Essays For Group 1[1]

Impact of Terrorism On Social, Economic And Legal Structure of The Countries Obstacle to Global Peace By : Dr. Arvind shukla Sr. lecturer, Invertis Institute Of management Studies, Bareilly.

The term "terrorism" since the 1970s was directed to various phenomenon, starting from fearsome threats Until today the world under UN has failed to come to an agreement about what is an acceptable definition for terrorism. It is still under debate despite attempts made by many experts. The effort to approach terrorism from a definitional perspective has thus become a never-ending effort, let alone conform the definition itself. So many definitions of terrorism have been attempted, but I am not going to discuss the diversities of terrorism definition. What I intend to discuss here is that for the purpose of enforcing the law against the act of terror, Indonesia has enacted a law on terror in its Act number 15 and 16, 2003 which goes as follows: "Every person deliberately uses violence or threatens to use violence causing terror or wide fear against person or causing massive victims, by taking others' freedom or the loss of life, property of others, or causing damage and destruction against vital and/ or strategic installations or environment or public facility or international facility, shall be penalized with a death penalty or life imprisonment or at least four years imprisonment and maximum 20 years imprisonment. " It is vital tool for our law enforcement as a vanguard of terror act attempted by any individual or group within our jurisdiction. So from law enforcement perspective the law is vital to stop a would-be criminal (s) from attempting to commit crime of terrorism which used to be absent in Indonesia for several years. From a perspective of motives of terrorist acts are recognized as follows: publicizing a statement through acts of ruthlessness. In that way they can make fast and massive publication; act of vengeance towards groups considered disadvantageous to them; serving as a catalyst for militarization or mass mobilization; spreading hatred and inter-communal conflict; announcing a certain group as the enemy and should be held responsible; victims are not the goal but a means to create "neural war"; create mass panic, damage public trust towards the government including security and law enforcement authorities. Whereas the justifications of terrorism taken on by terrorists including: justifying all means for the accomplishment of transcendental goals; extreme violence considered to be therapeutic, full of blessings and regenerative; the executor places himself/herself as part of history, where the act is a consequential element of history under the perspective of moral balance (a deserved treatment); the act of terrorism perceived as a minor crime; many among them even take this act insignificant in comparison to the

enemy's posing threat that suppresses them structurally; Let us now look at how terrorism has developed and its trend these days. Trends of Terrorism:Terrorism is a global crime. It has become the predominant geopolitical theme. The affairs of the world are influenced in important areas by the terrorist agenda. The thinking of policy makers and law enforcers is shaped increasingly by the need to respond appropriately to the threat of terrorism. Terrorism represents a challenge not just to the bases of civilized society, but also to the very foundations of the world order. Terrorism activities threaten fundamental nations' law and order, human rights and it is the enemy of mankind. Terrorism, in one form or another, has been around for a long time, and there is no realistic prospect of its becoming extinct in the foreseeable future. All of those concerned with the effective combat of terrorism must be prepared for the long haul. There is no simple solution to terrorism. Terrorism is fuelled by various factors. These include the openness of free societies, the easy access to technologies by means of violence and a radical and global ideology of hatred. Conflicts in some countries particularly in the Middle East have inevitably formed a global issue and solidarity among terrorists. This global issue has become a unifying factor to share the sufferings and establish a sense of togetherness based on religious brotherhood among the believers to resist against the oppressor. Terrorism will remain a menace as long as there are people who are driven by fanaticism, paranoia and extremism. So long as there exists in the world poverty, strife, injustice and oppression, conditions will exist which terrorists can turn to their advantage. No doubt that the campaign against terrorism is one that must be mounted at various levels, including political, economic, and humanitarian. The iron fist approach alone will not succeed. Terrorist will often have the advantage over the law enforcer in the sense that he/ she is able to decide when and where he/she will strike, and how hard he/ she will strike. Law enforcement, on the other hand, has to maintain constant vigilance. That is not easy at a time when commercial airlines can be used as flying bombs, and when terrorist strategy is planned by internet, mobile phone, satellite and coded messages on websites. The threats we face from terrorism are constantly changing in all sorts of ways. Just when progress is being made against a terrorist group, splintering often occurs, and hardliners break away and form splinter groups committed to the campaign of violence. It is feared that weapons of mass destruction previously controlled by governments can now be purchased on the black market. It is said that not only the weapons but also the scientists with the knowledge of how to make them are available if the price is right. And finance may be the key. Terrorists, like more conventional criminals, need access to adequate funds in order to finance their activities. Weapons, communication systems and transport all come at a price, as does training. Terrorism seeks power through violence, and money is a means to achieve that. Terrorism needs access to international payment systems in order to finance and sustain its campaigns. Terrorists, like organized criminals, make active use of credit card fraud and check fraud. This is why vigorous identification checks regime must be exercised on potential customers by credit card companies. The loopholes are in the area of money laundering legislation that must be closed.

Terrorism as it was defined a systematic use of violence or the threat of violence to achieve political, social or economic goals. Terrorism uses extreme physical violence to shock the targeted audience. The psychological impact generated in the mind of people as a natural corollary of that matters more to the terrorists than the physical attack on the victims (Cline, Ray S, 1998). Terrorism is as old as the civilization of mankind itself and has existed in all ages in some form or other which might be known anarchists, revolutionaries, fundamentalist or dissidents against the established authority or even ruling tyrants having no tolerance or dissent. However, terrorism was not as widespread phenomenon as it is today in contemporary political system of the world. Terrorism has, in fact, become a global phenomenon with increasing and rather well identifiable links between different terrorist group and organization. They use each other's areas for recruitment and training, exchange of illegal weapons, engage in joint planning and ventures and also provide administrative and other logistic support. This type of terrorist activities show a new dimension due to circumstances characterized by the advancement of science, technology and diverse social, economic, political and historical reasons conditioning it. The development of computer science, satellite and mobile links have also affected the modernization of terrorist activities. This further facilitated by support of states/ governments unfavorable to each other. An element of international terrorism comes into the picture when specific persons of the nation are designed as targets by the members of another group outside that nation. It is, therefore, described as warfare without territory. It is warfare without neutrals and with few or no by standards. Another form of global terrorism is sponsored terrorism, which is operated from safe areas in another country, which are out of reach of the counter insurgency forces of the targeted country. There cannot be any single cause of terrorism. Causes of terrorism may range from socio-economic and political conditions to theories based on the personality and environment of the terrorist. Terrorism is motivated by a variety of inner drives ranging from financial gains to revenge, from fundamentalism to deprivation, political frustration, regional disparities, marginalization of sub-national groups, extremism, despair, injustice, discrimination, resentment against the existing regime, feeling of insignificance, intervention into personal freedom, weak government, separatism and oppression, inequality etc. Terrorism produces harmful effects in several ways. The consequences of terrorism can be disastrous for all countries, both rich and poor, and their people. The normal social life gets totally disturbed and a large number of innocent lives go in vein. Fear and terror haunt everybody and the productivity of people is miserably stalled. Everything may come to a halt and the dream of leading a life of happiness and peace is shattered. Economic and social development of the society cease to uncertainly. Almost all become paralyzed amid terrorist incidents. Terrorism breaks down the social, economic political and legal structures of the affected countries and the entire process of development stops. Socio-cultural mosaic goes to rack and ruin, and the economy of the country suddenly becomes a shamble. The rule of law and human rights crumble and people suffer terribly. For developing countries, terrorism is fatal to their development planning because they can hardly withstand the violent assaults of terrorism; their longing for a better and brighter future goes up in smoke.

Moreover, terrorism not only weakens the established political authority but also brings about political instability. In that situation the maintenance of the rule of law and human rights become almost impossible. Terrorism idealizes violence, does away with morality, distorts politics, promotes totalitarianism, subverts progress, destroys the apparatus of freedom in democratic societies. In fact, it destroys the will of a civilized society to defend itself. It appears that everything the mankind strives for collapses like a house of cards. As a matter of fact, terrorism is war against civilization. Today, terrorism poses a great threat not just to human life, human rights, dignity and democratic values but to very existence of a civilized life. If the present trend continues, human civilization itself will be a casualty. That is why Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism held in 1979 declared that ‘terrorism is a serious and growing threat to the people of all states which live under the rule of law, that it is no longer a national problem, but a global one; that it cannot be constrained, and eliminated, except by concerted international action; and that the case for such action is overwhelming and urgent’. (Jonathan Institute, 1979) Prevention and Control Strategies:In this age of increasing globalization and interdependence, the national and international dimension of terrorism in fact, constitutes two facets of the same social phenomenon which infringes upon the interest of all states, not only as an assault against their public order and institutions that protect the liberty and security of their citizens but, also at the same time as a serious danger to peaceful international relations and cooperation, which is clearly understood as encompassing human rights and values as well as the principles of equal rights and self determination of people. It is, therefore, that the transnational character of contemporary terrorist events has prompted international efforts to suppress them at the global regional and bilateral levels.

Suggestions for stemming the growth of transnational crime:The answer seems to be intensifying law enforcement, more vigilance along borders, depriving the criminals of their profits, assisting poor countries with their efforts at strict law enforcement by way of providing training to their law enforcement officers, providing necessary technology, harmonizing laws, sharing information, concluding international agreements to facilitate co-operation and co-ordination in law enforcement and more importantly, political will and commitment. Profits generated by organized crime far exceed those that legitimate business enterprises could make. The incentive for organized crime, whether local or transnational, is profit. If organized crime syndicates can be deprived of their profits, they will cease their activities – altogether. It will therefore be worthwhile to examine and explore the ways and means of depriving them of their profits. The most effective way to do this is confiscation of the proceeds of such illegal activity by judicial means or with sufficient safeguards, by administrative means. A sine qua non in this direction is effective mutual legal assistance in the investigation and prosecution.

It has been found that certainty of detection and effective and expeditious disposal of cases is a deterrent to would be criminals. At present extradition procedures take a long time. Simplified extradition procedures will go a long way in expeditious disposal of cases. The international community responded to the phenomenal growth of transnational organized crime by signing in the year 2000, the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. By the end of 72 hours 124 countries have signed the Convention. This is an indication of the enormity of the problem transnational crime poses to the world. Success of the struggle against transnational organized crime lies in the answers to the six points set out above. The most significant step in the direction of the prevention of transnational organized crime is the adoption of the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. It has obligated states to act despite constraints of bank secrecy and also to extend co-operation in confiscating and seizing of assets obtained through corruption and transferred to different jurisdictions.

The following four protocols add muscle to the convention, namely, i. Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, specially Women and Children. ii. Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants iii. Protocol against trafficking in Firearms and iv. Protocol against Corruption Combating terrorism at regional level is becoming effective and popular. The external support is often found in every operation of terrorist acts in any part of the world whether in the context of inter-connection between a group and its rival group, a group and its enemy state, or a state and its unfriendly state. It is here that regional cooperation can be an effective instrument for the suppression to terrorism. In Europe, besides their individual national legal and institutional measures, a historic convention known as the “European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism, 1977” was signed and ratified. “South Asia Countries also recognized the importance of combating terrorism at regional level and consequently, signed a Convention titled the “Convention on Suppression of Terrorism, 1987” and ratified it. Similarly, in view of the complexity and problems of terrorism some bilateral and multilateral agreements between groups of countries have also been concluded. And many countries have extradition treaties between them. At the international level, response and cooperation against international terrorism has been invoked many a time, and a variety of measures and counter-measures have been designed for checking the menace of terrorism. Concerned by the increase of terrorist acts, the United Nations General Assembly in 1972 established a 35-member ad hoc Committee on International Terrorism, and in 1977 asked it to study the underlying causes of terrorism and recommend ways to combat terrorism. In 1979, the

Assembly stressed the importance of International cooperation for dealing with the acts of international terrorism. Adopting the report of the Committee, it condemned all acts of international terrorism that endangered or took human lives or jeopardized fundamental freedoms. In 1994, the General Assembly adopted a Declaration on Measures to Eliminate international Terrorism, which condemned all acts and practices of terrorism as criminal and unjustifiable, wherever and whomever they were committed. States were urged to take measures at the national and international levels to eliminate international terrorism. Important international Conventions on terrorism are the Convention on Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft (Tokyo, 1963), the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft (The Hague, 1970); the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Act against the Safety of Civil Aviation (Montreal, 1971); the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including diplomatic Agents (New York, 1973); the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material (Vienna, 1980); the Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts of Violence at Airports Serving International Civil Aviation (Montreal, 1988); the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Fixed Platforms located on the Continental Shelf (Rome, 1988) and the Convention on the Marking of Plastic Explosives for the Purpose of Detection (Montreal, 1991). The UN General Assembly also adopted the Convention against the Taking of Hostages in 1979 and the Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel in 1994, and International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings in 1997.’ Despite all these Conventions adopted and ratified, declarations made, and resolutions passed against international terrorism within the UN system outside, terrorism has become a ubiquitous phenomenon in the contemporary international affairs, and continues to grow. Every state is supposed to refrain from organizing, instigating assisting or participating in acts of civil strife on terrorist acts in another state or involved in organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts as well as prosecuting and punishing the perpetrators of terrorist acts. A concerted action has to be initiated and sustained by all States whether they are affected or not in collaboration and co-operation with each other with strong determination and will to root out terrorism altogether from the world. Of course, mutual agreement at the international, and regional levels have consolidated and strengthened co-operation between the countries in the fight against terrorism. Hard line policies against terrorism adopted by some countries have achieved success in this regard. But, it seems that combating of terrorist activities in a significant proportion will be possible only if terrorism is condemned and fought universally, unequivocally and effectively, by all the countries in the world.

Conclusion:-

Terrorism has no respect for national boundaries, and the problem-taking place in any part of the world today will sure enough to become the problem of all tomorrow. Terrorism is a monster like Frankenstein’s creation that is too horrible and dangerous. It is even a threat to those countries that create or promote it. Therefore, terrorism is a phenomenon which must be condemned, fought, resisted, controlled and, eventually, eliminated at all levels-national, regional and international. Conditions necessary for wiping out terrorism must, accordingly, be cultivated and strengthened nationally, regionally and internationally, and unilaterally, bilaterally or multilaterally. Terrorist acts confronted by a state cannot be eliminated by the affected States alone because of the international linkage of the terrorist groups. It is, therefore, clear that all the nations must form a common front to fight terrorism. If the much needed spirit of international cooperation in the required degree is not properly established, the world would become a dangerous place to live. It is for this reason that one nation’s peace and security will be determined by the success of all nations’ response to any kind of terrorism particularly for international terrorism.

Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam Discomfited End of Terror But Political Steps Towards Effective Devolution Needed

By : Dr. Divya Author is an expert and analyst of social and political issues

Founder and chief of Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam(LTTE) Velupillai Prabakaran was shot dead by the Sri Lanka Army on May 18,2009 at Mullivaikkal in Mullaithivu district in northern Sri Lanka. The 37-yearold quest of the LTTE has ended with the death of its all in all Prabakaran. He was 54 years old. His elder

son Charles Antony, and also the entire top leadership of the LTTE, including the LTTE’s intelligence chief, Pottu Amman, and the Sea Tigers chief, Soosai, were killed after being encircled by the Sri Lankan armed forces. Until the last, Prabakaran, a ruthless and dreaded terrorist yet ironically remaining an inspirational symbol to thousands of Sri Lankan Tamils, remained uncompromising on his goal of armed struggle, a struggle that despite its lofty claims had often manifested in ruthless violence even directed at fellow Tamils. Yet in the early 1980s, Prabakaran had indeed appeared eager to be seen as a revolutionary fighter, in the mould of heroic figures of legendary revolutions. Prabakaran, who had little patience for the sophistry of political negotiations, made a virtue out of his sole reliance on violence and armed struggle. Crisis of Human Rights:Thousands of Sri Lankans celebrated their government's military victory over the Tamil Tiger rebels when President Mahinda Rajapaksa told the country that the war is over. On the ground, the rebels have admitted that their 25-year struggle for a Tamil homeland has reached "its bitter end". However, the victory has come at a high price in terms of civilian life and damage to Colombo's international reputation. According to UN figures, an estimated 7,000 ethnic Tamil civilians were killed between 20 January, when a military offensive pushed back the rebels into a tiny enclave in the north-east, and 7 May. Although the military largely blocked the world's media from covering the carnage in the so-called no-fire zone, some TV images have conveyed part of the horror, showing civilians making a desperate break across a lagoon to escape the last strip of land controlled by the rebels. Doctors have recounted the cries of the wounded at a makeshift hospital that they had to abandon because of continual artillery shelling – bombardments denied by the Sri Lankan military. UN officials and human rights groups have been horrified at the disregard for civilians on both sides, particularly in the final stages of the conflict. Despite pleas from the US president, Barack Obama, and the UN secretarygeneral, Ban Ki-Moon, Colombo has zealously pursued its objective of wiping out the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) once and for all. For Rajapaksa, military victory is the climax of his election campaign in November 2005, when he ruled out autonomy for Tamils – a harbinger of the military option. Rajapaksa has been able to dress up the offensive as part of the global fight against terrorism. There is little sympathy for the Tigers. A ruthless group, listed as a terrorist organisation by both the US and the EU, the Tigers pioneered suicide attacks, carried out assassinations and stand accused of using civilians in the war zone as human shields and shooting those who tried to flee. However, such tactics provide no excuse for the Sri Lankan government's blatant disregard for the plight of civilians. While many Tamils are appalled by the Tigers' tactics, they also harbour deep grievances about their treatment by the Sinhalese majority. Analysts claim the government's conduct has hardened an already humiliated Tamil diaspora, storing trouble for the future. If the Tigers' leadership is removed or killed in a government assault, it's easy to imagine one of the newly energised generation stepping in to fill the void. The dream of an independent Tamil homeland in Sri Lanka resonates powerfully across the diaspora and will certainly live on even after the defeat of the

LTTE as a conventional military force. The deaths of tens of thousands of innocent Tamil civilians – while their family members watch from afar – is a recipe for another, possibly more explosive, generation of terrorism. For now, the Sri Lankan government has prevailed, militarily. It has a huge humanitarian problem on its hands, with tens of thousands of displaced civilians to care for, and it will need international aid. For western leaders who have urged restraint, this is the time to call on Rajapaksa to address Tamil demands for devolution of power and language rights now that the military conflict is over. India’s Opinion

India told Colombo to tackle the grievances of the Tamil minority which gave rise to the ethnic conflict. It sought political steps towards “effective devolution” of power within the Sri Lankan Constitution so that Sri Lankans of all communities, including the Tamils, could feel at home and lead lives of dignity of their own free will. India’s response came soon after Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa called up External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee to confirm that the armed resistance by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) had ended and its leader Velupillai Prabakaran was dead. India had promised to work with the people and the Government of Sri Lanka to provide relief to those affected by the tragic conflict, and to rapidly rehabilitate all those who had been displaced, bringing their lives to normality as soon as possible. In several interactions at the top level, India had received assurances from the Sri Lankan government that after the LTTE was militarily defeated, it would ensure the political accommodation of its Tamil origin citizens through several measures. Concerned at the developing unease among parties committed to a peaceful solution in eastern Sri Lanka, where the LTTE had already been routed, India wanted Colombo to take steps that guaranteed safety, a better quality of life and the genuine feeling of participation by Tamils of Indian origin in both provinces. From TNT to LTTE Prabakaran was drawn into the Tamil struggle after the Sri Lankan government passed a series of legislations, first aimed at the plantation Tamils and then against the Sri Lankan Tamils themselves. Repeated violence against the Tamils in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s influenced Prabakaran to take to armed struggle. Prabakaran, still in his teens, first formed the Tamil New Tigers (TNT) in 1972. The tiger was chosen as the emblem because the tiger represented the Chola flag and stood for Tamil patriotism and a Tamil nation. Yet the TNT was a forerunner of the LTTE, just as ruthless and fascist in its tactics. Apart from the assassination of Alfred Duraiappa, the record of the TNT included raids on banks, lampposting killing of informants and murdering secret service police officers. Prabakaran had a child-like craving for the LTTE to be recognised “as the sole representative of the Tamil race.” Unfortunately that craving turned into a deadly cannibalistic tendency to devour other Tamil militant groups, thus undermining the struggle for equal rights for Sri Lankan Tamils. The result was that most of his military energies were spent on the destructive task of liquidating other militant leaders and groups. An early chilling indication of Prabakaran’s fascistic side was his personal gunning down of the Mayor of Jaffna, Alfred Duraiappa, in July 1975. With the dastardly assassination of Rajiv Gandhi on May 21, 1991

by means of suicide belt-bomber Dhanu at Sriperumbudur, about 35 km from Chennai, Prabakaran was proclaimed an absconding offender. Prabakaran was the No. 1 accused in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case. The assassination led to the LTTE being banned by India and further ostracism internationally with a number of countries including the U.S. and the U.K. following suit. These included Sri Lanka adhering to its earlier promise of implementing its Constitution’s ‘Thirteenth Amendment plus’ which should include moving some items from the concurrent to provincial list and the setting up of a second chamber of federal representatives. As part of helping in providing humanitarian relief, India had already announced a Rs. 100-crore grant which included dispatching over one lakh family packs containing rations and shelter materials for a nuclear family that would last. India was also considering expanding of its 50-bed hospital, manned by a 62-member medical complement from the armed forces. It planned to increase the size of the de-mining team to ensure that civilians had access to more safe areas than was possible at present. India had received feelers from several countries for a joint effort to provide relief and to reconstruct the battered northern and eastern provinces. Some countries that kept a watch over the peace process or actively participated in it would like to be involved in the setting up of democratic institutions and associated infrastructure in the area. India had so far preferred to operate alone or through the International Committee of the Red Cross. It had earlier not favoured a joint civilian evacuation programme proposed by the U.S. Background of conflict:The root of modern conflict goes back to British colonial rule when the country was known as Ceylon. A nationalist political movement from Sinhalese communities arose in the country in the early 20th century with the aim of obtaining political independence, which was eventually granted by the British after peaceful negotiations in 1948. Disagreements between the Sinhalese and Tamil ethnic communities flared up when drawing up the country's first post-independence constitution. Prime Minister S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike's declaration of the "Sinhala Only Act" language policy was the spark that led to conflict. The civil war is a direct result of the escalation of the confrontational politics that followed. Communal uprisings in the 1950s, 1977, and the formation of the Tamil United Liberation Front TULF with its Vaddukkodei (Vattukottai)) resolution of 1976 were key events. These led to a hardening of attitudes on both sides. The TULF supported the armed actions of young militants who were dubbed "our boys." These "boys" were the product of the post-war population explosion. Many partially educated, unemployed Sinhala and Tamil youth fell for simplistic racist and violent revolutionary solutions to their problems. The leftist parties had remained "non-communal" for a long time, but the Federal Party (as well as its off-shoot, the TULF), deeply conservative and dominated by Vellala casteism, did not attempt to form a national alliance with the leftists in their fight for language rights. Following the sweeping electoral victory of the UNP in July 1977, the TULF became the leading opposition party, with around one sixth of the total electoral vote winning on a party platform of secession from Sri Lanka. In late 1977, in the aftermath of a serious communal clash in August that year, Junius Richard Jayawardene's UNP government granted only the educational rights demanded by the Tamils.

But to the Tamil leadership that was losing the control it had on the Tamil militants after not being able to follow through with the election promise of seceding from Sri Lanka to form Tamil, it was too little too late. After nearly two decades of violence, a ceasefire was signed in 2002, but it broke down in January 2008, leading to renewed fierce fighting. The violence killed more than 60,000 people, damaged the economy and harmed tourism in one of South Asia's potentially prosperous societies. A ceasefire and a political agreement reached between the government and rebels in late 2002 raised hopes for a lasting settlement. But Norwegian-brokered peace talks stalled and monitors reported open violations of the truce by the government and Tamil Tiger rebels. Escalating violence between the two sides in 2006 killed hundreds of people and raised fears of a return to all-out war. In January 2008, the government said it was withdrawing from the 2002 ceasefire agreement. The ceasefire expired a fortnight later. Following a renewal of fighting, in January 2009 government troops captured the northern town of Kilinochchi, held for ten years by the Tigers as their administrative headquarters. Sri Lankan Civil War The Sri Lankan Civil War is the name given to the ongoing conflict on the island-nation of Sri Lanka. Since July 23, 1983, there has been on and off civil war, predominantly between the government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE, also known as the Tamil Tigers), a separatist armed organization which fights for the creation of an independent state named Tamil Eelam in the north and the east of the island. Over 70,000 people have been officially listed as killed in the war since 1983. As one of the world's deadliest ongoing armed conflicts, it has caused significant adversity to the population, environment and the economy of the country. The tactics employed by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam have resulted in the organization being banned as a terrorist organization in 32 countries, including the United States, Japan, Brazil, Australia, the nations of the European Union, and Canada. After two decades of fighting and three failed attempts at peace talks, including the unsuccessful deployment of the Indian Army as a peacekeeping force from 1987 to 1990, a lasting negotiated settlement to the conflict appeared possible when a cease-fire was declared in December 2001, and a ceasefire agreement signed with international mediation in 2002. However limited hostilities renewed in late 2005 and the conflict began to escalate until the government launched a number of major military offensives against the LTTE beginning in July 2006, and drove the LTTE out of the entire Eastern province of the island. The LTTE then declared they would "resume their freedom struggle to achieve statehood". The government then shifted its offensive to the north of the country, and formally announced its withdrawal from the ceasefire agreement on January 2, 2008, alleging that the LTTE violated the agreement over 10,000 times. Since then, aided by the destruction of a number of large arms smuggling vessels that belonged to the LTTE, and an international crackdown on the funding for the Tamil Tigers, the government has taken control of 99.8% of the territory previously controlled by the Tamil Tigers, including their de-facto capital Kilinochchi, main military base Mullaitivu and the entire A9 highway. As a result of the latest fighting, experts predict the long running conflict could soon come to an end, with the government taking over the final bit of territory controlled by the Tamil Tigers. However the rebels

have vowed to fight on, and are expected to wage an underground guerrilla campaign, launching hit and run attacks against the military and suicide bombings around the country, if they were defeated as a conventional force. The fate of civilians trapped in the 'no-fire zone' has become a major concern for the international community at this stage of war. On April 22, 2009, the UN Security Council has called on Tamil Tiger rebels to lay down their arms and let the UN help evacuate civilians from the war zone. Indian involvement:Became involved in the conflict in the 1980s for a number of reasons, including its leaders' desire to project India as the regional power in the area and worries about India's own Tamils seeking independence. The latter was particularly strong in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu, where ethnic kinship led to strong support for independence for Sri Lankan Tamils. Throughout the conflict, the Indian central and state governments have supported both sides in different ways. Beginning in the 1980s, India, through its intelligence agency RAW, provided arms, training and monetary support to a number of Sri Lankan Tamil militant groups, including the LTTE and its rival Tamil Eelam Liberation Organization (TELO). The LTTE's rise is widely attributed to the initial backing it received from RAW. It is believed that by supporting different militant groups, the Indian government hoped to keep the Tamil independence movement divided and be able to exert overt control over it. India became more actively involved in the late 1980s, and on June 5, 1987, the Indian Air Force airdropped food parcels to Jaffna while it was under siege by Sri Lankan forces. At a time when the Sri Lankan government stated they were close to defeating the LTTE, India dropped 25 tons of food and medicine by parachute into areas held by the LTTE in a direct move of support toward the rebels. Negotiations were held, and the Indo-Sri Lanka Peace Accord was signed on July 29, 1987, by Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and Sri Lankan President Jayewardene. Under this accord, the Sri Lankan Government made a number of concessions to Tamil demands, including a devolution of power to the provinces, a merger—subject to later referendum—of the Northern and the Eastern provinces into the single province, and official status for the Tamil language (this was enacted as the 13th Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka). India agreed to establish order in the North and East through a peacekeeping force, and to cease assisting Tamil insurgents. Militant groups including the LTTE, although initially reluctant, agreed to surrender their arms to the IPKF.

Signing of Permanent Ceasefire Agreement Sri Lankan government and LTTE formalized a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on February 22, 2002, and signed a permanent ceasefire agreement (CFA). Norway was named mediator, and it was decided that they, together with the other Nordic countries, monitor the ceasefire through a committee of

experts named the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission. In August, the government agreed to lift the ban on the LTTE and paved the way for the resumption of direct negotiations with the LTTE. Following the signing of the ceasefire agreement, commercial air flights to Jaffna began and the LTTE opened the key A9 highway, which linked government controlled area in the south with Jaffna and ran through LTTE territory, allowing civilian traffic through the Vanni region for the first time in many years, but only after paying a tax to the LTTE. Many foreign countries also offered substantial financial support if peace was achieved and optimism grew that an end to the decades long conflict was in sight. The much anticipated peace talks began in Phuket, Thailand further rounds followed in Phuket, Norway and Berlin, Germany. During the talks, both sides agreed to the principle of a federal solution and the Tigers dropped their long standing demand for separate state. This was a key compromise from the LTTE, which had always insisted on an independent Tamil state and it also represented a compromise from the government, which had seldom agreed to more than minimal devolution. Both sides also exchanged prisoners of war for first time. At the time the Sri Lankan government, which was facing an unrelated Marxist youth uprising by the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna in the south, called in the Indian military immediately after the agreement was signed. A force dubbed the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) was formed, and it initially oversaw a cease-fire and a modest disarmament of the militant groups. The Sri Lankan government pulled its troops south and put down the JVP rebellion as the IPKF took over control of most areas in the North of the country. While most Tamil militant groups laid down their weapons and agreed to seek a peaceful solution to the conflict, the LTTE refused to disarm its fighters. Keen to ensure the success of the accord, the IPKF then tried to demobilize the LTTE by force and ended up in full-scale conflict with them. The three year long conflict was also marked by the IPKF being accused of committing various abuses of human rights by many human rights groups as well as some within the Indian media. The IPKF also soon met stiff opposition from the Tamils. Simultaneously, nationalist sentiment led many Sinhalese to oppose the continued Indian presence in Sri Lanka. These led to the Sri Lankan government's call for India to quit the island, and they allegedly entered into a secret deal with the LTTE that culminated in a ceasefire. The LTTE and IPKF continued to have frequent hostilities, and according to some reports, the Sri Lankan government even armed the rebels in order to see the back of the Indian forces. Although casualties among the IPKF mounted, and calls for the withdrawal of the IPKF from both sides of the Sri Lankan conflict grew, Gandhi refused to remove the IPKF from Sri Lanka. However, following his defeat in Indian parliamentary elections in December 1989, the new prime Minister V. P. Singh ordered the withdrawal of the IPKF, and their last ship left Sri Lanka on March 24, 1990. The 32 month presence of the IPKF in Sri Lanka resulted in the deaths of 1100 Indian soldiers and over 5000 Sri Lankans. The cost for the Indian government was estimated at over 20 billion rupees.

Wildlife Conservation in India Aiming to Sustainable Growth and Development

By: Sangeeta Gupta Author is an expert of various competitive examination.

Wildlife includes all non-domesticated plants, animals, and other organisms. Domesticating wild plant and animal species for human benefit has occurred many times all over the planet, and has a major impact on the environment, both positive and negative. Wildlife can be found in all ecosystems, Deserts, rain forests, plains, and other areas including the most developed urban sites all have distinct forms of wildlife. While the term in popular culture usually refers to animals that are untouched by human factors, most scientists agree that wildlife around the world is impacted by human activities. Indian wildlife:The wildlife of India is a mix of species of diverse origins. The region's rich and diverse wildlife is preserved in numerous national parks and wildlife sanctuaries across the country. Since India is home to a number of rare and threatened animal species, wildlife management in the country is essential to preserve these species. According to one study, India is home to about 60-70% of the world's biodiversity. India, lying within the Indomalaya ecozone, is home to about 7.6% of all mammalian, 12.6% of avian, 6.2% of reptilian, and 6.0% of flowering plant species. Many ecoregions, such as the shola forests, also exhibit extremely high rates of endemism; overall, 33% of Indian plant species are endemic. India's forest cover ranges from the tropical rainforest of the Andaman Islands, Western Ghats, and Northeast India to the coniferous forest of the Himalaya. Between

these extremes lie the sal-dominated moist deciduous forest of eastern India; teak-dominated dry deciduous forest of central and southern India; and the babul-dominated thorn forest of the central Deccan and western Gangetic plain. Important Indian trees include the medicinal neem, widely used in rural Indian herbal remedies. The pipal fig tree, shown on the seals of Mohenjo-daro, shaded the Gautama Buddha as he sought enlightenment. Many Indian species are descendants of taxa originating in Gondwana, to which India originally belonged. Peninsular India's subsequent movement towards, and collision with, the Laurasian landmass set off a mass exchange of species. However, volcanism and climatic changes 20 million years ago caused the extinction of many endemic Indian forms. Soon thereafter, mammals entered India from Asia through two zoogeographical passes on either side of the emerging Himalaya. As a result, among Indian species, only 12.6% of mammals and 4.5% of birds are endemic, contrasting with 45.8% of reptiles and 55.8% of amphibians. Notable endemics are the Nilgiri leaf monkey and the brown and carmine Beddome's toad of the Western Ghats. India contains 172, or 2.9%, of IUCN-designated threatened species. These include the Asiatic lion, the Bengal tiger, and the Indian white-rumped vulture, which suffered a near-extinction from ingesting the carrion of diclofenac-treated cattle. In recent decades, human encroachment has posed a threat to India's wildlife; in response, the system of national parks and protected areas, first established in 1935, was substantially expanded. In 1972, India enacted the Wildlife Protection Act and Project Tiger to safeguard crucial habitat; further federal protections were promulgated in the 1980s. Along with over 500 wildlife sanctuaries, India now hosts 14 biosphere reserves, four of which are part of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves; 25 wetlands are registered under the Ramsar Convention. The varied and rich wildlife of India has had a profound impact on the region's popular culture. Common name for wilderness in India is Jungle which was adopted by the British colonialists to the English language. The word has been also made famous in The Jungle Book by Rudyard Kipling. India's wildlife has been the subject of numerous other tales and fables such as the Panchatantra and the Jataka tales. The gradual emergence of the human beings as the most dominant species among all other species of animals and the attempt of the human beings to set themselves apart from other species is the main underlying cause of the contemporary environmental disaster. The main reason behind a threat to the wildlife and the ecosystem is the constantly growing deforestation, poaching and negligence towards animals and nature. The Indian Government has started nature projects like, Project Tiger, Nature Camps, Jungle Lodges, etc. to encourage wildlife awareness among the common people. Besides preserving the natural heritage, these projects also promote eco-tourism. Various Projects:Gir National Park in Gujarat is the only existent habitation for the nearly extinct Asiatic Lions in India. The Kaziranga Sanctuary in Assam is a major example of good effort to save the endangered Rhinoceros. Similarly, Periyar in Kerala is doing a great job to preserve the wild Elephants and Dachigam National Park is progressing rapidly to save Kashmiri Stag. Wildlife Conservation in India occupies a total area of about 3.29 million sq. km. that contains floral and

faunal species, mammals, reptiles, insects and birds. The Wildlife Conservation in India has become the most popular holiday destinations because of its diverseness. In India there are 571 sanctuaries and reserve parks that are protected by the Indian Government, mainly meant for the protection of the extinct species of animals and birds. Predators, Carnivores and Herbivores, - all are equally important to maintain the vital ecological processes as nutrient and water cycling. India has over 500 animal sanctuaries, referred to as Wildlife Sanctuaries (IUCN Category IV Protected Area). Among these, the 28 Tiger Reserves are governed by Project Tiger, and are of special significance in the conservation of the tiger. Some wildlife sanctuaries are specifically named Bird Sanctuary, eg. Keoladeo National Park before attained National Park status. Many National Parks were initially Wildlife Sanctuaries. Wildlife sanctuaries of national importance to conservation, usually due to some flagship faunal species, are named National Wildlife Sanctuary, like national chambal (gharial) Wildlife Sanctuary for conserving the Gharial (1978). Some of the important wildlife sanctuaries in India are:• Bandhavgarh National Park in Madhya Pradesh • Corbett National Park in Uttar Pradesh • Gir National Park & Sanctuary in Gujarat • Kanha National Park in Madhya Pradesh • Kaziranga National Park in Assam • Periyar Wildlife Sanctuary in Kerala • Sariska Wildlife Sanctuary in Rajasthan • Sunderbans National Park in West Bengal • Dachigam National Park in Jammu & Kashmir • Manas Tiger Reserve in Assam National Parks of India:India's first national park (an IUCN category II protected area) was established in 1935 as Hailey National Park, now known as Jim Corbett National Park. By 1970, India only had five national parks. In 1972, India enacted the Wildlife Protection Act and Project Tiger to safeguard the habitats of conservation reliant species. Further federal legislation strengthening protections for wildlife was introduced in the 1980s. As of April 2007, there are 96 national parks. All national park lands encompass a combined 38,029.18 km², 1.16% of India's total surface area. A total of 166 national parks have been authorized. Plans are underway to establish the remaining scheduled parks. Biosphere Reserves:The term ‘Biosphere Reserve' should denote an area: • Which is, set aside for the conservation of the resources of the biosphere and for the improvement of the relationship between man and the environment; • Which is, to serve as sites for long term scientific research as well as education all over the world.

List of National Parks:• Dibru-Saikhowa National Park-Assam • Desert National Park-Rajasthan • Dachigam National Park-Jammu and Kashmir • Corbett National Park-Uttarakhand • Chandoli National Park-Maharashtra • Campbell Bay National Park-Andaman and Nicobar • Anshi National Park-Karnataka • Balphakram National Park-Meghalaya • Bandhavgarh National Park-Madhya Pradesh • Bandipur National Park-Karnataka • Bannerghatta National Park-Karnataka • Vansda National Park-Gujarat • Betla National Park-Jharkhand • Bhitarkanika National Park-Orissa • Blackbuck National Park, Velavadar-Gujarat • Buxa Tiger Reserve-West Bengal • Fossil National Park-Madhya Pradesh • Great Himalayan National Park-Himachal Pradesh • Indira Gandhi National Park (Annamalai National Park)- Tamil Nadu • Dudhwa National Park-Uttar Pradesh • Intanki National Park-Nagaland • Guindy National Park-Tamil Nadu • Govind Pashu Vihar-Uttarakhand • Kaziranga National Park-Assam • Khangchendzonga National Park-Sikkim • Kishtwar National Park-Jammu and Kashmir • Van Vihar National Park-Madhya Pradesh • Kanha National Park-Madhya Pradesh • Mollem National Park-Goa • Mount Harriet National Park-Andaman and Nicobar The programme of Biosphere Reserve was initiated under the 'Man & Biosphere' (MAB) programme by UNESCO in 1971. Biosphere Reserves are areas of terrestrial and coastal ecosystems promoting solutions to reconcile the conservation of biodiversity with its sustainable use. They are internationally recognized, nominated by National Governments and remain under sovereign jurisdiction of the states where they are located. Biosphere Reserves serve in some ways as 'living laboratories' for testing out and demonstrating integrated management of land, water and biodiversity (CES., UNESCO, 2005., IUCN, 1979). List of Biosphere Reserves • Achanakmar-Amarkanta- Madhya Pradesh & Chhattishgarh • Agasthyamalai- Kerala

• Dehang-Debang- Arunachal Pradesh • Dibru-Saikhowa- Assam • Great Nicobar- Andaman and Nicobar • Gulf of Mannar - Tamil Nadu • Khangchenjunga – Sikkim • Manas- Assam • Nanda Devi-Uttaranchal • Nilgiri -Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Karnataka • Nokrek-Meghalaya • Pachmarhi -Madhya Pradesh • Simlipal-Orissa • Sunderbans-West Bengal IUCN The International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) is an international organization dedicated to natural resource conservation.Founded in 1948, its headquarters is located in the Lake Geneva area in Gland, Switzerland. The IUCN brings together 83 states, 108 government agencies, 766 Non-governmental organizations and 81 international organizations and about 10,000 experts and scientists from countries around the world. IUCN's mission is to influence, encourage and assist societies throughout the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of nature and to ensure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable. Biosphere Reserve Objectives:Each Biosphere Reserve is intended to fulfill three basic functions, which are complementary and mutually reinforcing: • A conservation function - to contribute to the conservation of landscapes, ecosystems, species and genetic variation; • A development function - to foster economic and human development which is socio-culturally and ecologically sustainable; • A logistic function - to provide support for research, monitoring, education and information exchange related to local, national and global issues of conservation and development (UNESCO, 2005). The Indian government has established 15 Biosphere Reserves of India, (categories roughly corresponding to IUCN Category V Protected areas), which protect larger areas of natural habitat (than a National Park or Animal Sanctuary), and often include one or more National Parks and/or preserves, along buffer zones that are open to some economic uses. Protection is granted not only to the flora and fauna of the protected region, but also to the human communities who inhabit these regions, and their ways of life. Four of the fifteen biosphere reserves are a part of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves, based on the UNESCO Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Programme list.

• Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve • Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve • Sundarbans Biosphere Reserve • Gulf of Mannar Biosphere Reserve

Conservation of wildlife in India:The need for conservation of wildlife in India is often questioned because of the apparently incorrect priority in the face of dire poverty of the people. However Article 48 of the Constitution of India specifies that "the state shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country" and Article 51-A states that "it shall be the duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers, and wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures." Large and charismatic mammals are important for wildlife tourism in India and several national parks and wildlife sanctuaries cater to these needs. Project Tiger started in 1972 is a major effort to conserve the tiger and its habitats. At the turn of the 20th century, one estimate of the tiger population in India placed the figure at 40,000, yet an Indian tiger census conducted in 1972 revealed the existence of only 1827 tigers. Various pressures in the later part of the 20th century led to the progressive decline of wilderness resulting in the disturbance of viable tiger habitats. At the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) General Assembly meeting in Delhi in 1969, serious concern was voiced about the threat to several species of wildlife and the shrinkage of wilderness in the India. In 1970, a national ban on tiger hunting was imposed and in 1972 the Wildlife Protection Act came into force. The framework was then set up to formulate a project for tiger conservation with an ecological approach. Project Tiger which was launched on April 1, 1973, has become one of the most successful conservation ventures in modern history. The project aims at tiger conservation in specially constituted 'tiger reserves' which are representative of various bio-geographical regions falling within India. It strives to maintain a viable tiger population in their natural environment. Today, there are 27 Project Tiger wildlife reserves in India covering an area of 37,761 km².Project Elephant, though less known, started in 1992 and works for elephant protection in India. Most of India's rhinos today survive in the Kaziranga National Park. The wildlife institute of India (WII) is a government institution run by the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education which trains wildlife managers and wildlife researchers. Trained personnel from WII have contributed in studying and protecting wildlife in India. WII has also popularized wildlife studies and careers. The institute is based in Dehradun, India. It is located in Chandrabani, which is close to the southern forests of Dehradun. The Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education also runs the Forest Research Institute and the Indian Institute of Forest Management Wildlife Protection Act of 1972 :In 1972 by the Government of India. Prior to 1972, India only had five designated national parks. Among

other reforms, the Act established schedules of protected plant and animal species; hunting or otherwise harvesting these species was largely outlawed. The Act provides for the protection of Wild animals, birds and plants and for matters connected therewith or ancillary or incidental thereto. It extends to the whole of India, except the State of Jammu and Kashmir which has its own wildlife act. It has six schedules which give varying degrees of protection, with absolute protection being provided under Schedule I and part II of schedule II with the highest penalties prescribed for offences under these schedules and Species listed in the Sch. IV are also protected but the penalties are much lower, with the enforcement authorities having the power to compound offences (as in they impose fines on the offenders).

First BRIC Summit Developing World Rendered New Power By R.K.Pandey Brazil, Russia, India and China ended the first BRIC summit at Yekaterinburg in Russia by calling for an increased role in global financial institutions by emerging economies and developing nations. At the conclusion of the first BRIC summit on June16,2009 BRIC countries issued a joint statement calling for increased economic reform. The four nations, representing emerging economic powers, demanded that developing economies have a greater voice and representation in international financial institutions, and their heads and senior leadership should be appointed through an open, transparent and merit-based selection process. BRIC countries said that they also believe there is a strong need for a stable, predictable and more diversified international monetary system, it showed a warning against the global domination of the US dollar as the world’s standard reserve currency. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev had voiced similar sentiments before the summit, saying the current reserve policies have not managed to perform their functions. Chief economic aide, Arkady Dvorkovich, suggested that the International Monetary Fund (IMF) should revise the basket of currencies used to value its financial products to include the Russian ruble and Chinese Yuan. At the moment the currencies included are the dollar, euro, yen and sterling. The range of topics on the agenda and the line-up of presidents attending showed the growing economic and political power of the world's emerging nations, including India and China, and their desire to forge new levers of influence. Host president Dmitry Medvedev of Russia hailed the Urals city of Yekaterinburg as the epicenter of world politics.

BRICs New Affirmation The so-called BRIC nations of Brazil, Russia, India and China called for reform of international financial institutions, sweeping changes to the United Nations to give a bigger role to Brazil and India and a stable and predictable currency system. Iran's president, re-elected in a disputed vote, fired a salvo at the United States, the leaders of India and Pakistan had their first one-to-one meeting since the Mumbai attacks and the four top emerging market economies held their first summit. A common thread running through the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit and a separate meeting between Brazil, Russia, India, and China (BRIC) was discussion of a new world order less dependent on the United States. President of Russia told that existing reserve currencies, including the U.S. dollar, had not performed their function and said it was time for change and countries should use their national currencies more for trade. The BRIC summit ended with a statement by Medvedev and a communique which demanded more power for developing nations. It did not mention two key Moscow initiatives a smaller role for the U.S. dollar and a supranational reserve currency. The Kremlin's top economic aide, Arkady Dvorkovich, said the International Monetary Fund (IMF) should expand the basket of its Special Drawing Right (an international reserve asset) to including the Chinese yuan, the Russian rouble and gold. The dollar fell 0.9 percent against a basket of major currencies on world markets after Medvedev's comments. Since the four BRIC nations represent around 40 percent of the world's population and 15 percent of its GDP. Russia and China lead the SCO, a security and economic co-operation forum which also includes four Central Asian states, plus Iran, Mongolia, India and Pakistan as observers. It can be say that such a type of coordination will allow developing nations to better explain their positions to each other and work out a novel path to resolving international financial problems and the reform of international financial relations. Underlining its growing economic influence abroad, Chinese President Hu Jintao offered Central Asian states $10 billion of credit support to help counter the global economic slump, though he did not mention the proposals for diluting dollar dominance. In another ignore to the West, the SCO leaders welcomed Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, making his first foreign trip to attend the summit since his disputed re-election. Ahmadinejad arrived a day late in Yekaterinburg after mass protests against his disputed victory in Tehran but the SCO presidents had congratulated Ahmadinejad on his victory. On the sidelines, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh met Pakistani leader Asif Ali Zardari for the first time since the Mumbai attacks and asked him to ensure that Islamist militants could not operate from Pakistani territory. His tough words offered little hope for a breakthrough in relations between the two nuclear-armed Asian powers. Campaigning for Economic Modification Those divisive issues are mainly political in nature which is why most observers correctly predicted that the BRIC summit would focus predominantly on economic issues. Combined, the BRIC countries currently have a 15-percent share of the world economy and a 42-percent share of global currency reserves. Their increased economic power was underscored when Brazil and Russia joined China in

announcing they would shift some $70 billion (50 billion euros) of reserves into multicurrency bonds issued by the International Monetary Fund. The move was interpreted by some as an attempt to topple the dollar in part because the Russian president said at the time that his proposal to create a new world currency could be discussed at the summit. But fiscal experts said that BRIC will tread carefully where the dollar is concerned, as triggering a dollar crisis would be akin to shooting themselves in the foot. The BRIC’s are putting the US on notice that there has to be a cutback on spending and that they need to get their house in order any attack on the dollar will hurt them. But they want to make sure this kind of mess doesn't happen again. Clearly though, BRIC is using its new influence to put pressure on the IMF to reshape its voting structure to better reflect the shift in economic power. Brazil, for example, is the world's 10th largest economy, but has just 1.38 percent of the IMF board's votes, compared to 2.09 percent for Belgium, an economy one-third the size. Joint Statement of the BRIC Countries’ Leaders Leaders of the Federative Republic of Brazil, the Russian Federation, the Republic of India and the People’s Republic of China, have discussed the current situation in global economy and other pressing issues of global development, and also prospects for further strengthening collaboration within the BRIC.

BRIC have arrived at the following conclusions: » BRIC stressed the central role played by the G20 Summits in dealing with the financial crisis. They have fostered cooperation, policy coordination and political dialogue regarding international economic and financial matters. » BRIC called upon all states and relevant international bodies to act vigorously to implement the decisions adopted at the G20 Summit in London on April 2, 2009. BRIC shall cooperate closely among them and with other partners to ensure further progress of collective action at the next G20 Summit to be held in Pittsburgh in September 2009. BRIC countries are committed to advance the reform of international financial institutions, so as to reflect changes in the global economy. The emerging and developing economies must have greater voice and representation in international financial institutions, whose heads and executives should be appointed through an open, transparent, and merit-based selection process. BRIC also believe that there is a strong need for a stable, predictable and more diversified international monetary system. » BRIC countries are convinced that a reformed financial and economic architecture should be based, inter alia, on the following principles: • Democratic and transparent decision-making and implementation process at the international financial organisations; • Solid legal basis; • Compatibility of activities of effective national regulatory institutions and international standard-setting bodies;

• Strengthening of risk management and supervisory practices. » BRIC countries recognise the important role played by international trade and foreign direct investments in the world economic recovery. BRIC countries call upon all parties to work together to improve the international trade and investment environment. They urge the international community to keep the multilateral trading system stable, curb trade protectionism, and push for comprehensive and balanced results of the WTO’s Doha Development Agenda. » The poorest countries have been hit hardest by the financial crisis. The international community needs to step up efforts to provide liquid financial resources for these countries. The international community should also strive to minimise the impact of the crisis on development and ensure the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. Developed countries should fulfil their commitment of 0.7% of Gross National Income for the Official Development Assistance and make further efforts in increasing assistance, debt relief, market access and technology transfer for developing countries. » The implementation of the concept of sustainable development, comprising, inter alia, the Rio Declaration, Agenda for the 21st Century and multilateral environmental agreements, should be a major vector in the change of paradigm of economic development. » BRIC countries stand for strengthening coordination and cooperation among states in the energy field, including amongst energy producers and consumers and transit states, in an effort to decrease uncertainty and ensure stability and sustainability. They support diversification of energy resources and supply, including renewable energy, security of energy transit routes and creation of new energy investments and infrastructure. » BRIC countries support international cooperation in the field of energy efficiency. They stand ready for a constructive dialogue on how to deal with climate change based on the principle of common but differentiated responsibility, given the need to combine measures to protect the climate with steps to fulfill our socio-economic development tasks. » BRIC countries reaffirmed to enhance cooperation among our countries in socially vital areas and to strengthen the efforts for the provision of international humanitarian assistance and for the reduction of natural disaster risks. They take note of the statement on global food security issued today as a major contribution of the BRIC countries to the multilateral efforts to set up the sustainable conditions for this goal. » BRIC countries reaffirmed to advance cooperation among our countries in science and education with the aim, inter alia, to engage in fundamental research and development of advanced technologies. » BRIC countries underlined their support for a more democratic and just multi-polar world order based on the rule of international law, equality, mutual respect, cooperation, coordinated action and collective decision-making of all states. BRIC countries reiterate their support for political and diplomatic efforts to peacefully resolve disputes in international relations.

» BRIC countries strongly condemn terrorism in all its forms and manifestations and reiterate that there can be no justification for any act of terrorism anywhere or for whatever reasons. They note that the draft Comprehensive Convention against International Terrorism is currently under the consideration of the UN General Assembly and call for its urgent adoption. » BRIC countries expressed their strong commitment to multilateral diplomacy with the United Nations playing the central role in dealing with global challenges and threats. In this respect, They reaffirmed the need for a comprehensive reform of the UN with a view to making it more efficient so that it can deal with today’s global challenges more effectively. They reiterated the importance that attach to the status of India and Brazil in international affairs, and understand and support their aspirations to play a greater role in the United Nations. » BRIC countries have agreed upon steps to promote dialogue and cooperation among our countries in an incremental, proactive, pragmatic, open and transparent way. The dialogue and cooperation of the BRIC countries is conducive not only to serving common interests of emerging market economies and developing countries, but also to building a harmonious world of lasting peace and common prosperity. » Russia, India and China welcomed the invitation of Brazil to the next BRIC summit where it will host in 2010. Cooperation Within BRIC BRIC is a loose group of countries including Brazil, Russia, India and China, the largest economic growth and political influence centres among emerging economies. These countries have a substantial integration potential in their respective regions. The global problems of international terrorism and multinational crime, environmental degradation and climate change, plus food and energy security cannot be effectively solved without the involvement of the BRIC countries. BRIC partnership is becoming increasingly important amid the global economic and financial downturn, when the four countries should coordinate their efforts with the international community to weather the crisis on global financial markets and reform the world financial system. Political dialogue within the BRIC format began in New York in September 2006, when their foreign ministers conferred during the 61st UN General Assembly. Since then, the BRIC foreign ministers have met four times, including at a full-scale meeting in Yekaterinburg on May 16, 2008. The joint statement adopted as a result of the latter meeting formulated common approaches to crucial issues on the international agenda. Ties between the BRIC foreign ministers were completed by the meetings between their finance ministers in Sao Paulo, Brazil, on November 7, 2008 and in London on March 13, 2009. The finance ministers adopted joint statements on their meetings, which reflected common views of global economic problems, including the reasons for and ways to weather the global financial crisis. At the initiative of Russia, the four leaders had a short meeting on July 9, 2008, during the G8 summit in Japan, to agree on drafting a full-scale BRIC summit. Official contacts in the BRIC format have been

buttressed by interaction between the respective regional authorities and public organisations. Russia would like the cooperation between the BRIC countries to become a major factor of multilateral diplomacy and to make a substantial contribution to promoting the nascent multipolarity and development of collective leadership by the world’s leading countries. By some predictions, the four nations, Brazil, Russia, India and China, a group referred to as the BRIC group, will surpass the current leading economies by the middle of this century, a tectonic shift that by this reckoning will eventually nudge the United States and Western Europe away from the center of world productivity and power. Russia’s president, Dmitri A. Medvedev, said the main point of the meeting was to show that the BRIC should create conditions for a more just world order. The four countries produce about 15 percent of the world’s gross domestic product and hold about 40 percent of the gold and hard currency reserves, but they are not a unified bloc and do not do enough business among themselves to justify a trade alliance. Russia and Brazil export natural resources, China exports manufactured goods and India bases its growth primarily on domestic demand. As such, India is not as concerned with the status of the dollar and is by no means as intent on scoring ideological points against the United States as is Russia. The acronym BRIC was coined by a Goldman Sachs economist in 2001 to describe the four countries that were expected to surpass today’s largest economies by 2050, owing to their faster growth rate. A communiqué issued after the meeting highlighted the common goals of a greater voice in international financial institutions and a more diversified global monetary system. They agreed to meet again in 2010, in Brazil. The gathering was the second of back-to-back summit meetings sponsored by Russia in this city in the Ural Mountains on the divide between Europe and Asia. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a regional security alliance intended loosely as a counterweight to NATO, met in an expanded format with many Eurasian nations holding observer status. It even included a brief appearance by the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose disputed re-election last week has touched off street demonstrations in Tehran. In a sign of regional economic integration, China’s president, Hu Jintao, pledged $10 billion in aid to Central Asian nations in the group, which consists of China, Russia and four former Soviet states: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. Mr. Hu and Mr. Medvedev then met separately with India’s prime minister, Manmohan Singh, and the Brazilian president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. Mr. Medvedev encouraged China, the world’s largest holder of dollar reserves, and other nations to put their money in some other currency or financial mechanism. He also urged members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization to use their national currencies in conducting bilateral trade. There can be no successful currency system, and particularly a global system, if the financial instruments that are used are denominated in only one currency, Mr. Medvedev said. A top economic policy aide to Mr. Medvedev, Arkady Dvorkovich, said Russia would like to diversify its currency reserves away from dollars by buying bonds from Brazil, China and India, but only if they bought Russian rubles as a reserve. The dollar fell slightly against the euro and other currencies on Tuesday, though some traders quoted by Bloomberg News cited a more workaday cause: good results on new American housing starts were encouraging investors to move out of Treasury bonds and into equities.

The Path To 2050 The BRIC dissertation (defended in the paper Dreaming with BRICs: The Path to 2050) recognizes that Brazil, Russia, India and China have changed their political systems to embrace global capitalism. Goldman Sachs predicts China and India, respectively, to be the dominant global suppliers of manufactured goods and services while Brazil and Russia would become similarly dominant as suppliers of raw materials. Cooperation is thus hypothesized to be a logical next step among the BRICs because Brazil and Russia together form the logical commodity suppliers to India and China. Thus, the BRICs have the potential to form a powerful economic bloc to the exclusion of the modern-day states currently of "Group of Eight" status. Brazil is dominant in soy and iron ore while Russia has enormous supplies of oil and natural gas. Goldman Sachs' thesis thus documents how commodities, work, technology, and companies have diffused outward from the United States across the world. Following the end of the Cold War or even before, the governments comprising BRIC all initiated economic or political reforms to allow their countries to enter the world economy. In order to compete, these countries have simultaneously stressed education, foreign investment, domestic consumption, and domestic entrepreneurship. According to the study, India has the potential to grow the fastest among the four BRIC countries over the next 30 to 50 years. A major reason for this is that the decline in working age population will happen later for India and Brazil than for Russia and China. Analysis The Economist published an annual table of social and economic national statistics in its Pocket World in Figures. Extrapolating the global rankings from their 2008 Edition for the BRIC countries and economies in relation to various categories provides an interesting touchstone in relation to the economic underpinnings of the BRIC thesis. It also illustrates how, despite their divergent economic bases, the economic indicators are remarkably similar in global rankings between the different economies. It also suggests that whilst economic arguments can be made for linking Mexico into the BRIC thesis, the case for including South Africa looks considerably weaker. A Goldman Sachs paper published later in December 2005 explained why Mexico wasn't included in the original BRICs. According to the paper, among the other countries they looked at, only Mexico and perhaps Korea have the potential to rival the BRICs, but they are economies that they decided to exclude initially because they looked at them as already more developed. According to that paper, Mexico becomes the fifth-largest economy by 2050, ahead of Russia. A criticism is that the BRIC projections are based on the assumptions that resources are limitless and endlessly available when needed. In reality, many important resources currently necessary to sustain economic growth, such as oil, natural gas, coal, other fossil fuels, and uranium might soon experience a peak in production before enough renewable energy can be developed and commercialized, which might result in slower economic growth than anticipated, thus throwing off the projections and their dates.

The economic emergence of the BRICs will have unpredictable consequences for the global environment. Indeed, proponents of a set carrying capacity for the Earth may argue that, given current technology, there is a finite limit to how much the BRICs can develop before exceeding the ability of the global economy to supply. Academics and experts have suggested that China is in a league of its own compared to the other BRIC countries. BRIC are the one with the big reserves. They are the biggest potential market. They are the U.S. partner in the G2 (imagine the coverage a G2 meeting gets vs. a G8 meeting) and the E2 (no climate deal without them) and so on. Deutsche Bank Research said in a report that economically, financially and politically, China overshadows and will continue to overshadow the other BRICs. It added that China's economy is larger than that of the three other BRIC economies (Brazil, Russia and India) combined. Moreover, China's exports and its official forex reserve holdings are more than twice as large as those of the other BRICs combined. Another criticism is the understatement of GDP growth in China over the next 45 years; which predicts growth falling far below normal development. This contradicts the rapid economic growth that has already taken place in the country and the experience of countries like South Korea catching up with western GDP per capita, which China has been growing faster than in a similar period of development. There are many uncertainties and assumptions in the BRIC thesis that could mean that any or all of these four countries will not live up to their promise. The preeminence of China and India as major manufacturing countries with unrealised potential has been widely recognised, but some commentators state that China's and Russia's disregard for human rights and democracy could be a problem in the future, as is the possibility of conflict over Taiwan in the case of China. Likewise, the population of Russia is steadily declining and aging, and Brazil's and China's populations will begin to decline in several decades, and with their demographic windows closing in several decades as well. This may have implications for those countries' future, for there might be a decrease in the overall labor force and a negative change in the proportion of workers to retirees. Brazil's economic potential has been anticipated for decades, but it had until recently consistently failed to achieve investor expectations. Only in recent years has the country established a framework of political, economic, and social policies that allowed it to resume consistent growth. The result has been solid and paced economic development that rival its early 70's miracle years, as reflected in its expanding capital markets, lowest unemployment rates in decades, and consistent international trade surpluses - that led to the accumulation of reserves and liquidation of foreign debt (earning the country a coveted investment grade by the S&P and Fitch Ratings in 2008). How long such positive factors will stay in place remains to be seen. Finally, India's relations with one of its neighbors, Pakistan, have always been frosty. In 1998, there was a nuclear standoff between Pakistan and India. Border conflicts with Pakistan, mostly over the longheld dispute over Kashmir, has further aggravated any economic ties. The BRIC countries have enormous populations of extremely impoverished people. This impedes progress by limiting government finances, increasing social unrest, and limiting potential domestic economic demand. Factors such as international

conflict, civil unrest, unwise political policy, outbreaks of disease and terrorism are all factors that are difficult to predict and that could have an effect on the destiny of any country. Other critics suggest that BRIC is nothing more than a neat acronym for the four largest emerging market economies, but in economic and political terms nothing else (apart from the fact that they are all big emerging markets) links the four. Two are manufacturing based economies and big importers (China and India), but two are huge exporters of natural resources (Brazil and Russia). Two have growing populations (Brazil and India), and two have shrinking populations (China and Russia). The Economist, in its special report on Brazil, expressed the following view: In some ways Brazil is the steadiest of the BRICs. Unlike China and Russia it is a full-blooded democracy; unlike India it has no serious disputes with its neighbors. It is the only BRIC without a nuclear bomb. The Heritage Foundation's Economic Freedom Index, which measures factors such as protection of property rights and free trade ranks Brazil (moderately free) above the other BRICs (mostly unfree). In a not-so-subtle dig critical of the term as nothing more than a shorthand for emerging markets generally, critics have suggested a correlating term, CEMENT (Countries in Emerging Markets Excluded by New Terminology). Whilst they accept there has been spectacular growth of the BRIC economies, these gains have largely been the result of the strength of emerging markets generally, and that strength comes through having BRICs and CEMENT.

Facts on 15th Loksahba Election

» The highest number of candidates that an EVM can support is 64 and if the number exceeds this, the commission will have to use manual ballot for elections. » The EVMs are designed by Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. and Bharat Electronics Ltd. EVMs were first used in India 1989-90 in 16 assembly constituencies in three states. Kerala was the first state. » The Government spends Rs. 10 crore approximately on conducting a Lok Sabha election. » Photo electoral roll was used in 522 Parliamentary seats in 2009 elections. » The number of electorate in 2009 general elections was 71.377 crore with an increase of 4.3 crore from the 2004 general elections. » Total number of candidates was 8070. » 7514 was male candidates: while number of female candidates was 556. » Percentage of female candidates was 6.9 % of total candidates. » The number of polling stations were 8,34,944 in 2009. There were 2046 observers and 1.4 lakh micro-observers in 2009.

» The total number of polling staffs was 46.9 lakh. » Total number of Booth Level Officers (BLO) was 8.34 lakh. » Highest number of candidates was 43 in Chennai South, Tamil Nadu while lowest number of candidates was 3 in Nagaland. » Highest polling station was AuleyPhu in Leh. It was setup at an altitude of 15,300ft. » Number of seats in the Lok Sabha (lower house of Parliament): 545 (of which two are appointed by the President) Moni Kumar Subba, the Congress candidate for the Tezpur LS seat, was the richest candidate in the poll fray in Assam. He has declared assets worth Rs 60 crore. » For the first time, a women battalion of the Shashtra Seema Bal was deployed along the Indo-Nepal border in Uttar Pradesh during the Lok Sabha elections. » Danseuse Mallika Sarabhai, who was contesting as an Independent from the Gandhinagar Lok Sabha seat, had challenged her opponent L.K.Advani to a public debate on his achievements. General Elections in India The Constitution of India came into force on January 26, 1950. The first general, elections under the new Constitution were held during the year 1951-52 and the first elected Parliament came into being in April, 1952, the Second Lok Sabha in April,1957, the Third Lok Sabha in April,1962, the Fourth Lok Sabha in March, 1967, the Fifth Lok Sabha in March, 1971, the Sixth Lok Sabha in March, 1977, the Seventh Lok Sabha in January,1980, the Eighth Lok Sabha in December, 1984, the Ninth Lok Sabha in December, 1989, the Tenth Lok Sabha in June, 1991, the Eleventh Lok Sabha in May, 1996, the Twelfth Lok Sabha in March, 1998, the Thirteenth Lok Sabha in October, 1999, the Fourteenth Lok Sabha in May, 2004 and the Fifteenth Lok Sabha in May, 2009. New Government: Dr Manmohan Singh was sworn in as the Prime Minister of India for the second consecutive term along with his 19 Cabinet colleagues at a simple and brief function at the Rashtrapati Bhavan on May 22. Thus he become the first prime minister since Jawaharlal Nehru in 1961 to be elected to another five year term after completing his first Jawaharlal Nehru was re-elected in 1962. There were four new faces in the first edition of the Union Cabinet. All the others were in the outgoing Cabinet. All but two were from the Congress party. Among the new entrants in the Cabinet were Mamata Banerjee, the Trinamool Congress leader who trounced the Communists in West Bengal, Rajasthan Congress unit president CP Joshi, Congress general secretary M Veerappa Moily, and former Karnataka chief minister S M Krishna. The new Cabinet of the Congress-led UPA Government is a mix of the old and the new, reflecting Manmohan Singh’s experience and the youthfulness. Agatha Sangma, the daughter of former Lok Sabha Speaker P A Sangma, is the youngest minister in the Manmohan Singh cabinet at the age of 28 years. Jitin Prasada of Congress, who was the minister of state for steel, was the youngest minister in the previous UPA government at 35 years of age. Council of Ministers

• Dr Manmohan Singh : Prime Minister • Shri Pranab Mukherjee : Minister of Finance • Shri Sharad Pawar : Minister of Agriculture, Food & Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs & Public Distribution • Shri A. K. Antony : Minister of Defence • Shri P. Chidambaram : Minister of Home Affairs • Kum. Mamata Banerjee : Minister of Railways • Shri S. M. Krishna : Minister of External Affairs • Shri Ghulam Nabi Azad : Minister of Health and Family Welfare • Shri Sushil Kumar Shinde : Minister of Power • Shri M. Veerappa Moily : Minister of Law and Justice • Shri S. Jaipal Reddy : Minister of Urban Development • Shri Kamal Nath : Minister of Road Transport and Highways • Shri Vayalar Ravi : Minister of Overseas Indian Affairs • Smt. Meira Kumar : Minister of Water Resources • Shri Murli Deora : Minister of Petroleum and Natural Gas • Shri Kapil Sibal : Minister of Human Resource Development • Smt. Ambika Soni : Minister of Information and Broadcasting • Shri B. K. Handique : Minister of Mines : Minister of Development of North Eastern Region • Shri Anand Sharma : Minister of Commerce and Industry • Shri Virbhadra Singh : Minister of Steel • Shri Vilasrao Deshmukh : Minister of Heavy Industries and Public Enterprises • Shri C. P. Joshi : Minister of Rural Development : Minister of Panchayati Raj • Kum. Selja : Minister of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation & Minister of Tourism • Shri Subodh Kant Sahay : Minister of Food Processing Industries • Dr. M. S. Gill : Minister of Youth Affairs and Sports • Shri G. K. Vasan : Minister of Shipping • Shri Dayanidhi Maran : Minister of Textiles • Dr. Farooq Abdullah : Minister of New and Renewable Energy • Shri Mallikarjun Kharge : Minister of Labour and Employment • Shri Pawan K. Bansal : Minister of Parliamentary Affairs • Shri Mukul Wasnik : Minister of Social Justice and Empowerment • Shri Kantilal Bhuria : Minister of Tribal Affairs • Shri M. K. Alagiri : Minister of Chemicals and Fertilizers • Shri A Raja : Minister of Communications and Information Technology Lok Sabha:Lok Sabha is composed of representative of the people chosen by direct election on the basis of adult suffrage. The qualifying age for membership of Lok Sabha is 25 years. The Lok Sabha at present consists of 545 members including the Speaker and two nominated members. Lok Sabha, unless sooner dissolved, continues for five years from the date appointed for its first meeting and the expiration of the period of five years operates as dissolution of the House. However, while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, this period may be extended by Parliament by law for a period not exceeding one year at a time and not extending, in any case, beyond a period of

six months after the proclamation has ceased to operate. The maximum strength of the House envisaged by the Constitution is 552, upto 530 members to represent the States, up to 20 members to represent the Union Territories and not more than two members of the Anglo-Indian Community to be nominated by the President, if, in his opinion, that community is not adequately represented in the House. The total elective membership is distributed among the States in such a way that the ratio between the number of seats allotted to each State and the population of the State is, so far as practicable, the same for all States. An exercise to redraw Lok Sabha constituencies' boundaries has been carried out by the Delimitation Commission based on the Indian census of 2001. The number is divided among the 28 States and the 7 Union Territories as follows:Seats in States and Union Territories:-

» Uttar Pradesh - 80 » Maharashtra - 48 » Andhra Pradesh - 42 » West Bengal - 42 » Bihar - 40 » Tamil Nadu –39 » Madhya Pradesh - 29 » Karnataka - 28 » Gujarat - 26 » Rajasthan - 25 » Orissa - 21 » Kerala - 20 » Jharkhand - 14 » Assam -14 » Punjab - 13 » Chhattisgarh - 11 » Haryana - 10 » Delhi - 7 » Jammu & Kashmir - 6 » Uttarakhand - 5 » Himachal Pradesh - 4 » Arunachal Pradesh - 2 » Goa - 2 » Manipur - 2 » Meghalaya - 2 » Sikkim - 1 » Mizoram - 1 » Nagaland - 1 » Tripura - 2 » Andaman & Nicobar Islands - 1

» Chandigarh - 1 » Dadra & Nagar Haveli - 1 » Daman & Diu - 1 » Lakshadweep - 1 » Pondicherry -1