Wait and watch: on U.S. security strategy

ndia has unequivocally welcomed U.S. President Donald Trump’s announcement of the National Security Strategy (NSS) for his country during his tenure. To be sure, the positive words used in the international section of the 55-page strategy paper represent an affirmation of India’s stature, and acknowledge “India’s emergence as a leading global power”. It mentions plans to “encourage Indian economic assistance in the region”, and outlines U.S. support to India’s “leadership role in Indian Ocean security and throughout the broader region” as a priority. Mr. Trump’s views of China’s assault on the “sovereignty” of South Asian nations and of Pakistan’s continued support to terror groups are closely aligned with India’s concerns in the neighbourhood. It is significant that the U.S. has highlighted them. In its response, New Delhi has “appreciated the strategic importance” given to India as well as the common objectives that India and the U.S. now share. Predictably, the five countries singled out by the U.S. for criticism have not been as warm in their response. China has accused the U.S. of pursuing what it calls a “cold war mentality and the zero-sum game”. Russia has said that the strategy reeks of “imperialism” as the NSS accuses China and Russia of using their military might to deny America access to what it calls “critical commercial zones”. Pakistan, Iran and North Korea have also been dismissive.

India must be mindful, therefore, that in welcoming the U.S.’s categorisations of its security threats, it doesn’t unthinkingly get swept into an American clinch. To begin with, the U.S. articulation of its perceived challenges has swung wildly over the past year of the Trump administration. It would be wise to await a stabilisation in Mr. Trump’s policies, or at least concrete action to back its words. For example, while the U.S. has talked of countering China’s influence in South Asia, it has not backed this with actual financial assistance for infrastructure critical to the region. Equally, while Mr. Trump’s words on Pakistan and terrorism are sharp, the U.S. has yet to show its hand, either in terms of military action or withholding of coalition support funds. While the U.S. strategy deals with global concerns, the past year has seen American withdrawal from pacts ranging from the Trans-Pacific Partnership to the Paris agreement on climate change. A tough U.S. security strategy can only be realised through cogent policymaking — whether it is on Israel-Palestine, North Korea, Iran or Afghanistan, Mr. Trump has been publicly at odds with his key advisers. A watch-and-wait stance is still India’s best option to preserve the autonomous and pluralistic nature of its engagement in areas where the U.S. faces its greatest challenges.

Affirmative vote: on US' move on Jerusalem

he UN General Assembly vote on a resolution calling for the final settlement of Jerusalem through negotiations may have been pitched as a contest between Israel and Palestine; however, it became a referendum on U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to recognise the city as Israel’s capital. The final outcome should force the U.S. to rethink its move, with 128 of the UNGA’s 193 member-countries voting for the resolution, and only nine against it. Among those voting for the resolution that “deeply regretted” the U.S. decision were its NATO allies, Germany, the U.K. and France, its Asian allies Japan and South Korea; its closest neighbours Canada and Mexico chose merely to abstain. The overwhelming majority ignored Mr. Trump and his UN Ambassador Nikki Haley’s threats that all countries that defied America would be ‘named and shamed’ and face cancellation of U.S. aid. The suggestion was that the U.S. would exact its revenge by refusing to support these countries when they next need it at the UN. Israel showed deep derision for the world body, which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu referred to as a “house of lies”, while his UN envoy called the 128 countries “puppets forced to dance”. Such threats and epithets mark new lows in international diplomacy, and Israel and the U.S. come away looking like churlish bullies for issuing them. With all its weaknesses, the UN is a global collective, and it is imperative to acknowledge its mandate when such a large number of nations speak in one voice. The U.S. only recently asserted its intention to uphold the international rules-based order in its National Security Strategy document. It cannot now just walk away from both UN resolutions and its national commitment to the Israel-Palestine peace process by unilaterally changing its stand on the status of Jerusalem, without being accused of doublespeak.

By voting for the resolution, India has affirmed its traditional policy in favour of a negotiated settlement for Jerusalem as part of a larger two-state solution for Israel and Palestine. Although Prime Minister Narendra Modi avoided mentioning the contours of the settlement during his visit to Jerusalem in July this year, India’s support to the creation of a Palestinian state according to UN Resolution 181 (1948) was heavily underscored in his statement to the UN in November, just days before Mr. Trump’s decision. There had been some speculation that in the face of the U.S. threats over the resolution, as well as Mr. Netanyahu’s impending visit to India in January, India would dilute its support to those principles in favour of close strategic ties with both nations. In choosing to vote for the resolution at the UNGA, India has shown a clarity of purpose that also aligns with the broad global consensus.

Another fodder jolt: on Lalu Prasad's conviction

wenty years on, the Bihar fodder scam is still hounding Rashtriya Janata Dal leader Lalu Prasad. In 1997, he had to resign as Chief Minister after being charged with involvement in a conspiracy to fraudulently withdraw money from the treasury to pay non-existent suppliers of livestock feed. In 2013, he was sentenced to a five-year prison term in a case relating to the withdrawal of ₹37 crore from the Chaibasa district treasury. He remains disqualified from electoral contest as a result of that conviction, although he was granted bail by the Supreme Court in December 2013. His conviction on Saturday by a Central Bureau of Investigation court relates to withdrawals worth ₹84.50 lakh between 1994 and 1996 from the Deogarh treasury. As it has been established even in earlier trials that a large-scale scam had taken place in the name of purchasing fodder for cattle, any more convictions in one or more of the many cases spread across Bihar and Jharkhand will come as no surprise. Mr. Prasad had failed to convince the Supreme Court earlier this year that repeatedly trying him in respect of the treasury withdrawals in different districts violated his constitutional protection against double jeopardy. The court has ruled that different transactions ought to be established independently, even if the acts of embezzlement arose out of an overarching conspiracy. As Mr. Prasad awaits his sentence, which will be known on January 3, he is already in jail, along with 15 others. Instead of one, he now has two convictions against his name. He has to wait until a higher court exonerates him in both before he can regain eligibility to contest elections...

Mr. Prasad’s political fortunes have been fluctuating. He could take credit for the victory of the grand alliance of the RJD, the Janata Dal (United) and the Congress in the November 2015 Assembly election in Bihar, but that unity was short-lived. It was an allegation that went back to Mr. Prasad’s days as Railway Minister that ruptured the ties between his party and Chief Minister Nitish Kumar of the JD(U). Mr. Prasad and his family members were named in a First Information Report filed by the CBI that claimed that his wife Rabri Devi and son Tejaswi Yadav received a prime piece of property in Patna as a quid pro quo for a contract to develop and run two railway hotels. With Tejaswi Yadav refusing to resign as Deputy Chief Minister, Mr. Kumar quickly switched over to the BJP-led camp, to govern without the RJD’s support. This meant that Mr. Prasad’s influence as the leader of an 80-member legislature party was not as game-changing as it had appeared to be when the Mahagathbandhan was formed as an anti-Bharatiya Janata Party front in 2014. It may be too early to write off Mr. Prasad, who is perceived by some sections as a bulwark against communalism, but as the ghosts of the murky past return, his immediate political future looks bleaker. This jolt may not send him to political oblivion yet, but it may be one from which he will not recover easily.

On the line: on India-China boundary talks

he meeting between the Special Representatives of India and China — National Security Adviser Ajit Doval and State Councillor Yang Jiechi — on the boundary question on December 22, the 20th so far, was unique for a number of reasons. The talks came more than 20 months after the last round, reflecting a period of extreme strain in India-China ties, including the 70-day troop stand-off at Doklam this year. Previous meetings had followed each other within a year. Also, at the recent Communist Party Congress, Mr. Yang was elevated to the Political Bureau, and this is the first time the Chinese side has been represented by an SR of such seniority. As a result, the two sides were best poised to move ahead in the three-step process that was part of the Agreement on ‘Political Parameters and Guiding Principles for the Settlement of the India-China Boundary Question’ in 2005 — that is, defining the guidelines for the settlement of border disputes, formulating a framework agreement on the implementation of the guidelines, and completing border demarcation. The SRs were given an extended mandate after meetings between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping this year, and thus went well beyond the remit of discussing the resolution of boundary issues. Above all, they were guided by the Modi-Xi agreements of 2017, including the ‘Astana consensus’ that “differences must not be allowed to become disputes”, and the understanding at Xiamen that India-China relations “are a factor of stability” in an increasingly unstable world.

It would be a mistake, however, to infer that with all these engagements the worst in bilateral ties is now behind the two countries. Since 2013, when the Border Defence Cooperation Agreement was signed, there has been a steady decline in relations in all spheres. The border has seen more transgressions, people-to-people ties have suffered amid mutual suspicion, and China’s forays in South Asia as well as India’s forays into South-East Asian sea lanes have increasingly become areas of contestation. In India, this is seen as the outcome of China’s ambition of geopolitical domination. In this vitiated atmosphere India views every move by China as a targeted assault — such as the Belt and Road Initiative with the economic corridor with Pakistan, the free trade agreement with the Maldives, and the blocking of India’s membership bid at the Nuclear Suppliers Group. In turn, Beijing sees the U.S.-India defence agreements, the Quadrilateral engagement with Japan, Australia and the U.S., and Indian opposition to the BRI quite the same way. The stand-off at Doklam was a hint of what may ensue at greater regularity unless greater attention is paid to resolving the differences for which the SR meetings process was set up in the first place.

UN Security Council to vote on new North Korea sanctions

The U.N. Security Council is meeting on Friday to vote on whether to impose new sanctions on North Korea, including sharply cutting limits on its imports of refined oil, forcing all North Koreans working overseas to return home within 12 months and cracking down on the country’s shipping.

The draft resolution circulated to all 15 council members on Thursday wouldn’t go as far as the toughest-ever sanctions that have been sought by the Trump administration, such as prohibiting all oil imports and freezing international assets of North Korea’s government and its leader, Kim Jong Un.

The resolution would cap North Korea’s crude oil imports at 4 million barrels a year and limit its imports of refined oil products, including diesel and kerosene, to 500,000 barrels a year. That would be a nearly 90 percent cut in imported fuels that are key to North Korea’s economy.

The draft, obtained by The Associated Press, would prohibit the export of food products, machinery, electrical equipment, earth and stones, wood and vessels from North Korea. And it would also ban all countries from exporting industrial equipment, machinery, transportation vehicles and industrial metals to the country.

The proposed sanctions are the Security Council’s response to North Korea’s test on Nov. 29 of its most powerful intercontinental ballistic missile yet, which the government said is capable of hitting anywhere on the U.S. mainland. It was North Korea’s 20th launch of a ballistic missile this year and added to fears that the North will soon have a nuclear arsenal that can viably target the U.S. mainland.

The United States drafted the resolution and reportedly negotiated it with China before circulating the final text to the rest of the council.

The last sanctions resolution was adopted Sept. 11 in response to North Korea’s sixth and strongest nuclear test explosion eight days earlier.

U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley said the Trump administration believed the new sanctions imposed at that time combined with previous measures would ban over 90 % of North Korea’s exports reported in 2016.

Those sanctions prohibited North Korea from importing all natural gas liquids and condensates. It also banned all textile exports and prohibited any country from authorising new work permits for North Korean workers two key sources of hard currency for the northeast Asian nation.

The U.S. Mission said then that a cutoff on new work permits would eventually cost North Korea about $500 million a year once current work permits expire. The United States estimated about 93,000 North Koreans are working abroad, a U.S. official said.

The resolution to be voted on Friday would ban North Koreans from working abroad. It expresses concern that the foreign earnings from these workers are being used to support the country’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs.

The resolution would require all countries to send North Korean workers and safety monitors home within 12 months.

The draft resolution “notes with great concern” that North Korea is illegally exporting coal and other prohibited items “through deceptive maritime practices and obtaining petroleum illegally through ship-to-ship transfers.”

The proposed resolution would authorize U.N. member states to seize, inspect, and impound any ship in its ports or territorial waters suspected of being involved in these illegal activities. It would also order all countries to prohibit companies from providing insurance or re-insurance to North Korean-affiliated vessels.

The draft would also order all countries to de-register any vessel suspected of being involved in the transport or transfer of banned items. And it would ban the supply of used vessels to North Korea.

The resolution proposes adding 19 individuals to the U.N. sanctions blacklist.

Seventeen of those who would face travel bans and asset freezes if the resolution is adopted are foreign bank representatives. The other two are Kim Jong Sik, identified as a leading official guiding North Korea’s development of weapons of mass destruction, and Ri Pyong Chul, an alternate member of the Political Bureau of the ruling Workers’ Party of Korea and first vice director of the Munitions Industry Department.

Like the previous sanctions resolution, the new draft reiterates the Security Council’s regret at North Korea’s “massive diversion of its scarce resources toward its development of nuclear weapons and a number of expensive ballistic missile programs.” It notes that 41 % of the population is undernourished.

The proposed resolution calls for a resumption of six-party talks on North Korea’s nuclear program aimed at the peaceful denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. It reiterates the importance of maintaining peace and stability in northeast Asia and “expresses its commitment to a peace, diplomatic and political solution to the situation ... through dialogue.”

After the sanctions: on North Korea

The fresh round of economic sanctions imposed unanimously by the UN Security Council on North Korea is a predictable response to mounting international frustration over the nuclear stand-off. The measures come days after the U.S., echoing suspicions in other countries, charged the North Korean government with the world-wide ‘WannaCry’ cyberattacks in May. The sanctions include an 89% curb on refined petroleum imports into North Korea, stringent inspections of ships transferring fuel to the country, and the expulsion of thousands of North Koreans in other countries (who send home crucial hard currency) within two years. Despite the crippling nature of the curbs, there is some good news on this imbroglio. As on previous occasions, Beijing and Moscow were able to impress upon the Security Council the potentially destabilising and hence counterproductive impact of extreme measures. This is significant given the intercontinental ballistic missile that Pyongyang launched in November. It was described by U.S. Defence Secretary Jim Mattis as technically more sophisticated than anything witnessed previously, and the North Korean regime’s claim that it could deliver nuclear warheads anywhere in North America has been viewed with concern. However, even as China and Russia approved the latest measures, they continued to state their preference for diplomatic engagement. It remains to be seen how much more pressure Beijing can exert upon Pyongyang.

The stated aim of the sanctions regime has been to force North Korea to halt its nuclear programme and start disarmament negotiations. In September, North Korea detonated its sixth underground nuclear device, which it claimed was a hydrogen bomb. That assertion remains unverified, but experts believe the explosion was many times more powerful than previous detonations. The development has served as a reminder to the U.S. that the scope for military options may be increasingly narrowing. Against this backdrop, a revival of stalled peace negotiations between the P-5 nations and North Korea may be the only realistic alternative on the horizon. The successful conclusion of the 2015 civilian nuclear agreement between the P-5 plus Germany and Iran affords a constructive template to move ahead with North Korea. Certainly, U.S. President Donald Trump has delivered a scathing blow to the Iran deal, even as he stopped short of scrapping it. Iran’s continued compliance with the inspections of the International Atomic Energy Agency may not mean much to Mr. Trump, given his overall distrust of multilateral institutions. But that is no reason why other big powers should not pursue the diplomatic effort with redoubled energy. Countries that backed the recently adopted UN nuclear weapons abolition pact should likewise lobby Pyongyang.

Change & continuity: what lies ahead for Rupani, Thakur

 leader is as good as the party he leads. But in Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh, the Bharatiya Janata Party found the performance of its chief ministerial candidates at variance with that of the rest of the party. Vijay Rupani, the incumbent Chief Minister, won his Rajkot West seat comfortably, even as the BJP conceded ground to the Congress in Gujarat. Prem Kumar Dhumal lost in Sujanpur, but the BJP won big in Himachal Pradesh to wrest power from the Congress. After the poor showing in Gujarat, the re-nomination of Mr. Rupani as the legislature party leader was not automatic; there were other contenders, including his deputy, Nitin Patel. The BJP was under some pressure to send a positive signal to the Patidar community, large sections of which appeared to have shifted their allegiance to the Congress. But the party settled for another term for Mr. Rupani, not wanting to pin the blame for the below par performance on him. After all, the campaign had been led from the front by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and party president Amit Shah. Ignoring Mr. Rupani’s claim would only have meant laying the groundwork for further disaffection within the party. In Himachal Pradesh, the situation was, in many ways, very different. Despite losing his seat, Mr. Dhumal was not out of contention for the post of Chief Minister till the very end, with many newly elected members of the legislature offering to vacate their seats for him. But while recognising that Mr. Dhumal did indeed boost its chances in several seats, the BJP opted for five-time MLA Jairam Thakur as the new Chief Minister. Evidently, the reasoning was that rewarding Mr. Dhumal would be interpreted by detractors as a show of disrespect to the verdict of the people in his constituency. Also, the BJP’s ideological mentor, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, is known to be opposed to rewarding with ministerial posts those who have lost an election. That Mr. Thakur is a former pracharak would only have made the RSS bring greater force to bear upon the BJP in this regard.

While the choice of Mr. Rupani is a vote for continuity, it is not an endorsement of everything that he did in the short period he has been in power in Gujarat. To rule in Mr. Modi’s name is one thing, but to not be a pro-active agent in governance is quite another. Mr. Rupani will continue to be on test under the keen eyes of the Modi-Shah combine. The BJP’s rural backing seems to have shrunk and the party depended heavily on its core support base of traders and the urban middle class to win the election. In Himachal, Mr. Thakur will likely have a freer hand, but he too will be under watch. Unless he can help his party beat the incumbency disadvantage, Mr. Thakur will not be seen as having done his job. Retaining power is not as easy as re-gaining power.

About PSC for west bengal....For WBCS aspirants

All the details are given to my very honest and polite brother Mrinal mahato,
I always respect and regard for his honesty and scarification and dedication to parents and education.


I love and please for those who are honest polite speakers, and faithful,and render to god.


For Prepare and compete to any one you must follow:-


1. Upgrade your English skill and knowledge ;-

Antonym Synonym, 

The Mind Strengthening process

The mind strengthening is like:-


a) Remember that every good works in past,
b) Understand the reality,
c) Be practical, and be positive minded ,
d) If you have time please read the book and biography.
e) You must know what are expenses on you and compare to other with your skill,not your face and your structure.
f) Follow the great

6,117 Kuchipuri dancers set new Guinners World Record

Kuchipuri dancers from various age groupa from across the world including from US, UAE , UK, Russia, Honk kong and Mauritius from performace.

Deen Dayal SPARSH Yojona

The Union Ministry Of Communication has launched DEEN DAYAL SPARSH yojona  a pan india Scholership program for school children to increase the reach of Philately. The Sparsh Stand for Scholer ship .

Scholership and Sections Every Postal circuit will select a maximum of 0 scholaship will be 6000/- per annum rs 500/- per month. The selections will be made based on evaluation of project work on philately and performance in Philately Quiz conducted through.


Philately Club : To avail this scholarship child must be student of recognized school within indiaand concerned school should have Philately club and candidates..