Political India: Engaging America

From The Hindu

U.S. Treasury clamps down on its finances

In a swift follow-up move after the passage of the United Nations Security Council sanctions resolution against Iran earlier this month, the United States Treasury announced the first set of sanctions designations “targeting Iran's nuclear and missile programmes”.

The Treasury said the sanctions it had announced targeted in particular “Iran's use of its financial sector, shipping industry and Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps to carry out and mask its proliferation activities.”

The Treasury said that under Executive Order 13382 of UNSCR 1929, which permitted the freezing of assets of Iran, it had designated the following Iranian institutions: Post Bank of Iran for its links to Bank Sepah; Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) entities and individuals; the IRGC Air Force and IRGC Missile Command (both of which were alleged to have ties to Iran's ballistic missile programme); Rah Sahel and Sepanir Oil and Gas Engineering Co. for alleged ties to previously designated Khatam al-Anbiya Construction Headquarters; five Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL) front companies; and numerous individuals for their roles in the IRGC and in Iran's alleged weapons programmes.

The Treasury said that it had also 27 vessels blocked because of their connection to IRISL and updated the entries for 71 already-blocked IRISL vessels to identify new names given to these vessels as part of IRISL's efforts to evade sanctions.

Further, it identified 22 entities in the insurance, petroleum and petrochemicals industries determined to be owned or controlled by the Government of Iran by adding them to Appendix A of the Iranian Transactions Regulations (ITR). The ITR prohibit transactions between U.S. persons and the Government of Iran. As a result of these designations, the Treasury said, “all transactions involving any of the designees and any U.S. person are prohibited, and any assets the designees may have under U.S. jurisdiction are frozen.”

Labels: missile programmes, sanctions resolution, United Nations Security Council, United States Treasury

From The Hindu

On Friday, Ronnie Lee Gardner, a death-row inmate in the state of Utah, was executed by a five-man firing squad. This is only the third time in 33 years that this method of execution has been used in the United States.

Mr. Gardner (49) was sentenced to death in 1985, after killing lawyer Michael Burdell in a botched escape attempt from a courthouse. At the time, he was facing a murder charge for shooting Melvyn Otterstrom, a bartender.

Shortly after midnight in the Utah Department of Corrections in the suburbs of Salt Lake City, five anonymous rifle marksmen fired from a distance of 25 feet at a target pinned on Mr. Gardner’s chest. Mr. Gardner, who wore a black hood over his head and was tightly strapped to a metal chair, was pronounced dead two minutes after the shooting.

In keeping with the practice of previous firing squads — the last such execution was in 1996 — one of the five .30 calibre Winchester rifles used was loaded with blanks. This was designed to create room for doubt regarding which marksmen had fired the lethal rounds.

According to reports, journalists from the local media who witnessed the execution reported that Mr. Gardner’s arm had “twitched up and down” after the firing squad had discharged their weapons. “It was cleaner than I expected. It was fast. But he moved. He moved a little bit, and to some degree that bothers me,” reports quoted Cheryl Worsley, a local radio reporter as saying.

Execution by firing squad was banned in Utah since 2004; yet Mr. Gardner had been permitted to opt for it as the law did not apply retrospectively and he had been sentenced prior to 2004.

The BBC quoted Gary DeLand, former executive director of Utah’s corrections agency and an acquaintance of Mr. Gardner during the early years of his imprisonment as saying that he was not surprised by Mr. Gardner’s request for the firing squad. Mr. DeLand said, “We don't know why Gardner chose this method but one prisoner who had chosen the firing squad basically said if he was going to die, he wanted someone to have to clean up the mess.”

He added that Mr. Gardner was a particularly violent man and was kept away from other inmates. “He was the kind of person who would harm others for the sport of it, and enjoyed causing trouble,” Mr. DeLand said.

The Gardner case has renewed the sometimes wrenching debate on the death penalty in the U.S., especially as the firing squad method was considered by many to be a medieval form of “Wild West-style justice”.

Yet there were strangely modern twists in the plot as Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff announced his final approval for the execution on the micro-blogging site Twitter. “I just gave the go-ahead to Corrections Department to proceed with Gardner’s execution,” Mr. Shurtleff said on posting to the website, adding, “May God grant him the mercy he denied his victims.”

No final words

Reports said that Mr. Gardner had been asked if he had any final words and said: “I do not. No.” He was also said to have had his final meal — steak, lobster, apple pie, vanilla ice cream and 7-Up — on Tuesday, embarking on a 48-hour fast before his execution.

On his final day, Mr. Gardner had said his goodbyes to his brother and daughter through prison bars after which he had met his attorney. He was said to have requested that none of his family members be present at the execution.

At a press conference after the execution, Mr. Shurtleff said, “For us, the fact that we have exercised the most extreme power that the state has, that the government has, to take life, was done very solemnly. It is a very sobering moment.”

Labels: Firing squad execution, Ronnie Lee Gardner, Utah State Prison

From The Hindu

In a desperate bid to stave-off a surge off public anger that has now been engulfing oil major British Petroleum for nearly two months, the company’s CEO Tony Howard today said he was “deeply sorry.”

Facing a grilling during a hearing by the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives, Mr. Hayward said, “I want to speak directly to the people who live and work in the Gulf region: I know that this incident has profoundly impacted lives and caused turmoil, and I deeply regret that.”

Even as the Obama administration cranked up the heat on BP, the company announced that it would commit around $20 billion to an escrow account that would be used to help mitigate the costs of cleaning up the enormous spill from the BP-run Deepwater Horizon offshore rig.

On Wednesday President Barack Obama and senior White House staff met with Mr. Hayward and top BP executives to lay out their demands regarding the escrow account and the costs that they expected BP would make good.

According to reports Representative Henry Waxman of California said, “BP cut corner after corner...and they were apparently oblivious as to what was happening,” during the hearing which was conducted by the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. “Now the whole Gulf Coast is paying the price,” he reportedly said.

Further Representative Joe Barton of Texas noted, “The picture emerging in this investigation is not one of technological limits, but of unsafe industry practices… It is BP's decision making that was a critical factor in this incident.”

Regarding the escrow fund, BP said in statement that an agreement was reached to create a $20 billion claims fund over the next three and a half years on the basis that BP would initially make payments of $3 billion in the third quarter of 2010 and $2 billion in the fourth quarter of 2010. “These will be followed by a payment of $1.25bn per quarter until a total of $20bn has been paid in,” the company noted.

Settling claims

The fund would be available to satisfy claims such as natural resource damages and state and local response costs and fines and penalties would be excluded from the fund and paid separately. Payments from the fund would be made as they are adjudicated, whether by the Independent Claims Facility (ICF) or by a court, or as agreed by BP, the company said. It added that the ICF would be administered by Kenneth Feinberg, who also served as President Obama’s “pay tsar” in the aftermath of the global financial crisis.

Labels: Barack Obama, British Petroleum, claims fund, Gulf Coast, oil spill

From The Hindu

After waiting 25 years for a closure, families of the victims of the worst terrorist attack in Canadian history, the bombing of Air India 182, were on Thursday told by a Commission of Inquiry that the Canadian government was responsible for failing to act upon credible information indicating that the attack was imminent.

In a scathing report by the Commission, its head, the former Canadian Supreme Court Justice, John Major, noted: “Government agencies were in possession of significant pieces of information that, taken together, would have led a competent analyst to conclude that Flight 182 was at high risk of being bombed by known Sikh terrorists in June 1985.”

Flight 182, nicknamed Emperor Kanishka and operating on the Montréal-London-Delhi-Bombay route, was blown up by a bomb at an altitude of 31,000 feet on June 23, 1985. The Boeing 747-237B aircraft crashed into the Atlantic Ocean in Irish airspace, killing all 329 people aboard, including 280 Canadians – many of Indian origin – and 22 Indians.

The report also issued a sharp criticism of the structure of Canadian security agencies and their lack of coordination. “There is a lack of institutionalised coordination and direction in national security matters.” It added that Canadian agencies had developed a culture of managing information in a manner designed to protect their individual institutional interests.

In particular, the report recommended that the National Security Adviser ought to be given much greater powers to intervene and resolve disputes between the Canadian Security and Intelligence Services (CSIS) and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).

The Commission argued that the “current practice of attempting to limit the information the CSIS provides to the RCMP in order to prevent its disclosure in potential criminal proceedings is misguided, as disclosure obligations at trial are engaged by potential relevance, not by which agency has seen the information.” It further noted that the result of such efforts to deny intelligence to the police was an “impoverished response” to terrorist threats.

The Commission further criticised the process of the post-bombing inquiry, pointing out that the CSIS often failed to disclose promptly to the RCMP information relevant to the criminal investigation, particularly information from human sources, or it disclosed information without sufficient detail or in a manner that prevented the RCMP from using the information.

The report also attacked the government's response to victim families. It said Canadian government agencies consistently opposed external review and attempted, “at times successfully,” to avoid or delay such reviews.

Labels: Air India, Inquiry Commission, Kanishka bombing, Khalistan

From The Hindu

It is Sleeping with the Enemy meets Ruthless People. But any way you cut it, this real-life story is such a perfect mix of Hollywood drama and comedy that it has doubtless got dozens of screenwriters scrambling for their pens across Beverly Hills.

When officials in California's legislative departments received a petition from police detective John Pomroy of Pomona, near Los Angeles, they must have felt they were watching the latest instalment of Basic Instinct.

Unusual plea

Mr. Pomroy approached California legislators, in particular Democratic Assemblyman Marty Block of San Diego County, with a very unusual plea. He requested Mr. Block's help in closing a particular loophole in Californian divorce law that had bitten him hard personally — the right to prevent your ex-wife from running off with a chunk of your life savings if she hires a hit man from a motorcycle gang to have you bumped off.

Yes, you read it right.

According to reports, Mr. Pomroy went through a contentious divorce back in 2002 and his ex-wife, after turning violent due to alcohol and drug abuse, lost custody of their two sons. She apparently also lost some of her appreciation for the law — and possibly her grip on reality.

Instead of seeking legal recourse, the former Ms. Pomroy approached members of the feared Vagos motorcycle gang in San Bernardino County to kill her ex. What she clearly did not bargain for was the gang members alerting the police. Policemen reportedly disguised as biker-assassins taped a conversation with the ex-wife, leading to her arrest and subsequent conviction for soliciting murder.

Think this is twisted? There's more.

Given the oddities of the law in California, Mr. Pomroy's ex-wife was actually able to claim half of his wealth because she had not tried to kill him herself.

In other words, hiring an even more efficient killer enabled her to get away with serving a mere 22 months in prison, and then collecting a cool $70,000 from her ex-husband's estate in the divorce.

Mr. Pomroy commented on his attempts to get the law changed, saying: “This Assembly bill is not going to award me anything retroactively; I'm not looking for that … I'm just trying to prevent some poor sap in the future who goes through this, to prevent him from losing his assets to somebody that's trying to kill him.”

Assemblyman Marty expects the bill to pass unopposed in the State Senate this week.

Labels: Californian law, divorce laws, John Pomroy

From The Hindu

In an indication of the depth of his administration's concern over the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, U.S. President Barack Obama on Tuesday spoke directly to the American people in a rare televised address from the Oval Office.

During the address, Mr. Obama not only underscored — as he has done repeatedly over the last few weeks — the various steps his government had taken to combat the disaster in the Gulf but also made the case for ending the United States' “addiction” to fossil fuel.

Outlining what he called his “battle plan” to tackle the consequences of the leak, Mr. Obama laid out three dimensions of his strategy: the clean-up operation, recovery and restoration of affected areas and persons, and ensuring that such a catastrophe never recurred.

In terms of the cleanup, Mr. Obama said that through the efforts led by Coast Guard chief Admiral Thad Allen, there were nearly 30,000 personnel working across four states to contain and clean up the oil. Over five-and-a-half million feet of boom had been laid across the water to block and absorb the approaching oil.

With regard to recovery and restoration of the Gulf Coast, Mr. Obama said he will not let the way of life of fishermen and other coastal residents be lost. He said he would direct the chairman of BP, whom he would be meeting on Wednesday, to “set aside whatever resources are required to compensate the workers and business owners who have been harmed as a result of his company's recklessness.” Mr. Obama added that this fund would not be controlled by BP but by an independent third party.

Mr. Obama emphasised on the steps being taking to ensure that “a disaster like this does not happen again.” A National Commission had been established to understand the causes of this disaster and recommend additional safety and environmental standards where needed.

He noted that he had also sought to reform the ailing Minerals Management Service, the agency responsible for regulating drilling and issuing permits. In part he hoped this would be aided by his decision to bring in new leadership at the agency in the form of Michael Bromwich, a “tough federal prosecutor and Inspector-General,” who has been charged with building an organisation that acted as “the oil industry's watchdog — not its partner.”

Labels: Barack Obama, BP oil spill, Gulf Coast oil spill

From The Hindu

President Barack Obama on Tuesday announced that he had chosen Michael Bromwich, former Assistant Attorney and Justice Department Inspector General, to lead his administration's efforts to "accelerate reforms in the regulation and oversight of offshore oil drilling".

In a statement, the White House said Mr. Bromwich would lead the effort to reform the Minerals Management Service (MMS), with the aim of "restoring integrity and rigor to the relationship between federal regulatory officials and oil companies". It added that Mr. Bromwich would also seek to develop plans for a new oversight structure and replace long-standing and inadequate practices with a "gold-standard approach for environmental and safety regulation".

This is the second round of administrative appointments made by President Obama in the wake of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Earlier last month, he announced the establishment of a bipartisan National Commission to investigate the oil spill from British Petroleum’s Deepwater Horizon rig. The Commission was charged with closely examining the activities of the offshore drilling industry and is co-chaired by former two-term Florida Governor and former Senator Bob Graham and also former Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency William Reilly.

The latest appointment comes with a promise by the President that Mr. Bromwich will be provided with a mandate to implement far-reaching change and will have the resources to accomplish that change. Mr. Obama said, "For a decade or more, the cosy relationship between the oil companies and the federal agency was allowed to go unchecked. That allowed drilling permits to be issued in exchange not for safety plans, but assurances of safety from oil companies. That cannot and will not happen anymore."

In particular, Mr. Bromwich has been tasked with overseeing the reorganisation of the MMS to eliminate conflicts among the different missions of the agency which include establishing safety standards, regulating industry compliance, and collecting royalties, the White House noted. Further, InteriorSecretary Ken Salazar announced plans to split the MMS into three new divisions — the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, and the Office of Natural Resources Revenue.

Mr. Bromwich's work will also pick up the threads of the 30-day report by Mr. Salazar’s office, on the safety and environmental precautions for offshore drilling rigs and on the "forthcoming recommendations of the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling".

In terms of his background, Mr. Bromwich has specialised in taking "broken agencies, applying rigorous reforms and oversight, and seeing positive results". According to the White House, his work has led to significant improvements in a variety of organisations ranging from Federal agencies to local police departments in Houston and Washington.

Labels: Michael Bromwich, oil spill

From The Hindu

India has been ranked as a “Tier II Watch List” country – only one level better than worst-performing Tier III countries such as Saudi Arabia and Zimbabwe – in the 2010 Trafficking in Persons Report (TIP) compiled by the State Department.

Given the definition of Tier II Watch List in the TIP, this implies that India ranks among those countries whose governments “do not fully comply with the Trafficking Victims Protection Act’s (TVPA) minimum standards, but are making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with those standards.”

Additionally, one of the three following conditions was found in India: first, that the absolute number of victims of severe forms of trafficking was very significant or was significantly increasing; second, that there was a failure to provide evidence of increasing efforts to combat severe forms of trafficking in persons from the previous year; or, third, that the determination that India was making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with minimum standards was based on commitments by India itself, to take additional future steps over the next year.

In terms of the definition of trafficking under the TVPA, a person may be a trafficking victim “regardless of whether they once consented, participated in a crime as a direct result of being trafficked, were transported into the exploitative situation, or were simply born into a state of servitude.”

The TIP adds that at the heart of this phenomenon are the myriad forms of enslavement including forced labour, sex trafficking, bonded labour debt bondage among migrant labourers, involuntary domestic servitude, forced child labour, child soldiers and child sex trafficking.

While most of South Asia ranks along with India as a Tier II Watch List country, Pakistan is notably ranked as Tier II – one level better than India. Thus while Pakistan’s government did not fully comply with the TVPA’s minimum standards, it was making significant efforts to bring itself into compliance with those standards – with none of the three additional conditions found in the case of India applicable to Pakistan.

Most developed countries, but even some developing countries such as Colombia and Nigeria, were ranked as Tier I countries in the TIP, that is countries whose governments fully complied with the TVPA’s minimum standards.

Commenting further on the case of India, the TIP noted that the Government of India “does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however, it is making significant efforts to do so, particularly with regard to the law enforcement response to sex trafficking.”

Yet, the TIP argues, the Indian government did not demonstrate sufficient progress in its law enforcement, protection, or prevention efforts to address labour trafficking, particularly bonded labour. “Therefore India is placed on Tier 2 Watch List for the seventh consecutive year,” the report said.

The TIP also noted that there were few criminal convictions of forced labour during the reporting period and police raids of brick kilns, rice mills, factories, brothels, and other places of human trafficking were usually prompted by NGO activists, as were efforts to provide rehabilitation and protective services to the victims removed from human trafficking.

Further, national and state government anti-trafficking infrastructure, and the implementation of the Bonded Labour (System) Abolition Act (BLSA), “remained weak,” the TIP observed, and the number of government shelters increased but some continued to be of poor quality. Some public officials’ complicity in trafficking remained a major problem, the report noted.

Labels: human trafficking, Trafficking in Persons Report

From The Hindu

Dow Chemical Company, which owns the erstwhile Union Carbide Company that was behind the Bhopal gas tragedy of 1984, might have systematically sought to pre-empt the judicial outcome of the case by putting pressure on officials at the Indian Embassy in Washington, it has emerged.

This was revealed on Monday by non-governmental organisations that shared with media a response from the Indian Embassy to a Right to Information (RTI) application that they had filed in 2007. Earlier RTI applications filed in India had revealed a similar pattern of attempted influence by Dow on the Indian side.

The NGOs, including the International Campaign for Justice in Bhopal and the Association for India's Development (AID), had gathered outside the Indian Embassy at the heart of Washington to protest against Dow Chemicals for its alleged role in the case.

In the RTI response, embassy Press Minister Rahul Chhabra appended a letter from Andrew Liveris, Chairman, CEO and President of Dow Chemical, addressing the former Ambassador, Ronen Sen. The letter to Mr. Sen followed shortly after meetings they held in New York on October 25 2006, as part of the U.S.-India CEO Forum.

Dated November 8 2006, a time when the Bhopal case was still under the consideration of the courts, the letter from Mr. Liveris notes: “Given the statements made by Government of India representatives in front of all meeting attendees that Dow is not responsible for Bhopal and will not be pursued by the GoI, it will be important to follow through to ensure concrete, sustained actions are taken that are consistent with these statements.”

In comments to The Hindu, Somasundaram Kumaresamuthusamy of AID — who had filed the RTI application in Washington — said, “It is shocking that GoI representatives has announced that Dow is not liable even though court is still deliberating on this issue.”

In the letter Mr. Liveris further sought to address the question of an application for a financial deposit filed by the Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers in May 2005. The Ministry in its application requested that Dow Chemicals deposit Rs.100 crores ($22 million) for environmental remediation costs.

On this matter Mr. Liveris said in the letter, “It follows logically from the GoI's statement regarding the non-liability of Dow, that the Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers should now withdraw its application for financial deposit against remediation costs. Certainly a withdrawal of the application would be positive, tangible demonstration that the GoI means what it says about Dow's lack of responsibility in the matter.” Further, the RTI application response makes clear that Mr. Liveris sought to link the resolution of the Bhopal “legacy issue” to further progress between India and the U.S. in terms of industrial ties and cooperation at such forums as the U.S.-India CEO Forum.

In yet another letter to the Indian Ambassador after the meeting of the Forum on September 14 2005, Mr. Liveris said “to facilitate the Indan-U.S. strategic partnership and to help chart a path forward, the following proposal is designed to help resolve a specific legacy legal issue — the Bhopal matter.”

Mr. Liveris in the letter goes on to outline as the first step of the proposal, “The GoI will implement a consistent, government-wide position that does not promote continued GoI litigation efforts against non-Indian companies over the Bhopal tragedy.” He added that “identified companies” should be invited to discuss their views directly with the relevant ministries of the GoI at the request of the latter.

Linking this request for a softer approach to foreign companies facing liabilities to the broader issue of U.S.-India business ties, Mr. Liveris said, “One of the top areas cited as a barrier to mutual business success was legacy legal issues within India. Several companies face such issues, and all agree that legal matters which are unpredictable and changeable are a barrier for any company to feel certainty in the investment climate.” He said this was also raised in a discussion with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh by U.S. CEOs in September in New York.

The Hindu is in possession of copies of three letters from Mr. Liveris' to Ambassador Ronen Sen.

Labels: Bhopal gas tragedy, Dow Chemicals, Union Carbide, Warren Anderson

From The Hindu

“There is a liability which needs to be resolved… [and] we have not seen that [Dow Chemicals] has been able, or responsible enough, to come around” despite the matter being in court for many years, said Rajan Bharti Mittal, President of the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI), during a press conference here.

Mr. Mittal, along with Amit Mitra General Secretary, FICCI, spoke to media during a visit aimed at promoting Track II discussions in the aftermath of the recently concluded United States-India Strategic Dialogue.

While noting that he was not familiar with the commercial terms of the acquisition by Dow Chemicals of Union Carbide Company — the entity responsible for the Bhopal gas tragedy of 1984 — he added, “I would say that any company that was going to do business… of such magnitude that can have loss of life which is very large in the sense that a village of a township could be wiped out, they need to be responsible… not only on their technology, but to see that their backup [insurance] is enough.”

However, he argued, such liability needs to be capped even if, in cases such as the British Petroleum oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, it may be difficult to allocate the liability to BP or some insurance company.

Yet Mr. Mittal hinted at the need to further resolve the liability associated with the Bhopal gas tragedy. Again drawing a parallel to the BP spill he said, “The President and the administration are saying ‘Let’s talk about it later. First fix it, then let’s talk about liability.’

Prognosis for nuclear liability bill

Mr. Mittal also touched upon the related question of the nuclear liability legislation that the Indian Parliament is considering, especially given concerns that the liability has been capped at a relatively low level. He said, “I think… there will be some adjustments and some tinkering will be done because there is a precedent.” He added that he had seen “many figures” for the amount of liability across the world and they could range from “around $30 million to almost a $1 billion liability”.

Discussing some of the key factors that could determine the outcome of the negotiations on nuclear liability Mr. Mittal said, “At the end of the day, [it will] depend on [the question]: Is private enterprise going to join hands on nuclear power generation? Because if the private [parties] are there it is very different [compared to a situation where] the Government of India is going to do it.”

He also threw his weight behind the idea of manufacturer liability in the event of gross negligence regarding the equipment supplied. Mr. Mittal said that his real concern was over what would happen when the government handed over nuclear power generation to private hands, arguing that “the manufacturers of nuclear power generation [plants] will have to take their responsibility… for $100 million, You cannot say, ‘I have a bad manufacturing situation, and the operator is to be hung for that.’” … If it is a manufacturing defect, you have to hold the manufacturers responsible as much.”

Labels: Bhopal gas tragedy, Dow Chemicals, FICCI, Rajan Bharti Mittal, Union Carbide

From The Hindu

Reflecting continuing concerns within the Indian industry over tight restrictions on technology exports from the United States to India, the head of the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) expressed hope that the major relaxation of export control restrictions hinted at by the U.S. would become a reality by the time President Obama visits India later this year.

Speaking at a press conference here, Rajan Bharti Mittal, President of the FICCI, said, “It is a little unfortunate that when we have the first Indo-United States Strategic Dialogue on the one side, and then you have, with your own strategic partner you defined, dual technology denials, or entities which are on a list or watched.”

Mr. Mittal added that while the U.S. was, on the one hand, discussing collaboration on space with India, on the other, it was preventing the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) from using U.S. space technology by keeping it on the Entities List.

Also, he said, “While you talk about the most [joint] defence exercises being done between India and the U.S. … you [however] have the Defence Research and Development Organisation… on their banned list.” Thus, there was a need to look at the Indo-U.S. strategic relationship, “in a very different way”, he said.

To a question from The Hindu on when an announcement could be expected with regard to the relaxation of export control restrictions Mr. Mittal said that while the ongoing review of these restrictions by the U.S. was “not processed, it is work in progress”. He added that after his recent visits to Washington, he was “much more hopeful and encouraged by the response that now the needle is moving in the right direction”.

Mr. Mittal then observed that while the political authorities would decide the exact date of the announcement in this matter, “If some substance has to be delivered from [the U.S.’] side when the President visits, I think this could be the one that they would want to get much closer to delivering.”

Boosting Indo-U.S. investment flows

In the wake of the U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue last month, private sector representatives from both sides have engaged in numerous talks, and industry bodies such as FICCI have also been holding discussions with the Deputy U.S. Trade Representative (USTR).

On Monday, FICCI announced that it had signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Competitiveness Council, an MoU that would spur “innovation and competitiveness in many fields, including energy security, healthcare, education, food, manufacturing in the 21st century and also business processes”, according to Mr. Mittal.

FICCI along with several partners have also come out with a report on ‘How America Benefits from Economic Engagement with India’, a volume that hopes to set at ease concerns within the U.S. that it may be losing jobs to India. According to the report, jointly compiled by FICCI, the U.S. World Affairs Institute and the University of Maryland, India is also the third-fastest growing investor in the U.S.

Among other issues, the report notes that 127 'green field' investments worth $5.5 billion were made by Indian companies in the U.S. between 2004 and 2009. These projects accounted for nearly 17,000 jobs created in the U.S., said Amit Mitra, General Secretary, FICCI. Mr. Mitra added that in addition to the new investments, Indian companies had also made 372 acquisitions worth $21 billion, and these amounted to saving companies and jobs that might have otherwise been lost in the U.S. economy.

Touching upon the need for greater investment flows from the U.S. to India, particularly in the infrastructure sector, both Mr. Mitra said that such investments were needed in airports, railways, ports and roads.

FICCI representative Ranjana Khanna also underscored that the U.S. would also benefit from such investments, for example, the purchase of every Boeing aircraft led to the creation of 10,000 jobs across 15 states in the U.S., she said.

Ms. Khanna added that India and the U.S. were also looking to apply their combined economic potential to other areas, particularly in Africa. To this end FICCI, along with the Carnegie Endowment think tank, would holding discussions on prospects for Indo-U.S. investments in Africa later this week, she added.

Labels: FICCI, Rajan Bharti Mittal, U.S. export control restrictions

From The Hindu

Between making healthcare reform a reality through greater public expenditure and keeping fiscal deficit from ballooning, the U.S. government's resources are being stretched dangerously thin

When the healthcare bill was passed by the United States Congress a few months ago, the triumphalism that accompanied it belied the extent to which the older, demonstrably flawed system would continue untouched.

Last week, a desperate plea from President Barack Obama to his Congressional opposition to not stall one of the many ongoing pieces of healthcare legislation revealed reform for what it really is — a slow, plodding process.

In a televised address, Mr. Obama called on Senate Republicans to stop blocking a vote to prevent a 21-per cent pay cut for doctors who see Medicare patients; a cut, he argued, “that will hurt America's seniors and their doctors.”

This thorny issue dates back to more than a decade ago, when Congress created a formula to govern how doctors would get paid by the Medicare programme.

The original intention was in some ways farsighted, as lawmakers then worried about the fiscal burden that the healthcare system would impose on the economy. The formula annually reduced the reimbursement for doctors who cared for the elderly via Medicare.

A bit of history is in order here. Ever since the Medicare programme was established in 1965, several methods have been used to determine how much physicians are paid for their services.

In the early days, the programme compensated physicians on the basis of their charges and permitted them to bill clients for the entire amount above their Medicare reimbursement. As costs started to steadily climb, by 1975 caps were imposed on the annual increase in fees.

Even with the caps, costs continued to rise and between 1984 and 1991 the annual change in fees had to be determined by legislation. Thus, starting in 1992 a fee schedule was introduced. But, because the mechanism led to excessive variation in payment rates, Congress had to substitute it with what was called the Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR) formula in 1998.

Under the SGR, spending was controlled, according to the Congressional Budget Office, by setting an overall target amount for such items as physicians' services, laboratory tests, imaging services, and physician-administered drugs. In other words, the amount that Medicare spent on doctor fees for each beneficiary would not rise faster than the economic growth rate.

Yet again, the inherent cost-spiralling nature of the healthcare industry resulted in calls for cuts to the amount that doctors got for their services every year. With vociferous opposition from medical professionals' associations, Congress repeatedly passed temporary legislation to postpone these cuts.

Fast forward to the present day and these repeated postponements have led to a cumulative 21 per cent cut requirement — now a serious legislative headache for President Obama.

However, in today's context, where access to healthcare for relatively vulnerable groups has become a prime casualty, these pay cuts have reached a level where they now endanger “not only … our physicians' pay, but our seniors' healthcare”, according to Mr. Obama.

Ironically, this issue had been a bipartisan rallying point since 2003, when Congress undertook legislation to halt the pay cuts. That cross-party bonhomie may be about to falter on the threshold of Congressional elections — set for November this year — as the massive 21-per cent reimbursement cut affecting Medicare-focused doctors looms over Capitol Hill this week.

If Congress were to pass such a pay cut, it would, said Mr. Obama, “undoubtedly force some doctors to stop seeing Medicare patients altogether.”

But, the fact remains that the current administration is engaged in a high-stakes, tightrope act. Between making healthcare reform a reality through greater public expenditure and keeping the enormous fiscal deficit from ballooning, this government's resources are being stretched dangerously thin.

Mr. Obama appeared to recognise this. In his address, he said: “Now, I realise that simply kicking these cuts down the road another year is not a long-term solution to this problem ... I am committed to permanently reforming this Medicare formula in a way that balances fiscal responsibility with the responsibility we have to doctors and seniors.”

The answer that the White House team appears to have come up with is to improve the overall cost coverage within Medicare by curbs elsewhere in the system. For example, the administration is taking some steps to slow the growth of Medicare costs through health insurance reform by “eliminating 50 per cent of the waste, fraud, and abuse in the system by 2012”.

This is commendable. What may be less salutary, and less in keeping with the spirit of the hard-fought reform, would be any measures that punished the elderly who are almost entirely reliant on Medicare, or the service-minded physicians who treat them. As Mr. Obama said: “That's just wrong.”

Labels: Barack Obama, healthcare Bill, Medicare programme, senior citizens

From The Hindu

The Obama administration would finally appear to be waking up to the wave of anger over its slow reaction to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. This week the President is set to turn up the heat on British Petroleum (BP) over the question of compensation. He also made his fourth trip to the worst-affected areas along the Gulf, this time in Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida.

Over the weekend, the White House joined with a growing public clamour for BP to set up an escrow account to provide compensation for the clean-up and to those affected by the slick.

On Sunday, David Axelrod, senior White House strategist, said on the NBC channel, “We want to make sure that money is escrowed for the legitimate claims that are going to be and are being made by businesses down in the gulf — people who have been damaged by this.”

Mr. Axelrod added that the administration wanted to ensure that the money would be independently administered so those who have suffered losses and would not be “slow-walked on these claims”.

According to reports quoting administration officials Mr. Obama will, in a speech from the Oval Office on Tuesday, outline a plan to legally compel BP to create an escrow account to compensate businesses and individuals for their losses.

Additionally the New York Times reported that White House officials were researching what legal authority the President had to compel BP to set aside money for claims, based on the 1990 Oil Pollution Act.

Last week in a conversation with British Prime Minister David Cameron Mr. Obama noted that “BP must do all it can to respond effectively to the situation.” The White House had also warned BP that it had until the end of the weekend to speed up efforts to contain the oil spill.

The spill has so far seen over 1.7 million gallons of oil polluting the Gulf daily. Ever since the BP-operated Deepwater Horizon rig exploded and killed 11 workers in late April, there have been increasingly vociferous calls for President Obama to stop being soft on the oil major.

While BP has accepted responsibility for the massive leak it has failed to halt the flow thus far and has also been slow to come up with funds for compensation for environmental damage and loss of incomes along the Gulf coastline.

Labels: Barack Obama, BP escrow compensation, BP oil spill, Deepwater Horizon rig

From The Hindu

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) team that travelled to the United States from New Delhi to interrogate Mumbai terror attacks suspect David Coleman Headley was provided with seven days of access to him between June 3 and June 10, authorities confirmed on Thursday evening. According to an official statement from the Indian embassy here, the team was returning to India after a “useful” visit.

Sources on both the U.S. and Indian sides confirmed that access to Mr. Headley had been provided. In particular, the U.S. Department of Justice said, “Indian law enforcement officials were provided direct access to interview David Coleman Headley.”

The DoJ statement explained that Mr. Headley and his counsel, John Theis, had agreed to the meetings with Indian officials, and Mr. Headley “answered Indian investigators’ questions over the course of seven days of interviews”.

It further noted that there had been “no restrictions on the questions posed by Indian investigators [yet] to protect the confidentiality of the investigations being conducted by both India and the United States; both countries have agreed not to disclose the contents of the interviews”.

India’s Ambassador Meera Shankar said that following discussions with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, a team from the NIA had visited the U.S. to question Mr. Headley. She added that the visit took place “over several days, beginning from June 3, 2010, and the team is now returning to India on the conclusion of a useful visit.”

Ms. Shankar further said that India attached importance to “investigating the full dimension of this heinous act of terrorist violence [and] the support and cooperation extended by the U.S. authorities is appreciated and is in keeping with the commitment of the two countries to strengthen their cooperation in meeting the challenge of terrorism."

In a parallel statement U.S. Ambassador to India, Timothy Roemer also confirmed from Washington that “a team of Government of India investigators had been granted direct access to David Headley, and had conducted a series of interviews with him related to terrorist activities in India”. He also noted that the team had arrived in the U.S. on May 31.

Access removes irritant

Speaking to The Hindu, Lisa Curtis, Senior Research Fellow at The Heritage Foundation, said, “Providing Indian investigators direct access to David Headley removes an irritant from the U.S-India bilateral relationship that had threatened to disrupt future counter-terrorism cooperation between the two countries. Now that India has been given what appears to have been unfettered access to Headley, Indian suspicions that the U.S. might be covering up something in the investigation should now be put to rest.”

Ms. Curtis touched upon the nature of the legal process in the U.S. saying that because it was compartmentalised from other arms of the U.S. government it was “entirely possible that those officials responsible for U.S. policy toward Pakistan at the State Department and Department of Defense as well as U.S. Congressional Members are not fully aware of the information coming from the Headley investigations”.

She noted that therefore as additional details from the Headley investigation surfaced, these government authorities “will begin to factor into U.S. policymaking toward Pakistan in ways that give higher priority to ensuring Islamabad cracks down on groups that have traditionally focused on attacking India but now threaten the international community more broadly”.

ISI role

Further, in comments to The Hindu, Bruce Riedel, Senior Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, said, “The central question about Headley that was missing from his otherwise extensive guilty plea was the role of the Inter-Services Intelligence [the Pakistani intelligence agency, ISI].”

Mr. Riedel noted, “That question must still be addressed and the Indian detectives certainly pressed him on this. If there is an ISI hand and Headley confirms it, then that must raise profound questions about America's connections with the ISI in general and Generals Kayani and Pasha in particular.” He added that Americans had been killed in the Mumbai attacks.

Commenting on the implications of such developments for Pakistan, Ms. Curtis said, “If reports that Headley was directed by serving Pakistan Army or ISI officials gain steam, that will put enormous pressure on Pakistan to demonstrate it is putting the terrorist group out of business.” She added that otherwise, Pakistan would find itself increasingly isolated by the international community.

Labels: Headley access issue, India-U.S ties, National Investigation Agency, NIA

From The Hindu

In what might be the most serious setback to date in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill crisis, scientists have suggested that the rate at which the spill is growing could be double the original estimation.

Marcia McNutt, United States Geological Survey Director and leader of the Flow Rate Technical Group (FRTG) monitoring the spill, said the best estimate for the average flow rate of the leak could be as high as 40,000 barrels per day.

If indeed the true flow rate is 40,000 barrels per day, it would imply that 1.7 million gallons of oil have been flowing daily out of the ruptured well of the British Petroleum-owned Deepwater Horizon offshore rig.

The rig exploded on April 22, killing 11 people, and has been spewing out vast amounts of oil into the Gulf since then. It has already caused extensive damage to marine life and eroded the incomes of those dependent on it, particularly in Louisiana where the oil slick has swamped the state’s fragile coastal marshlands.

Researchers had earlier estimated the amount of oil escaping into the Gulf at between 12,000 and 19,000 barrels — 504,000 to 798,000 gallons — per day. During the most recent attempt to halt and divert the flow, by cutting well’s riser pipe and placing a cap on the well, the experts had said that the rate flow had increased by 4 to 5 per cent.

The latest estimates were, according to Dr. McNutt, based on “additional video that BP was directed to provide” and calculated the lower and upper bound range estimates for a period of time before the Riser Insertion Tube Tool was inserted and before the riser was cut. The scientist team further cautioned that the estimates depended on “limited data available and the small amount of time to process that data”.

Meanwhile BP reported on the containment process currently underway, which has entailed the use of a lower marine riser package (LMRP) containment cap to collect oil and gas flowing from the MC252 well and transport them to the Discoverer Enterprise drillship on the surface.

In an update the company said, “In the first 12 hours of June 9 (midnight to noon), approximately 7,920 barrels of oil were collected and 15.7 million cubic feet of natural gas were flared. On June 8, a total of approximately 15,000 barrels of oil were collected and 29.4 million cubic feet of natural gas were flared.”

BP continues to face pressure from the Obama administration to not only halt and mop up the leak but also compensate fishermen and others along the Gulf coastline for loss of income. On Thursday it announced a second round of block grants of $25 million each to the states of Florida, Alabama and Mississippi.

Labels: BP oil spill, environmental issues, Gulf of Mexico, oil spill

From The Hindu

In a media blitz that closely followed the announcement of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) sanctions against Iran for its alleged nuclear programme, President Barack Obama and his administration sought to dispel any notion that they were using a “double standard” in not giving the diplomatic channels for resolving the dispute a fair chance.

In a statement Mr. Obama said, “There is no double standard at play here. We have made it clear, time and again, that we respect Iran’s right, like all countries, to access peaceful nuclear energy. That is a right embedded in the Non Proliferation Treaty.”

He also praised the UNSC for imposing “the toughest sanctions ever faced by the Iranian government”, noting that they sent an “unmistakable message about the international community’s commitment to stopping the spread of nuclear weapons”.

Commenting that these were also “the most comprehensive sanctions that the Iranian government has faced,” Mr. Obama noted that they would impose restrictions not only on Iran’s nuclear activities and its ballistic missile program but also on its conventional military, on Iranian banks and financial transactions, individuals, entities, and institutions associated with the Revolutionary Guard.

Arguing that sanctions had not been inevitable, Mr. Obama emphasised his government’s two-track approach: “We made clear from the beginning of my administration that the U.S. was prepared to pursue diplomatic solutions to address the concerns over Iranian nuclear programmes… Together with the United Kingdom, with Russia, China, and Germany… we offered the Iranian government the prospect of a better future for its people, if and only if it lives up to its international obligations.”

Dual-track strategy

In highlighting the dual-track strategy in negotiations, Mr. Obama sought to pre-empt the charge that the sanctions, given their timing, potentially undermined the recent move by Iran to extend its cooperation through the fuel-swap deal brokered by Turkey and Brazil. Last month, Iran announced that it would be willing to move low-enriched uranium off its soil in return for 20 per cent enriched uranium that could be used in the Tehran Research Reactor for medical isotopes.

Although the White House initially greeted the fuel-swap deal as a “positive step”, it subsequently criticised the proposal for not addressing the question of uranium enrichment that Iran said it would continue. Further, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs had noted at the time, Iran had not agreed, as it did in October, to hold detailed discussions with the P-5+1 group of nuclear powers nor agreed to provide unfettered access to its nuclear facilities in areas such as Qom.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton echoed the same emphasis on the dual-track approach, arguing that the adoption of the UNSC Resolution 1929 on Iran went “well beyond the pre-existing sanctions on Iran. That said, we have worked hard to minimise their impact on the Iranian people”. She further noted that the adoption of Resolution 1929 kept the door open for continued engagement between the P5+1 and Iran and the U.S. “is committed to a diplomatic solution to the challenge posed by Iran's nuclear program”.

Susan Rice, U.S. representative to the UN, commented on why the P5+1 group had chosen to disregard any positive implications of the fuel-swap deal. She said, “Turkey and Brazil have worked hard to make progress on the Tehran Research Reactor proposal — efforts that reflect their leaders’ good intentions to address the Iranian people’s humanitarian needs while building more international confidence about the nature of Iran’s nuclear program.” Neither Turkey nor Brazil voted in favour of imposing the sanctions on Iran.

However, she noted, “The Tehran Research Reactor proposal — then and now — does not respond to the fundamental, well-founded, and unanswered concerns about Iran’s nuclear program. This resolution does,” she said, adding that the U.S. would continue to discuss the Iranian-revised proposal and their concerns about it, “as appropriate”.

Not directed at Iranian people

Another key thrust of the messages that the administration has put out to the media since the announcement of sanctions has been the emphasis that the sanctions would not negatively impact the people of Iran but would only target specific parts of the Iranian state that were involved in supporting the country’s alleged nuclear programme in one way or another. For example, President Obama and Ms. Rice said, “These sanctions are not directed at the Iranian people.”

However, responding to questions from media, Under Secretary for Political Affairs William Burns cast such assertions in doubt as he said, “I’ll be honest with you, there is no perfect assurance that you can give with regard to a sanctions regime or a new sanctions resolution and its impact on a country and a society.” He went on to state, “We have tried… to minimise the impact on the Iranian people and maximise the impact on that calculation of the Iranian leadership. Is that a perfect solution? No, I would not pretend that.”

Additionally, Mr. Burns defended the sanctions’ targeting of the Iranian Central Bank, saying, “Focus, not only on the Central Bank but on the Iranian banking system and ways in which the international financial system can be manipulated, is an important new development and a significant step forward in this resolution.”

Labels: Iran nuclear programme, Iran sanctions, U.S.-Iran relations, UNSC

From The Hindu

Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, struck a note of cautious and qualified optimism regarding the possibility of a sustained recovery in the United States' economy.

On the down-side risks Mr. Bernanke warned that market concerns have mounted over the ability of Greece and other European countries to manage their 'sizable' budget deficits and 'high levels of public debt'; and also the U.S.' own fiscal position had deteriorated 'appreciably'.

Yet, he noted, in a speech before the Budget Committee of the House of Representatives, "The recovery in economic activity that began in the second half of last year has continued at a moderate pace so far this year." He also added that on the inflation front, recent data continued to show a subdued rate of increase in consumer prices.

He added that the labour market, which was hard hit by the recession, had begun to show some 'modest improvement recently', in terms of employment — 431,000 more people were hired in May — hours of work, and labour income.

Markets cheered Mr. Bernanke's comments, rising during trading hours on Wednesday.

Indicating a positive prognosis for economic growth in the U.S., Mr. Bernanke said, "The latest economic projections of Federal Reserve Governors and Reserve Bank presidents… anticipate that real gross domestic product will grow in the neighbourhood of 3.5 per cent over the course of 2010 as a whole and at a somewhat faster pace next year."

Regarding the sources of growth in aggregate demand Mr. Bernanke cautioned that consumer spending was likely to increase at a moderate pace going forward, although it would be supported by a "gradual pickup in employment and income, greater consumer confidence, and some improvement in credit conditions".

Underscoring the role of the business sector in driving growth he said, that looking forward, investment in new equipment and software was expected to be supported by healthy corporate balance sheets, relatively low costs of financing of new projects, increased confidence in the durability of the recovery, and the need of many businesses to replace aging equipment and expand capacity 'as sales prospects brighten'.

Emphasising the risks that still remained in the system, primarily emerging from the turmoil in European markets, Mr. Bernanke noted that U.S. financial markets "have been roiled in recent weeks by these developments, which have triggered a reduction in demand for risky assets". He added that broad equity market indexes had declined, and implied volatility has risen 'considerably'.

However, he said that the actions taken by European leaders represented a firm commitment to resolve the prevailing stresses and restore market confidence and stability. "If markets continue to stabilize, then the effects of the crisis on economic growth in the United States seem likely to be modest," Mr. Bernanke added.

Labels: Ben Bernanke, Federal Reserve, global economy, U.S. financial markets

From The Hindu

India is among the least peaceful of major countries in the world and is getting even less peaceful year on year.

This was the major finding of the Global Peace Index (GPI) Report an annual publication by the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP), a global think tank focused on researching the relationship between economics, business and peace.

According to the 2010 report, which considered a range of peace-related variables among 149 countries, India’s rank was 128, six ranks lower than its 2009 position.

Some of India’s key neighbours in South Asia ranked in the bottom 20 per cent along with India — Sri Lanka was ranked 133rd, Pakistan 145th, Afghanistan 147th. However, Nepal did much better, ranked in 82nd place and Bangladesh in 87th. Bhutan, ranked at 36th, narrowly missed being in the top 20 per cent of nations.

Commenting on the results, the IEP said, “South Asia saw the greatest decrease in peacefulness, as a result of increased involvement in conflicts, a rise in deaths from internal conflict and human rights abuses. It added, “The main countries experiencing decreases in peacefulness were India, Sri Lanka and Pakistan.”

The report’s authors also observed that, overall, the world became “slightly less peaceful in the past year”, adding that in some nations, an intensification of conflicts and growing instability appears to be linked to the global economic downturn in late 2008 and early 2009.

Hinting at the possibility that rapid development might have brought more conflict in its wake the IEP also noted, “Three BRIC countries — Russia (143), India (128) and China (80) — saw substantial declines in peacefulness.” However Brazil’s score remained essentially stable (83) compared to the 2009 Index.

While most developed countries including those of Western Europe and Canada, ranked in the top 20 per cent of peaceful nations, the United States was an anomaly in this regard, ranking at 85th, outranked by countries such as Rwanda, Indonesia, the United Arab Emirates and Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Ranked low in Asia-Pacific region

India also ranked 19th out of 25 countries in the Asia-Pacific region. The leader in the region, New Zealand, was also the most peaceful nation globally. Close on its heels were Iceland and Japan. Iraq was estimated to be the least peaceful among all countries, accompanied at the bottom of the table by Somalia, Afghanistan and Sudan.

The identification and weighting of indicators in the GPI, which is compiled by the Economist Intelligence Unit, was undertaken by an international panel of experts in the study of peace.

“How peaceful a country is depends on the internal structures, institutions, and attitudes that sustain and promote peace as well as on external factors,” said Clyde McConaghy, board director of the IEP.

He added, “This year’s top five countries, and more peaceful countries in general, have certain things in common: well functioning governments, stable business environments, respect for human rights, low levels of corruption, high rates of participation in education, and freedom of information.”

Labels: civil unrest, global peace index, GPI, human rights abuse, terrorism

From The Hindu

Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia Robert Blake underscored shared interests and dimensions of cooperation between the United States and India in Pakistan and Afghanistan, including action against terror networks in the former and development projects in the latter.

Addressing media at the Foreign Press Center here Mr. Blake said that counter-terrorism was the U.S.’ “highest priority” and the one area in which the U.S. had “made the greatest progress in terms of our cooperation with India — in terms of not only law enforcement cooperation but also intelligence cooperation”. He added that the U.S. would never be soft on terrorism.

Terror syndicates threat to India, Pak

Mr. Blake further noted, “We take extremely seriously the threats against both of our countries because we believe increasingly that there is a syndicate that is operating in countries like Pakistan that threatens both of our countries.” This syndicate of terror networks also threatens Pakistan itself, he added.

Mr. Blake emphasised that the U.S. had been at “the forefront of countries urging Pakistan to not only continue the progress it has been making in Swat and South Waziristan, but also to address the problem in the Punjab, namely the Punjab-based groups such as the Lashkar-e-Taiba, that are operating against India, that have also targeted the U.S., in the Mumbai bombings and elsewhere.”

Speaking at a televised discussion with Teresita Schaffer of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Mr. Blake further noted that the U.S. was aware of India’s concern regarding the possibility of U.S. aid to Pakistan being diverted to use against India. He said, “I think [India understands] that we are trying to build up Pakistan’s counter-insurgency capabilities and we are seeking end use assurances to insure that… the weapons that are provided will not be used against India.”

During the discussion with Ms. Shaffer, Mr. Blake also announced that the U.S. and India would engage in joint projects in Afghanistan. On India’s work in Afghanistan he said, “We have welcomed the very important role India has played so far. It is really up to India to decide where it wants to take its cooperation but we commend the steps it has taken so far and we had a discussion on ways that we might be able to cooperate together.” He added that such joint projects may be a promising new area of cooperation between the two countries.

Mr. Blake’s comments came shortly after External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna firmly underscored India’s intention to continue its work in Afghanistan despite its mission there coming under attack from insurgents. India’s approach to Afghanistan has been the subject of recent discussion in policy circles, with some analysts such as Raja Karthikeya of the non-partisan India Research Group think tank arguing that “India enjoys tremendous soft power in Afghanistan but the challenge lies in converting that soft power into influence”.

Labels: Lashkar-e-Taiba, Pak terror networks, Robert Blake

From The Hindu

After many months of pressing its case with the Obama administration, the Government of India may finally hope to get some good news regarding export control restrictions imposed by the United States on sensitive, dual-use items of high-tech trade and on legitimate government institutions such as the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO).

Addressing media here closely on the heels of the United States-India Strategic Dialogue, Robert Blake, Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia, said, “I expect that there will be some positive announcements to be made before the President’s visit — hopefully well before [that].”

His comments also follow statements made by Nirupama Rao, India’s Foreign Secretary, at the close of the Strategic Dialogue, that an important element with regard to the ongoing U.S.-India partnerships in defence modernisation would be “progress on the easing of U.S. export control restrictions as they apply to India”. Ms. Rao had noted that this would not only be a logical outcome of the civil nuclear initiative, but would also be a catalyst for promoting trading and cooperation in high-technology, defence and the space sectors.

Two processes

By way of explaining the U.S. approach to this issue, Mr. Blake said there were two processes involved, firstly a wider review, on the part of the administration, of the overall export control regime; and secondly, an “India-specific review that also is under way… [which] will probably split off from the wider review”.

He also admitted that the U.S. export control regime was “in many cases outdated”, and in the case of India, the U.S. was taking “a particularly close look at the Entities List”. Mr. Blake noted that many entities had already come off the Entities List — a list of organisations with which U.S. companies cannot trade, or can only trade under restrictions — over the last few years, and “now there is a focus on entities like ISRO and the Defence Research and Development Organisation”.

India-specific export controls

Arguing that significant progress had been made with India-specific export controls, Mr. Blake said, “We have made a great deal of progress over the last six years or so in reducing the export controls that apply to India. Now less than one half of one per cent of all exports requires any sort of license at all — and most of those are presumed to be approved.”

He added that there was a reciprocal process under way which also sought to obtain “the necessary assurances from the Indians about the strength of their own export control regime that would enable us to relax our restrictions”. Mr. Blake added that he anticipated there was going to be “further good progress” on this matter and the U.S. and Indian sides had a “good exchange during the Strategic Dialogue”.

Touching upon the potential for cooperation in high-technology trade, he also noted, “We think there are enormous opportunities for American companies to do more and work more with their colleagues in the space area and also in the defence area. These are steps that would serve both of our countries.”

Labels: high tech trade, ISRO, Nirupama Rao, Robert Blake, U.S. export restrictions, U.S. India Strategic Dialogue

From The Hindu

The United States government virtually ruled out any further review of the investigation into the Bhopal industrial disaster of 1984, and in particular, refused to discuss the extradition of American citizen Warren Anderson, CEO of Union Carbide behind the leak of poisonous gasses that led to the deaths of many thousands of people.

Speaking to media here shortly after an Indian court announced the conviction of the seven accused in the case, Robert Blake, Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia, said, “Let me just say that we hope this verdict today helps to bring some closure to the victims and their families. But I do not expect this verdict to reopen any new inquiries or anything like that.”

Mr. Blake underscored the United States’ unwillingness to take the matter any further at its end, saying, “On the contrary, we hope that this is going to help to bring closure.” However, he acknowledged, “With respect to Bhopal, obviously that was one of the greatest industrial tragedies and industrial accidents in human history.” He also said the announcement made by the Indian courts was “an internal matter to India”.

In response to a question on whether the U.S. would be more receptive to any requests for extradition of Mr. Anderson or other American officials connected with the Bhopal disaster Mr. Blake said, “On the question of extradition — as a matter of policy we never discuss extradition so I cannot comment on that.”

Mr. Blake also did not comment on a question regarding whether the U.S. would be willing to exert any pressure on Dow Chemicals for compensation to victims, as the administration is currently doing in the case of British Petroleum and the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

At the State Department, spokesman P.J. Crowley struck a relatively positive note, saying, “Our economies are increasingly closely connected. So I certainly would hope that this particular case does not inhibit the continuing expansion of economic, cultural, and political ties between our two countries.” He added, “We fully expect that this will not be the case.”

Labels: Bhopal gas tragedy, Dow Chemicals, Indo-U.S. ties, Keshub Mahindra, Union Carbide, Warren Anderson

From The Hindu

Two men were arrested at John F. Kennedy international airport in New York over the weekend and charged with “conspiring to kill, maim, and kidnap persons outside the United States”, according to an announcement by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

The arrests came just before the men were about to board separate flights to Egypt on their way to Somalia to join Al Shabaab, a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization, and “wage violent jihad”.

The men were identified as U.S. citizens Mohamed Mahmood Alessa (20) and Carlos Eduardo Almonte (24), both from New Jersey. The FBI said their team had been “waiting for the defendants at the airport holding arrest warrants”. The two men were expected to appear before a Magistrate Judge in a Newark federal court on June 7.

According to a Criminal Complaint note unsealed over the weekend, the FBI received a tip concerning the men’s activities in October 2006. Following an investigation, undercover officers reportedly recorded numerous meetings and conversations with them, during which the men discussed and prepared to carry out their plan.

Preparing for Jihad

The FBI remarked that the preparations made by Alessa and Almonte included saving thousands of dollars, physically conditioning themselves, engaging in paintball and other tactical training, acquiring military gear and apparel for use overseas, and purchasing airline tickets to Egypt with the intent to then travel to Somalia. The Bureau added that the defendants also discussed their “obligation to wage violent jihad and at times expressed a willingness to commit acts of violence in the U.S.”.

Quoting an excerpt of the conversation between the suspects, the FBI said the two men had remarked, "They only fear you when you have a gun and when you start killing them, and when you take their head, and you go like this, and you behead it on camera... We’ll start doing killing here, if I can’t do it over there."

The FBI also reported that on April 25 Almonte stated there would soon be American troops in Somalia, “which was good because it would not be as gratifying to kill only Africans”. The Bureau added that the defendants watched and played for the undercover officer numerous video and audio recordings that promoted violent jihad, including lectures by Yemen-based cleric Anwar al-Awlaki and videos featuring attacks by Al Shabaab and other terrorist groups.

Reports, in addition said Alessa referred in one conversation to Major Nidal Hasan, the army psychiatrist charged with shooting 13 people dead at the Fort Hood base in Texas last year. He apparently claimed, “He’s not better than me - I'll do twice what he did.”

Commenting on the case U.S. Attorney Paul J. Fishman said, “This case demonstrates the seriousness with which our Office and our law enforcement partners regard those who seek to join the ranks of violent extremists. When Alessa and Almonte schemed to engage in violent jihad, we were listening. When they attempted to leave the country, we were waiting. We will continue to be vigilant and to protect against terrorism no matter where its adherents intend to do harm.” If convicted of the charge, the defendants would face a maximum potential penalty of life in prison.

Labels: Al Shabaab, Carlos Eduardo Almonte, Foreign Terrorist Organization, JFK airport arrest, Mohamed Mahmood Alessa

From The Hindu

Even as British Petroleum (BP) reported tentative signs of success in its latest attempt to slow the powerful gush of oil from the Deepwater Horizon rig in the Gulf of Mexico, Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen, leading the federal government's response to the spill, said this was a “siege that is going to go on for a long time”.

He added that the mop-up operations were spread from south-central Louisiana to Port Saint Joe, Florida and they were “not going to end soon”. He went on to describe the situation in the Gulf as a “very, very, very tough problem”.

The Deepwater Horizon rig operated by BP, sank on April 22 following an explosion that killed 11 workers.

Speaking to CBS news channel, Admiral Allen said the effort would be a long-term campaign that would last for several more months. “This will only end when we intercept the well bore, pump mud down it to overcome the pressure of the oil coming up from the reservoir and put a cement plug in,” he said.

Further Admiral Allen warned that even after such a procedure, there would be oil on the water and along the coastline for “months to come”. This would be well into the fall, he noted. In earlier statements he had also indicated that the digging of relief wells, to take the pressure off the damaged rig, could take until August.

Admiral Allen’s comments came as BP reported it had started drawing the oil to a ship on the surface by deploying a containment cap on the lower marine riser package. The company said the cap, installed on June 3, had collected a total of 10,500 barrels of oil by June 5 and transported them to the Discoverer Enterprise drillship. However official estimates place the leak somewhere between 12,000 and 25,000 barrels of oil a day.

In a statement BP added that 22 million standard cubic feet of natural gas had been flared.

Costs and liabilities

BP also announced that the cost of the response to date amounted to approximately $1.25 billion, including the cost of the spill response, containment, relief well drilling, grants to the Gulf states, claims paid, and federal costs. This did not include its costs for a Louisiana barrier construction project, which was estimated to be $ 360 million. "It is too early to quantify other potential costs and liabilities associated with the incident," BP said.

Visiting fishermen and others in local communities in Louisiana recently, President Obama had reiterated his administration’s commitment to get BP to compensate them for their loss of income and damage to their livelihoods.

Yet BP’s share price actually rose 2.7 per cent on Monday morning, reportedly in response to statements by its Chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg late last week that the company would aim "always to strike the right balance for shareholders between current returns through the dividend, sustained investment for long term growth and maintaining a prudent gearing level".

He said, "We will do all we can to protect and grow the value of the company in which you have invested," and added, "We fully understand the importance of our dividend to our shareholders."

Labels: Admiral Thad Allen, British Petroleum, Deepwater Horizon spill, Gulf Coast oil spill

From The Hindu

U.S. President Barack Obama this weekend reiterated his determination to get BP to pay for the damage caused by the oil spill from their Deepwater Horizon offshore rig, including a preliminary bill of $69 million for the costs of the response thus far. After speaking at Grand Isle, Louisiana, to local residents and small business owners about the hardships that they were facing, he underscored his commitment to helping them recover and rebuild.

Mr. Obama also sought to deflect criticism that his administration had failed to respond rapidly enough to the crisis, arguing “… from the beginning, we have mobilised on every front to contain and clean up this spill. I have authorised the deployment of 17,500 National Guard troops to aid in the response. More than 20,000 people are currently working around the clock to protect waters and coastlines.”

He added that his government had also convened hundreds of top scientists and engineers from around the world, that more than 1,900 vessels were in the Gulf assisting in the clean up, and more than 4.3 million feet of boom had been deployed with another 2.9 million feet of boom available.

His comments came even as BP announced that oil and gas was being received on board the Discoverer Enterprise drill ship at surface level, following the successful placement of a containment cap on top of the rig's failed blow-out preventer (BOP). BP also issued caveats regarding the success of this operation. The company said, “It is expected to take one or more days for flow rates of oil and gas to stabilise and it is not possible at this stage to estimate how much oil and gas will be captured by this containment system.”

It added that a complex operation such as this one entailed the use of remotely operated vehicles at 5,000 feet under water and the containment cap had never before been deployed at this depth. Thus the “containment system's efficiency, continued operation, and ability to contain the oil and gas cannot be assured,” BP warned.

Top priority

However, in another statement to shareholders issued on Friday, BP's Chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg and Chief Executive Tony Hayward said that the company's response to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill was their “top priority,” along with rebuilding trust and confidence in BP and “ensuring that such an accident never happens again.” A press release said that both Mr. Svanberg and Mr. Hayward expressed their deep regret and sorrow for the tragedy.

The Obama administration has nevertheless sought to keep up the pressure on the oil major, with the President noting over the weekend that he had “… ordered BP to pay economic injury claims, and we will make sure they pay every single dime owed to the people along the Gulf Coast.” He said that in addition, after an emergency safety review, his administration would be putting in place “aggressive new operating standards for offshore drilling.”

In that context he emphasised the key role of the bipartisan commission that he had appointed last month to look into the causes of this spill. Mr. Obama said, “If laws are inadequate – laws will be changed. If oversight was lacking – it will be strengthened. And if laws were broken – those responsible will be brought to justice.”

Labels: environmental disaster, Gulf of Mexico, oil spill

From The Hindu

Is it because of our colonial history with Britain or is it something at the level of genetic programming? Whatever the explanation, there is no denying that Indians have a penchant for the English language, a trans-generational, linguistic love affair that gets transmitted even to far-flung diaspora.

This week, the Scripps National Spelling Bee in the United States was — for the third consecutive year and for the eighth time in the last 11 years — won by an Indian-American, Anamika Veeramani of North Royalton, Ohio.

Anamika won after nine nerve-wracking rounds culminating in her correctly spelling “stromuhr”, a device used to measure blood flow velocity. She fought her way through earlier rounds successfully spelling words like “foggara”, “osteomyelitis”, “mirin”, “nahcolite”, “epiphysis”, and, in the penultimate round, “juvia”, a term for a Brazilian nut.

Anamika, an eighth grade student at Incarnate Word Academy in Parma Heights, Ohio, was competing in her second consecutive Spelling Bee, after tying at fifth place last year. This year’s competition began on Wednesday with 273 competitors who qualified through locally sponsored bees in their home communities.

Rich Boehne, President and CEO of sponsor E.W. Scripps Company, said, “Congratulations to Anamika, who triumphed over some of the most challenging words in the English language to emerge as the 2010 national champion.”

And Anamika was not the only Indian-American in the limelight this year: in joint second place was Shantanu Srivatsa of West Fargo, North Dakota, who fought valiantly before misspelling “ochidore” — a shore crab — as “ocodor”.

Their dominant performance follows a string of Spelling Bee victories by children of Indian-American origin, including Nupur Lala in 1999, George Abraham Thampy in 2000, Pratyush Buddiga in 2002, Sai Gunturi in 2003, Anurag Kashyap in 2005, Sameer Mishra in 2008 and Kavya Shivashankar in 2009. Kavya’s 8-year old sister Vanya also showed tremendous promise in this year’s competition, and made it as far as the pre-semifinal round.

For her win Anamika will receive a cash prize of $30,000, according to a press statement by the competition sponsors; she will also get an engraved cup, a $5,000 scholarship from Sigma Phi Epsilon Educational Foundation, a $2,500 U.S. Savings Bond and a reference library from Merriam-Webster, and $2,700 in reference words, and the Britannica Test Prep Precocious Package from Encyclopædia Britannica.

Reports quoted Anamika as saying, “It was too surreal… It was an amazing experience. I usually have a poker face, so that's what that was.”

Reflecting on the mystery of the enduring Indian passion for all things English Anamika's father, Alagaiya Veeramani, said to the Associated Press, “This has been her dream for a very, very long time. It's been a family dream, too,” adding, “I think it has to do with an emphasis on education.”

And that might well be the answer — that Indians are simply a people who believe that hard work, a rigorous education and familial support are the keys to our dreams. It would certainly appear that Anamika would agree — she hopes to attend Harvard University and become a cardiovascular surgeon.

Labels: American Spelling Bee contest, Anamika Veeramani

From The Hindu

Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao said the three key issues discussed during the strategic dialogue were reform of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) that recognised India's central role in global politics, counter-terrorism cooperation and the need for a peaceful and stable Afghanistan, and defence modernisation, including relaxation of export controls for sensitive high-tech items of trade.

Speaking at a seminar hosted by the Brookings Institution on ‘India and the United States: A Strategic Partnership,' Ms. Rao said the three driving factors behind what President Obama had described as an “unprecedented partnership” were shared values, growing economic and people-to-people contacts, and convergence on major global issues such as terrorism, and energy and food security.

On possible future discussions regarding reform within the United Nations, Ms. Rao said: “The question of reform of the UNSC and the expansion of its membership is an important item on the agenda of our dialogue as we seek U.S. support for India's case for permanent membership of the Security Council.”

Describing India's vision of enhanced South Asian cooperation, Ms. Rao noted: “That vision is, however, being challenged by violent extremism and terrorism which originates in our region and finds sustenance and sanctuary there.” She added that the recent failed terrorist attempt in Times Square, New York, had again revealed the global reach of terrorist organisations, whether Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammad, Al-Qaeda or the Taliban.

Touching upon the Afghanistan link to terror, Ms. Rao said India was “supportive of the U.S. efforts to fight terrorism in Afghanistan” and help with restoring stability there. She noted that Indian assistance amounting to over $1.3 billion had helped develop vital civil infrastructure, build human resources and capacities in the areas of health, education, agriculture and rural development among others.

Ms. Rao reiterated the comments of External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna during the dialogue, saying that India stood by its development partnership with Afghanistan “despite repeated terrorist attacks on the Indian mission and our brave men and women who are working there to help transform the lives of ordinary Afghan citizens.”

In her speech, Ms. Rao also emphasised that an important element with regard to ongoing U.S.-India partnerships in defence modernisation would be “progress on the easing of U.S. export control restrictions as they apply to India.”

She argued that this would not only be a logical outcome of the civil nuclear initiative, but would also be a catalyst for promoting trading and cooperation in high-technology, defence and the space sectors. “It would also be consonant with the nature of the strategic partnership that exists between us and the growing mutual trust and confidence that is an important driver in our relations today,” she added.

Labels: Afghan terror link, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Nirupama Rao, S.M. Krishna, Strategic Dialogue

From The Hindu

At the end of the first round of strategic dialogue between India and the United States here, the two countries significantly expanded the breadth of their collaboration across a range of areas. These include counter-terrorism, disarmament and non-proliferation, United Nations Security Council reform, trade and investment, science and technology, climate change mitigation, energy and food security, education, agriculture, healthcare and empowerment of women.

In a rare symbolic gesture designed to underscore the importance of the U.S.' relationship with India, President Barack Obama made a brief visit to the State Department during a reception for select officials and the media. He announced that his much anticipated visit to India would come in “early November.”

The dialogue, led by External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, saw both sides pledging to “continue to consult each other closely on regional and global developments and remain sensitive to each other's interests,” given their role as strategic partners.

Reiterating Under Secretary William Burns' statements at a recent event, Ms. Clinton said after the conclusion of the discussions that the U.S. considered India an important part of any future reform plans for the Security Council, even if there was no consensus yet in the multilateral context.

Both Indian officials and their U.S. counterparts came out with strong comments on the need to tackle terror attacks. In his opening remarks before the plenary session, Mr. Krishna said: “Though the epicentre of this threat lies in India's neighbourhood, it reaches far and wide all across the world as we have seen time and again, and most recently a few weeks back in the Times Square.”

He also noted that given that the groups preaching “the ideology of hatred and violence are increasingly coalescing, sharing resources and operating as one,” it was incumbent upon both countries to focus their efforts “laser-like” on every one of them.

Headley issue

In the course of the strategic dialogue, Mr. Krishna said India was assured of access to David Headley. India's Ambassador to the U.S. Meera Shankar added that the Indian delegation was in touch with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder regarding the “entire process” after which the assurances were made.

President Obama also emphasised the transnational nature of terror threats. He said tackling these threats would require “making progress for the Afghan people and preventing terrorism, whether it's in Manhattan or in Mumbai.” It would include securing vulnerable nuclear materials, a goal that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had furthered by committing India to building a new centre of excellence for nuclear energy and security.

Mr. Obama again touched upon the high priority his administration accorded to the U.S.-India relationship. Pointing to Dr. Singh's visit last November, he said: “It was a state visit that demonstrated that our relations with India are at the highest of priorities for my administration, and for me personally as President of the United States.” He believed that India was a “leader in Asia and around the world. It's a rising power and a responsible global power.”

Mr. Obama said his administration's new National Security Strategy, released last week, made the importance of India “absolutely clear.” “A fundamental pillar of America's comprehensive engagement with the world involves deepening our cooperation with the 21st century centres of influence — and that includes India,” he said.

Labels: Barack Obama, counter-terrorism, disarmament, Hillary Clinton, non-proliferation, S.M. Krishna, Strategic Dialogue