sound and fury in the US Congress. Even under a Trump administration last year, the House Foreign Affairs Committee held a hearing on human rights in South Asia where Democrat Congresswoman Ilhan Omar grilled US government representatives and speakers from India on the state of affairs in Kashmir.

Two resolutions were moved in Congress. One, by Democrat representative Pramila Jayapal, raised concerns about the communications blockade while speaking of “dire security challenges” faced by the Indian government. It found bipartisan support. The other, pushed by Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, held that India had “unilaterally changed the status of Jammu and Kashmir without a direct consultation or the consent of the Kashmiri people”. It condemned human rights violations and spoke of “supporting Kashmiri self-determination”. It had few takers even within the Democratic party.

Going forward, Staniland predicted, the US might adopt the kind of balance reflected in the Jayapal resolution – talking about human rights rather than “making deeper claims about Kashmir’s political status or suggesting actual coercive measures”.

The longstanding US position on Kashmir, as this Congressional paper from last year noted, was that it should be settled through “negotiations between India and Pakistan while taking into consideration the wishes of the Kashmiri people”. But for years, the US government has done little to push that position. 

Biden may not provide the kind of “political cover” that Trump did to Modi, but he is unlikely to rock the boat.

THE LEOPARD WHO DIED OF SHAME.(R)

SOURCE:

https://youtu.be/qFvdK3YigsA?t=407

         THE LEOPARD WHO DIED OF SHAME

Story telling - What the Ad world can learn  from the Army" 

                                    By 

      Capt Raghu Raman @ Goafest 2016

 

                    [ https://youtu.be/qFvdK3YigsA?t=407 ]

            

                                                        

             Leopard Who Died of Shame 

                                   By 

               Captain Raghu Raman

                                   [  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwK0aFlpnr8 ]

          THE LEOPARD WHO DIED OF SHAME.

If you visit the Officer's Mess Bar of a certain  KHALSA Battalion, you are likely to stop and look at a leopard skin strung over the bar and read these words underneath,

     THE LEOPARD WHO DIED OF SHAME.

A veteran who had very successfully worked for a Japanese Heavy Engineering firm told me that the following story has great management value.

An Indian army battalion was in tents on the East Pakistan border just before the 1971 war.The young officers piled up in the mess tent every night and got drunk. 

 Good soldiers are good tipplers, unsaid rule of Ind Army.

"Tomorrow be damned, here is to life.No better place to be in mate."

"Rum or whisky pal?"

"I am an occasional drinker."

"What, sacrilege,you won't drink. You want to stop a bullet without ever touching alcohol to your lips. You will die of chastity and virginity pal."

"I never said so. I am an occasional drinker but the occasion comes regularly. Hi hi ."

"Waiter garam paani lao."

It was a chilly evening and the battalion was spread out in tents along the East Pakistan border.The young lieutenants were at it again after the days reconnaissances and briefings of their platoons.

At 9:30 pm, the mess havildar came, saluted and announced,

"Bhojan prastoot hai sahab bahadur."

The seniormost captain present said,

"What Sanghara Singh, abhi to peena chaalu kiya hai. Come after a while please."

The night wore on and the cicadas and crickets became louder and louder.The young men sat round a fire and someone started singing,

"Angoor ki beti...jhoom nashe me, jhoom bara bar jhoom sharabi.."

                           

              ( CLICK/GOOGLE URL TO OPEN )   

                     [ https://youtu.be/XaMfRN0PVQ8 ]                                              

 
                     

The mess havildar came again after an hour and announced that the dinner was ready.The food had been reheated and laid on the camp tables.

"Abhi thoddi der ruko, baad me aana."

The mess havildar went away. The mess waiter kept bringing hot water and bottles of brandy and rum in the cold winter night of India.

Finally, past midnight the merry band of revellers went to eat food that had been reheated four times. But they were past the state of registering flavour and taste.They ate and were soon seen stumbling to their tents.

The Mess Havildar who was waiting for the officers to push off went to the utensil cleaner and said,

"I want all utensils and saucepans cleaned up for the morning."

The Mess Havildar extinguished all the hurricane lamps and pushed off.The harrased dishwasher piled all the utensils near the mess water trailer and sat washing the bartans in the weak light of the lantern. He would be the last one to sleep. He sat rubbing the utensils in cold water and ash when he heard a dog eating out of a big deghchi. He picked up a pebble and threw it towards the dog who was nearly invisible in the dark night.

"Shooh shooh,bhaag jaa saale.Shhoh."

The dog withdrew and the masalchi resumed his washing, cursing everyone of the officers who kept drinking so late. Good that he had had a nip of rum too. One works without tiring out with rum inside one's bones. He had a bottle hidden in his blanket. He looked forward to finishing the job quickly, smoke a furtive beedi, take a nip of rum and sleep.The mess havildar objected to the masalchi's smoking beedies. It was a  KHALSA battalion.

He heard a scratch and the dog was again muzzling the meat saucepan, licking the meat grease and gravy dregs.

"Shooh,shooh,be off with you.Accursed animal."

The dog retreated again and the masalchi    Sepoy Ram Phal,  HARYANVI,  who was nearly at the end of his patience got up and started rinsing the utensils in the tin water tub.The dog was again making sounds behind him licking the utensils.

"Yeh saala yoon nahi maaneygaa.." 

A heavy stirring ladle was in his hands. In the dead puce pale light of the smoking lantern, he swung it with both hands over his head and brought it down on the head of the unsuspecting dog.The dog leapt away and the masalchi resumed his washing.Then he put the utensils in the kitchen tent, went to his blanket, smoked a beedi, took a few neat swigs from his botttle and slept the sleep of the dead.

Since he slept late,the Mess Havildar usually woke him up late. He awoke when he found he was being shaken by the Mess Havildar.

"Utth jaa,tujhey CO saab ne jaad kiya hai."

"Ustaad why will the CO call for me."

The poor man was frightened stiff. He washed all utensils to best of his ability. Could the CO sahib have found his plate dirty.

He hastily put on his hob nailed boots, tucked in his shirt in his trousers, wetted his hair, shaved in cold water quickly and followed the mess havildar to the CO sahib's tent. Many officers of the battalion were standing next to the CO and staring hard at him. He was terrified at the sight. What could he have done wrong? Who had complained against him. Although he cursed officers a lot, but he did so only, Mann hi Mann. He never spoke an ill word about any body. He stood in attention in front of the CO. The CO spoke.

"Ram Phal what were you doing last night.?"

Did his ears hear right.What can a masalchi do? Wash utensils . What did the CO sahib mean? 

"Hazur, when the sahib log  went after dinner last night, I washed utensils, put them in the pantry and went and slept."

"Is that all, you did nothing else ?"

"Ji hazur, nothing else. If you can count it not as part of duty, there was a dog who was heckling me when I was washing utensils. I shooed him off a couple of times and he kept returning and muzzling the utensils. I hit him with a Kaddchi  sahib. He pushed off after that. I came and slept."

"Are you sure?"

"Bass saheb,after finishing my work I smoked a beedi also. Its a bad habit sahib. I want to be rid of it." He was scared that he would be punished for smoking.

"Come with me?"

The CO walked and the Adjutant walked behind him, followed by the Subedar Major and the officers.

In a thicket, near the mess tent lay a leopard, quite dead.

"Did you kill this leopard?" asked the CO.

"Kyaa bataun sahib, It was dark and I couldn't see properly in the night. I have never seen a leopard in my life. I thought that dogs of this side are different from dogs of Haryana."

The leopard hangs till this day in the unit mess bar. Its the leopard who died of shame and young officers raise a toast to it to this day.

But for the life of me, I have been wondering all along, what are the management lessons from this story.

                               THE LEGEND GREW 

"DON'T TAKE A  PANGA  WITH THE BATTALION  WHERE 

  EVEN  A    MASALCHI  KILLS A LEOPARD WITH BARE HANDS "              

     --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

              

      Bulla Ki Jaana Main Kaun – Rabbi                  Shergill Lyrics [PUNJABI | ROM | ENG]

                                     [   https://youtu.be/gbpdE8n_QWo ]