Monday, July 18, 2016

TURKEY : July 2016 - Coup / Mutiny

SOURCE:


Turkish President Erdogan Denounces Coup Attempt

 
by VOA News July 15, 2016

President Recep Tayyip Erdogan flew into Istanbul early Saturday, denouncing an attempted coup by a rogue group of military officers as an act of treason in a live, televised speech.
Hundreds of supporters greeted Erdogan at Istanbul's Ataturk Airport. He said that Prime Minister Binali Yildirim had given orders to "eradicate" soldiers involved in the uprising and that many arrests of officers were underway.
The Turkish military on Friday said that it had assumed power over Turkey, yet early Saturday, Turkish authorities said the coup attempt had been repelled. Martial law has been imposed across the country.
​​The situation was fluid through the night, with reports of explosions, including at least two bombs striking parliament in Ankara, gunfire in Istanbul, and reports of a Turkish fighter jet shooting down a helicopter used by coup plotters. Early Saturday, police officers and military traded gunfire at Taksim Square, with reports saying military soldiers then laid down their arms.
A helicopter attack on a police special forces headquarters Friday in Ankara left 17 officers dead, according to the state-run Anadolu news agency.
Western intelligence and military officials are closely monitoring developments in NATO member Turkey, a key U.S. ally in the war against Islamic State terrorists. Turkey also supports the moderate opposition looking to overthrow Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
​​Events began Friday when the army put out an email statement, read on Turkish television, saying it had "fully seized control" of the government to protect democracy and maintain human rights.
Speaking to the people
Erdogan, who conducted a FaceTime interview from an unknown location with a local TV station late Friday, urged the Turkish people to go to the streets to protest the soldiers' actions. He said those behind the move were associated with U.S.-based Islamic cleric Fethullah Gulen.
Gulen is a former ally of Erdogan who has accused the president of corruption as part of an apparent power struggle.
In response to the upheaval in Turkey, a nonprofit group serving as a voice for the Gulen movement rebuked the violence.
"We have consistently denounced military interventions in domestic politics," the Alliance for Shared Values said in a statement. "We condemn any military intervention in domestic politics of Turkey."
U.S. President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry issued a statement calling on all parties in Turkey to support the country's democratically elected government.
Prime Minister Yildirim told private NTV television that the group stormed the main TV station, TRT, and forced broadcasters to read a statement saying a curfew had been imposed. The soldiers also forced CNN Turk off the air.
"The government elected by the people remains in charge. This government will only go when the people say so," Yildirim said on NTV.
In Istanbul, massive crowds gathered in the city, including Taksim Square, waving flags and shouting support for Erdogan.
Erdogan, who said, "I never believed in a power higher than the people," vowed that the coup plotters would pay a "very heavy price."
Growing tensions
VOA's Dorian Jones said the chaotic events came amid growing tensions between Turkey's secular military and the pro-Islamist Erdogan government, which have been simmering since Erdogan came to power in 2014.
Jones said there have been concerns in Turkey that the airport bombing and other terrorist attacks, the government's crackdown on Kurds, and Erdogan's attempts to solidify control over the media could spark a reaction from the military.
By late Friday, a VOA correspondent in Istanbul said police were arresting rogue soldiers. Other pro-coup soldiers were beginning to return to their barracks and would face harsh repercussions, said Turkey's intelligence spokesman Nuh Yilmaz
Friday night there were numerous reports that hostages were taken in Ankara. CNN Turk said the chief of military staff, General Hulusi Akar, was among those being held. But Akar had been freed by early Saturday.
Ataturk Airport in Istanbul is apparently closed to traffic, and tanks are blocking the entrance. Security forces had also blocked all traffic from crossing the Bosphorus and the Fatih Sultan Mehmet bridges, the two main bridges over the Bosphorus Strait in Istanbul, but cars appear to be moving again.
Ankara Correspondent Yildiz Yadicioglu said credit cards and ATMs were not working there, with lines forming in front of banks.
Scrambling for information
U.S. military and diplomatic officials were scrambling to try to find out exactly what was going on in Turkey.
A senior U.S. Defense Department official said officials were monitoring the situation closely. "As of this time, there has been no impact to Incirlik Air Base and counter-ISIL air operations from Incirlik continue," he added, using an acronym for Islamic State.
Former intelligence officer Patrick Skinner said, "The coup really throws regional crises into a different stage." Skinner now works with the Soufan Group, a New York organization that provides strategic security intelligence services to governments and multinational organizations.
Current and former U.S. intelligence and military officials have long pointed to Turkey's critical role both in the Syrian refugee crisis and in blocking the flow of fighters and supplies to the Islamic State terror group.
"A military government would likely crack down on ISIS and extremist groups that heretofore the government had perhaps seen more in the light as a tool against Assad than a domestic threat," Skinner said, using another acronym for Islamic State. "But perhaps the focus shifts a bit as internal needs supersede CT [counterterror] concerns."
He said it was possible that a military government could look to strengthen its ties with the West, but that there was no way at this point to know for sure.
Issues facing Turkey
There was also concern as to how a series of other issues would be impacted by the apparent coup, including the fate of Turkey's Kurdish population, and those in Iraq and Syria, too, as well as the involvement of Russia and Iran in the region.
"One would be hard pressed to pick a more destabilizing place for a coup right now," Skinner said.
Earlier this week, CIA Director John Brennan admitted to disagreements between the U.S. and Turkey, and not just over Syria, where the U.S has repeatedly urged Turkey to do more to crack down on IS.
"There are some things that are going on inside the Turkish political system that are subject to a lot of debate and even controversy," he said.
"But I'll just leave it that we do work closely with the Turks," Brennan added. "I have very close interaction with my Turkish counterpart."
VOA's National Security Correspondent Jeff Seldin, Mary Alice Salinas at the White House, Dorian Jones in Istanbul, Jill Erzen, Ken Schwartz and
VOA's Turkish service contributed to this report.​​




Further Reading


July 2016 - Coup / Mutiny




July 2016 - Coup / Mutiny

Edward N. Luttwak noted "The technique of the coup is the technique of judo : the planners of the coup infiltrate and subvert a small critical part of the security apparatus, which they then use with surgical precision to displace the political leadership from its control of the rest of the state bureaucracy". This was not the normal military coup that Turkey had experienced multiple times in the past. This time, it was a group of a few thousands officers and soldiers within the military who tried to overthrow the government - more a mutiny than a full scale coup.
With remarkable prescience, Michael Rubin wrote in March 2016 that " ... given rising discord in Turkey as well as the likelihood that the Turkish military would suffer no significant consequence should it imitate Abdel Fattah el-Sisi’s game plan in Egypt, no one should be surprised if Turkey’s rocky politics soon get rockier."

What Happened

On 15 July 2016 Turkish security forces closed portions of both of the Bosphorus bridges in Istanbul that link the European continent with Asia. Military jets and helicopters have been deployed over Turkey's capital, Ankara. Gunfire could be heard in Anakra as the aircraft flew over at a low altitude. Local television channels in Istanbul reported the closures of the Bosphorus bridges but did not immediately provide a reason. Footage by Turkey’s Dogan News Agency showed cars and buses being diverted from the bridges as a result of the unprecedented closures.
Only when military tanks and vehicles occupied the city center did it become clear that a military coup was underway. Whether or not the jets were used for aerial bombing remains unclear, but scenes of destruction from the parliament confirm heavy artillery was used on the building, injuring some of the MPs inside. Helicopter fire, though, was widely documented on social media.
Military personnel moved swiftly to disarm Turkish police officers, who tend to back Erdogan's government, before occupying the TRT Turkish national television station to announce martial law and declare the coup a success. The Turkish military broke into the headquarters of state broadcaster TRT. After seizing the channel, Turkish Armed Forces broadcast a statement declaring martial law and announcing that they had “completely taken over the administration” with the aim of “reinstat[ing] constitutional order, human rights and freedoms.”
Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) announced that the country's government was confiscated its entirety. The statement, "President deluded, misguided and even traitors; Peace Council seized the country's leadership at home!" it said. Turkish Armed Forces said in a statement: "Turkish Armed Forces, the constitutional order, democracy, ensure the repetition of human rights and freedoms and facilities, enabling dominate again the rule of law in the country, deteriorating public security order of confiscated whole administration of the country in order to ensure again. All international agreements and our commitment remains with all countries of the world, we hope to continue our good relations."
President Erdogan's office website said he was safe and and that a coup attempt by a small group of soldiers was "unsuccessful." In his appearance on CNNTurk via a reporter's mobile phone, Erdogan urged people to take to the streets to protect "democracy." He said "This is an act encouraged by the parallel structure. ... I believe that this act will have the necessary punishment that will be given by our nation."
Prime Minister Binali Yildirim said a group within Turkey’s military had attempted to overthrow the government and security forces had been called in to “do what is necessary”. Yildirim said in comments broadcast by private channel NTV “Some people illegally undertook an illegal action outside of the chain of command ... “The government elected by the people remains in charge. This government will only go when the people say so.”
Speaking live on local television, Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Numan Kurtulmus said Erdogan's AK Party was still in charge of the government. Justice Minister Bekir Bozdag claimed that the people behind the coup are members of the movement that is loyal to US-based cleric Fethullah Gulen, according to Reuters. President Erdogan and his supporters within the government described the military behind the coup as a small faction.
The takeover saw a night of explosions, air strikes and gunfire. The Turkish parliament in Ankara was bombed and Istanbul's main airport was seized. The coup attempt also led to the temporary seizure of the state broadcaster TRT. Erdogan, who had been holidaying on the southwest coast when the coup was launched, called the uprising an "act of treason" and said that those responsible would pay a heavy price.
Among the top military officers arrested was the commander of the Third Army Corps, General Erdal Ozturk, based in Istanbul, who would face charges of treason for alleged links to the coup plot. General Adem Huduti, the commander of the Second Army, was also detained. In past Turkish coups, the chief of staff of the military and other generals have been the main ringleaders. This time, that appears to not to be case. There were local media reports that the chief of staff and other members of the military top brass had been taken captive by pro-coup forces and held at the main military base in Ankara.
Turkish officials said July 16, 2016 that 2,839 soldiers and officers who attempted a coup had been arrested, as the president accused an exiled cleric of organizing the plot. A number of high-ranking military officials fled to neighboring Greece by helicopter and requested political asylum. According to local media reports, some of them are believed to be among the architects of the coup. Greek police said that the arrested Turks include two majors, four captains and two sergeants first class, differing from earlier reports. Greece's government said they will return a Turkish Blackhawk helicopter "as soon as possible" but will examine the asylum claims made by eight Turkish military personnel who were on board.
Turkey's four main political parties condemned the failed coup attempt in a joint statement read during a symbolic parliamentary session, just hours after government control was reinstated. In a speech to parliament, Kemal Kilicdaroglu - the leader of Turkey's main opposition, the secular Republican People's Party (CHP) - said the failed coup attempt had brought political parties closer to finding common ground to improve democracy.
There were varying reports of the number of people killed in clashes. Updating the death toll, the Turkish government says 265 people were killed during the failed military coup. Officials say 161 civilians died, including conspirators. A further 104 military plotters were also killed. Conditions remained tense in Istanbul, Ankara and some other provincial cities, and there were reports of sporadic continuing violence. Turkish media reported intense clashes at a large military barracks outside Ankara that was believed to be a stronghold of the coup plotters.
As many as 2,745 judges reportedly were suspended for allegedly having links to the cleric, Fethullah Gulen. Turkish media also reported that 140 arrest warrants had been issued against members of Turkey's Supreme Court.
Turkish officials continued to arrest judges and military officers in connection with the coup attempt, detaining more soldiers Sunday. Justice Minister Bekir Bozdag said 17 July 2016 around 6,000 people had been detained.

What went Wrong?

A senior EU source monitoring the situation said: “It looks like a relatively well orchestrated coup by a significant body of the military, not just a few colonels. They’ve got control of the airports and are expecting control over the TV station imminently. They control several strategic points in Istanbul. ... Given the scale of the operation, it is difficult to imagine they will stop short of prevailing. It’s not just a few colonels”. As it turned out, it was just a few colonels.
After 8 hours of ongoing fighting, the military coup attempt began to falter. Erdogan landed at Ataturk airport, where he delivered a speech to reassure supporters. Soon afterwards, police officials began arresting plotters and posting videos on social media of military personnel in handcuffs, and some of them being lynched by angry mobs.
Addressing his supporters in Istanbul, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has called on the US to either arrest or extradite Fethullah Gulen, the Pennsylvania-based Islamic cleric who he accuses of being behind the coup attempt. He told the crowd: "The army is ours, not that of the parallel structure [behind the coup]. I am chief commander."
  1. The plan was undertaken in haste, apparently an effort to pre-empt an anticipated purge of the military and judiciary expected in August [that list of 2700 judges who were purged did not come out of no where]. Under these circumstances, there were limits to the number of people who could be recruited, and the number of contingencies that could be addressed. The planners must rely on potential recruits whose discretion can be assumed even if they refuse to join the plan.
  2. The Erdogan regime had recently surrounded itself with commando formations - Gendarmerie Special Forces (GSF / JÖH - Jandarma Özel Harekât) and the Police Special Operations (PSO / PÖH - Polis Özel Harekât) - consisting of several tens of thousands of recently recruited troops with combat experience against the Kurds, and readily available to ensure regime survival. Although these formations have not received a great deal of public notice, Saddam Hussein [with the Republican Guard, Special Republican Guard, etc], or Putin, or Hitler, or Boris Yeltsin, with similar concentric rings of protection, would have understood the theory quite well.
  3. Luttwak wrote that "... the confused and dramatic events of the coup will mean that the radio and television services will have a particularly attentive and receptive audience. In broadcasting over the radio and television services our purpose is not to provide information about the situation but rather to affect its development by exploiting our monopoly [or other de facto control] of these media." In this case, the coup never gained control of the media, and the incumbent government quickly used the media to convincingly claim it was still in charge. Erdogan broadcast from his smart phone a statement to the people, tweeted to his supporters and relied on the media.
  4. Edward Luttwak, Writing in Foreign Policy magazine, said the plotters broke “Rule No. 1, which is to seize the head of the government before doing anything else, or at least to kill him.” A coup seeks to replace one set of senior government officials with another, yet none of the senior officials in Erdogan's government were taken into custody. It is reported that the coup leaders were unaware of Erdogan's whereabouts, and bombed the resort at which he was staying after he had left.
  5. A coup seeks to displace those who control and use major government buildings, such as the Presidential Palace, Legislature, and so forth. This did not happen. A few pilots involved in the plot bombed and strafed the parliament in Ankara, the MIT intelligence agency's headquarters and military forces tanks near the presidential palace. Troops were sent to several facilities, but none were seized.
  6. Edward Luttwak, writing in Foreign Policy magazine, said: “Rule No. 2 in planning a successful military coup is that any mobile forces that are not part of the plot — and that certainly includes any fighter jet squadrons — must be immobilized or too remote to intervene. ... But the Turkish coup plotters failed to ensure that these loyal tanks, helicopters, jets were rendered inert, so instead of being reinforced as events unfolded, the putschists were increasingly opposed.”
  7. It appears that the few thousand soldiers under the coup commanders was insufficient to complete the various tasks at hand. Although some troops showed up at various strategic locations, they were too few to seize and hold them. The troops that seized the Bosporous brigdes made for a good photo op, but their contribution to a favorable outcome is less clear.
  8. Top military leaders denounced the rebellion. The navy chief and special forces commanders spoke out against the coup plotters. The chief of staff, General Hulusi Akar, was not part of the coup, nor was the head of the army in Istanbul, who took overall command briefly while the plotters held Akar captive. In two out of four previous coups in Turkey since 1960, the top military brass were involved and were able to use the chain of command to ensure success.
  9. As the attempt unfolded, it became clear that the ringleaders did not have widespread support within the military, nor any serious political or public backing. None of Turkey’s opposition parties endorsed it, and even Erdogan’s die-hard liberal and secular critics in the media and civil society denounced the action, saying Turkey had had enough of coups.

Naunihal Singh is an academic and the author of Seizing Power, a groundbreaking book on coups. According to Singh, the failure of Turkey’s coup wasn’t likely determined by the coup plotters’ military strength, or even their support inside the military. It was determined by their inability to make it seem like they were going to succeed. The ability to shape perceptions of success, often through media, is crucial in coups — basically, if people think a coup is going to succeed, they usually just join up because they don’t want to be on the wrong side of the guns.

Why

For a long time it seemed that Erdogan, who is pursuing a policy of a creeping but inexorable Islamization, had the upper hand, after suppressing the resistance of the generals, forcing them to resign themselves to giving up the secular principles of Kemal Atatürk, and getting rid of a “fifth column” in the midst of the armed forces, having “purged” the officer corps through a series of large-scale court trials. It turns out this was not quite the case.
From the point of view of many residents of Turkey and a considerable section of its elite, the president bears responsibility for destabilizing the domestic political situation in the country. Society is split, as was testified by the mass protests in 2013. Yet the authorities stubbornly refuse to listen to their opponents and are implementing the social mandate only of their voters, who represent about half of the population.
Erdogan provoked a resumption of a civil war in Turkish Kurdistan. In the opinion of many Turkish politicians and Kurds themselves, it was his actions that triggered a flare-up in hostilities and wiped out years of efforts to establish a peace dialogue. As a result, the country has found itself in a state of war, although just a couple of years ago there were neither reasons nor preconditions for this.
In its foreign policy the Turkish leadership managed to ruin relations with practically all the key global and regional players. The diplomatic results of Erdogan's rule are dismal. The events in Syria are following a scenario that is absolutely at variance to Ankara was counting on. In Egypt, Erdogan's protégé, Islamist Mohamed Morsi, has been ousted. Relations with the EU are ruined.

Why Now ?

The government pointed fingers at the Gulen movement, President Erdogan's rival and a declared terrorist organization, but it was unclear who was behind the coup. The Supreme Military Court was getting ready to expel military servicemen said to be affiliated to the Gulen movement in August 2016, so the mutiny sought to pre-empt that purge.
For weeks there were signs that tensions between Turkey's secular military and the Islamist-aligned government of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan were reaching a boiling point. Semi-public disagreements between the politicians and the generals, especially over Syria policy, were becoming all too frequent. Military briefings appeared increasingly to be at odds with government statements.
And some analysts in recent weeks had feared a coup might be in the offing, with concerns mounting in military ranks about the series of recent deadly terrorist attacks in Turkey, the government's no-holds-barred war on the Kurdish minority in southeast Turkey, and Erdogan's attempts to consolidate ever greater control over the media and judiciary.
Afzal Ashraf of the Royal United Services Institute, a London-based think tank, said he was surprised by the level of hostility among officers toward the government. They expressed increasing alarm at the autocratic tilt of Erdogan and anger at what they saw as the creeping Islamization of Turkey.
"For the first time in 15 years, young officers were making comments about their government in cynical terms," said Ashraf, a frequent visitor to Turkey. That was unusual, especially in front of visiting foreigners, he said. He noted, though, that top-ranking officers seemed more supportive of the government.

Now What ?

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan wasted little time Saturday before launching a purge of his enemies. He promised on his arrival at Istanbul Ataturk Airport to punish the coup plotters who had tried to kill him. “They will pay a heavy price for this,” said Erdogan. “This uprising is a gift from God to us, because this will be a reason to cleanse our army,” the president told supporters at the airport. Few regional analysts doubt that he will now use the failed coup to strengthen his presidential powers and to cleanse not only the military but other institutions suspected of harboring opponents.
Adding to fears that the government’s reaction to the coup would match Erdogan’s threats and his record of ruthlessness, Prime Minister Binali Yildirim said the government was considering legal changes to bring the death penalty back “to make sure this does not happen again.”
Former US ambassador to NATO, Kurt Volker, told VOA he was very concerned Erdogan might use the attempted coup as a pretext for becoming more authoritarian than he has been. "Erdogan, who has already shown some very strong anti-democratic tendencies before the coup, will use the coup plot and the attempt of the generals to take power as a justification for cracking down on society even more. And I think we may see a more restrictive environment for Turkey — less press freedom, less political openness".


























 

Saturday, July 9, 2016

PROJECT SARASWATI : PART I - BRICKS SPEAK HISTORY

SOURCE: PART I - BRICKS SPEAK HISTORY




                                  PROJECT SARASWATI


               BRICKS SPEAK HISTORY


  [Source - http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/haryana/villagers-in-jind-stumble-upon-vedic-era-wall-bricks/262602.html ]

Intal Kalan (Jind), July 7 ,THURSDAY




 [visit the pond at Intal Kalan village of Jind district on thursday. ]








Residents found an ancient structure while digging a pond in Intal Kalan village of district. 




A few days ago, the residents had started cleaning of the pond located outside the village with the help of a JCB machine. While cleaning, they noticed some wall-like structure beneath the ground. On further digging, they found a long wall in the pond. The villagers also recovered large-size bricks from the site.

On getting information, Jind-based historian Prof BB Kaushik, who visited the site, said: “The structure looks different from the Harappan-era and it is clear from the size of the bricks recovered from the site. The bricks are of 38cmX22cmX6.5cm dimensions, while Harappan bricks were smaller in size.”

“The site seems to be older than the Harappan period and it looks like that it belongs to the later Vedic period,” he said, adding that the government should protect and conserve the site.

Dharamveer Sharma, a former official of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), said: “The site appears to be an ashram in the Vedic period where saints used to perform yajna.” He also supported the fact that the site was not related to the Harappan period and could be older than that of the period around 1,800 BC. Sharma said that he had noticed signs of three fingers on some bricks which could have some religious belief during the Vedic period.

Sharma said the state government and the ASI to explore the site and start excavation to know the right chronology of the site. 

Ramesh Kumar, a former sarpanch of the village, said: “Every year, people, especially from southern states, visit our village to perform some rituals near the pond. It is still not clear why they visit our village and how they come to know about it.”

Deputy Commissioner Vinay Singh said the administration would approach the ASI and the other departments concerned to bring out the facts of ancient site.

He said: “I will also send a team of officials to the village to know more about the place. If anything having historical importance has been recovered then the administration will preserve it.”

  [ In all probability, from the size of the bricks it looks like the bricks pertains to KUSHAN PERIOD ie the era of Gautma Budhha ie 600 BC to 200 BC, because the size of the bricks used at NALANDA is also the same size- Vasundhra ]


              BRICK & BRICK SIZES

           – A Tool To Find History

 [SOURCE : https://builtheritageconservation.wordpress.com/2012/09/22/hello-world/ ]

 
 
 

 
The brick first produced in a sun-dried form at least 6,000 years ago and the forerunner of a wide range of structural clay products used today is a small building unit in the form of a rectangular block, formed from clay or shale or mixtures and burned (fired) in a kiln, or oven, to produce strength, hardness, and heat resistance. The original concept of ancient brick makers was that the unit should not be larger than what one man could easily handle; today, brick size varies from country to country, and every nation’s brick making industry produces a range of sizes that may run into the hundreds.
 
 
HISTORY OF BRICK MAKING
 
Mud brick, dried in the sun, was one of the first building materials. It is conceivable that on the Nile, Euphrates, or Tigris rivers, following floods, the deposited mud or silt cracked and formed cakes that could be shaped into crude building units to build huts for protection from the weather. In the ancient city of Ur, in Mesopotamia (modern Iraq), the first true arch of sun-baked brick was made about 4000 BC. The arch itself has not survived, but a description of it includes the first known reference to mortars other than mud. Bitumen slime was used to bind the bricks together.
 
 
Burned brick, no doubt, had already been produced simply by containing a fire with mud bricks. In Ur the potters discovered the principle of the closed kiln, in which heat could be controlled. The Ziggurat at Ur is an example of early monumental brickwork perhaps built of sun-dried brick; the steps were replaced after 2,500 years (about 1500 bc) by burned brick.
 
 
As civilization spread eastward and westward from the Middle East, so did the manufacture and use of brick. The Great Wall of China (210 bc) was built of both burned and sun-dried bricks. Early examples of brickwork in Rome were the reconstruction of the Pantheon (ad 123) with an unprecedented brick and concrete dome, 43 metres (142 feet) in diameter and height, and the Baths of Hadrian, where pillars of terra-cotta were used to support floors heated by roaring fires.
 
 
Enamelling, or glazing, of brick and tile was known to the Babylonians and Assyrians as early as 600 bc, again stemming from the potter’s art. The great mosques of Jerusalem (Dome of the Rock), Isfahan (in Iran), and Tehran are excellent examples of glazed tile used as mosaics. Some of the blues found in these glazes cannot be reproduced by present manufacturing processes.
 
 
Western Europe probably exploited brick as a building and architectural unit more than any other area in the world. It was particularly important in combating the disastrous fires that chronically affected medieval cities. After the Great Fire of 1666, London changed from being a city of wood and became one of brick, solely to gain protection from fire.
 
Bricks and brick construction were taken to the New World by the earliest European settlers. The Coptic descendants of the ancient Egyptians on the upper Nile River called their technique of making mud brick tōbe. The Arabs transmitted the name to the Spaniards, who, in turn, brought the art of adobe brick making to the southern portion of North America. In the north, the Dutch West India Company built the first brick building on Manhattan Island in 1633.
 
 
INDIAN HISTORY
 
The Indian sub-continent with great variations in climate conditions displays similar responses. Our cultural diversity manifests itself in the variety of basic materials and construction systems, and in the manner each region has developed unique ways of using stone, timber, bamboo and Bricks.
 
Progress appears to have been along two main vectors. First gross functionalism was replaced with better lines, forms and pattern with progressively greater intricacies in internal and external decorations. Second, materials and systems of construction were improved to perform better after each observed failure. Sustained development along these two lines possibly triggered ancient Indian sages to combine material and spiritual aspects and lay the ground rules of habitat, settlement, and its basic unit home in the Shilpa-Sastra.
 
The Ancient Period
 
The earliest evidence of the use of adobe for constructing house in rectangular forms in the subcontinent dates to 7000 BC. There are over 1000 Harappa sites across the Indian subcontinent of which Mohenjo-Daro, Taxila, Harappa and Lothal are better known. Building materials in use were stone, mud adobe and hard baked clay bricks.
 
 
Different brick sizes used in ancient
 
Pre-Harappa – 30 x 20 x 10 cm
 
Post-Harappa – 50 to 25 x 25 to 12.5 x 12.5 to 6.35 cm.
 
Early-Harappa – 33 to 27.9 x 15.2 to 12.7 x 12.7 to 8.9 cm.
 
Early Historical – 60 to 20 x 31.75 to 16 x 10 to 5 cm.
 
Late Historical – 60 to 11 x 28.6 x 8 12 to 4 cm.
 
These only exemplify the variety of brick sizes but do not exhaust the innumerable sizes found in excavated buildings in different sites.
 
 
Lothal
 
Lothal brick-makers used a logical approach in manufacture of bricks, designed with care in regards to thickness of structures. They were used as headers and stretchers in same and alternate layers. Archaeologists estimate that in most cases, the bricks were in ratio 1:0.5:0.25 on three sides, in dimensions which were integral multiples of large graduations of Lothal scale of 25 mm.
 
 
Bricks Used in Lothal
 

Bricks Used in Lothal
 
 
 
 
 
From 1100 to around 300 BC there is little evidence of use of hard baked clay bricks. What happened to the old technology is not known. Between 5th and 3rd century BC Nalanda, Bihar. The shrine is made of baked bricks with stucco figures done in lime. The monasteries at Nalanda were made of bricks and superstructures were supported on wooden beams.
 
 
Since the imperial Maurya burnt brick have been continuously in use as building materials in the alluvial plains of India. Temple at Bhitargaon dating to the Gupta period, this temple is made of hard-baked bricks and mortar.
 
 
The Medieval
 
Relatively, fever examples of dwelling units survive. It is, however, quite clear that stone, timber, biomass and brick were the main building material for the common man.
 
 
The Sultanate Period
 
Islam had its impact on construction in the subcontinent. The Indian subcontinent has a long history of trade and commerce with west Asian tribes. The Sultanate was established in India. Constructions of Qutubbuddin Aibak and his successors proved to be one of the three principal influences on later Mughal architecture.
 
However, it is clear that during this period the primary materials continued to be stone, Brick and timber. While techniques may be improved materials remained the same.
 
 
The Mughal Period
 
Both Babar and Humayun are credited with having taken up constructions which would influence later Mughal constructions. In the architectural sense, the Mughal period can be divided into the Mughal and the Imperial Mughal periods. In the earlier period, the construction was generally simple.
 
 
Evidence shows that houses of the nobility and wealthy men were made of stone and burnt bricks. Houses built of un-burnt bricks have collapsed. This shows that constructions even of wealthy people required regular repairs and maintenance. The dominant material in these constructions is stone which was quarried locally.
 
 
 
The Colonial Period
 
The advent of the British and the establishment of the Raj across the Indian subcontinent led to interesting constructions and extensive use of local materials. The most extensive constructions by the British were the Dak bungalows. The foundation and walls were made of local bricks, bonded with surkhi and lime until these were replaced with cement. With the British came ordinary Portland cement, Victorian bricks and steel as key building materials. Also, with the British came the bull’s trench kiln to produce burnt clay bricks. The earliest Bull’s trench kiln was established off Mapla in Hooghly district, about 100 years ago. This brick field is still in operation and its bricks sell under the brand name ‘Kishori”. With the establishment of the Bull’s kiln based mass production of brick, building materials emerge as an industry. Later cement and steel also came to be produced in India.
 
 
For the ancient period until the end of the British Raj, the dominant materials have been mud, adobe, stone, sundry bricks, baked bricks, lime and timber. Steel and cement introduced by the British.
 
 
BRICK SIZES IN AHMEDABAD
 
BRICK SIZE (CM.)
TIME PERIOD
EXAMPLE (AHMEDABAD)
30 X 22.5 X 7.5-8
Sultanate Period
Bhadra Fort
20 X 14 X 4-5
16th Century
Bhadra Fort
22.8 X 10.7 X 6.9
19th Century
Town Hall
10 X 10 X 20
20th Century
AMC Building
 
 
 
Conclusion
 
Brick, clay being easily available in all areas and could be moulded in desired shapes, dried in sun for ready use or baked to last longer to be used in buildings.
 
A study of the various brick sizes through the ages will show that with different cultural influences brick size and shape were changed in India. With the change in building construction details also affects the brick size according to their needs, like in the early medieval period mostly cuboids shape because they were better suited to arches and domes. In corbelled constructions of the early period for compression and cantilever action thick large-sized bricks were used.
 

REFRENCES
 
  • Building Material in India: 50 Years A Commemorative Volume – Gupta, T.N And  Others

  • The Chemistry of Building Materials – R.M.E Diamant

  • History of Brick Making – Britannica Online Encyclopaedia

  • Brick in 20th-Century Architecture By Jonathan Ochshorn

  • An encyclopedia of Indian archaeology



















THEN IN INDIA THERE WILL BE " NO BLINDS"



    THEN IN INDIA THERE WILL BE

                      " NO BLINDS"





























 

Wednesday, July 6, 2016

7CPC : THE TARGET IS IN SELF DESTRUCT MODE

SOURCE:
http://swarajyamag.com/politics/the-negatives-of-the-7th-pay-commission-nation-suffers-from-civil-military-confrontation



The Negatives Of The 7th Pay Commission:                             Nation Suffers
                                 From
           Civil-Military Confrontation
                                    By

                        Syed Ata Hasnain



- March 22, 2016.

                             Snapshot

Does the 7th Pay Commission give unfair primacy to the civil services at the cost of the armed forces? Lt Gen Syed Ata Hasnain (retd) weighs in on the issue:



 
 
 
 
Published on Mar 20, 2016
 
While netas play politics over patriotism, soldiers are fighting for pay parity.
 

The seventh pay commission says Indian Police Service and Indian Forest Service will be at par with the IAS, leaving the military behind. On We The People, we debate the pay panel's recommendations. Why this pay divide? Will politicians who are playing patriotic games put their money where their mouth is? In crises like the recent Jat agitation, the Army is often replacing civil administration, but is not being paid as much. Why is this so? Should Armed Forces have a separate pay commission?



 
Sitting somewhere in Islamabad or elsewhere in Pakistan and in fact in many other places where India’s adversaries exist and monitor our social media, television and print media, there must be considerable mirth and much joy. A look at the way in which the 7th Pay Commission recommendations have ignited the civil-military divide in India and brought out the entire issue in the public domain must really be a finger-licking (dipped in 'HONEY')moment for our adversaries. Pakistan’s Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR), who I always praise to high heavens for its complete professionalism, would probably in its Monday brief state that it is holiday time;

            the target is in self-destruct mode.

[ Don't be surprised even if all 'LEAVE' restrictions  may have been relaxed ]
Sunday night’s program, ‘We the People’, on NDTV on 20 Mar 2016, on the 7th Pay Commission recommendations was probably a path-breaking event in the exercise of outreach and sensitization. The ‘us’ versus ‘them’ was out in the open. Right from the Third Pay Commission which saw the reduction of pension and lowering of status (that actually started well before) each such Commission has consciously diluted the military’s standing while the changing environment only added to the responsibilities and expectations from the men in uniform. There is no need to go into history all over again except to mention that the traditional antipathy Nehru had against the Army always colored his judgment. This disdain arose out of three things. First was his belief that pre-Partition, the Army worked for the colonial masters and not for the National movement. Second was his fear that the Army would not remain apolitical and would probably have ambitions of its own. Third remained his utopian idea that India had no enemies and all it needed was a stick wielding police force to manage order.

His perceptions were no doubt reinforced by an ICS oriented civil service who could not have asked for more. The Army leadership was silent and table thumping was not its forte. It never objected to its own virtual disenfranchisement from the national security domain which came to be dominated by the bureaucrat diplomat combine who played on the fears of the political leadership. They assiduously garnered the national security space shutting out all three Services and playing them against each other.



The glorious victory of 1971 created a major dilemma because it was the nation’s victory made possible by the Armed Forces. Adulation among the public was at a high and the personality of senior leaders with ‘spine’ as a major element of their mental makeup was causing concern. It wasn’t a happy situation for the civilian leadership. With this backdrop, since 1972 there has been a systematic campaign to whittle down the image of the Armed Forces and their position. The Pay Commissions could be virtually seen as a means of tying the Armed Forces down with pay being the deciding factor to determine status. With each passing Commission the attempt to complicate the system and leave milestones in forms of unresolved anomalies helped to tie everyone in knots. It’s a great strategy which ensures primacy in pay and status to the civilian while the Armed Forces continue to live and function by their discipline and accountability.


The above was not a narration of history but just a few painful facts which cannot go away from any analysis. Before coming to the actual issues involving pay and status and the arguments of the senior veteran bureaucrats let me reiterate a few things. Decisions which even affect functional efficiency are ignored and just postponed.

Would any member of the bureaucracy have an explanation for the 20-year old representation of the Army that the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) must be distinctive from the Army in accoutrements and at least with reference to the disruptive pattern combat dress?

The issue finally came to a head in the recent agitation in Haryana where the Army had to suffer the ignominy of using placards to identify itself.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          'WARNING FROM 'VASUNDHRA'

 IN 1978 A WESTERN JOURNALIST ASKED AYATOLLAH KHOMENI IF HE IS AWARE THAT HIS AGITATION IS FACING THE SHAH's ARMY WHICH IS BEST EQUIPPED & TRAINED EAST OF SUEZ. KHOMENI's ANSWER WAS SIMPLE- "WHEN WEAPONS ARE REQUIRED IT WILL COME WALKING ON ITS OWN."

       YES "WEAPONS" CAME WALKING IN 1979 IN THE                               CRASH OF IRAN IN 1979

SIR, YES, WEAPONS CAME WALKING FROM THE "THE KOTES" OF LEAST  DISCIPLINED  &   ILL TRAINED POLITICALISED  'PARA' MILITIA FORCES  OF IRAN. 

                                   REST IS HISTORY

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

This is not a point by point analysis or debate. Sunday’s NDTV program would have helped clear a few cobwebs but equally add a few more. The one issue no bureaucrat seems to be able to explain is the absence of a representative from the Armed Forces on the Pay Commission. They put up a great argument to say that none of the members represent any service. That is as good as burying your head in the sand. When there is continued obfuscation of issues, anomalies of the past remain unresolved and the largest of the organizations has remained dissatisfied with the Pay Commission system, prudence demands that a fresh approach be followed. This is where the political leadership has to step in, otherwise the continuum of burial of contentious issues under the carpet will only lead to a breakdown of the system.



We earlier had a set of military men who gave great credence to acceptance of the word of the civilian leadership. That is changing faster than the members of the Pay Commission or the political leadership would like to believe or have been informed about. In 2012 the military leadership in good faith opted to continue with the old system of the common pay commission for all, placing confidence in the wisdom of the political leadership. It appears they will live to rue that decision.


The bureaucrats on the panel of the NDTV program tried to confuse and confound with two arguments; first that the government needs to do a cost benefit analysis to compare the cost of upkeep of civilian functionaries and that of servicemen; and second that Service officers rose to high ranks and remained in service long enough to earn like all others.

It needed someone to point out to them that the benefit of the cost of upkeep of Service personnel could never be quantified. In fact a visibly upset former Army Chief General VP Malik had to use unusually harsh words to state clearly that it was up to the Government to decide the strength of the Armed Forces and the quantum it could afford for national security. The Cost to Government (CTG) seems to be a carefully adapted strategy by the bureaucracy this time.

 It probably hasn’t seen the end of the day yet and will emerge again in even the Empowered Committee of Secretaries where the three Services go unrepresented yet again. The Government has yet to come out with any credible argument on why this has not happened. In making the second argument the bureaucrats forgot about the percentage approval rates for higher ranks. For public consumption it must be known that at first select rank of Colonel 60-70 percent of the officers are unlikely to be promoted. Thereafter at each higher select rank the number dwindles by more than fifty percent. For an original strength of over 800 officers commissioned in 1974 only twenty or so could make it to the three star rank; they thus retired from ages of 54 to 58 with just 20 or so achieving 60. Contrast this with the bureaucrats where each and every entrant retires at 60 years of age and comparative three star rank with many going up to Secretary (four star equivalent). Leave the officer cadre and you have other ranks among soldiers and equivalent where 80 percent retire at 34 to 37 years. Chalk and cheese, apples and oranges is what the bureaucrats spoke of; that there are no ways by which we could find equivalence in environment, promotion opportunities and ages of retirements so why compare wages. In fact a senior JCO in the audience spoke up and asked for assured re-employment till the age of 60 years for all exiting soldiers as a means of resolving all issues. Then the Servicemen would be at par with civilian counterparts and would demand no higher compensation.


Half the problem lies in the lack of knowledge among the political class. Worthies should know that military security cannot be wished away; equally a high quality administration and efficient/motivated bureaucracy is a must. Both must be treated at par, compensating where there is fair and acceptable perceived grievance. To assume that the supposed premier civil services should be given triple increments at different stages while the Armed Forces remain laggards in promotion progression and receive single increments all along, is calling for disgruntlement. In a system where basic pay decides status obviously by accepting the recommendation the Services would be axing their own feet for ever.


The Non Functional Financial Upgradation (NFFU) system doesn’t appear to be understood by the public because of lack of transparency. The civil services have conveniently linked their pay increments to years of service irrespective of rank achieved. This is a huge outflow of public money irrespective of work output. Promotion in all systems brings higher wages and acts as incentive and motivation for higher efficiency and better qualification. Not so in our civil services where year on year salaries increase irrespective of higher rank being achieved or not achieved. This has led to a piquant situation within organizations where there are uniformed and civilians working together such as in Military Engineering Service (MES) (not Corps of Engineers which is a combatants based organization) and Border Roads Organization (BRO). In these organizations civilian subordinates who earlier earned less than their uniformed superiors received pay increments irrespective of promotions and started earning equivalent to or more than the superiors.



Since status is dictated by pay they refused to have their Confidential Reports endorsed by their superiors on technical grounds of higher status. Such a situation must never have occurred in any other organization in the world. The decision to grant NFFU had obviously never catered for such a situation. The Services were divided on the issue of NFFU. In a strictly hierarchical system you cannot have a superior earning less than the subordinate; it is against all norms of functioning. This issue did not even come up for discussion on the NDTV program for shortage of time and possibly expertise because there are no answers to it.

NFFU [ IT IS HARAM KA KAMAI-Vasundhra ] is bad for the entire system of government machinery and should be done away with. Increments must be streamlined to common application for all personnel, civilian or in uniform. If the Armed Forces are not to be given any favors beyond those which are owed by virtue of the nature of the job as recognized the world over, then special increments must be given to none others.


The public must also be made aware that the 6th Pay Commission still has approximately 22 anomalies to be resolved and once the 7th pay Commission recommendations are adopted these will be conveniently forgotten. What answer does anyone have to the competence and credibility of the Pay Commissions when representations after representation in pensions and pay bands have been shot down by the honorable courts? Will Servicemen ever have belief in fair play and will the civil services officers who form the Pay Commissions ever represent interests other than of their own service? It is very well to argue that such eminent persons are supposed to be even handed in their responsibilities as custodians of values but the proof of the pudding is in the eating.


The Armed Forces may not have chosen the personalities on display in the program but emotions and choice of wrong words can and will work against them. The public has to be informed and informed without rancor, emotion and negativity. People in uniform are supposed to be patient as per their discipline and their families must carry that same value system otherwise the debate will be hijacked by emphasis on the wrong issues as it almost happened on the program.

 
A misnomer unanswered in the program and a linked question thrown at me on social media. How is it that so many Armed Forces officers live in splendor and own high value automobiles and travel abroad, if they claim to be poorly paid. Firstly, the Government of India is a worthy paymaster; that it looks after its employees well is beyond debate. However, there are many propertied people who hardly rely on pay and allowances. In fact that is true even among some jawans. That however, is the exception and not the rule.

Secondly, the glamorous are visible not the sedate – an old adage as much applicable today. Thirdly, service life teaches dignity and helps you acquire it in a transformational way unlike civil services where jobs are many times transactional in nature. The Army’s regimental system creates bonds and a social life which goes beyond the ordinary. All this is observed from outside and perceived as a higher status in standard of living. It actually is but not because of better pay but better organization and ethos.



Finally, to the last word and a revisit to the issue raised in the first paragraph.

The cleavage between the Armed Forces and the Civil Services is increasing by the day. It smacks of national immaturity if personnel selected to man government jobs and function for the national good cannot see beyond the individual good of their own departments; it is indeed a sad commentary.

This is leading to tardiness in government functioning, personality clashes where there should be total cooperation and much disappointment within the public which is forced to take sides based upon who has been able to influence whom at a given point of time.


 
This is a ready-made recipe to play into the hands of our adversaries who would also soon be involved in planting disinformation and playing off one against the other.

The nation should look towards the sagacity of a few good men who can still put service before self. The Government must realize the looming threat of dysfunctional and demotivating influence on its own machinery and hasten to act against it. The first step should be a representative body of respected personalities to comprehensively examine the mismatch in the personnel management system involving pay, allowances and status of government servants. Perhaps even personalities of eminence from outside the government could add much worth to this.



































 

Tuesday, July 5, 2016

Indian Naval Sales: The Cautious Emergence Of A New Supplier

SOURCE:
http://www.eurasiareview.com/23062016-indian-naval-sales-the-cautious-emergence-of-a-new-supplier-analysis/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+eurasiareview%2FVsnE+%28Eurasia+Review%29


Indian Naval Sales: The Cautious Emergence   Of A New Supplier

                             By

           Sanjay Badri-Maharaj


Indian Navy Ship INS Kochi during Sea Trials. Photo: IDRW, WIkipedia Commons.Indian Navy Ship INS Kochi during Sea Trials. Photo: IDRW, Wikipedia Commons.