By Shamsher M. Chowdhury, BB*

It has become usual pattern for any political interaction between Bangladesh and India at the highest political level to be preceded, and followed, by an endless stream of analysis and curiosity on both sides of the border, but more so in Bangladesh. The just concluded official visit of Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to India from 7 to 10 April has been no exception, nor was it expected to be.

That the bilateral ties between the two South Asian neighbours have been on an upward curve is beyond denial. This is manifest in the fact that between 2010 and now there has been four exchanges of visits at the level of heads of government. Each has been laced with cordiality, warmth and fond utterances for each other. Lengthy joint statements cataloguing what has been achieved and a clear declaration of intent on the way forward have followed each visit. It is not surprising, therefore, that this relationship, rooted as it is in history and conditioned by geography, finds its rightful place at the top of the foreign policy agenda in Bangladesh and a priority one in India.

This time the visit kicked off with a bang when Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in a clear break from standard protocol practices, chose to personally receive his Bangladesh counterpart at the airport. The gesture helped create the right chemistry between the two leaders and set the tone for what would follow over the next four days, and even beyond. The optics that followed were good and incidents of culinary meddling added to the flavour and gave a helpful personal touch.

The two major issues that drew most attention in the build-up to the visit were a possible defence related deal and whether there would be any forward movement on the thorny question of sharing of the waters of common rivers with special focus on Teesta. While the first was signed, sealed and delivered, the second was again marked off as work in progress, albeit progress at a glacial pace. The significant difference this time was a public pronouncement by Prime Minister Modi that a solution to this matter would be found during the tenures of the respective governments in Dhaka and Delhi. This commitment was, however, somewhat watered down in the Joint Statement issued following the official talks.

The Teesta issue featured more prominently in the public discourse, keeping in mind that an interim deal was on the verge of being penned during then Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh’s visit to Dhaka in 2011 before West Bengal Chief Minister Ms. Mamata Banerjee scuttled it by refusing to go along. Dr. Singh was embarrassed enough to publicly apologize to the people of Bangladesh for this unforeseen and unfortunate turn of events.

Hoping for something more positive this time, Indian President Pranab Mukherjee, a genuine friend of Bangladesh, and Prime Minister Modi invited Chief Minister Banerjee to Delhi to time with the presence of the Bangladesh Prime Minister. The outcome was not, however, much different: Ms. Banerjee played hardball once again and refused to shift from her earlier obstinacy. Not just that, after a lengthy meeting with Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina at Rashtrapathi Bhavan, where the Bangladeshi leader was lodged, Ms. Banerjee sprung a surprise by offering an alternative solution, suggesting that water from four other rivers in West Bengal be diverted to Bangladesh on the grounds that there was not enough water in Teesta to share. The redeeming feature here is that officials in India, and sections of the media, were quick to dismiss this proposal because of its sheer absurdity. Subsequently, Bangladesh officials also rejected it, stating that Dhaka would count on the pledge made at the highest level from India.

While the West Bengal Chief Minister’s concerns for her constituents is understood, the sustained forward movement of Bangladesh-India relations in all fields should not be held hostage to those concerns. Delhi sincerely understands that, and Dhaka believes it. During his official visit to Dhaka in 2015, Prime Minister Modi commented that “rivers should nurture the India-Bangladesh relationship and not become the source of discord”. He went a step further this time by publicly committing his government to a deal sooner rather than later. Initial steps on this are already underway in India. This is heartening and needs nurturing. However, not even a reference to the Joint River Commission, JRC, which was launched as early as 1972 specifically for this purpose, was a surprise as was the absence of a firmer pledge to cut down to zero the killing of Bangladeshis at the border.

A significant event during this visit was the belated formal recognition from Bangladesh of the supreme sacrifices made by members of the Indian Armed Forces during its Liberation War in 1971. At the event, held at the Manekshaw Centre in Delhi, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, in the presence of her Indian counterpart, honoured seven of the Indian heroes who had laid down their lives for Bangladesh’s independence. The occasion was as much poignantly sombre as it was emotionally charged. Even here, Teesta found mention. The symbolism of the reference to Teesta as one of Bangladesh’s lifelines by Master of Ceremony retired Colonel Sajjad Zahir, a decorated Bangladeshi freedom fighter, was not lost on the audience, both those on the stage and those off it.

On balance, the outcome of this visit weighed more on the side of optimism than otherwise. More than 20 deals of varying shapes and covering a wide range of issues were signed following the official talks. India also offered to sell an additional 6o megawatt of electricity to Bangladesh and connectivity was boosted with new rail and road connections. A credit line of USD 4.5 billion from India was signed to cover costs related to multifarious projects, boosting Indian investments in Bangladesh, and cooperation on peaceful nuclear technology and in outer space. Furthering the ongoing cooperation on combatting trans-boundary terrorism and violent extremism was also agreed. The much talked about defence deal materialised with the signing of two major documents, one a framework Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) and the other a USD 500 million line of credit for the Bangladesh military. In form and content, the framework MoU is not much different from the ones Bangladesh has with others. In any case, defence cooperation between the two militaries has been on a constant rise in recent times. The deal provided a framework for institutionalising these links.

The author is a decorated freedom fighter and a former Foreign Secretary of Bangladesh.

Views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IDSA or of the Government of India. Originally published by Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (www.idsa.in) at http://idsa.in/idsacomments/bangladesh-prime-minister-delhi-visit_smchowdhury_120417

The US Navy is banning vaping aboard ships, submarines, aircraft, boats, craft and heavy equipment.

The Navy announced on Friday that it is suspending the use, possession, storage and charging of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) aboard navy craft following continued reports of explosions of ENDS due to the overheating of lithium-ion batteries.

The prohibition applies to Sailors, Marines, Military Sealift Command civilians and any personnel working on or visiting those units.

The Navy said it implemented this policy to protect the safety and welfare of sailors and to protect the ships, submarines, aircraft and equipment. Multiple sailors have suffered serious injuries from these devices, to include first- and second-degree burns and facial disfigurement. In these cases, injuries resulted from battery explosions during ENDS use, charging, replacement or inadvertent contact with a metal object while transporting.

The prohibition will be effective 30 days from the release of the policy May 14, and will remain in effect until a final determination can be made following a thorough analysis.

Deployed units may request extensions on device removal until their next port visit. Supervisors should ensure that removable lithium-ion batteries are removed from the units and stored according to the ENDS manufacturer instructions, in plastic wrap, in a plastic bag or any other non-conductive storage container.

Sailors on shore will still be allowed to use ENDS on base, but must do so in designated smoking areas ashore while on military installations.

By Jayshree Sengupta

India’s central government had announced in its 2016 Union Budget 100 per cent foreign capital in processed food retailing. Amazon got permission to do so via e-commerce and has applied to the government to invest $500 million in a wholly owned venture to sell food items online. Now US based retail giant, Walmart, is planning to open 50 brick and mortar stores, half of them in UP and Uttarakhand. Walmart already has 21 stores under the umbrella of Best Price Stores — a wholesale chain. It had bought 50 percent share in the Bharati enterprise in the Cash and Carry venture after the joint venture ended in 2013 (100 percent FDI in Cash and Carry ventures which sell in bulk to members only, which was allowed from 2003).

The government’s condition to open up the food retail sector in brick and mortar stores has been that sourcing of all products should be from India. However, this has not bothered Walmart because, according to its CEO, it does not carry many imported items due to high custom duties.

In the past, the BJP government had opposed the opening up of the multi-brand retail while the UPA government was trying to push ahead with it and had allowed up to 51 percent FDI in 2011. There were political reasons for this opposition. Small traders in corner shops and mom and pop stores constitute important voters for the BJP. There are around 50 million such traders while the food retail business is worth $70 billion. Naturally, getting a slice of this lucrative market is the dream of multinational giant retailers like Walmart and Tesco.

But the government, though it has opened up multi-brand retail in food items, has not yet allowed other items to be sold in such stores.  One option is to allow food retailers to generate 20 to 25 percent of their sales from non-food items like kitchen use products or basic household requirements like toothpaste. Walmart is pushing for this because the margins in food retail are very thin.

Whether the government will allow 100 percent FDI in multi-brand retail in the future is a much awaited policy move and if it does, it will be welcomed by Food Processing Minister Harsimrat Kaur Badal. Those for it would say that it would create jobs, bring efficiency in storage and inventory management, encourage food processing and bring food from farmer to fork without the chain of middlemen. Lastly, the biggest advantage would be the inflow of a huge amount of FDI that India needs.

If Walmart stores do open only food retail shops, they will offer competition to the domestic retail giants like Reliance Fresh, Big Bazaar, Spencer’s, etc. The consumer may benefit if this may bring about competitive pricing and cleaner and properly labelled food items with nutritional information. Walmart may also bring professionalism in management and control of inventories.

It may sign contracts with farmers to sell directly to the stores and this would give a better deal to farmers. It would eliminate a long chain of middlemen, but let us not forget that Walmart is also a middleman because it too is an intermediary between the farmers and consumers.

While it is true that global supermarkets may purchase directly from farmers and would send produce to their stores in air-conditioned trucks thereby reducing wastage of fruits and vegetables, excessive amount of refrigeration and the extensive use of Styrofoam/plastics for packaging are bad for the environment and will add to our solid waste problem.

The consumers may however benefit from food products that have been sorted out, washed and sliced or chopped which will help the average working woman, short of time to cook a meal. But these things are already being done in many up-market Indian supermarkets in big cities. Hence, Walmart has nothing new to offer except perhaps a cleaner ambience.

Many have argued that there will be additional jobs in these global supermarkets, especially for women at the cash counters. Others are likely to find jobs in moving, labelling and sorting out goods. But Walmart’s track record is of creating less jobs and using more automation/technology. They will also employ educated smart young people and not the average unskilled job seeker. They may go for capital intensive processing and not employ more labour for their backend operations.

On the whole, they will retain an air of exclusivity which may be welcomed by the upper middle classes. Their exclusiveness would mean that the Kirana stores and corner shops may still be around for those wanting to buy one or two items with petty cash and not a cart full of goods with a credit card.

Kishore Biyani, the biggest retailer in India, has been thinking ahead and is planning 10,000 stores over four years that will be a hybrid between Kirana stores, e-commerce and large supermarkets. According to him, he will offer unbeatable prices and bank on the loyalty of customers. This will make the global giants’ task more difficult as they are counting on uniform tastes and culture across India. Yet, it must be remembered that global supermarkets have deep pockets and are able to offer big discounts and have staying power that would eliminate others, big and small. They can suffer losses for a number of years in order to capture the market later.

For global retail giants, it would be ideal if they are allowed to sell other items also, like in China.  Walmart is very popular in China because one can buy clothing, footwear, groceries, household items, wines and spirits — almost everything under one roof.  But China has nothing much to fear because most goods are Made in China. In India, with people still having great fascination for imported items sourced from other countries, things could be very different.

For complete opening up of the multi-brand retail sector, the same condition of selling “Made in India” products may apply and if the global companies agree, there would be a big opportunity for Indian products to be sold in such giant retail outfits and this could give a boost to the languishing manufacturing industry.

It is heartening to note that Indian multi-brand retail business is flourishing and will give the global retailers a tough competition and the consumers will be the ultimate beneficiaries.

(RFE/RL) — More than 1,600 candidates have filed to run in the Iranian presidential election as the official registration period ended on April 15.

Among the last-minute entrants for the May 19 election was 55-year-old Tehran Mayor Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who arrived at the Interior Ministry just before the deadline.

First Vice President Eshagh Jahangiri, 60, also was a late entrant. He is a close ally of moderate cleric President Hassan Rohani, who registered on April 14.

Experts said the reformist Jahangiri could be running as a potential alternative should Rouhani be disqualified by the Guardian Council, which vets candidates before they can appear on the ballot.

“Rouhani and I are side-by-side,” Jahangiri told reporters.

The council routinely disqualifies those it regards as a threat to the clerical establishment. In 2013, it prevented ex-President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani from running.

Officials said a total of 1,636 people registered for the election, including 137 women. The council has not allowed women to run in the past.

Traditionally, about six candidates are finally approved to run. The campaign officially opens April 28 and the vote is on May 19.

Ebrahim Raisi, 56, a hard-line cleric close to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, on April 14 filed to run and is considered by many to be the 68-year-old Rohani’s main challenger.

Raisi is expected to draw support from Iran’s hard-line factions, including the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Rohani negotiated the Iranian nuclear deal with world powers last year, but some disappointment that the accord has not spurred economic growth has boosted the opposition against him.

Former hard-line President Mahmud Ahmadinejad, 60, made a surprise move to register for the election against Khamenei’s advice.

Khamenei has said Ahmadinejad candidacy would create a “polarized situation” that would be “harmful for the county.”

By Joseph Green*

The scene is a familiar one in any number of Latin American nations: poor results from chronically underfunded schools that are touted as proof that public education has failed by axe-grinding policy makers who use their legislative platform to disparage and undermine public school students and their teachers, with acts of complicity from corporate-owned media outlets. It would seem that in the perpetual rollback of the public sector under neoliberal ideological hegemony, expecting free, accessible education for every child has become a bridge too far. As the 2017 school year commences in Argentina the scenario is playing out yet again, this time with remarkable fury and a degree of rancor from the highest levels of government.

Politicians

The premise for the most recent escalation in the education debate is a fierce, ongoing public school teachers’ strike in Buenos Aires Province, in response to the provincial government’s inflexible offer to allow a pay increase of 18 percent to compensate for the previous year’s inflation (which was over 40 percent) along with a simultaneous threat to discount any days spent on the picket line from teachers’ paychecks.[i] Argentine President Mauricio Macri has thrown the weight of his political clout in the struggle behind Buenos Aires Province Governor María Eugenia Vidal, a staunch Macri loyalist whose positions fit in with his larger austerity program. While publicly maintaining that quality public education is necessary to ensure that all children have equal opportunities awaiting them, Macri raised eyebrows when he punctuated a presentation of public and private reading comprehension scores with the phrase “[the difference in scores] highlights the other fundamental problem that is the terrible inequality between those who can go to private school versus those who have to lower themselves to public school.”[ii] People remained in shock when later that week he repeated his support for Videla in the “fight for public education” and reframed her stand against the teachers under her charge around gender rights: “In the province of the ‘manly men’ it took a woman to change history.”[iii] Vidal, for her part, has commented on the matter that “public education has nothing more to give” and that the province’s public schools “have been privatized de facto.” She deflected further discussion by pointing her finger at some teachers who she believes are only striking for political purposes and would sooner effect chaos to destabilize the Macri administration and “evade justice.”[iv] Vidal is alluding to the declarations of support for teachers and alleged meddling in the strike by ex-president and current opposition figure Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, who has been formally charged in recent months with fraud, corruption, and money laundering for her actions while in office.[v]

Media

Several of Argentina’s principal media outlets–generally the same ones who also regularly print editorials supporting Macri–have been waging a campaign in favor of private education for years, often with little fanfare. One of these, Clarín, (Argentina’s largest newspaper) ignited a firestorm in mid-March when it published a report of two young boys’ progress in school in an attempt to present a comparison of their respective accomplishments as a metaphor for the woes of Argentina’s educational system.[vi] Titled, “They Began First Grade Together and One has a Two-Notebook Lead Over the Other,” the article’s featured photo displays Maxi, a public school student with dark, unkempt hair and dark skin, dressed in a t-shirt and the white lab-style coats typical of Argentine public schools. Maxi is admiring the work of Facu, a private school student with light skin and straight blond hair, who is wearing a polo and plastic watch that is so large it appears to inhibit his writing somewhat as he concentrates on the workbook in front of him. According to the byline, Facu is so much farther ahead in his classwork because he has attended 10 days of class to Maxi’s five, apparently due to days missed by Maxi as a result of the public school teachers’ strike. Questionable premise aside–the article itself does little more than describe the neighborhoods in which the boys live and add some token statements from their mothers–the piece reveals much about prevailing prejudices regarding the status of education in Argentina.

Education

Argentina has one of the longest public school traditions in Latin America, with the provision of obligatory, free, and secular public education being required by law since 1884 (the latter requisite being essential in the context of power struggles between the sovereign governments and the Catholic church in the region.)[vii] Nevertheless, for many this tradition has gone by the wayside for a variety of reasons.

An often-parroted anecdote in Argentina, particularly in cases of conflict, is that parents increasingly switch their children from public to private school for the security of knowing that their children will not miss class because of striking teachers–hence the article in Clarín. There are also the widely-held and untested clichés that children have less structure and learn less in public schools, neither of which is empirically true.[viii] These stereotypes are repeated by the media and rationalized by citing the Kirchner-era policy of focusing on indicators like percentage of GDP invested in public education and social inclusion in educational institutions, instead of quality per se.[ix] However, these are not the only perceived problem with Argentina’s public schools. With the rise of neoliberalism over the last several decades and the allotment of market values to incongruent subjects it came to be expected that schools be efficient and competitive–criteria by which open-access public schools are essentially guaranteed to fail.

More to the point, those who base their criticisms of public education on disparities in testing are ignoring the obvious roots of the performance gap in the socioeconomic differences between students in public and private schools. How a child fares in school tends to be a direct result of their home life, according to factors such as the profession and education level of the parents, household stability, available nutrition, neighborhood safety, personal attention, and others, which are mostly determined by wealth and social access. This gives private schools a clear advantage, as they have the luxury of turning away prospective attendees who cannot pay tuition and focusing their resources on the best and the brightest. Public schools are then left holding the bag, being legally required to accept all students–including those whose brain function is hindered by malnutrition, lack of sleep, or mental anguish from less-than-ideal family situations in addition to those who cannot pay for a private school, and teacher strikes notwithstanding.

Virtually none of this has managed to affect the discourse concerning public education. By framing the argument around relative student enrollment and test scores (among other things), the media and the Macri government are grossly misrepresenting the heart of the issue, be it through ignorance or intent. Argentine public schools are far from perfect, but so are the arguments against them. As such the mediatic and political assault on public education in Argentina should be treated with skepticism, if not great alarm.

*Joseph Green, Research Fellow at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs

[i] María Díaz Reck, Las mentiras de Vidal en su guerra contra la educación pública, La Izquierda Diario, February 16, 2017. Accessed April1, 2017. http://www.laizquierdadiario.com/Las-mentiras-de-Vidal-en-su-guerra-contra-la-educacion-publica ; Télam, El Gobierno celebró el aval para descontar los días de paro docente, February 22, 2017. Accessed April 1, 2017. http://www.telam.com.ar/notas/201702/180472-docentes-buenos-aires-ferrari-paro.html

[ii] Perfil, El Presidente habló de los que eligen ir a una escuela privada y de los que tienen que “caer” en una pública., March 21, 2017. Accessed April 1, 2017. http://www.perfil.com/politica/el-inoportuno-comentario-que-hizo-macri-sobre-la-educacion-publica.phtml

[iii] Ámbito, Macri respaldó a Vidal por la “batalla que está dando por la educación pública”, March 21, 2017. Accessed April 1, 2017. http://www.ambito.com/876929-macri-respaldo-a-vidal-por-la-batalla-que-esta-dando-por-la-educacion-publica

[iv] María José Lucesole, María E. Vidal: “El kirchnerismo busca generar conflicto para eludir la Justicia”, La Nacion, March 16, 2017. Accessed April 1, 2017. http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1993965-maria-e-vidal-el-kirchnerismo-busca-generar-conflicto-para-eludir-la-justicia

[v] Clarín, Cristina Kirchner salió a respaldar a los gremios docentes que están de paro y criticó a María Eugenia Vidal, March 15, 2017. Accessed April 1, 2017. http://www.clarin.com/politica/cristina-kirchner-salio-respaldar-gremios-docentes-paro-critico-maria-eugenia-vidal_0_B1nT2IDix.html ; Hugo Alconada Mon, Cristina Kirchner quedó imputada en la causa por la ruta del dinero K, La Nacion, April 10, 2016. Accessed April 1, 2017. http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1887996-cristina-kirchner-quedo-imputada-en-la-causa-por-la-ruta-del-dinero-k  ; Carlos E. Cué, Cristina Kirchner, imputada por corrupción: “Quieren tapar la crisis”, El País, November 1, 2016. Accessed April 1, 2017. http://internacional.elpais.com/internacional/2016/10/31/argentina/1477927368_881089.html ; Hernán Cappiello, Procesan a Cristina por asociación ilícita y le traban un embargo millonario, December 28, 2016. Accessed April 1, 2017. http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1970866-procesan-a-cristina-por-asociacion-ilicita-y-le-traban-un-embargo-millonario

[vi] Yasmin Diamore, Arrancaron juntos primer grado y uno le lleva al otro 2 cuadernos de ventaja, Clarín, March 18, 2017. Accessed April 1, 2017. http://www.clarin.com/sociedad/arrancaron-juntos-primer-grado-lleva-cuadernos-ventaja_0_r1CMLRcog.html

[vii] Clarín, Aniversario Ley 1420: el país que se hizo con buenas escuelas, July 5, 2014. Accessed April 1, 2017. http://www.clarin.com/cartas_al_pais/Ley-pais-hizo-buenas-escuelas_0_HySl9ocDQg.html

[viii] Alejandro Grimson and Emilio Tenti Fanfani, Caer en la Pública: Educación pública y privada, Revista Anfibia, March 22, 2017. Accessed April 1, 2017. http://www.revistaanfibia.com/ensayo/caer-publica/

[ix] Infobae, Escuelas: la matrícula privada creció casi 7 veces más que la pública, March 9, 2013. Accessed April 1, 2017. http://www.infobae.com/2013/03/09/700086-escuelas-la-matricula-privada-crecio-casi-7-veces-mas-que-la-publica/

Acclaimed Sri Lankan filmmaker Prasanna Vithanage came to Assam in the time of Rongali Bihu to accept an international award in memory of legendary Assamese cultural personality Bhupen-da from Asom Sahitya Sabha (ASS).

Prasanna Vithanage, while receiving the third Biswaratna Dr Bhupen Hazarika International Solidarity Award on April 10, 2017 in Guwahati, echoed the gesture with the greetings of the spring festival celebrated in his island nation on the same occasion.

The award, launched in 2013 by Assam’s highest literary forum ASS with supports from Numaligarh Refinery Limited to commemorate Bhupen-da as an international icon, was first offered to Bangladeshi scholar and dance exponent Lubna Marium. The second award was conferred on eminent Malayalam filmmaker Adoor Gopalakrishnan. Presented biannually, the award carries a trophy, a citation, cash price and other traditional gift items.

In his acceptance speech, the Sri Lankan film director echoed similar concerns of regional film makers in India for their survival.

However, Prasanna, whose movies have been screened in various international film festivals, pointed out that there is still a sizable group of serious film-goers in Sri Lanka who support alternate film making. Nevertheless, he agreed that Bollywood movies enjoy an important market share in Sri Lanka.

Prasanna also paid tributes to Indian filmmakers, namely Satyajit Ray, Mrinal Sen, Guru Dutt, Adoor Gopalakrishnan, Jahnu Barua, etc. along with Bhupen Hazarika.

According to Prasanna, the simplicity conveyed with creative ardors by the filmmakers inspired him to try his hands with the art of film-making. He specially mentioned Jahnu’s award winning Assamese movie ‘Halodhiya Choraye Baodhan Khay’ (The Catastrophe) that influenced his creative journey to a great extent.

Born at Panadura, an outskirt locality of Colombo in 1962, Prasanna started working in theaters and soon emerged as a sensitive visual translator of inner conflicts carried by ordinary people along with their journey for individual freedom. He has received recognition from the international audience for ‘Sisila Gini Gani’ (Ice of Fire), ‘Anantha Rathriya’ (The Dark Night of Soul), ‘Akasa Kusum’ (Flowers of the Sky), ‘Pura Handa Kaluwara’ (The Death on a Full Moon Day), ‘Ira Madiyama’ (August Sun), ‘Oba Nathuwa Oba Ekka’ (With You, Without You), ‘Usawiya Nihandai’ (Silence in the Courts), etc.

The feature film titled ‘With You, Without You’ is the third part of a war trilogy — after ‘The Death on a Full Moon Day’ and ‘August Sun’ —  and deals with the human cost of Colombo’s three decade long war against the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). For some time, the film was banned from public screenings in Sri Lanka.

Prasanna also attended in an interactive session titled Guest of the Month at Guwahati Press Club with the local scribes. He bared his heart to the participants expressing his concern to the crisis of small-time film makers based in different parts of the globe, but also conveyed optimism over digital screening of quality films for the benefit of film appreciators.

The Sinhalese director stated that the present scenario of Sri Lankan film industry is bleak, but the new technology can be used for its sustained growth. He argued that the screening of regional movies (inclusive of Sinhalese films) with multiple sub-titles through various alternate media outlets would help the industry to survive for a better future.

Talking about the strong presence of female characters in his movies, the energetic director revealed that he has succeeded because of his mother’s influence over him. Prasanna termed his mother as a strong individual and admitted that her influence remains a real strength for him in all times of crisis. For him a mother is always an unparalleled symbol of love, affection, care and simplicity.

Prasanna also made an interesting revelation that unlike Indians — who are divergent, but united in oneness — the Lankans are yet to nurture the spirit of nationalism. He admitted that the Lankan society remains ethnically divided even after the end of Tamil uprising that turned into terrorism in the northern part of the country.

He also disclosed that there was no freedom of movement against the British colonial rule in Sri Lanka, unlike India. As the British authority was forced to leave India, the Lankan people got the benefit of circumstance and subsequently the island nation emerged as a sovereign country.

It goes without saying that one of the major all-encompassing events of the last part of the second millennium was undoubtedly the advent of globalization, as a clear political expression of the triumphing capitalism and market economy theories, following the end of the Cold War and the bi-polarization of the world.

The concept of globalization, itself, was not something new to mankind, it was a dream nurtured over the centuries, by various thinkers and statesmen who failed to see it materialize in such a magnitude as is the case today. However, this hope was rekindled in modern times by a thought crafted, that the rapid technological advances achieved by humanity will ultimately result in the world becoming a “planetary village”.

After the short-lived euphoria that followed the birth of the globalization, soon fear and mistrust ensued and many a nation saw in it Trojan horse for hegemony and control carefully and intelligently mounted with the intention to impose a McWorld1 way of life on humanity at large. The diplomatic denunciation of this concept came from France that saw in this act an Anglo-Saxon drive to control the world and consequently destroy progressively all other cultures, languages and civilizations. To thwart this veiled aggression on cultural values of humanity; the French called on the world to respect the “other” and his culture2 and to defend it from the onslaught of the global uniformity.

Nowadays, however, the rejection of globalization has taken an unfortunate turn, for each international conference attended by the world main powers or G8 meetings is marred by bouts of violent clashes between the security forces of the host country and anti-globalization militants who congregate to the site of the meeting from all over the world. The last of these saw the death of the young Italian protester Carlo Giuliani (23 years) in the city of Genoa where G8 leaders were meeting lately in July 2001. According to political analysts and observers, these international events are tuning more into occasions for the celebration of anti-globalization than what they were meant for in the first place.

The legitimate fear expressed by the rejectionists of globalization worldwide, whether peaceful or violent, means that if this phenomenon is left unchecked it will destroy everything around it in a flash, and especially vulnerable cultures with no economic strength. This may not be the ultimate reason for which globalization was set up for in the first place, but it is an outcome that has to be taken into consideration.

Globalization would not be seen today as an overwhelming danger to humanity by many, if it were not for its ability to stifle the local cultural expression for the sake of uniformity at the global level.

Education, more than ever before, is solicited today by everyone to prepare the individual to face the challenges of the future and the uncertainties of tomorrow with determination, responsibility and faith. To achieve this, education is called upon to display, in no doubtful terms, openness and flexibility towards what is different and unknown, with a view to achieving fully the overall objective of learning to live together.

Learning to live together is an integral part of the ongoing life exercise of constructing meaning, for there is no such a thing as absolute truth and it should be emphasized that expressing the wish to live together involves much affectivity and a great deal of emotions.

Education, to be relevant, has to help the individual construct his own “structure of meaning” by helping him and providing him with the necessary tools for building painstakingly his values, ethics, attitudes and behaviour as well as his own personal code of morality, obviously in tune with that of his society, which will constitute his own natural baggage in life. As such, the individual is required to learn self-esteem and self-respect which are the basis for accepting the “other” in his “otherness” and showing solidarity, respect and empathy for him. Self-respect and self-esteem are the basic qualities that make coexistence, cooperation, mutual understanding, and conflict resolution something achievable and possible.

Intolerance, hatred and rejection of the “other” by means of violence and/or ostracism are generally the end result of ignorance and stereotyping. So, expressing the wish and the willingness to learn to live together entails unequivocally knowledge.

Armed with knowledge, the individual pushes further daily the limits of fear and broadens the field of mutual understanding and acceptance. And, likewise, investigates one’s strengths and weaknesses and learns to discover other people’s passions, fears, customs, beliefs, expectations, motivations, suffering as well as needs and aspirations.

The learning process is a matter of faith in humanity as a whole and faith in the individual, and the desire to work together towards carrying out joint projects and ultimately fulfilling common dreams and aspirations for a better future for everyone.

To achieve these lofty ideals and to give the education a new meaning and a new lease of life, the learning process has to reach out to common values and cultural diversity to overcome ethnocentric tendencies.

For the sake of an education that mirrors cultural diversity:

In the last century, ignorance and its corollary that is fear have been at the origin of much distrust and violence between individuals, communities and nations. This tendency cannot for the moment, unfortunately, be scratched out from the human psyche, but it can certainly be contained, by encouraging human beings through education to construct a common meaning, common objectives and aspirations and work together towards achieving them.

Likewise, tremendous progress has been gladly achieved in our perception of education3: in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it was written in gold, for the first time, that education is an undeniable right of every human being. In 1990, at the World Conference on Education for All at Jomtien in Thailand, this concept was further clarified and enriched, in the sense that every person ought to benefit from a basic education which meets his basic needs. Last but not least, at the World Forum on Education in Dakar, Senegal (2000), emphasis was put on the objective of providing quality education for all human beings, by taking better stock of its complexity and this was stated clearly in the Final Report of the World Forum on Education4:

“The movement toward more open and democratic societies has created a need for learning that goes beyond the academic curriculum and factual knowledge to emphasize problem-solving and open-ended enquiry. The expansion of communication and information technologies necessitates more interactive and explanatory forms of learning, and the increased pace of change has put a premium on the need to engage in continuous learning over a lifetime. There is also a new urgency to ensure that education at all levels and in all places reinforces a culture of peace, tolerance and respect for human rights.”

Education is not an isolated phenomenon within society and within the lives, passions and experiences of human beings. It is constantly in confrontation with the hard realities of its environment at the local, national and global levels. So, it is duly expected to overcome numerous tensions, these have been identified by the report of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty First Century5, three of which are of capital interest to workshop 3 on the topic of : “Common Values, Cultural Diversity and Education: What and How to reach?”. These are as follows:

• “The tension between the global and the local: people need gradually to become world citizens without losing their roots and while continuing to play an active part in the life of their nation and their local community”;
• “The tension between the universal and the individual: culture is steadily being globalized, but as yet only partially. We cannot ignore the promises of globalization nor its risks, not the least of which is the risk of forgetting the unique character of human beings, it is for them to choose their own future and achieve their full potential within the carefully tended wealth of their traditions and their own cultures which unless we are careful, can be endangered by contemporary developments”;
• The tension between tradition and modernity: how is it to adapt to change without turning one’s back on the past, how can autonomy be acquired in a complementary fashion with the free development of others and how can scientific progress be assimilated? This is the spirit in which the challenges of the new information technologies must be met”.

The tensions stated here above sum up the state of humanity today, it is confronted to the reality of learning to live together in the face of the unbearable pressure between belonging to a “world culture” and supporting cultural diversity.

It is an established fact that the dissemination of cultural expressions, forms and experiences is as vital and important as social, political and economic manifestations and processes6.

If today, globalization is raising fears within societies worldwide, it is simply because it is seen as a destructive world phenomenon that is one way only and exclusively in the service of one language (English) 7, one culture (Anglo-Saxon) and one market (America), which leads to the imposition of the McWorld syndrome. And with this in place, cultural uniformity will become the norm and diversity the unacceptable exception or the world social taboo.

Essentially, the man of the present century has to have deep roots in his own culture and civilization and show, at the same time, a tremendous degree of receptiveness of the “other”.

To achieve this, he has to drop off his misconceptions and fallacies about the “other” and his “otherness” and accept to understand his culture in its environment with its own rationale and salient features tracing their origin in beliefs and various aspects of material culture.

It is, also, a known fact among educators and anthropologists that slipping into a stereotype is as simple as breathing, but finding one’s way out of it is quite a task. It is likewise true that stereotyping is a prominent manifestation of our human weakness, but it is also and most importantly, a blatant and an unacceptable expression of our ignorance, presumption and self-indulgence that verges on racism and egocentrism.

There is no such a thing as a good and/or superior culture or stupid and/or culture, for these unfortunate qualifiers are the reflection of self-adoration and self-love and infatuation, not to say, of course, feeling of superiority.

Human beings of the twenty first century have to learn to accept what is different or alien with humility and that all cultures share in grandeur as well as failings. What is important, though, is working together with the “other” towards forging a “multicultural common identity” on bedrock of diversity and common values and ethics.

To reach this noble objective in education and move on with it to an all-inclusive new reality, several questions, all important and vital, impose themselves at his juncture:

• What philosophy and approach to adopt in order to improve educational output in the light of cultural diversity and the development of new shared values?
• How can the community be implicated in an educational effort aiming at establishing complementary and intercultural states of being in order to make plurality a value enabling mankind “to learn to live together”?

Philosophy and approach:

To achieve cultural diversity in education, it is important to adopt an attitude based on the idea of reshaping vision. The new vision ought to be broad and creative or rather an “expanded vision” as stated in article 2 of the World Declaration on Education for All8:

“To serve the basic learning needs of all requires more than a recommitment to basic education as it now exists. What is needed is an “expanded vision” that surpasses present resource levels, institutional structures, curricula, and conventional delivery systems while building on the best in current practices.”

This entails broadening the scope and most importantly enhancing the environment for learning and increasing the potential of partnership. This is further highlighted in the above-mentioned Declaration in the following words9:

“The realization of an enormous potential for human progress and empowerment is contingent upon whether people can be enabled to acquire the education and the start needed to tap into the ever-expanding pool of relevant knowledge and the new means for sharing this knowledge”.

Tapping into the pool of “relevant knowledge” presupposes that this knowledge has been identified, researched, studied and “digested”, or to be able to undertake this daunting and ambitious task properly, people have to fulfil the following conditions:

• Be receptive to other opinions, realities, experiences and approaches;
• Be open to other truths and philosophies;
• Conceive of plurality and diversity in life and in learning practices;
• Overcome ethnocentric inclinations and social arbitrariness;
• Adopt an intercultural attitude to the realities of the world;
• Seek complementary status and commonality between visions that are opposed and contradictory;
• Instill curiosity and respect for “otherness” and difference in future positive and responsible society;
• Help build a world based on common concerns and shared values;
• Shape our dormant and boring diversity into an active and electrifying experience enabling individuals “to learn to live together”.

A curriculum for creative diversity:

In 1989, Jean Marie Domenach, a French philosopher and political and social scientist, published an insightful book entitled: Ce qu’il faut enseigner (What should be taught)10, which he devoted exclusively to educational matters.

Domenach’s opinion is that societies today undergo incredible changes at great speed and so do educational systems, but because they are moving at different speeds in different directions, the gap between the two is widening alarmingly to the extent that there is a profound malaise among teachers and anxiety among pupils who question the validity of the curriculum taught.

Domenach’s advice is clear, today’s schools must impart today’s knowledge, which is synonymous to saying that curriculum has to be in tune with the expectations of society, on the one hand, and the world, on the other. In other words, societies around the world are gradually getting rid of their monolithic legacy of the past to become plural and multicultural. So if Domenach’s view is adopted, their curricula ought to become multicultural to avoid incongruity.

According to Giovanni Gozzer, an Italian renowned educator11, the world because of migrations and population movements, has changed so much and with it education which is gladly taking a multicultural coloration:

“There is now an irreversible trend towards transcending national frontiers, in both the economic and the cultural fields (and to a certain extent as regards political, ethnic, linguistic, scientific and technological exchanges). Large community groupings are now taking place in Europe, as well as emerging in other continents, breaking down not only the barriers of politically homogeneous states, but also those of countries aligned in other blocs with opposing ideological and military policies. The fact that this situation has come to stay had an enormous impact on “teaching structures” (which seems a more appropriate term than the increasingly ambiguous word “education”). Until recent times the theory that the content of school curricula was a kind of automatic adjunct to the idea of the nation-state, similar to nationality, possession of a passport, a national language and a constitution, was admitted readily and without reservation. Today, this comparison seems less evident, not only as a result of the existence of the communities and groupings already mentioned, but also because of the reciprocal influences which economies, culture, and trade exert on individual national groups”.

Because of this new reality created by migration and population movement all over the world and especially in the West, many countries adapted their educational policies gradually to this new situation, by taking measures to bring in new players into the fold, such as international organizations, NGOs and community leaders. Curriculum must not, anymore, be centrally-imposed, as it is the case unfortunately in many developing countries; it has to be the result of a consensus, so that every ethnic or cultural group can identify with it. It has to be a sort of educational melting pot that erases emotional borders, but takes in all cultural ingredients as a form of recognition of the cultural diversity of a given society.

And given, also, that societies are not anymore what they were in the past: monolithic in their composition and their aspirations, curriculum has to follow suit and attempt to reflect, as faithfully as possible, the needs of the people taking into consideration their language, their origin, their culture and most of all their legitimate aspirations.

It is important, first and foremost, to identify the potential players needed today to take part in curriculum design, in its diverse and all-encompassing version:

Traditional approach:

• government officials (curriculum departments of ministries of education);
  educators;
• planners;
• Ideologues (partly officials in one-party system countries (Communist bloc)).

This curriculum often had catastrophic results on the learners, the educational system and development in general. It is so rigid and so un-educational that it fails miserably, in the end, because of the following mishaps:

• No field-testing undertaken prior to using the curriculum, to determine its educational validity, if any;
• No attempt to encourage feed-back from educators, teachers, pupils and parents on the material and its educational content;
• This curriculum does not reflect the cultural diversity of the learner and, as a result, it does not enhance his spirit of creativity;
• This curriculum encourages school failure and the drop-out syndrome;
• This curriculum develops authoritarianism in society and non-democratic values.

Modern approach:

• no government officials,
• educators;
• community leaders;
• religious leaders;
• NGOs;
• International Organizations;

This final output can in no way be considered as a “sacred” output, it is constantly open to new ideas and new input. Therefore, its life expectancy ought to be as short as possible to allow introduction of new ideas and concepts.

Another important feature of the modern approach is that is does not work towards transmitting information to the learner. It strives to build his skills and to prepare him for action by exposing him to tried data, in mock situations, and allowing him to review and discuss, in his own manner, every aspect of it.

Now, to make curriculum a fruitful investment, it is important to implicate the parents, from the very beginning, because their input is of vital importance for the future success of their offspring.

Aware of the importance of this issue, the Islamic Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization –ISESCO- has published in the year 2000 a book entitled Parental Education12 in its working languages Arabic, English and French, which it has distributed to its Member States. This publication deals with the different aspects of parental supervision of the education of their children and suggestions to improve its impact and results.

All in all, parental education has to be taken more seriously than what there is now, especially if there is interest in devising a relevant and quality-motivated curriculum, that takes into consideration the multicultural concerns of the society at large.

Educational content and methodology:

Educators and teachers worldwide are always asking the same relevant question, to which obviously there is no easy answer:

• What to teach and how to teach it?

Obviously, if the traditional curriculum is changed in favour of a new curriculum aiming at positive diversity, new material has to be introduced, as well as, new players and a new approach.

Curricular Education:

In addition to the traditional subjects that have showed their relevance and effectiveness, in economic terms among the learners. The following subjects ought to be introduced in the new curriculum, if they had not been taught yet;

• Specific studies:
  • Civic education;
  • Health education;
  • Environmental education;
  • Population education;
  • Human rights subjects;
  • Nutrition education;
  • Women’s studies;
  • Ethnic studies;
  • Community Development studies; and
  • Anti-racist education.
• Cultural studies;
  • Urban anthropology / Cultural anthropology;
  • Comparative religion / religious studies;
  • Mother tongues;
  • Area studies; and
  • International education13.

Extra-curricular education:

There is to be, also, interest given to extra-curricular learning as a vital supplement for “building the skills” of the learner rather than “stuffing his head with information”.

The objective of extra-curricular education is to put the skills acquired in school to use through personal experience acquired in vivo.

The Americans, aware of the importance of extra-curricular knowledge, have, decades ago, introduced such courses in their educational system. Some of these are:

• Volunteer work abroad: students go abroad to do volunteer work for the benefit of native populations in developing countries, where they provide help with development projects and learn the language and the customs of the local population in return;
• Semester abroad: students go to a foreign country to study a given number of subjects for a semester and write papers on their experience to their schools;
• Gap-filling experience: before embarking on university studies, students go abroad to teach a subject of their choice and learn other skills in return. This experience helps them broaden their horizons and see the world afterwards from a different perspective.
• Exchange programmes: students from different countries exchange their families for a cultural experience;
• Semester at sea: students travel on a “floating university” around the world for a semester to improve their educational skills, polish their knowledge and discover the world.

If the content is modernized to take into consideration cultural diversity, then the methodology has also to undergo a similar operation. As such, teaching methods have to be reviewed to adapt to the new reality.

The new methodology has to meet the following procedural requirement:

• Be relevant;
• Be effective;
• Be quality-oriented;
• Be community-minded;
• Be multicultural-oriented;
• Be skills-motivated.

And make use constantly of such tools as the following:

• Evaluation techniques;
• Feed-back;
• One on one situations;
• Field-testing.

Likewise, teachers and administrators have to undergo frequently in-service training, during which they will be exposed to the multicultural curriculum in different areas and to methods to approach it in the classroom, highlighting the educational fact that the student is not anymore a passive element but an active player who can have an important input in the educational game.

Conclusion:

To the highly important question: “Can we conceive of diversity in school and in curriculum in terms of being complementary rather than in state of opposition?” The answer is “yes”: this is possible and feasible provided all the concerned players: government officials, teachers, pupils, parents, NGOs and international organizations do engage seriously in a cultural dialogue on the best way to make multicultural education a reality in our schools and an enjoyable experience, too.

The fact is that the idea of a “global village” is attractive to the majority of the inhabitants of this only inhabitable planet in the known universe, as of today. But, it is, also, an established truth that without cultural diversity this village will be a boring place and our life a tedious experience imposed on us.

There is an urgent need for human beings “to learn to live together” by accepting the “other” in his difference and “otherness” and overcoming our ethnocentric tendencies, jingoistic madness, racist foolishness and cultural selfishness in favour of a true multicultural society.

To achieve this noble ideal, the starting point is undoubtedly education. Through education, human beings can easily overcome their societies’ arbitrariness and lack of values and build a world based on shared values, one such value being the diversity that has always characterized humankind.

Endnotes:

1. A world dominated and regulated, at will, by US multinationals such as McDonald’s, that is denounced vehemently in Europe for marketing junk food and junk culture, by such vociferous opponents of globalization as José Bové, the head of the French Trade Union of Farmers.

2. This French worldwide campaign was conceived and articulated around the concept of l’exception culturelle (cultural difference) which defends the notion of spécificité culturelle. The indirect outcome of this campaign was the creation of a political organization to defend francophone culture and interests.

3. Cf. UNESCO, World Education Report 2000. The right to education: towards education for all throughout life, Paris, UNESCO Publications, 2000.

4. Cf. World Forum on Education, Final Report, Dakar, UNESCO, 2000, p.20.

5. Cf. J. Delors et al., Learning : the Treasure Within, Paris, UNESCO Publications and Odile Jacob, 1996, p.12 onwards.

The tensions identified by the commission are as follows:
a) The tension between the global and the local;
b) The tension between the universal and the individual;
c) The tension between tradition and modernity;
d) The tension between long-term and short-term consideration;
e) The tension between, on the one hand, the need for competition, and on the other, the concern for equality of opportunity;
f) The tension between the extraordinary expansion of knowledge and human beings’ capacity to assimilate it;
g) The tension between the spiritual and the material;
h) The tension between the market economy and the market society.

6. Cf. Javier Pérez de Cuéllar et al.,Our Creative Diversity, Paris, UNESCO Publications, 1996. (Report on the World Commission on Culture and Development).

7. A proof of this is the supremacy of the English language in the material found on the net. It was estimated in the year 2000 at about 60%.

8. Cf. WCEFA Inter-Agency Commission, Final Report of the World Conference on Education for All: Meeting Basic Learning Needs. New York, UNICEF Publications, 1990. p. 44..

9. Ibid, p. 44.

10. Cf. Jean-Marie Domenach, Ce qu’il faut enseigner, Paris, 1989.

11. Cf. G. Gozzer, « School curricula and social problems » in Prospects 73: vol XX, n°1, 1990:9-19, Paris, UNESCO. P. 11.

12. Cf. ISESCO, Parental Education, Rabat, ISESCO Publications, 2000.

13. ISESCO has published in the year 2000 a book for this purpose entitled “Islamic Perspective of International Education”. (Cf. Hassan Mohammed Hassan, Islamic Perspective of International Education, Rabat, ISESCO Publications, 2000).

By Karen Parrish

US Vice President Mike Pence and his wife, Karen, made an Easter Sunday holiday visit today to troops in U.S. Army Garrison Yongsan, South Korea, where their message was one of gratitude for service members.

Pence noted with pride that their son, Michael J. Pence, is a serving Marine Corps second lieutenant, but he also looked back to the previous generation of his family in evoking a tradition of service: his father went before him on the family’s travels to Korea.

Pence Talks Heroes, Sacrifice

The vice president said that as his party’s aircraft approached landing on the Korean peninsula, “I looked out at those rolling hills, and I thought about 2nd Lt. Edward J. Pence, who was with the 45th Infantry Division of the United States Army. Dad served here in combat. It was in this month — this very week — in 1953 that my dad was awarded a bronze star here in Korea for action in combat.”

Pence said that “like so many who have worn the uniform and come home, my dad didn’t think the heroes were the ones that came home.”

He said his father “spoke of the ones that didn’t come home. He spoke of friends lost, sacrifices made.”

Pence added that his father would today take comfort that “the sacrifices that were made here, and the commitment that endures here has resulted in a free and prosperous South Korea.”

He said President Donald J. Trump today expressed his appreciation for South Korea-based troops and their commander, Army Gen. Vincent K. Brooks, who leads United Nations Command, Combined Forces Command and U.S. Forces Korea.

“General, we are proud — grateful for your leadership,” Pence said. He added that the commander in chief sent his greetings.

“I spoke to the president early today,” he said. “And he asked me to be here, and he told me in no uncertain terms to make sure that I told all of you we’re proud of you, and we are grateful for your service to the United States of America on this frontier of freedom that is South Korea.”

Facing Provocation ‘Without Fear’

CNN and others reported that according to U.S. and South Korean defense officials, an attempted missile launch by North Korea today failed, a day after a large-scale military parade honoring the Kim dynasty’s founder, Kim Il Sung.

“This morning’s provocation from the north is just the latest reminder of the risks each one of you face every day in the defense of the freedom of the people of South Korea and the defense of America in this part of the world,” Pence told the assembled troops.

“Your willingness to step forward, to serve, to stand firm without fear inspires our nation and inspires the world.”

Pence called on the assembled service members to join him in applauding their families, and vowed that “under President Trump’s leadership, we’re going to rebuild our military. We’re going to restore the arsenal of democracy.”

The vice president concluded his remarks with, “So for the sake of all of you who wear the uniform today, for the sake of all who have gone before, thank you for your service and happy Easter.”

Turkey’s President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has declared victory in a controversial referendum on granting him additional powers, but the opposition said it would challenge the unconfirmed result.

Soon after polling stations in Turkey closed on Sunday, the state news agency Anadolu Agency, citing 99.9 per cent of counted ballots, announced that 51.3 per cent of voters had backed a constitutional amendment granting additional powers to President Erdogan.

According to Anadolu, the turnout was 85.6 per cent. It said 48.7 per cent of voters had voted against the proposal.

A majority of voters in most of the bigger cities, such as Istanbul, Ankara, Adana, Antalya, Izmir and the mostly Kurdish city of Diyarbakir, voted against the proposed changes.

Official results from the Supreme Election Council, the YSK, were expected to come on Monday morning.

“We have won. There is no discussion that victory is ours. More than 25 million people voted in favour of the change. This is the greatest reform of our nation,” Erdogan said in a televised statement from the Presidential Palace in Istanbul.

However, the opposition bloc alleged election fraud and said it was certain that 52 per cent of Turks had voted “no” in the referendum.

Opposition leaders also claimed the Anadolu Agency had manipulated the results and that the Election Commission, which they said was controlled by Erdogan, assisted in this.

“These results are questionable, we will not accept them,” Kemal Kilicdaroglu, head of the main opposition Republican People’s Party, CHP, said after the first results.

“The results lack legitimacy because of the YSK’s policies and because of several serious irregularities,” he added.

Opposition officials and experts said one irregularity was a controversial decision – made on the referendum day – by the YSK to accept unsealed ballots.

According to many experts and the opposition, this was violation of the constitution.

Besides this, more than a million votes were cancelled, Anadolu Agency previously reported.

CHP Vice-President Erdal Aksunger told the media that they would officially challenge the results.

“Erdogan and his team are manipulating the results and the YSK is part of this crime. A recount is necessary,” he said. “They will lose the referendum and the people will win,” he added.

Unabashed, Erdogan dismissed all queries about the result, and said he would now proceed with his priority – restoring the death penalty in Turkey.

“I will discuss with the government about reintroducing the death penalty as my first task after the referendum,” he noted.

The new presidential political system, which includes abolishing the post of Prime Minister, will be applied as of 2019.

It remains unclear how the opposition can challenge the referendum results and what the outcome of such a challenge would be.

Since a failed coup attempt last summer, hundreds of thousands of people have been arrested, investigated, suspended or fired from their jobs, while numerous institutions including media and non-governmental organisations have been closed down.

If Erdogan escalates his oppression of political opponents in Turkey, it will further undermine Turkey’s relations with the EU, the US and NATO, experts say.
– See more at: http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/turkey-s-referendum-erdogan-declares-victory-opposition-disputes-results-04-16-2017#sthash.jBhRHLSe.dpuf

People who possess a greater understanding of finance are less likely to fret about life in their twilight years.

It seems financial literacy – the ability to understand how money works, enables people to accumulate more assets and income during their lifetime, and so increases confidence for the years ahead.

Additionally, financial literacy seemingly engenders a greater perception for risk and enables those who have it to face off later-life’s dilemmas with ease.

These findings, from Associate Professor Yoshihiko Kadoya of Hiroshima University and Mostafa Saidur Rahim Khan of Nagoya University, stem from a study which asked people from across Japan to answer questions assessing their calculation skills, understanding of pricing behavior, and financial securities such as bonds and stocks.

Respondents were also asked about their accumulated wealth, assets, and lifestyle – and to rate the level of anxiety they felt about life beyond 65.

As the first study to investigate financial literacy as a contributing factor to anxiety about old age, it should prove useful to policy makers in Japan and other developed countries where population aging is a growing concern.

The study has thrown up several intriguing findings for economic gurus to mull over. It suggests that financial literacy is not particularly high throughout Japanese society, and that men, and those with a higher level of education are more financially clued-in than women, and those with less education respectively.

The overriding thrust is that the more financially literate earn and accumulate more during their lifetime – and thus worry less about growing old.

It also appears that financial literacy helps shape people’s perception towards risk and uncertainty – making them more capable and confident in tackling whatever problems life throws at them.

Professor Kadoya said that financial literacy increases our awareness about financial products, builds a capacity to compare all available financial options, and changes our financial behavior – all which bodes well for our perceptions of, and actual experiences during our seniority.

While financial literacy taken alone was seen to reduce anxiety – its affect was further heightened by other factors.

Married respondents had even lower levels of anxiety about growing old than financially literate singletons. This could be down to married couples together planning more-effectively for the future due to familial responsibilities.

Age also plays a significant role, with anxiety levels peaking around 40. The researchers suggest that people at this age have the most home and workplace responsibilities, but with less money and time to support them, increasing anxiety about the here and now – and the journey ahead.

Interestingly as people get older their anxiety levels drop off on gaining access to social security, government funded health care and pensions – all taking the sting out of the post-retirement blues.

Having dependent children on the other hand increased anxiety levels – presumably due to respondent’s worry for their children’s wellbeing – as well as their own.

The findings should have implications for Japan and other countries where retirees account for a large and rapidly growing share of the population.

Although Japan has a universal pension system, its benefits depend on an individual’s ability to pay throughout their working life. As in much of the developed world, it is increasingly perceived that a pension is insufficient for daily expenses without a backup pool of savings and assets – putting the financially literate at a distinct advantage.

But should we be worrying about our finances in old age at all? Professor Kadoya doesn’t think so and said governments need to develop strategies to stem an anxiety pandemic:

“People shouldn’t spend time worrying about the future. That is why governments provide pensions, housing, and medical plans. If the perception is that these are not fulfilling their purpose then governments and providers need to look at making them more accessible – if people are still worried then we need to look at educating people about these services that are supplied for their needs.”

By Marion Kawas*

The challenges faced by the students of Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights SPHR and the YestoBDS campaign at the University of British Columbia (UBC) in recent months serve as a template for what to expect from pro-Israel groups on campuses.

The ultimate end result was that the BDS referendum did not pass this year at UBC, although the students won an earlier landmark and (perhaps more significant) victory from the BC Supreme Court that dismissed a challenge to suppress the vote altogether.

Zionist groups have all now joined in the same chorus that the final vote count shows that BDS is “nefarious”, “divisive” and “promotes hate”.

I would suggest a different analysis, that the referendum results simply show us how much more ruthless, underhanded and aggressive the pro-Israel lobby have become around BDS, particularly at universities.

Israeli apologists constantly repeat the mantra that BDS creates a toxic and divisive environment on campus, but really, who is driving that toxicity?

After following the debates on both print and social media at UBC during the referendum, and personally witnessing the horrific verbal abuse (that could easily have escalated into physical abuse) and disruption from the “Jewish Defense League” at a BDS panel on April 3, I have come to the conclusion that part of the strategy by pro-Israel groups is to manufacture this “toxic” environment so that student unions will be hesitant to deal with the issue.

As SPHR-UBC noted in their statement following the vote, the court case and the delays in being able to campaign (especially for a volunteer student group in the final week of term) severely hindered their efficacy. They summed it this way:

“We started this campaign knowing the odds were against us: we only had a week to campaign, the delay was caused by a legal battle that had drained our efforts already, we had limited resources compared to our opposition, and we knew it would be hard.

“Regardless, we managed to start important conversations and the outcome of the vote shows that in better circumstances we could actually make it, and we commit to keep this conversation going on campus. It’s a shame that so few students had the opportunity to be aware of the referendum due to the constraints of limited campaign time.”

There were also reports that the AMS Student Union did not send out an email to all students notifying them of the online BDS referendum, even though it was an official AMS referendum that had met all the necessary criteria and email notices had been sent 2 years prior during the first BDS vote.

Further, the AMS Code of Procedure specifically states on page 128 that for online voting:

“1. The Elections Committee shall ensure that all Active Members have an opportunity to vote and shall establish staffed information booths and take other measures to publicize the election or referendum so as to ensure that as many Active Members as possible do vote.”

Clearly this did not happen as shown by the very low voter turnout; we have to ask why? Given the hectic nature of the last week of classes, and the imbalance in resources, this AMS lack of publicity may have been critical.

From the “Hillel student that went to court” to the Bnai Brith smear campaign to the JDL thuggery – the pro-Israel lobby groups were all on the same trajectory. Make the subject so contentious, so onerous, so costly that many students will not want to take it on.

And make sure that even if you can’t convince people of the rightness of your position, the issue will be considered too “hot to handle”. As Gilad Erdan, the Israeli Minister of Strategic Affairs, said over a year ago – “Soon every BDS activist will know that he will pay a price for this.”

And given developments in the past few months, we take him at this word. If you’re of Palestinian descent, the new travel ban means you might not be able to return to see your family if you are publicly active around BDS. Or the JDL will physically assault you, as happened in Washington DC to Kamal Nayfeh, who required 19 stitches for an eye injury. Or you will be falsely linked with alleged “terrorist” groups, and your photo spread across Zionist websites for simply wearing a symbolic Palestinian scarf, as happened at UBC.

We are deeply moved that in the face of such blatant and aggressive tactics, the students at UBC were not intimidated and carried on with their YestoBDS campaign. More than that, they pledged to continue the struggle by saying:

“We will keep standing up for human rights, even in the face of hateful misinformation and intimidation. We will keep giving space to the voices of Palestinians, in the name of freedom, justice and equality.”

And this is the real victory for BDS – that despite facing the full force of what can only be called the “BDS busting” machine, these students stood their ground and insisted to speak up for Palestinian rights, and scored a precedent-setting legal decision in the BC Supreme Court at the same time.

– Marion Kawas is a long-time pro-Palestinian activist, a member of BDS Vancouver-Coast Salish and co-host of Voice of Palestine. She contributed this article to PalestineChronicle.com. 

The remains of a medieval priest who died 700 years ago have been uncovered in an elaborate grave.

Archaeologists from the University of Sheffield uncovered the rare find at Thornton Abbey in Lincolnshire, which was founded as a monastery in 1139 and went onto become one of the richest religious houses in England.

The priest’s gravestone was discovered close to the altar of a former hospital chapel. Unusually for the period, it displayed an inscription of the deceased’s name, Richard de W’Peton – abbreviated from ‘Wispeton’, a medieval incarnation of modern Wispington in Lincolnshire – and his date of death, 17 April 1317.

The slab also contained an extract from the Bible, specifically Philippians 2:10, which reads; “that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth.”

The discovery of Richard’s grave was made by University of Sheffield PhD student Emma Hook, who found his skeletal remains surrounded by the decayed fragments of a wooden coffin.

“After taking Richard’s skeleton back to the laboratory, despite poor preservation, we were able to establish Richard was around 35-45 years-old at the time of his death and that he had stood around 5ft 4ins tall,” said Emma.

“Although he ended his days in the priesthood, there is also some suggestion that he might have had humbler origins in more worldly work; his bones show the marks of robust muscle attachments, indicating that strenuous physical labour had been a regular part of his life at some stage.

“Nor had his childhood been easy; his teeth show distinctive lines known as dental enamel hypoplasia, indicating that his early years had been marked by a period of malnutrition or illness.”

In order to further investigate Richard’s health, researchers in the Department of Archaeology produced a 3D scan of his skull. The model produced enables detailed features of the skull to be seen with much more ease than with the naked eye.

This revealed a potentially violent episode in the priest’s past: a slight depression in the back of his skull shows evidence of an extremely well-healed blunt force trauma suffered many years before Richard’s death.

None of the investigations shed light on the cause of his demise at a relatively young age, however there is one possibility that researchers are exploring.

Dr Hugh Willmott from the University of Sheffield’s Department of Archaeology, who has been working on the excavation site at Thornton Abbey since 2011, said: “2017 marks not only the 700th anniversary of Richard’s death, but also that of a catastrophic event that is now largely forgotten, but caused years of suffering for the whole of Europe: the Great Famine of 1315-1317.

“Triggered by a whole spring and summer of relentlessly heavy rain that caused widespread crop failures – which vastly depleted the availability of grain for humans and hay or straw for animals – this was a period of mass starvation.

“Although not on the same scale as the Black Death, which devastated Europe from 1346-1353 and which also left its mark at Thornton Abbey, these hungry times struck rich and poor alike, killing millions across the continent.”

He added: “By spring 1317, when Richard died, the crisis was at its peak and its events would undoubtedly have affected medieval hospitals like Thornton Abbey, and the priests who served there.

“These institutions traditionally cared for the poor and hungry as well as the sick, so during the Great Famine sites like Thornton would have found themselves on the front line. Richard would have ministered to the starving, working in the face of desperately limited resources – and perhaps despite these efforts, he too succumbed to the natural disaster that was unfolding around him.

“For now, such a narrative can only be a matter of speculation, but it does seem clear that – whatever caused his death – at the end of his days Richard was held in high regard, afforded an elaborate burial in the most prestigious part of the hospital chapel, in the very place he would have spent his final years working among the poor and dying.”

This is the latest significant archaeological find at Thornton Abbey in Lincolnshire. Last year a mass burial of bodies, known to be victims of the Black Death, was discovered at the hospital. A total of 48 skeletons, many of which were children, were found by the excavation team including PhD and undergraduate archaeology students.

The Russian government and its media routinely treat all Muslims as potential terrorists, Denis Sokolov says, creating a dangerous situation in which “terrorism, the struggle with it, and the criminal world are fused into a single market of force, subordinate to the laws of the marketplace and not to the Constitution and conspiracies of the special services.”

“And this market,” the Moscow sociologist says, “unfortunately is becoming the main driver of [Moscow’s] domestic and foreign policy. And this war with an entire religious group … where the frontline is between citizens of one country can lead to a situation in which the market of force simply swallows the state, together with its power vertical.”

Writing in Vedomosti, the head of Moscow’s RAMCON Research Center says that the situation has deteriorated in the wake of the St. Petersburg bombings because both the regime and the population think that any moves against Muslims are justified as a form of insurance against terror (vedomosti.ru/opinion/articles/2017/04/11/685050-pobeda-nad-razumom).

And they are especially ready to apply harsh penalties against any Muslim from Russia who has gone abroad for whatever reason, forgetting that while “about 7,000” Russian citizens have fought (and about 3500 have died) fighting for ISIS, there are “tens of thousands absolutely peaceful Muslims who have emigrated from Russia because of fears for their freedom and life.

Despite their experience in their homeland, these people “do not intend to take part in the caliphate or a war or ‘Islamic terrorism,’” and acting as if they all are doing so and as if their relatives at home can be mistreated or used as hostages only has the effect of helping the radicals by radicalizing more of their number.

According to Sokolov, “the majority of emigres never have supported armed struggle or international terrorism: they simply were forced to flee and have not returned. Among this many-thousands-strong flow are preachers, imams, leaders of communities, several former muftis of entire Russian regions, Islamic activists, journalists and enlighteners.”

In short, they constitute “a large part of the intellectual and spiritual leaders” of the Muslim community of “the former CIS” now are in exile. And this means, although Sokolov does not say so, that once again the Muslims of Russia are being left without their own domestic transmission mechanisms, something that has potentially serious consequences as well.

In the 1920s and 1930s, the communists expelled or killed almost all the imams, mullahs and muftis, degrading the members of traditionally Muslim nationalities to the status of “ethnic Muslims,” that is, people who knew they were Muslim but did not know what being a Muslim entailed.

Such people were thus especially at risk of being led astray by radical Muslim missionaries after it became possible, in the wake of the collapse of the USSR, for such people to to enter Russia and the other post-Soviet states. Now, albeit in a slightly different way, Moscow is taking steps that could provoke similar burst of radicalization in a much less distant future.

Sokolov continues: “In Russia and the Central Asian republics, using laws on extremism and an imprecise set of definitions which leave an enormous space for local initiatives, Muslims are being kidnapped, arms and drugs are being planted on them, and they are given enormously long jail sentnences.”

“While we are citizens of one country, we in fact live in various world: In the North Caucasus, for example, the torture of prisoners has long been the norm, and the persecution of people for different opinions was practiced 15 years before the adoption of the Yarovaya law.”

In Central Asia, he points out, there has been “a wave of ethnic and religious cleansings from Namgan and Andizhan in Uzbekistan to Osh in Kyrgyzstan.”   And many Muslims in western Kazakhstan in recent years “have been arrested or have emigrated.”

There are two distinct “generations” of Russian citizens fighting for ISIS in Syria: the first consists of members of the Caucasus Emirate and the second of newly urbanized young people “who in the 1990s moved from auls into the cities.” There Islamic knowledge came from “the Internet and [so-called] ‘Google sheikhs.’”

At the present time, the behavior of the Russian authorities is driving many Muslims to emigrate and some to join the ranks of ISIS, Sokolov says. Far more effective in convincing Muslims from Russia not to join that group have been those who are convinced Muslims or those who have gone to fight and been horrified by what they have seen.

Unfortunately, he continues, the Russian authorities view both such groups as the enemy rather than as potential allies; and consequently, if Moscow continues to view all Muslims as a threat, the number who will become one almost certainly will grow first in Syria and then in the Russian Federation itself.

As the sociologist concludes, “It is impossible to deny the terrorist character of the Caucasus Emirate which is banned in Russia; but as an opponent of ISIS, it is very effective.” Unless Moscow can learn to make such distinctions, the future will be very bleak indeed.

By Kimberley Anne Nazareth*

During the Obama presidency, US policy towards Syria, Iran and North Korea rested on a ‘carrot and stick’ approach with greater emphasis on the carrots. The Trump administration, while following a similar approach, appears to be willing to use more sticks. The recent air strikes on Syria’s Al Shayrat airbase sanctioned by President Trump in response to the chemical attacks by the Assad regime, have demonstrated a clear shift in strategy since the Obama administration. There are also indications of the possibility of US military strikes against North Korea; for instance the deployment of the Carl Vonson carrier, and against Iran in future. The question is: to what extent, and in what forms, will the Trump administration bring with it continuity or change in its dealings with adversarial states, in this case, Syria, Iran and North Korea?

Syria

Obama seemed hesitant of military intervention in Syria. US strategy hinged on a couple of factors, which included the objective of avoiding another Libya, the unorganised anti-Assad rebels, and Russian involvement, to name a few. In spite of the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime in2013, which crossed Obama’s ‘redline’, the then US administration refrained from using force. Obama’s policy towards Syria has been considered a failure as Assad is still in power, the civil war continues, and the peace process has become redundant.

On the other hand, the Trump administration seems more decisive in terms of policy. Trump’s rhetoric in comparison to the past has undergone a shift, from avoiding involvement to getting involved. US policy for the moment seems more in tune with action than inaction. This was evident with the recent US strike. The Trump administration responded decisively by ordering 59 Tomahawk missile strikes on the Syrian airfield. The administration has also signalled further action against Syria but has been unclear on the nature of potential action. Having said this, current US policy towards Syria has its own set of problems. Notwithstanding the obstacles, the larger question is, how far is Trump willing to go and what lengths is he willing to cross in his policy towards Syria?

Iran

Obama’s policy towards Iran hinged on ‘engagement’, but more accurately it separated the nuclear deal/Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) from the Iranian ballistic missile programme. That is, the Obama administration found it prudent to impose sanctions on Iran’s ballistic missiles programme while simultaneously lifting sanctions when it came to the JCPOA.

This policy has so far been continued by the current administration. Trump has carried forward the sanctions imposed by Obama on the ballistic missiles programme, which were authorised by UN Resolutions 2231. In fact, the Trump administration has also imposed sanctions as per the lists drawn up by the previous administration. This strategy makes it clear that both the US and Iran indirectly agree that all the issues that fall outside the JCPOA are fair game. Thus, in considering US policy towards Iran, there seems to be greater continuity.

North Korea

Obama’s carrot and stick policy to rein in the North Korean nuclear as well as ballistic missile programmes was unsuccessful. His policy of ‘strategic patience’, which was successful with Iran was unsuccessful in the case of North Korea.

During the US election campaign, candidate Trump dabbled with the idea of a ‘face-to-face’ meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. Recently, there have been back and forth provocations between the two, from the testing of ballistic missiles by North Korea, to the US deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Air Defense (THAAD) system in South Korea, which provoked Pyongyang’s ‘nuclear threat’, in turn propelling the US to put the military option on the table. More recently, the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson and its escorts were diverted to the Korean Peninsula. These appear to be stronger measures against North Korea, and are signs of decisive action by the US to assure its regional allies. Irrespective of campaign rhetoric, the Trump administration seems more willing to not only maintain the status quo but enforce it with greater vigour, thus strengthening the idea of ‘support any friend.’ Although the current US strategy seems to be more decisive than before, is it is a wise choice in terms of future implications?

Conclusion

A comparison of Obama’s approach and the Trump administration’s still evolving policy towards adversarial states reveals marked changes in US strategy towards Syria and North Korea. Trump seems willing to use more sticks in his strategy towards adversaries. However, in the case of Iran, there seems to be greater continuity in US policy, which could be to avoid getting in the way of the JCPOA.

The down side to this strategy could be in terms of a regional fallout. Given the mounting regional challenges, the question is whether Trump’s strong actions towards Syria and North Korea are a good idea for all the stakeholders involved. The Trump administration will have to tread ahead with caution and carefully evaluate the marked difference in the behaviour of all three countries and the interests of the other stakeholders involved.

* Kimberley Anne Nazareth
Researcher, Nuclear Security Programme (NSP), IPCS

By Georgi Gotev

(EurActiv) — Bulgarian ultra-nationalists look set to enter government for the first time after a new pro-Russian “patriotic” alliance agreed on a coalition with former Premier Boyko Borissov’s party following elections on 26 March.

The United Patriots, which includes the anti-Semitic Ataka (“Attack”) party, stoked anti-immigration sentiment to come third in the elections while also railing against Muslims, Roma and gay people.

The tie-up of the fractious alliance with Borissov’s pro-EU centre-right GERB party, which came first in the elections, will give the coalition a majority of just two seats.

“If we have not agreed on a government platform with these people, we would have had to go for new elections in several months and end up in the same situation,” Borissov said yesterday (13 April) in a special address in parliament, flanked by the leaders of the United Patriots.

One of them, Valeri Simeonov added: “Despite the differences that we have, we are obliged in the interest of the Bulgarian people to form a common government as there are no other (coalition) options available.”

With Bulgaria and Russia enjoying close historical, cultural and economic ties, the ‘patriots’ campaigned on a platform of getting EU sanctions on Moscow lifted.

However, in its joint programme, the coalition commits Bulgaria to continued membership of the European Union and the NATO military alliance, and to curbing immigration.

The parties also pledged to boost the minimum salary in the EU’s poorest country from the current 460 leva (€230) to 650 leva within four years and to hike state pensions.

Former firefighter and bodyguard Borissov is set to return as prime minister but negotiations on the divvying up of ministerial positions will begin on Monday (17 April), he said.

Borissov, 57, has already served twice as premier, from 2009 to 2013 and again from 2014 to 2017.

He quit early both times, first in 2013 after mass protests and then last November after his candidate lost the presidential race to air force commander Rumen Radev, backed by the opposition Socialists (BSP).

The government will rely on loose backing from the new Volya party of businessman Veselin Mareshki, who likes to be called the Bulgarian Donald Trump, and which won 12 seats in the 240-seat parliament.

Parliament is expected to convene on 19 April and President Radev is due to hand out the first mandate for forming a government to GERB shortly after that.

Bulgaria needs to name a new Commissioner after Kristalina Georgieva last November resigned to take a job with the World Bank.

Bulgaria will hold the rotating presidency of the Council of the European Union from 1 January 2018.

By Elise Harris and Martin Rothweiler

In a lengthy interview with EWTN’s German television branch, Benedict XVI’s closest aide describes how the retired pontiff is doing as he turns the milestone age of 90, giving a rare look into what life is like for the Pope Emeritus.

Archbishop Gänswein has been Benedict’s personal secretary since 2003, while the latter was still Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. He has remained close at Benedict’s side throughout his papacy, resignation and his life of retirement.

In anticipation of Benedict XVI’s 90th birthday, which this year falls on Easter Sunday, April 16, Gänswein gave a lengthy interview to EWTN.TV in German, sharing insights into how the Pope Emeritus plans to celebrate his birthday and highlights and personal memories of his pontificate.

Among other things, the archbishop recalls how Benedict handled his election, the frequently negative media-firestorm that enveloped much of his pontificate, his hope for what people take from his papacy as well as how he spends his days in retirement.

Please read below for the full interview with Archbishop Gänswein, conducted by the head of EWTN.TV Martin Rothweiler, and translated from the original German by EWTN’s Silvia Kritzenberger:

EWTN.TV: The question everyone’s interested in is, of course: How is Pope Benedict? The Psalm says: “Our lives last seventy years or, if we are strong, eighty years.” That happens to be psalm 90. And now on the 16th of April, Pope Benedict will celebrate his 90th birthday! How is he?

Gänswein: Yes, indeed, on Easter Sunday he will turn 90! Considering his age, he is remarkably well. He is also in good spirits, very clear in his head and still has a good sense of humor. What bothers him are his legs, so he uses a walker for help, and he gets along very well. And this walker guarantees him freedom of movement and autonomy. So, for a 90-year old, he is doing pretty well – even though, from time to time, he complains of this or that minor ailment.

EWTN.TV: How will he celebrate his birthday?

Gänswein: On Easter Sunday, priority will of course be given to liturgy. On Easter Monday, in the afternoon, we will hold a small celebration. He wanted something not too exhausting, appropriate to his strengths. He didn’t want to have a big celebration. That was never an option for him. A small delegation from Bavaria will come, the Mountain troops will come… The Bavarian Prime Minister will come to the monastery, and there we will hold a small birthday party in true Bavarian style!

EWTN.TV: Have you any idea if Pope Francis will come to see him?

Gänswein: That is quite likely. He will surely do so.

EWTN.TV: No one knows Pope Benedict better than you – apart from his brother Georg Ratzinger. How did you get to know Pope Benedict?

Gänswein: Actually, through literature. Back in the day, when I was just about to finish gymnasium, my parish priest gave me Ratzinger’s Introduction to Christianity, urging me: “You absolutely have to read this! That’s the future!” I said: “Okay, but have you read it?” “No,” he replied, “but you have to read it!” And I did. Later, when I started to study theology in Freiburg, and then in Rome, and then again back in Freiburg, I had practically read everything the then-professor and cardinal had written. But it was only 21, or maybe 22 years ago, that I finally met him in person here in Rome, when I was asked to become a collaborator of the Roman Curia … More concretely, I met him in the Teutonic College, that is, in the chapel, where Cardinal Ratzinger used to celebrate Mass for the German pilgrims every Thursday, joining us for breakfast. That was how the first personal contact with Cardinal Ratzinger came about, and since then we never lost that contact.

EWTN.TV: At some point, he decided to call you to his side. Why did his choice fall on you?

Gänswein: Well, you must know that I didn’t come directly to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith; my first employment was at the Congregation for Divine Worship. But when, in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, a German priest left after a certain period of time in order to go back to Germany, Ratzinger asked me to come. “I think you are suitable for the post, and I would like you to come,” he said to me. “If you agree, I would like to speak with the respective authorities.” And he did. That was how it came about that, in 1996, I entered the staff of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, a post I held until 2003. Afterwards, he made me his Personal Secretary – which I still am, to this very day.

EWTN.TV: What was your first impression of him? What did you think when he called you to work closely with him?

Gänswein: My first thought was: Have I done something wrong? Don’t I have a clean record? So I examined my conscience, but my conscience was clear. And then he said: “No, it is something that concerns your future. Something I think might be a good task for you. Consider it carefully!” Of course, I was very pleased that he thought I was capable of working in his entourage. It is indeed a very demanding task, one that requires all your strength.

EWTN.TV: Which personality traits and characteristics did you discover in him?

Gänswein: The same I had already discovered in his writings: a sharp intellect, a clear diction. And then, in his personal relations, a great clemency, quite the contrary of what he has always been associated with and still is, of what has always been said about him, when he was described as a “Panzerkardinal” (army tank Cardinal), someone rough – which he is not. On the contrary, he is very confident when dealing with others, but also when he has to deal with problems, when he has to solve problems, and, above all, in the presentation of the faith, the defense of the faith. But what moved me most, was to see how this man managed to proclaim our faith with simple, but profound words, against all odds and despite all hostilities.

EWTN.TV: What were the main issues on his agenda when he was Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith?

Gänswein: When I joined the Congregation, he was dealing with the encyclical letter Fides et Ratio, and then with Dominus Jesus, documents which date back to years when I was already part of the Congregation. Later, of course, it was also about religious dialogue – a subject he revisited and deepened also after he’d become Pope. And then the big issue of faith and reason. A whole chain of subjects, so to say, I could witness in person. And it was all highly interesting, and a great challenge, too.

EWTN.TV: It was Pope John Paul II who nominated Cardinal Ratzinger Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. What kind of relationship did they have? What kind of relationship did Pope Benedict, then Cardinal Ratzinger, have with the Pope who was, as we now know, a holy man?

Gänswein: Cardinal Ratzinger, that is to say, Pope Benedict, had contributed with a relatively long essay to a small, but beautiful little book that was published on the occasion of the canonization of John Paul II. An essay, in which he describes his relationship with the holy Pope John Paul II –  after all, they had worked closely together for 23 years – and the great admiration he has for him. He spoke of him very often. It is of course a great gift, an immense grace, to work for so long, and so intensely, side by side with a man like John Paul II, facing also many a storm together! And the then Cardinal Ratzinger had to take many blows for John Paul II, since the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith clearly cannot be everybody’s darling: He has to offer his back, so that he can take the blows that are actually meant for the Pope.

EWTN.TV: How strong was his influence on the pontificate of John Paul II?

Gänswein: I am convinced of the fact that the pontificate of John Paul II was strongly influenced and supported not only by the person of the then Prefect of the Congregation of Faith, but also by his thoughts and his actions.

EWTN.TV: Pope Benedict once said that he had learned and understood much of John Paul II when he watched him celebrate Mass; when he saw how he prayed, how very united he was with God, far beyond his philosophical and mental capacities. What do you think when you watch Pope Benedict celebrate Mass, when you might be present while he is praying?

Gänswein: In fact, that is something I see every day, but especially since the moment I became secretary to Pope Benedict. Before, I was already his secretary, but we didn’t live together. It did happen that we celebrated Mass together, of course. But from the very moment of his election, it was no longer a work communion, but also a communion of life. And the daily Mass has become part of this life, then and today. It is moving to watch Pope Benedict during Mass simply abandon himself to what is happening, even now, in his old days, with all the physical handicaps that come with it; to see how intensely he enters the depths of prayer, but also afterwards, during the thanksgiving in front of the tabernacle, in front of the Most Blessed Sacrament. As far as I am concerned, it makes me enter the depths of prayer. That is highly motivating, and I am very thankful that I was given the chance to have an experience like this.

EWTN.TV: 2005 is the year that marked the end of the long and public suffering and death of John Paul II. How does Pope Benedict XVI remember this moment today? After all, with his resignation, he has chosen to let his own pontificate end in a different way…How does he remember the suffering and the death of John Paul II?

Gänswein: I remember very clearly what he said to me when he made me his secretary. He said: “We two are interim arrangements. I will soon retire, and you will accompany me until that moment comes.” That was in 2003. Time passed by…and then came 2005. The interim arrangement lasts and lasts. And he was really looking forward to having some time off in order to be able to finish writing his book about Jesus. But then things turned out differently. And, well, I think that after the death of Pope John Paul II he had other plans, hoping that the new Pope would let him take his leave, entering his well-deserved retirement. But once again, things turned out differently: he became Pope himself, and the Lord took him up on his promise once again. He had plans, but there was another who had different plans for him.

EWTN.TV: Did he expect – or fear –  that in any way?

Gänswein: He certainly did not expect it – but, at a certain point, he might have feared it. In this context, I always remember his first press conference (as Pope), where he described the 19th of April, the day of his election when, in the late afternoon, the ballot was so clear that it became obvious that he would be elected. Well, the image he used, the one of the guillotine, was a very strong one, and full of tension. And later, in Munich, referring to the image of the bear of St. Corbinian, he said that the bear was actually supposed to accompany the then-bishop Corbinian to Rome, and then return to where he had come from, whereas he, unlike the bear in the legend, couldn’t go back, but has remained in Rome to this very day.

EWTN.TV: How was your first encounter, after he had become Pope? What did he say to you?

Gänswein: We had our first encounter in the Sistine Chapel, right under the Last Judgement. The cardinals had approached him and sworn obedience to him. And since I had been allowed to be present at the Conclave – Ratzinger, being the Deacon of the Cardinals, had the right to take a priest with him, and his choice had fallen on me – I was the last in the queue. There were others before me, I was the last. And in this very moment…I remember it so well…I can still see him, for the first time all dressed in white: white pileolus, white cassock, white hair – and all white in the face! Practically a whole small cloud of white…He sat there, and in this moment I granted the Holy Father my unconditional availability, promising him that I would always gladly do whatever he might ask of me; that he would always be able to count on me, that I would back him, and that I would gladly do so.

EWTN.TV: What were the joys of this pontificate? Usually, the burden of the Petrine ministry is what first comes to mind. But are there also moments, events, when you could feel the joy Pope Benedict experienced in carrying out his ministry?

Gänswein: There were, without any doubt, moments in which he felt utter joy, and also manifested it. I think, for example, of various encounters, not only during his travels. Encounters with the Successor of Peter are always special encounters; even here, during the General Audiences or the Private Audiences – and, in another, very special way, when he acts as officiant, that is, during the celebration of the Holy Mass or other liturgical celebrations.  There were indeed moments full of joy, fulfilled with joy. And afterwards, he never failed to remark on it. It made him really happy.

EWTN.TV: Are there any events you remember particularly well, especially in connection with Pope Benedict’s visits to Germany, which we all remember vividly, for example the first World Youth Day?

Gänswein: Yes, well, the first encounter hadn’t been brought about by Pope Benedict himself, but by John Paul II. And so, in 2005, as we all know, it was Benedict’s turn to travel to Cologne. It was surely something great, something really moving. It was the first time in his life he met such an immense crowd of young people, who were all waiting for him! How will it go? Will the ice break, will the ice melt? Or will it take some time? And how will we get along with one another? But there was no ice at all! It simply worked, right from the start!  And I think, he himself was more surprised by it than the young people he met.

EWTN.TV: What are the key messages of his Pontificate? His first encyclical letter was Deus Caritas est, “God Is Love.” The second one was dedicated to hope; his third encyclical, the one on faith, was passed on to his successor who completed it. Don’t you think that especially Deus Caritas est, so full of tenderness and poetic language, was something many didn’t expect?

Gänswein: Yes, one has to say, he published three encyclical letters. And we must not omit Caritas in veritate, which is very important. In fact, the one about the third theological virtue, faith, fides, was then published under his successor: Lumen fidei. But these four encyclicals clearly contain a fundamental message that has moved him his whole life long; a message he wanted to bequeath to men, to the Church.

Another constant of Pope Benedict is a very important word, a very important element: joy, “la gioia,” in Italian. He always spoke of the joy of faith, not of the burden, the hardship, the weight of faith, but of the joy that comes with it. And he said that this joy is an important fruit of faith – and also the one thing that gives men wings; that this is how faith gives human life wings: wings which, otherwise without faith, man would never have.

Another important thing for him is – obviously – liturgy, that is to say the direct encounter with God. Liturgy does not represent something theatrical – it means to be called into a relationship with the living God. And then, in theology, we have the person of Jesus Christ: not a historical “something,” a historical person long lost in the past. No, through the scriptures and liturgy, Jesus Christ comes into this world, here and now, and above all: he also comes into my own life. These are the pearls Pope Benedict has bestowed upon us. And we should treat these pearls very carefully, just as we do with precious jewelry.

EWTN.TV: This joy of faith is something Benedict never lost, despite often even heavy media criticism. He never really was the media’s darling, at least not as far as the German media are concerned. How did he account for that?

Gänswein: Well, I have to say, to me that is still a mystery. Whoever defends the truth of faith – to say it with Saint Paul – be it convenient or not, cannot always trigger joy. That is clear. Some essential things just aren’t for sale, and then there’s always a hail of criticism. But he has never answered to provocation, nor let himself be intimidated by criticism. Wherever the substance of the faith is at stake, he had no doubts, and always reacted explicitly, without any inner conflict whatsoever.

On other points, I have to say, there was a mixture of incomprehension, and also aggression, aggressiveness, that became like a clustered ball that consistently hit at the person of the Pope. The incomprehension of many, and especially the media, is still a mystery to me, something I have to take note of, but cannot sort out. I simply have no answer to it.

EWTN.TV: Pope Benedict was never shy about talking to journalists. In the introduction you wrote to the book Über den Wolken mit Papst Benedikt XVI. (Above the Clouds with Pope Benedict XVI), published to mark his 90th birthday – above the clouds, because it contains interviews often given during Papal flights – you state that these conversations reveal his particular cordiality, his often not understood or underestimated humanity…

Gänswein: Pope Benedict has never shunned away from personal contact with the media, with the journalists. And one great gift was that everything he says is well-worded, ready for printing. He was never shy about answering questions, even questions that were embarrassing – well, not embarrassing, but difficult. And that made it even more incomprehensible that it was exactly this corner from where the arrows came, where the fire was set – and for no clear reason at all. He, too, took notice of it. Of course, there were also things which offended, hurt him. Especially when it was clear to see that there was no reason at all, when you couldn’t help asking yourself: why this snappish remark, this acrimonious presentation? Things like that would hurt anyone, that’s only normal. But, on the other side, we also know that our measure is not the applause we get; our measure is inner righteousness, the example of the Gospel. That thought has always comforted him; it was the line of reasoning he has always pursued, until the end.

EWTN.TV: But was he also aware of the value of the media in the process of evangelization? After all, he has awarded the Medal Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice to Mother Angelica, founder of our television network, which means he must really appreciate her! How did he judge the role of the media in the concrete work of evangelization?

Gänswein: The media are an important means; a means that will become ever more important, especially in our time. He has never failed to recognize the value of the media, of the work done by the media and those who are behind it. Because media work is done by people, not by “something.” Behind every camera, every written word, every book, there is a person, there are people he appreciated, whose work he appreciated, regardless of what sometimes had been used or said against him.

EWTN.TV: One cannot think of Pope Benedict without rekindling the memory of his resignation. That is not about to change, and will continue to be a subject that stirs people’s interest. So I would like to ask you again: Did you see it coming? Was it clear to him that he would go down that road one day?

Gänswein: Well, as far as I’m concerned, I didn’t see it coming. If and since when he started to nurture this thought, is something I don’t know. The only thing I know is that he told me about it when the decision was already made. But I definitely didn’t see it coming – and that made the shock for me even greater.

EWTN.TV: In his latest memoirs – I refer to the interview-book Last conversations with Peter Seewald – Benedict XVI makes it very clear that external pressure or adversities would never have made him resign. So this cannot have been the case…

Gänswein: That’s right.

EWTN.TV: …So this is the final word that puts an end to the discussion on possible motives…

Gänswein: In another book – the penultimate project carried out with Peter Seewald in Castel Gandolfo – he had already answered the question whether or not a Pope could resign, in the affirmative. I don’t know in how far he had, already then, considered resignation, stepping back from his office, an option for himself. When you start to have thoughts like that, you do it for a reason. And he has named these reasons very openly…and very honestly, too, one has to say: the waning of his forces, spiritual and physical. The Church needs a strong navigator, and he didn’t have the feeling that he could be that strong navigator. That’s why he wanted to put the faculty bestowed upon him by Jesus back into His hands, so that the College of Cardinals could elect his successor. So obviously, the pontificate of Benedict XVI will also go down in history because of his resignation, that is clear, inevitable…

EWTN.TV: I found it really moving to watch him deliver his last speech to the priests of the diocese of Rome, the one on the Second Vatican Council. In that moment, I couldn’t help asking myself: Why does this man resign? There was clearly a spiritual force! It was an extemporaneous speech in which he exposed one more time his whole legacy, so to say, on the Second Vatican Council, expressing his wish it might one day be fulfilled…

Gänswein: In fact, that was in the Audience Hall. There was this traditional encounter, established many years ago, where the Pope, every Thursday after Ash Wednesday, met with the clergy of Rome, the clergy of his diocese. There were questions and answers, or even other forms of encounter. And in 2013, he was asked to talk about the Second Vatican Council, which he did. He delivered an extemporaneous speech in which he described, one more time and from his point of view, the whole situation and development of the Council, giving also his evaluation. It is something that will remain; something very important for the comprehension of the Second Vatican Council and Ratzinger’s interpretation of it. As far as I know, up to this day there is no other theologian who has defended the documents of the Second Vatican Council on so many levels, and so intensely and cogently as he did. And that is very important also for the inner life of the Church and the people of God!

EWTN.TV: And I think it is safe to say that he contributed to the shaping of the Council…

Gänswein: In fact, being the consultor, the advisor of Cardinal Frings, he did have a part in it. Many of the theological contributions of the Cardinal of Cologne had actually been written by Professor Ratzinger. There are lots of documents where you can clearly see that. And there are also dissertations on this subject which investigate into the possible influence of the then-Professor Ratzinger.

EWTN.TV: Let’s come back to the moment of his resignation, the very last hours. Whoever watched it on TV, was surely moved to see the helicopter departing for Castel Gandolfo. You, too, were visibly moved…And then, the final moment, when the doors in Castel Gandolfo  closed. That was the moment when I – and I guess, many others – thought that we might never see Pope Benedict again. But then things turned out quite differently…

Gänswein: Yes, indeed, the farewell: the transfer to the heliport, the flight in the helicopter over the city of Rome to Castel Gandolfo, the arrival at the Papal Villa. And indeed, at 8 p.m. the closing of the doors. Before, Pope Benedict had delivered a short speech from the balcony, his farewell speech. And then? Well, the works in the monastery Mater Ecclesiae hadn’t been finished yet, so the question was: where could he stay? And the decision was quickly taken: the best option would be Castel Gandolfo. There he will have everything he needs, since no one knows how long the works will last; so he can stay there as long as necessary.

And so two months later, he returned to Rome, and has been living in the monastery Mater Ecclesiae ever since. He himself had said that he would withdraw, going up to the mountain in order to pray. He didn’t mean a withdrawal into private life, but into a life of prayer, meditation and contemplation, in order to serve the Church and his successor. His successor often told him that he shouldn’t hide. He invites him often to important public liturgies, consistories like – I remember it well – the inauguration ceremony of the Holy Year on the 8th of December 2015.

He is present, even when no one sees him. But often he has been seen. He simply wants to be present, as much as possible, while remaining all the same invisible.

EWTN.TV: Many people wish to meet him, and he allows them to. Does he enjoy these encounters? I myself had the chance of a brief encounter with him. There are still many people who ask to see him.

Gänswein: Yes, there are many people who ask to meet him; and many are sad when this is not possible. But those who come, are all very happy, very glad. And the same goes for him. Every encounter is also a sign of affection, a sign, so to say, of approval. And human encounters always do us good.

EWTN.TV: Do some of these people also ask him for advice?

Gänswein: Definitely. I’m convinced of that. I’m never there, though; these encounters are private. Of course, he sometimes talks about it, we talk about those visits. There are indeed people who seek his advice on personal matters. And I’m convinced that the advice they receive is indeed good…

EWTN.TV: Does he still receive many letters? Who writes to him?

Gänswein: People he has known in the past. And also people I don’t know, and he doesn’t know, but who have clearly re-discovered him through literature. They express their gratitude, their happiness, but also their worries: people from all around the world. The people who write to him are very different; they do not belong to the same category, no: it’s people of different ages, of different positions, from all walks of life, a complete mixture.

EWTN.TV: We have talked about “seeking advice:” Pope Francis, who is of a certain age himself, has always said that we should ask our grandparents for advice. Has Pope Francis ever asked Benedict for advice? What kind of relationship do they have?

Gänswein: Yes, indeed, in one of his interviews, Pope Francis is said to be happy about having a grandfather like Benedict – a “wise” grandfather: an adjective not to be omitted! And I am convinced that, as far as this is concerned, one thing or another will come up, or come out, from their contacts and encounters.

EWTN.TV: Your relationship with Benedict is a very close, very personal one. I don’t know if it would be appropriate to talk about a relationship between father and son. Have you ever talked with him about your future?

Gänswein: No.

EWTN.TV: It is known that you would love to engage in pastoral care, that you already do engage in pastoral care.

Gänswein: It was always like that: we didn’t talk about it. Only the very moment he said that he would resign, he asked me to accept the office I still hold. It was his decision, and he hadn’t talked with me about it beforehand. I was very skeptical, and remarked: “Holy Father, that might not be my thing. But if you think it is right for me, I will gladly and obediently accept it.” And he replied: “I do think so, and I ask you to accept.” That was the only time we talked about me and my future career.

EWTN.TV: What are the subjects you talk about? What are the issues that concern him in our world full of crises; what worries him about the situation of the Church?

Gänswein: Well, of course, Pope Benedict takes an interest in what happens in this world, in the Church. Every day, as the conclusion to the day, we watch the news on Italian TV. And he reads the newspapers, the Vatican press review. That is a large range of information. Often we also talk about actual issues that concern our world, about the latest developments here in the Vatican, and beyond the Vatican, or simply common memories regarding things happened in the past.

EWTN.TV: Is he very worried about the Church?

Gänswein: Of course, he has noted that the faith, the substance of the faith, is about to crumble, above all in his homeland, and that inevitably worries, troubles him. But he is not the kind of man – he never was and never will be – who will have the joy taken away from him! On the contrary: he brings his worries to his prayers, hoping that his prayers will help to put things right.

EWTN.TV: He brings them to his prayers and surely also to Holy Mass. On Sundays, he delivers homilies, and is also keeping notes. What happens to these notes?

Gänswein: Well, it is true that Pope Benedict comments on the Gospel. He does so every Sunday, and most of the time only in the presence of the (consecrated laywomen of) “Memores Domini” and myself. Sometimes there might also be a visitor, or – should I not be there – a fellow priest who will then concelebrate. His homilies are always extemporaneous. It is true, he has a sermon notebook, and he takes notes. And I have been asking myself the same question: what happens to these notes? Of course we will keep a record of them. I would like to ask him one day if he could take a look at the notes we have, in order to approve them. I don’t know, though, if that day will ever come.

EWTN.TV: Pope Benedict is undoubtedly one of the greatest theologians…as far as of our century is concerned, he surely is! He has been referred to as the “Mozart of theology.” In your introduction to the already mentioned book Über den Wolken mit Papst Benedikt XVI (Above the Clouds with Pope Benedict XVI) you wrote: “Pope Benedict XVI is a Doctor of the Church. And he has been my teacher up to this day.” What have you learned from him, maybe even in the last weeks?

Gänswein: As I already said, my theological thinking started with the reading of Ratzinger’s Introduction to Christianity. The theological teacher who accompanied my theological studies, and the time that followed, has always been the theologian Ratzinger, and still is. Being given the chance to meet him in person, to learn from his personal example, is of course an additional gift, something unexpected, and I am very grateful for that. I know it is a grace – a grace for which I will thank the Lord every single day.

EWTN.TV: So what could be, in your opinion, the lesson Pope Benedict would like us to learn from his pontificate?

Gänswein: His great concern was that the faith could evaporate. And it is surely his greatest wish that every man be in direct relationship with God, the Lord, with Christ, and that we might dedicate to this relationship our time, strength and affection. Whoever does that, will prove the same sentiment Benedict has in mind when he talks about “joy.” I think the greatest gift would be, if men allowed his proposal or what moved him, to become part of their lives.

EWTN.TV: Our wish to you: could you please assure Pope Benedict also in the name of our viewers, of our thankfulness, our sentiments of appreciation, and convey him our heartfelt best wishes for his 90th birthday! And thank you so much for this conversation!

Gänswein: Thank you. I will gladly convey your wishes, and thank you for having me!

Abdulrahman Al-Rashed, head of Shoura Council’s committee on economy and energy, said he is in favor of women driving “as long as there is a clear system to enable them to drive.”

He said in an interview with Okaz newspaper that Shoura Council members should not be silent on this issue.

Al-Rashed said the extent of criticism they receive indicates high expectations from the council. He said the council does not serve a certain category of people but rather, plays a monitoring role, participates in legislations, studies government departments’ reports and issues recommendations aimed at improving the performance of those entities.

He said all members deal with the issues discussed and vote on them, but do not form blocs.

Women’s participation in the council is developing every day, he said. “Their presence in the council is positive. They propose discussions on important issues related to society.”

Rejecting proposals or recommendations is done by the members of the council themselves.

“No hidden hands prevent the council proposals,” he said. “There are no restrictions as Article 23 gives a member the right to file proposals.”

He said the issue of women driving had been discussed in the council, and the traffic department does not have a law preventing them from driving.

He said the question is how to enable them to drive — if there is a clear regulation that allows women to drive “then I am with it, especially as there is no Sharia restriction on the issue.”

Every day and throughout the world we read and hear of turmoil, of threats, violence, divisions, wars for peace and peace for wars, freedom as oppression and oppression as freedom.

In a world where words have lost their meanings and meanings have no words, how do we go about understanding turmoil?

Surely, economies rise and decline, new empires become dominant and old powers attempt to regain their power.

Does global turmoil ‘up end’ the established order? Or does it add up to hot air, flatulence, loud, smelly, empty and of short duration?

Is turmoil more than gaseous air, an after-dinner deep-throated salute to the cook? Or is it a result of transformations of substance, albeit piles of broken societies stacked as precisely located horse buns?

In plain English: we experience turmoil . . . but we struggle to understand its significance. We ask: who benefits? And the quacks answer: Everybody, nobody and somebody.

We will argue that most turmoil receives grave attention but is of little consequence.

Turmoil has many facets and is expressed by many voices, but it seldom leads to substantive outcomes.

A caveat: I am not a Burkean conservative fearful of turmoil, nor a modern version of Candide finding a silver earring in every cauliflower ear.

Turmoil does, on rare occasion, result in greater freedom and justice, but certainly not as a product of a unipolar world.

Turmoil, ‘Turmoil’ Everywhere You Turn

The United States faces ‘unprecedented turmoil’. The chattering classes debate with fervor and solemnity questions of momentous importance.

The two major parties arouse passions over whether one hundred million votes were tampered by a feisty bear, hacking a national committee of garrulous roosters, changing the voting result.

A world historic event! Crowing arouses world attention.

The snoopy bear, or so we are told, was investigated by the former President’s staff, men and women. One million security officials studied, in great depth, untold number of rumors. They scrutinized the dinner tables with high-powered secret cameras to find if the bear chose to sit next to US officials eager for cash and access to honey pots.

Turmoil spread to the stock market and the Federal Budget, facing a shut-down, which will close government offices, stops pensions and salaries. Rumors have it that the Interior Department will lose control of federal lands and the crafty bear will exploit it.

As the clock ticks to doomsday – utter turmoil lurks in the hearts and minds of Congress. The White House gloats, the media points to the Bear in the White House.

Wall Street worries not, since it buys and owns both Parties: It will tell them when to end the Kabuki strife. The turmoil will conclude with an amicable agreement. The budget turmoil was only a scare: flatulence without ‘substance’.

Global Turmoil

Turmoil reigns across the globe because adversaries near and far resist the overtures of an endearing missile up their orifices.

We mean war! This is no idle congressional chatter and boisterous bursts of military clap trap. The US sends bombs and missiles to defeat our adversaries by killing civilians. We empty the cities to capture the terrorists.

Wars become ‘Historical ’ because they are of long duration leading to relentless defeats! Turbulence goes on because of oil, Israel and terrorists (proximity is an unintended coincidence!).

When turmoil ends, we may inherit a land without people and a people with depleted uranium – to paraphrase the modern philosopher queen, Golda Meir.

Turmoil Strikes the Heartland of Our Unipolar World

Let us be absolutely clear: We are not always pointing our middle finger at the US as the root of turmoil. If we go beyond roots and examine branches and falling, dying leaves, millions are involved in the turmoil. It is the joint responsibility of our living and their dead.

Syria is a case in point. We have only killed less than a million, and then ten million abandoned their land and chose our liberty over our terrorists. By the way, how can our terrorists be call terrorists if, with our guns in hand, they stave off the greedy bear — the very same bear who stole our election.

Syria is in turmoil because as Henry Kissinger wisely noted: “If a people is foolish enough to vote for a government that has failed to understand our unipolar world, they deserve their fate”.

Turmoil: Turkey

Turkey is rife with turmoil because it refused to surrender to a false coup by a false leader named Gulan. He happens to live and plot in the US. He was hoping to repay our hospitality with expanded Turkish air bases and open highways for our mercenaries, arms and funds to liberate civilians and recover headless cadavers in Syria.

When the Turkish Sultan dared to imitate our leaders by extending imprisonment to all who opposed him, we denounced him for not consulting us on whom to jail or not jail.

Ankara now threatens our Kurds, who use our arms and Special Forces to liberate the Syrian borders along southeastern Turkey (Kurdistan).

The Turks claim to see a conspiracy to unify the secessionist Turkish Kurds with our freedom-loving annexationist Syrian Kurds. United Kurdistan may be a true ally for now, but who’s to say that in our game of unipolar chess we could turn the Kurds back into pawns if they become unruly under independence and fall prey to the appeals of the roaming Bear.

Turmoil in Korea

In Korea, turmoil is rife! But is it a tempest in a teapot, or a nuclear pressure cooker ready to explode?

We are there. We allowed the North to exist. We only bombed four million of their citizens and limited our defenses to stationing our navy, air force, army and missiles along the North Korean border.

They had the effrontery to seek negotiations for a peace treaty, disarmament and a neutralized Korea. Some quasi-traitors from our side, who deviated from our unipolar mission, had almost reached an agreement. Our President Obama slapped them back and pursued missiles, sanctions and visions of mushroom clouds to bring them under our heel.

President Kim Jong-Un played deaf and blind to our requests for surrender. So when we engaged in a full dress rehearsal for war off their coast – avoiding any incident – the roly-poly Kim Jong-Un shot four fearful missiles into the Sea of Japan, a mere five thousand miles from Silicon Valley and Hollywood , an existential threat.

Our experts detected turmoil: a wider and deeper threat to our respected and long-standing supremacy in Asia.

Turmoil in China

China is fomenting turmoil by supplying our importers with consumer goods; buying our debts, spending only $3 trillion of our T notes; grabbing our markets with their exports while we pursue peaceful wars.

China has stirred our pot, over there and even here. They teamed up with Vlad the Snooping Bear, the same one who fooled 50 million voters to elect Trump, the protectionist. Sly Chinese now entice our Asian trading partners. They close huge trade deals while we openly proclaim that the Pacific Ocean is an American lake —-though it’s not on any map. Chinese rock piles in the South China Sea are global threats, pirate lairs, missile and mussel hangouts.

We reject the One-Party State in China. In America, we have two parties. Bi-Partisan leaders propose that China end the turmoil by closing their labs, research centers, factories and universities and open wide their door with a sign on the entrance of the Forbidden Kingdom: “OxyContin for Sale: Discounted Prices from our Billionaire Pain-killer Partners.”

Yemen in Turmoil

Turmoil in Yemen exists only because the people want to be free of our ‘dear friends, the hand- chopping and head-chopping Saudi Monarchs.

We are for diversity! We fraternize with Saudi-funded mercenary terrorists, Jewish land-grabbers, Egyptian tyrants and Libyan tribal allies, who blend with all of the above!

As our President tells it: “If the Yemenis don’t recognize that they are the poorest country in the Middle East and choose instead to resist the richest tyrants in the region, who are allied with the US, British and French arms merchants. Then the Yemenis, facing our precision bombs, which never miss a school, hospital or food warehouse, must be embracing a ‘death wish’.”

These stubborn Yemenis fighters should stop and study the US Marine Corp porno-website, whose once famous motto has morphed from Semper Fideles to ‘Just lay back and enjoy the violation’!

Turmoil is not necessary if the other side does not provoke our unipolar visionaries and our unsavory allies.

Turmoil in Iran

Iran must be our biggest threat – after Russia, China and others among our ‘biggest enemies of the moment’ – because the Iranians haven’t started a war in the last 200 years. But according to Israeli intelligence who pass their secret information while staying at the Trump Towers, the Persians are preparing secret nuclear weapons, sending secret agents, operating out of secret mosques, run by secret mullahs to launch invasions… while hiding behind their history of non-aggression.

The devious Iranians are sending food and medicine to starving Yemen: This is a Shia plot to infiltrate the Sunni Saudi oil fields to measure if the size of oil wells matter.

We signed fake nuclear pacts with Iran to increase sanctions in order to clear the Straits of Hormuz to allow our Hebrew brethren to breathe freely when Tehran is bombed!

Turmoil in Latin America

Turmoil is a Latin American phase borrowed from overhearing conversations between the Pentagon and Bankers regarding how to topple unfriendly democratic demagogues.

Friendly turmoil allowed us to pre-empt a coup against an incompetent elected regime in Brazil, which committed a stupid bookkeeping error. We put in its place a mega corrupt President who was our man to hand over the jewels of their economy to the people who will make America strong again.

We don’t select individuals –we shepherd flocks, led astray by center-left turmoil, by promoting peace-loving and dynamic wolves. From Mexico to Patagonia, oil giveaways are common currency that surely activate the economy – our economy.
Argentina led the way. The ‘vulture’ speculator, Paul Singer, didn’t have to raise a peep or pick a pocket: Five billion in cash just jumped from their pocket into his.

Turmoil returned as Argentina’s workers failed to find jobs in closed factories, and they couldn’t afford to buy newspapers to look for the want ads; besides these ‘deplorables’ can’t read them because the lights are turned off for not paying the one hundred percent increase in the electrical bill.

The general strike of millions of Argentine workers is just a Latin expression of ‘blowing off steam’ whispered a clever New York professor into the ear of a Wall Street broker.

She received tenure because she always looked through the wrong end of the telescope, to study their turmoil.

We mainly fleece the big Latin sheep first, but we do not neglect the lesser Andean herd. Peru and Chile elected presidents who will shear their people, not of bags of wool, but of tons of copper from their mines.

Turmoil in Dissenting Countries

We may occasionally welcome, and even promote, turmoil if it turns out the oil fields have passed to greedy elected Presidents who claim that petroleum is part of their national patrimony. We generously passed a hundred million dollars to a diverse group of generals, bankers, upscale street thugs and NGOers who seized the Presidential palace and in a fit of wrong-headed compassion merely kidnapped (but did not kill) the greedy elected President. One million slum dwellers, fooled by fake solidarity, protested the regime change. The elected demagogue was reinstated.

The oil-greedy president was re-elected a dozen times.

We were not discouraged because the president foolishly freed our leaders, in a fit of compassion, so they could pursue a coup replay.

We promoted turmoil in phases, with material incentives. We dubbed our coup-masters, “democrats”, and helped them launder billions from the Treasury, hoard food in private warehouses and smuggle contraband to free markets in Colombia in exchange for sending cocaine to our markets via Venezuelan airports.
We don’t rely on coups, until we are forced to, since we finally won two elections; One in Venezuela and the other in the Organization of American Colonies. Any act in defense of the elected president is a gross violation of the Democratic Chatter-Charter, which we wrote in English and procured a translation by our Secretary General Luis Almagro. We mispronounced his name as “El Amargo” – the ‘bitter one’ – which is dead wrong, as he fawns over us while attacking Latinos who resist us.

The United Kingdom: Turmoil of ‘Great Historic Consequences’

We are told that Brexit (the UK departure from the European Union) has created turmoil around the world. In the City of London and the European Union, among bankers, investors and overseas professionals in Great Britain and pensioners in Southern France and Spain, there are cries of despair and regret: What idiot allowed a free and popular vote over the EU?

Turmoil, Prime Minister Theresa May tell us, is ‘all for the best in the best of all worlds’. We are closing our doors to foreign interlopers without shedding our moneylenders and money launderers. We will no longer act as vassals to serve the oligarchs of Brussels; we got better oligarchs at home with a long tradition of training our vassals to serve our empire.

We need not share our export profits with the greedy Germans, nor the tourist markets with pompous French; nor slight our ale-swillers at the Brighton shore for the warm beer at crowded Benidorm.

Once free of the turmoil, our monarchy will sign off lucrative arms agreements with its counterpart in Saudi Arabia. The EU will have to absorb all the Yemeni refugees fleeing the Anglo-Saudi bombardments. We will keep our banks in the City and every ruler with his secret swindle will still come to us.

The United Kingdom will experience a rebirth of an English-speaking free market empire! The Commonwealth will continue to look to us for football scores even if we recruit half our teams from the former colonies.

Of course, English society will change a bit if we leave the EU. We will slow the flow of immigrants but we will not raise wages. Immigration is about ‘values’ not jobs and wages! We will let our workers know who is boss, lest some turmoil results in a united front between departing speculators and our knighted trade union officials.

There is no turmoil in the City over Brexit. Some critics claim that investors and money managers will move to the Continent because they now will have to carry their passports to travel to and fro between each transaction. It’s hard to believe that a mere flash of a passport could be such a nuisance!

The EU real estate accountants claim that England must pay back $80 billion euros for joint holdings in property and cash. An entirely outrageous divorce settlement given the intangible gains the Brussels crowd received from using the British name in overseas transactions or imperial endeavors.

UK will experience some initial turmoil when the foreign and our unpatriotic speculators depart. But we can easily replace them with our highly competent English lads and lasses.

We may experience some initial discomfort if Scotland votes to skip off to the EU and the Northern Irish decide to fall in line with the Popish bunch in the South and sign off with the EU.

There are some rumors that Wales, provoked by the extremist Language Society, might jump ship to the EU, angry over the English buying farming cottages for summer homes – “They denounce them as illegal immigrants”!

We have already announced that we may lose half our kingdom to the EU shortly, but we have given notice that we are ready to defend our rock of Gibraltar and the seaweed stalwarts at our Malvinas Island. Let some Wall Street idlers josh about our empire amounting to a rock-island, they should think twice about its significant. China has colonized unpopulated rocks, which are a fraction the size of our rock! And no one dares to joke about China’s rock island empire building!

The EU is stirring turmoil by insisting that the political divorce precede our trade agreements: This is an unprecedented step according to our respected High

Courts of Justice.

Brussels wants to monopolize trade and investment transactions among their vassal member states. We say we will keep to free trade and let their banks go in order to free our financial institutions. We will tell them to keep their refugees and immigrants!

England will be smaller but better! We will deepen our ties with Anglo-speaking nations!

There might be some turmoil in convincing the other Anglophones to join a sterling zone and to revise their trade ties with China, the US and other regions.

Scoffers may say the ‘Brexiters’ are hallucinating sentimentalists who believe that Merry Old England can refashion a great ‘global union of states’, a ‘union’ of London – New York – Toronto – Canberra – Johannesburg – Buenos Aires .

But there might be some misunderstandings… New York’s Wall Street competes with the City; it poaches high-powered bankers and is advising its subsidiaries to hold out on the high-end rentals at Canary Wharf. Can the City of London build a trans-Atlantic oil pipeline from Canada in order to compete with Keystone pipeline between Alberta and New Orleans?

The sad fact is that the US has already replaced the British Empire and is highly unlikely to share any markets with an isolated and fragmented UK converted into “Merry Old England” – an England which faces turmoil between the workers of the Midlands, the City bankers and the rentiers in the South.

The best bet is for the City of London to secede and become an independent City State and long for the success of Venice several centuries past.

Conclusion: Their Turmoil and Ours

Turmoil is everywhere but some turbulence is better than others. When the US-EU provokes turmoil – wars against adversaries in the Middle East, North and Central Africa, Asia and Latin America– it is a bitter pill necessary to cure the disease of disobedient regimes, which had sought to go their own wrong way.

The turmoil, which destabilizes us and our allies and vassal regions, is putting a spanner in the wheels of progress and development.

Turmoil is part of our changing reality. We are neither rigid nor dogmatic; we are pragmatic. We promote progressive turmoil, so when democratic Turkey overthrows the Syrian regime we can incite a turbulent coup to replace the dictator of Ankara.

To be scientifically correct we must start from the assumption that turmoil, big or small, national or international, a rock pile or a continent, is a class question! Which classes are behind or in front of the turmoil and which classes benefit!

By Niharika Tagotra*

The economic and fiscal policies of a government are the prime indicators of its priorities. In this regard, the Union Budget 2017 and the recently introduced Goods and Services Tax (GST) bill, hailed as a part of the larger economic reforms undertaken by the government, have little to show for in terms of India’s climate change commitments. That the economic policies and tax reforms appear to be inconsistent with the country’s climate change obligations highlights how policy makers in India are yet to give any serious thought to the issue.

Budget 2017: Provisions for the Renewable Energy (RE) sector

Budget 2017, in a major push towards achieving greater energy security, introduced policies for the conventional energy sector. These included setting up of two new strategic crude oil reserves in Odisha and Rajasthan; and a significant cut in the import duty on Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) from 5 per cent to 2.5 per cent. Additionally, the budget announced 20 GW of solar capacity addition and feeding 7,000 railway stations with solar power along with a cut in import duty on solar tempered glass from 5 per cent to 0 per cent. However, these incentives for solar energy systems are far too little to provide momentum to the clean energy transition in India.

Moreover, the Budget 2017 was silent on the most pressing issues concerning the renewable energy sector, including the extension of the Generation Based Incentive (GBI) scheme for the wind energy sector that expired on 31 March, 2017. This scheme, which has incentivised investments in the sector, was not extended further by the union government, and this is bound to affect the viability of the sector.

The budget also failed to provide incentives for the rooftop solar project that could contribute approximately 15 GW of energy by 2022. The rooftop solar project could have been easily integrated with the larger housing schemes announced by the government, including the PM Gramin Aawas Yojana. While this would have helped normalise the domestic production of solar energy in the country, the lack of any creative integration of housing and clean energy under the larger umbrella of sustainable infrastructure is reflective of the union government’s little regard for the issue.

Additionally, the budget was silent on the issue of strengthening the Renewable Purchase Obligations (RPO) market for the RE sector, the sluggishness of which has contributed to the low demand and lower investments in the sector.

GST: Impact on the RE Sector

While the budget gave little space to the clean energy sector, the recently passed GST bill is expected to further dent the RE market in India. As power (particularly electricity duty) is expected to be kept out of the purview of the GST, the prices of electricity are expected to escalate by 6-18 per cent. This is because while the companies will have to pay GST for their inputs, their taxes will not be refunded as the output (electricity) is exempted from the GST, and will continue to be subjected to state specific electricity duties. For the RE sector, inputs such as solar panels and wind turbines will be taxed at 18 per cent under the new tax regime, up from the current 12 per cent, with no benefit of input tax credit. This will most likely result in a major cascading effect for the sector, thus pushing up prices. On the contrary, the GST is expected to bring down prices for coal as many state cesses that were previously charged on the dry fuel are expected to be subsumed under the GST.

Meanwhile, tax exemptions previously provided for the sector are expected to be done away with. The Interstate GST (IGST) fixed at 20 per cent for interstate procurements could further push up the prices of goods that are procured by states through interstate commerce for the generation or distribution of electricity. Earlier, these items were provided with a concessional rate of Central Sales Tax of 2 percent.

However, in comparison, environment unfriendly items including petrol and diesel are proposed to be kept out of the purview of the GST in order to avoid the “inflationary pressures” that could affect the pricing of these commodities. This will, in turn, have an adverse impact on the bio-fuel industry that currently depends on the Oil Marketing Companies (OMCs) for the production, assimilation and distribution of bio-fuels. While the prices of conventional fuels are expected to remain the same, the prices of bio-fuels are expected to go up by 11-14 per cent under the new GST regime. The OMCs, which at present use a 5 per cent bio-diesel and 10 per cent ethanol mixed with petrol, are expected to bear the increase in the cost of these fuels, a move that could further disincentivise their use.

Looking Ahead

The broader economic reforms undertaken by India appear to be out of sync with the pressing concerns about climate change mitigation. As a part of its voluntary commitments under the 2015 Paris climate deal, India had agreed to cut down on the emission intensity of its GDP by 20-25 per cent. This was to be accomplished by using fiscal instruments like promoting the RPO market, increasing taxes on petrol and diesel as well as strengthening the institutional arrangement for RE power. Instead, however, the government policies have essentially sought to disincetivise investments in the renewable energy sector.

In order to channelise its commitments towards the global climate change mitigation, India will need to harmonise its social, economic and environmental policies. That climate change is fast growing into a national security issue should make the government more pro-active and less reactive in its outlook.

* Niharika Tagotra
Researcher, CRP
E-mail: niharika.tagotra@ipcs.org

By Carrie Winters*

Donald Trump’s primary focus might be making America “great again,” but it seems he is actively seeking mediocre or worse status when it comes to one area: cutting carbon emissions. The Mar-a-Lago summit between Trump and China’s Xi Jinping only served to drive this point home: whereas former American presidents used energy policy as a bridge to cooperation with Beijing, the new US leader flippantly left the global crisis he once wrote off as a “hoax” off the agenda.

As Trump has settled into the Oval Office, his administration has begun honouring its pledge to undo the progress US energy policy had made under his predecessor. Last month, as he set about unravelling Obama’s nascent attempts to tackle climate change, Trump declared: “together we are going to start a new energy revolution.”

Trump’s plans may be many things, but a “revolution” is not one of them. Instead, they have a distinctively regressive edge, focusing on traditional fuel sources such as coal, oil and natural gas. In fact, there was no mention of any type of renewable energy or indeed climate change at all. This abandonment of clean energy is a stunning role reversal from just a few months ago, when the US was at the vanguard of the quest to cut carbon emissions.

Fortunately for the rest of the planet, however, the once-climate conscious US has an unlikely successor: China, which finally seems to be developing an appetite for carbon reduction that matches its once-insatiable love of carbon production. The Chinese National Energy Administration recently confirmed its intention to invest at least US$360 billion on renewable energy development by 2020, and the country has already become the largest market for renewable energy, with 34GW of solar photovoltaic capacity and 23GW of wind power capacity installed in 2016 alone.

That commitment to renewable energy is only set to grow. In taking an overall look at China’s energy infrastructure, the majority of annual net capacity additions have been clean energy projects such as wind and hydro. Lining up with the Chinese governments’ plans, the International Energy Agency forecasts that that around 300GW worth of clean energy tech, mainly wind, solar PV and bio-energy, will be installed in China in the next five years.

In this, China is spearheading an embrace of clean and renewable energy technologies that is sweeping across Asia and fundamentally altering the policies of even those countries most implicated in the fossil fuel industry. To take one key example, representatives from 115 countries are set to travel to Kazakhstan between June and September this year for the city’s Astana Expo 2017, which will focus on emerging technologies that will help cut carbon dioxide emissions and protect the environment.

The Astana Expo 2017 will showcase both small and large-scale projects designed to contribute to truly sustainable transport and energy generation, and some of those on display could have major implications for facets of everyday life that currently contribute to climate change. One such project is the Solar Impulse, which became the first solar-panelled airplane to successfully complete a “round-the-world” flight, traveling 40,000 kilometres using the energy generated by 17,000 solar cells and emitting no carbon dioxide whatsoever. Others, like the Glowee project from France, look to natural solutions for providing light without needing to burn fuels to create energy. In Glowee’s case, bioluminescent bacteria are used to illuminate urban settings without needing any connection to the grid.

The expo’s host, Kazakhstan, clearly recognises the importance of emissions-free energy sources, despite the fact that its own economy runs on fossil fuels. Hosting Astana Expo 2017 signals a recognition that the world is changing and a willingness to support sustainable energy and ensure that the country is part of the solution. As the commissioner of the Expo wrote last year in explaining his country’s choice of theme: “Green energy – affordable, reliable and environmentally sustainable – is at the heart of the answer to how we protect our planet while enabling prosperity to spread.”

Other Asian economies have also taken this message to hear. India has created a $679 million solar power plant of gargantuan proportions in Tamil Nadu. By covering an area of 10 square kilometres and generating up to 648MW, it is now the world’s largest solar plant at a single location… and was built in a span of just eight months. Estimated to produce enough electricity to power 150,000 homes, the plant has brought India’s total installed solar capacity to around 10GW. By 2022, the country aims to power 60 million homes using the sun. Japanese plant engineering companies are pursuing their own clean energy projects: IHI and Chiyoda look to use hydrogen as an energy source, aiming to have an ammonia-fuelled hydrogen power plant online by around 2020.

As progress in this area continues apace, Asian manufacturers will continue to come up with better and cheaper methods of lowering carbon emissions. America, under Trump’s policies, will inevitably lag behind. This may be a very inconvenient truth for the American president: if he continues to allow his Luddite attitudes to energy and renewables to permeate policy, it won’t just be the environment he damages.

Source: This article was published at Modern Diplomacy