Professional Documents
Culture Documents
As per the new guidelines of the MHA, 10% of the funds under BADP has been set aside for
states and union territories that share a border with China and the other 10% has been set aside
to provide assistance to those state governments which are the best performing under the
program and out of the remaining 80% of the funds, 40% of it has been allocated to the North
Eastern states and the remaining 60% has been allocated to all the other states.
The border area development Program is an integral part of ensuring India's internal security
because border villages are located in remote and inaccessible locations and they are usually
underdeveloped. So the lack of development and the lack of adequate infrastructure in the
border areas would promote discontentment among the population that is residing in the
strategically located border villages. This discontent might make the border population feel that
the government and the rest of the country does not care about them and it increases the
disconnect with mainland India. This discontent could also be exploited by hostile foreign
countries against India.
Then the lack of development and lack of opportunities might force the border population to
migrate to other areas of India and this could result in the depopulation of the border villages
which could weaken India's territorial place especially in areas where there is a border dispute.
Then upon this, the lack of border infrastructure and the inaccessibility of these remote villages
can affect the movement and deployment of the forces as well. So the BADP was launched
specifically to address these concerns and it helps not only in creating border infrastructure but
it also helps in promoting social economic development in these border villages.
So such developments will promote goodwill for the government and the security forces among
the border population. It could help strengthen India's claims in the border areas. It could also
help Indian security forces and Indian intelligence agencies to collect intelligence by relying upon
the border population as sources and more importantly, during conflicts and standoffs, border
villages can provide the much needed logistics support to the security forces and the armed
forces.
As per the new guidelines, the respective border guarding forces have been asked to select
strategically important villages that are located within 10 km from the international border with
the funds so that they could be spent for creating infrastructure and for promoting social
economic development. Under the ‘one border one force’ policy, one Central armed police
force has been given the mandate to guard one particular international border. For example, the
border security force(BSF) is responsible for guarding India's borders with Pakistan and
Bangladesh. Similarly, for India's borders with China, it is the ITBP or the Indo Tibetan border
Police. For India's borders with Nepal and Bhutan, it is the SSB or the Shastra Seema Bal and for
India's border with Myanmar, it is the Assam rifles.
As for the new guidelines, 10% of the funds that has been allocated for villages located along
the China border would be spent on the construction of roads and bridges, creation of primary
health Care centres, playfields and sports infrastructure for the children and the youth and also
for constructing irrigation facilities in the border areas.
Seven to Eleven
This article evaluates the proposal of Donald Trump to expand the G7 into the G11 by including
India, Russia, Australia and South Korea.
Prime Minister Modi has welcome this decision of Donald Trump and he has called this a
creative and farsighted decision of Trump which is in line with the new realities of the post
covid-19. So clearly, India has expressed its interest to be a part of such a group proposed by
Donald Trump. A similar stand has been taken by Australia and South Korea as well and both the
countries has welcomed this proposal.
However, Russia, which has its own geopolitical conflict with the United States, has been
conscious and it has said that President Putin would be accepting terms of invitation to attend
this year's G7 summit and it would be willing to consider this proposal only if it is treated as an
equal partner. This concern of Russia is driven by the fact that it was suspended from the
grouping in 2014 over the issue of annexation of Crimea. The G7, which was the G8 until 2014,
voted for the suspension of Russia by the other members due to its annexation of Crimea and
this lead the foundation for increased hostilities between Russia and the western countries led
by the United States.
Russia has said that it would consider this proposal and it would consider accepting Trump’s
invitation to the G7 summit only if it is assured of equal treating. But whether Russia joins the
grouping or not and whether G7 turns into the G10 or G11, irrespective of that, one thing is very
clear- this proposal of Donald Trump has been clearly aimed to sideline and isolate China and
hence we can say that this is an extension of the new cold war that is brewing between the
United States and China. Prior to 2014, when the grouping was still the G8, that is, Russia was
still a part of the group, the then developed economies would reach out to five emerging
economies under the G8 +5 format. At every G8 summit, 5 emerging economies would be
invited to participate and this included China, members of the IBSA grouping( that is, India,
Brazil and South Africa) and Mexico. So just like India and other emerging economies, China also
has been a part of the G8 summit. But the exclusion of such a major power from the G11
definitely indicates the beginning of a new cold war between the two global powers.
This cold war has been in the making over the last one decade and it began with the United
States deciding to shift the focus towards the Indo-pacific region through its pivot to Asia policy.
This policy of the United States which was adopted under the Obama administration was clearly
aimed at containing China and to allow the United States to play a role in the maritime disputes
involving China in the South China Sea and the East China Sea. Now under Donald Trump, this
political rivalry between the US and China has increased further, especially as a result of the
ongoing trade war between the two countries the conflict between the two over the emerging
technologies such as 5g and the blame game between US and China surrounding the covid-19
pandemic. If the increasing economic and military might of China was a primary reason for the
United States to feel threatened about it superpower status, then these factors have further
added to rising tensions between two countries.
So the proposal of Donald Trump to establish such a grouping in the middle of an ongoing cold
war is basically an invitation for these countries to choose sides between the United States and
China and this places India in a very tough position.
What if India wants to join this proposed grouping, then it definitely brings India the much-
needed recognition that it deserves at the global high tea. Over the last two decades, India has
been seeking such recognition in order to ensure that its voice is heard at the global level. India
being the world's largest democracy and one of the fastest growing economies in the world, it
has always felt that the existing global institutions and multilateral platforms have not
adequately recognized India's position and they have not given a voice for India's aspirations.
This is the primary reason why India has been a voice for reforms at the United Nations, World
Bank, the IMF etc and the proposal of Donald Trump to provide a seat for India alongside other
developed economies and leading powers in the world definitely gave India the much needed
recognition for India.
But the editorial says that India will have to carefully value the geopolitical pros and cons of this
development before joining the grouping because as of now, the benefits of joining the
grouping is still very unclear. There are a number of roadblocks that lie ahead before the
creation of such a grouping and India will have to carefully considered that first and foremost,
this proposal to expand the G7 has to be approved by the other members of the G7. Gaining the
approval of the other members of G7 is still not guaranteed because there are deep internal
divisions within the G7 itself. Then, Russia might try to sabotage this proposal due to its hostile
relationship with the United States. It is highly unlikely that Russia would be willing to join a US
led grouping and abandon its close ally China. And thirdly, even if the proposal has taken
forward, will such a grouping be established before the Presidential elections that have been
scheduled for November 2020, because if Trump was to lose the upcoming elections, then the
proposal may not be revived by the new administration. As of now, the US government has
indicated that Trump could host such a summit as early as September when the leaders of these
countries are anyways going to travel the United States to attend the UN general Assembly
summit.
So without having more clarity on this uncertainty, India cannot afford to jump the gun and
accept the proposal to be a part of the expanded G7. Then upon this, would India be willing to
choose sides in this new cold war between the US and China? The question is would India be
willing to compromise on its principle of strategic autonomy and join The United States at the
cost of isolating China. The foundational principle of India's foreign policy is the maintenance of
its strategic autonomy. Over the last seven decades, India has consistently upheld this policy and
it has consciously chosen to be non-aligned without using any of the power blocks. Lets say,
1971, during the liberation of the Bangladesh civil war, India was forced to side with the Soviet
Union. But it was more because of the hostility that the United States had towards India during
the conflict and it was not a choice that India made.
But after the collapse of the Soviet Union and after the cold war came to an end, India has
consistently followed the policy of strategic autonomy and it has maintained a considerable
distance from all the powers. It has chosen not to be a part of any power block and not to be
seen as an ally of any country. Instead, India has believed in maintaining friendly relations with
all the countries on a bilateral basis based on India's national interest.
So, the question is if India accepts this proposal of Donald Trump and be a part of such a group
in which isolates China, would India be willing to increase tensions with China with which it
shares a long border and numerous border disputes. Despite the numerous differences and
conflicts that both India and China have, both the countries do share a close relationship and
partnership between India and China is very crucial for emerging Asia as well as for the rest of
the world. So would India be willing to breach this relationship in its neighborhood for the sake
of pursuing a close relationship with western countries and other global powers.
This is a tough question that India needs to answer before it decides to join such a grouping.
Then, finally India should also consider whether the current G7 is really an effective platform for
addressing global issues. Deep divisions and issues have emerged within G7 members itself,
especially under the Trump administration. The United States in particular, has a number of
disagreement with other members of the G7 over a number of contentious issues such as
climate change, Iran's nuclear program. On the subject of climate change, European members of
G7 has been given to accept more commitments whereas United States has given up on its
responsibilities and commitments as far as global warming and climate change are concerned.
Then particularly under the Trump administration, the United States that entered into a trade
war with other members of the G7 such as Germany, Canada, etc over the last couple of years.
Donald Trump has publicly claimed that G7 is outdated and he has even criticized Canada,
Germany, France and United kingdom for not contributing enough to the group and and he had
claimed that the United States is a soul contributor to the grouping. Then over Iran's nuclear
program and the joint comprehensive plan of action of the Iran nuclear deal, deep differences
were seen amongst the G7 Nations. When the Trump administration chose to quit the Iran
nuclear deal, the other members of G7, particularly France, UK and Germany, they were
opposed to this and they declared to uphold the commitments of the Iranian nuclear deal.
All these differences between the G7 members was very evident in the last summit that was
held in France when no joint statement was issued by the grouping for the first time in the last
45 years. So before India decides to take up this offer of Donald Trump, it will have to carefully
evaluate the geopolitical pros and cons of this development.
This article evaluates the new cold war that is brewing between the United States and China.
This article evaluates the reasons behind these increasing geopolitical tensions between the US
and China and analyze the impact of this emerging cold war on the rest of the world, particularly
India. This cold war has been in the making for the last one decade and is particularly increased
over the last 4 years as a result of the increase aggression that is being displayed by both the
countries. What began as a geopolitical conflict over the South China Sea dispute has spilled
over to various other domains such as trade, war, technology, economy, governance as well as
travel and connectivity.
Over the last one decade, the United States has closely watched the military rise of China and
its increasing military aggression in the South China Sea. In response to this increasing military
aggression of China, the United States came up with a diplomatic and military strategy that was
designed to primarily counter the rising influence of China. So this increasing hostility in the
military and strategic domains quickly spilt over into the trade and economic domain as well.
Under the Trump administration, the trade war the President Trump initiated against China
increased tensions between the two countries and it is yet to be resolved.
Then, of late, we have also seen how Western countries led by The United States are trying to
counter China's dominance in the 5G technology domain. Then in the last 3 months, there has
been a series of developments which has increased tensions between the two countries and the
strategic exports conclude that they might very well be witnessing the beginning of a new cold
war between the two superpowers.
As the US President Trump has held China to be responsible for the spread of the covid-19.
Along with this, the United States has been critical of the development that have taken place in
Hong Kong over the last one year. Last year, when pro-democracy protests broke out in Hong
Kong, the US government more than supported the protesters and this invited retaliatory
response from China. Then just few days back, China passed a controversial legislation which
allows mainland China to pass national security laws that will have application and jurisdiction in
Hong Kong. It is said that this Chinese legislation undermines the special administrative status
that Hong Kong enjoys. United States has criticized this legislation and it has expressed concern
over the status of human Rights in Hong Kong.
As a response to this Chinese law, the United States has revoked Hong Kong special status and
this standoff between the two countries regarding the developments in Hong Kong has further
increased tensions. Then, just the other day, the United States decided to ban all passenger
flights from China because China had also not been allowing international flights as a result of
the covid-19.
So such aggressive and retaliatory steps from both the countries has raised the prospects of the
beginning of a new cold war between the two countries. We basically have a situation where the
world's largest economy has been repeatedly targeting China over the last 3 to 4 years and in
return, the world second largest economy has been displaying its own aggression and retaliating
against United States. This emerging cold war between the two of the world's largest economy
faces the risk of further escalation as there is a complete lack of trust and confidence on each
side.
So the editorial says that disputes such as these can be resolved by only talks and cooperation
and both the countries should be willing to show signs of de-escalation. Take for example, the
issue of passenger flights. China has already sent de-escalation signal to the United States by
allowing foreign airlines to resume flights on a limited scale starting from the 18th of June. The
editorial hopes that the United States should see this is a sign of de-escalation sign from China
and it reciprocates by lifting the bans of passenger flight from China. Such de-escalation
measures will set the ground for the talks and negotiations which could help in resolving
intentions and hostility.
But the increasing hostility towards China being shown by the Trump administration and the
refusal of China to back down has made the beginning of a new cold war almost inevitable. But
strategic experts point out that the so-called ‘cold war 2.0’ or the second version of the cold war
between US and China would be different from the earlier cold war that we have seen a few
decades ago between the United States and the Soviet Union.
The cold war that we witnessed between the United States and the Soviet Union began after
the second world war in the 1958 and it lasted until the collapse of the Soviet Union. This cold
war rivalry was largely based on ideological conflicts between the two superpowers -The United
States and the western countries ruled for democracy and capitalism, Soviet Union and its allies
good for Communism and socialism. So the defining feature of the first world war was the
ideological conflict between the two superpowers and it involved territorial conflicts.
But, in comparison, if we look at the new cold war that is brewing between the United States
and China, it is largely being fought on economic, financial and strategic grounds and at least as
of now, there is no explicit ideological conflict between the two. So compared to the ideological
cold war between the United States and the Soviet Union, the emerging cold war between the
US and China has a greater chance of being resolved though talks and negotiation. But for talks
to be held, there has to be an element of mutual trust and confidence in each other.
In the past as well, United States and China have shared quite a complicated relationship. In the
1970s, that is when the United States was still logged in a cold war with the Soviet Union, China
was and is a major communist Ally to the Soviet Union. In fact, the United States had even cut
off diplomatic ties with China by blaming China for displaying territorial expansionism through
the annexation of Tibet.
In the other column, Vijay Gokhale writes that during this cold war period, that is between 1950
to 1970, Communism had been formally established itself in Russia. So during this period, the
United States pursued the policy of regime change in China in order to push for an ideological
shift and defeat Communism and introduced democracy. So this covert attempt of the United
States to push for a regime change in China created a lot of suspicion amongst China's
leadership and as a result, Chinese leaders to this day treat the United States as an existential
threat to China.
But Vijay Gokhale writes that before Communism took root in China in the 1950s,the United
States used to look at China with a sense of fascination. But the rise of communism in 1948
under Mao and the establishment of the People's republic of China in 1949 affected the
relationship between these two countries for nearly two decades. After this brief period of
hostility, US President Richard Nixon pursued diplomatic reset with China through his national
security advisor Henry Kissinger in the late 1960s. The combination of Richard Nixon and Henry
kissinger managed to re-establish diplomatic relationships with China with the help of Pakistan
and this lead to a period of cordial relations between the two countries which lasted between
the 1977 to the the early 2000. During this period, the United States had pragmatic relationship
with China by keeping the ideological conflict aside and it built its relationship on the basis of
cooperation and mutual trust and respect.
In fact from the 1980s,United States played a direct role in the economic crisis of China under
the hope that it could bring China under its theory of influence and it was expecting China to
behave as a responsible international player. But according to Vijay Gokhale, all the while China
was driven by its self-interest and national interest and it had no intention of being undermined
by the United States and it had no intention of being treated as a puppet of the United States
for the the suspicion that the United States posed an existential threat to China continued to
grow in the minds of the Chinese leadership even as a United States was enabling the rise and
growth of China. So, as soon as China emerged as a major power post 2008, it immediately
started asserting its newfound economic and military might and according to the writer, the
current equation that China displays is an extension of this mind set. After 2005, China started
seeing itself as not just an Asian power, but as a global power which could challenge American
hegemony in international office. Then through a series of diplomatic, military, economic and
strategic steps, China began to assert itself in global affairs and it began to spread its influence
around the world including the Asia-pacific region, the Indian Ocean region, across Europe,
Africa as well as across Latin America.
The strategy of China post it into direct conflict with the United States which started seeing the
economic and military rise of China directed towards its economic and financial dominance of
the modern world and as China started to assert itself with regard to Maritime disputes in the
South China Sea, for the first time, the United States started seeing the rise of China as a threat
to its own dominance.
In 2010, the United States immediately adopted the ‘pivot to Asia’ policy in order to focus
exclusively on the Indo-pacific region and it started deploying its diplomatic and military assets
from the Atlantic region towards the Indo-pacific region. So this strategy of the US was clearly
designed to contain the rise of China and contain its influence. In anticipation of this extension
of the threat posed by the United States, China initiated a modernization in almost all the
domain a couple of decades ago in order to challenge the American dominance. As a result of
this modernization, China has been able to completely transform its military and armed forces.
It had built a strong economy based on its manufacturing strength. It has also tried to counter
Western dominance in global trade and commerce, in global financial institutions, through its
initiatives-belt and road initiative, the Asian infrastructure investment bank and the new
development Bank of BRICS. Then, in order to counter American dominance in satellite
navigation, China came up with its own version of GPS known as the Beidou. Then over the last
one decade, private technology companies of China, with the support of the Chinese
government, have pioneered innovations in the field of emerging technologies in order to
counter the technological superiority of the US government and private corporations.
All these developments brings us to the current state where the Trump administration has
repeatedly tried to label China as America's enemy number 1 and has pursued aggressive and
hostile relationship with China in the hope that this issue could help Donald Trump get re-
elected in the upcoming Presidential elections. Trump’s popularity ratings have drastically
declined over the past few months as a result of the inefficiency in handling covid-19 pandemic
and the current state of the American economy with the unemployment rate consistently
increasing.
So the editorial is of the opinion that Trump is exploiting China's lack of transparency over the
covid-19 to break forward its aggressive and assertive foreign policy to label China as enemy
number one in order to make China a campaign issue ahead of the Presidential elections.
In response to this, China has retaliated against these actions of Donald Trump and it has only
increased the prospects of a new cold war. So the editorial says that the only way in which
tensions can be reduced between US and China is if both the countries are willing to change the
course and provide a chance for talks and negotiations in order to build mutual trust and
confidence.
Vijay Gokhale says that this emerging cold war between US and China is going to have a
collateral damage on the global economy, particularly India. India is forced to choose a side
between the two. Then it would test India's principle of strategic autonomy and it would test
India's capacity to maintain strategic and decisional autonomy in foreign policy.
Killing Gajah
• recent news reports related to the death of an elephant in the palakkad district of Kerala
reportedly after consuming a pineapple filled with explosives has gone viral and is caused
massive outrage across the country these initial report has claimed that the elephant was
deliberately fat with the pineapple which led to create a repulsion and anger across the country
but however according to experts the elephant most likely might have consumed the pineapple
on its own which was made to be used as a snare to scare away okil wild boars which could
cause extensive damage to plant and crops but whatever is the version of events the death of a
pregnant elephant in this tragic manner is highly unfortunate and highlights threatpost to India's
environment and biodiversity due to increasing incidence of man animal conflict the editorial
points about that a number of elephants get killed every year in India as a result of such man
animal conflict incidents and this is a direct result of increasing commercial pressure on the
habitat of the elephants the need to expand and urban areas and agricultural activities and the
need to promote industrial non economic activities has ended up destroying sensitive habitats in
forest and as a result for migratory animals such as the elephant that traditional ranges has
been occupied and their migratory corridors have been blocked by human activities in fact it is
not just elephants which are being pushed into a conflict with humans due to habitat
destruction and habitat fragmentation but even number of other high value species and
threatened species face the same thing as the contact of wild animals with humans increases it
increases the threats faced by the animal itself the editorial points out that despite the threat
posed by habitat destruction and an regulated habitat activities to the natural rangers and
corridors of wild animals there has been no attempt made by the government to mitigate the
impact of economic development and industrialisation. the editorial says thatthe government
has failed to adopt a science based policy to prevent incidents of man animal conflict by
adopting measures such as the creation of soft landscapes the provision of migratory passages
especially in and around protected areas while approving new industrial projects and economic
activities according to the editorial there is no scientific culture in India which inspired the
governments conservation efforts the editorial says that environmental policies and regulations
of the government has been designed to favour economic development and commercial
activities even at the cost of destroying forests and the natural habitats of wild animals take for
example how even during the lock down the ministry of environment the national board for
wildlife and the expert appraisal committee manage to create a number of destructive projects
in protected areas despite this project dinner post by environmental groups such rampant
destruction of natural habitat of the animals reduces their ranges and makes a feeding grounds
in accessible to them so this reduction in their natural habitat and the acute shortage of food
that their face pushes the animals to venture into the human habitats such as the nearby
villages agricultural field plantations extra so when such incidents of man animal in conflict
increases the cost is Borne by both the animals and human beings for example the entry of wild
elephants and wild boars into agricultural fields and plantations could cause extensive damage
to the farmers the entry of carnivorous animals such as tigers who threatened human lives and
cattle in the nearby villages solocal who would have suffered such clauses as a result of man
animal conflict they tend to hold a grudge against the animals and in order to prevent the
occurrence of such incidents that end to use a number of in human and violin techniques to
keep the animals ok so every year hundreds of elephants tigers leopards and other high value
species and threatened species are killed across the country as a result of such preventive
techniques so in order to reduce such incidents the editorial provides to suggestions one day
editorial highlights how important it is for us to revisit the recommendations of the madhav
gadgil committee the ministry of environment and Forest headset of the Western ghats ecology
expert panel under the chairmanship of madhav gadgil committee had submitted its
recommendations in 2011 and in order to conserve the equality and biodiversity of the Western
ghats the madhav gadgil committee has recommended the zonification of the entire structure of
the Western ghats in 2-3 Eco sensitive zones and inside each zone human activities were
supposed to be strictly regulated with varying degrees of enforcement these restrictions and
regulations would apply for industrial activity is mining activities construction activities as
agriculture extra but all the state government Saturday part of the Western ghats had a poster
recommendations of the madhav gadgil committee due to pressure from the industry as well as
from the local villages the editorial says that such science-based zonification of the forest areas
and regulation of the industrial activities can help conserve habitats and prevent the occurrence
of such man animal conflict II recommendation of the editorial is for the government to provide
adequate and timely compensation to the victims of man animal conflict incidents because
when the victim to have suffered losses due to man animal conflict is there compensate
compensated adequately and in time it will reduce the chances of them adopting in such in
human methods to keep the animals of wave the editorial conclude by saying that it is this
culture of commercial exploitation of forest the natural resources that has led to the death of
this elephant in Kerala and this could change only if we adopt a cultural shift towards science
based conservation.
• ****shine a light****
• ****lancet and NEJM retracts in controversial studies on covid-19****
• LANCET HAPPENS TO BE ONE OF THE IMPORTANT AND INFLUENTIAL MEDICAL JOURNALS OF THE
WORLD.it has recently conducted a study on hydroxychloroquine according to this study by the medical
journal they came up with a particular conclusion it found that there was no benefit from the use of this
hydroxychloroquinewhen hydroxychloroquine was given to all those patients were suffering from covid-
19 de derived no benefit from it and in fact after it was administered to the patients it has resulted in
high mortality rate so they said that when this particular antimalarial drug was given to the patient such
patients whom it was administrator to suffer from death and mortality when it was administered to
search patients to this particular argument the world health organisation data safety committee has also
found that there was no evidence with respect to higher mortality in fact clinical trials has been
conducted with respect to the beneficial use of hydroxychloroquine with this the world health
organisation has put to rest the claim that hydroxychloroquine will cause death to the covid-19 positive
patients while all this was happening researchers and scientific community started questioning the
methodology where did you get this data from how did landsat procure this particular data even if you
are taking the data who are the patients from whom you have takenwhat the patients in hospital what is
the source of this hospital which are the hospitals that you have considered even if there are death with
respect to the hospital which you have taken from thecountry of Australia the number of deaths that
you are claiming in the lancet journal is totally different from what country of Australia is claiming so the
numbers that you are saying in your landlord journal and the numbers that are given in the official
channel books of Australia is totally different so it question se methodology and how their source that
patient records and the mortality of attributed which is totally different from that which is present in the
journal and that which is present in the official channel books of the Australian government its author
says that the journal has sourced your information from surgisphere cooperation. but this corporation
does not have scientific expertise who would be able to check whether the information is right or wrong
so how can we believe this particular journal and its article that you have put out in the public forum is
what the researchers and the scientific community has been questioning this is where the land set and
another organisation that is the New England journal of medicine have retracted their studies so so they
have retracted because there has been lacunas with respect to this article and there has not been any
statistical evidences and experimentation elevenses and certain research protocols that is why these
two journals have taken back their statistics.
• what can we learn from this debacle? are we sure that all the results given by thisjournals is less
legitimate are they not getting influenced by the pharmaceutical companies or are there any industrial
lobbies which are pushing in their agenda let's draw the inference from this particular article. the key
lesson is that the mistake to assume the scientific process has always diveresed d from the influence of
power privilege finance and politics. let's say for example there is a company this particular company
wants to push its particular product so it pays this medical journal to put out a positive view point about
this particular drug or about this product so medical journals have a closed financial conflict of interest
particularly in relationship with all those pharmaceutical companies some journals has been even
captured by the pharmaceutical companies that have they have come to depend on these
pharmaceutical companies many including some of the many prestigious journals published most trials
because of the funding that they require from the industrial bodies so the first key thing is the influence
at these companies draw to the medical journals. this points out to the means and methods in the
present scenario they came out with the study and statistics how did you draw this particular statistics
how did you get to a particular conclusion we should not always look at the result but instead we should
focus on the how how they got this particular information so you have taken this particular information
from a particular company is it a legitimate company do they have the expected to conduct this
particular experiments all this would have to be tested so the means and method to collect and collude
this particular information is very important and the global scrutiny of this particular method will also
have to be taken but here we should not only focus on the end. that is a result but we should also focus
on how this particular information is derived from a process this ultimately leads to people losing their
confidence and undermining the confidence in this medical journals which means that all the good work
that they have done in the past will completely avoid and in the near future doctor scientific people
researchers and infected people who want to read such medical journals will not trust this medical
journals this gives rise to a couple of a concerns as well.
• discover ultimately influence how doctors treat the patients and the actions taken by the public
authorities let's say for example this is one of the trusted journals now it comes up with a particular
argument that hydroxychloroquine when it is administrator to the covid-19 leads to mortality so what
would happen your the doctors and the public authorities world over wood immediately stop
administering hydroxychloroquine to the patients so who are the measures officers the measures
officers are the people the measures officers are the persons who have been administered with this
particular drug so unfortunately this could cause a square among the public and genuine treatment may
be asked to be withdrawn because of this particular study or research put out by this journal then what
we have is called a peer review.
• se lancet in this particular case has given out a particular study and certain information with respect
to an infection so I ask another friend or an organisation to review this whole process to review this
whole study only after the other organisation or another organisation or individual says that this
particular study is right and has a global scrutiny on it with respect to a particular organisation that is
when this has to be put out in the open forum now what we see is the peer review with respect to the
lancet was not taken and even in the past that have been scenarios that this particular peer review has
been very slow expensive ineffective anthrone to biased and use and has resulted in fraud as well so we
require a proper analysis global scrutiny and proper peer review such that this issue does not persist in
the near future so much more needs to be done to improve the ethical accountability of all the editors
and the journals in the near future is what is the Crux of this article.
• ****tracking Google****
• this article exposes the privacy relations of the Google as one of the important search engines when
we look at Google we have the normal mode and the private mode the private mode is also called as
incognito mode let's say you have opened your browser in a normal mode you might be looking for
some information in your office or you might be working on something in Google in your personal laptop
or you may serve some information in the Cyber centre or it might be on your personal phone as well
when you are using it on your normal mode people would be able to see what you have searched for so
you leave your trace of your history the websites that you have visited and the people can come to a
conclusion that this is what you are looking for.but when you enter the incognito mode are the private
mode you leave no trace of history so this means that a person who comes in next for the person who
logs in next will not have any idea about the history or what information you are looking for this means
that you have ensured that you have privacy with respect to a searches but what is the present scenario
this is what happens in Google when you enter into an incognito mode especially with respect to Google
chrome it clearly says that it will not save your browsing history cookies and side data and information
that are entered in forms but it also says that websites you visit can also track you your employee or the
school can track you and at the same time the internet service provider like the act or the atom or any
other service provider would be able to see what are your Google searches this is what the in incognito
mode is but now there is a case that is filed in the United States of America where they feel that once
they have entered into a private mode for the incognito mode Google has still been looking at you me
and all of us who has been searching on incognito this means that in spite of us going into the incognito
mode the private mode the Google is having a vigilant ise 1 hours and in creating the privacy of millions
of people who has been using internet through these users in a private mode and a lawsuit has been
filed asking Google to pay about $5000000 of using Google that it has been collecting all the information
about Private data which day has been holding on onto in the incognito mode so they believe that
Google gathers all the information through the Google analytics Google ad manager and other organs
that has been encrypted by Google so because they has been able to get all this information in spite of
them being in the incognito mode Google is able to each of us when we enter into the in incognito mode
this helps Google to understand who we are what we do when we had who are friends are what are
political inclination it also helps Google to understand our most intricate and embarrassing moments as
well all this means that in spite of meandering into the incognito mode Google has been violating our
privacy they say that users don't know when Google is tracking you when Google is not tracking us and it
is collect information whether we know or not not about this particular process they also have filed this
particular petition and have brought in multiple view points as well one such viewpoint is with respect to
the federal wiretap act what is Federal via time at this allows any intentional interception of of any wire
oral or electric communication so it has clearly mentioned that intentional tapping of any wire oral that
what we speak and the electronic communication through emails cannot be done by any of the
organisations intentionally or until the government give the permission but is Google violating it yes yes
the petitioners according to them Google has been violating intercepting all the personal information
and hence it is violating the federal fire type act and they have to be prosecuted is what the petitioner
state they also say that there is one of the important laws known as the California invasion of private at
the same act has also been violated by Google as privacy is not taken into consideration by the Google
as a company in fact Google and its YouTube was also asked to pay about 170 million dollar because
they had violated the privacy conditions of the children and they had taken some of the important
potentials of the children without the permission of the parents in the past few years as well for children
whenever they are using Google or YouTube in specific they have to take parental consent in case there
are drawing some information but both Google and YouTube have not done it without parental consent
they were able to take some of the information of the children and in the past Google has also been find
about 170 million dollar for this particular violation they also bring into picture and other important case
and that happens to be Arizona versus the Google case what is the Arizona versus the Google case. we
are moving in a era where everything is being tracked without locationwe have to GPS that is encrypted
in our phones the minute you step out you are at your home and you want to travel all the way from
your home to the traffic or you want to enter into a particular Cafe or you want to enter particular Mall
because there is location that is turned on Google is tracking us everyone of us in our every movement
but what this particular case is that let suppose the location is turned off and we do not want Google to
track you in spite of the location tracker been switched off and ask not giving permission Google was still
able to track your location and then Google was filed a lawsuit against this particular move. Google has
already been issued in the past for wiretapping and low violations in the year 2016 reportedly they filed
particular case where they were trackingall the moves of the Gmail users and they were flooded with all
the advertisements to the Gmail as well we might think that no one is watching us we might have all the
privacy that we require but unfortunately Google is looking into every move and that is how it is able to
generate revenues through the advertisements that is flooding your Gmail accounts as well it is this that
we have to understand with respect to this article.
9th june 2020
• *****LG over rules Delhi government order to restrict covid-19 treatment****
• the lieutenant Governor of Delhi has overruled the orders of Delhi government that had restricted
covid 19 treatment in government and private hospitals only to the Delhi residents earlier the Delhi
government had passed the controversial order that restricted over 19 treatment facilities in the
government and private hospitals of Delhi only to the residents of Delhi Delhi government had justify
this decision by citing a lack of capacity of treating outsiders and hence it was trying to prioritise
residents of Delhi by treating for copd 19 but the lieutenant Governor in is capacity as the chairperson of
the deadly disaster management authority has overruled the decision of the Delhi government and he
has stated in is order that right to health is integral to right to life that has been recognised as a
fundamental right under article 21 of the Indian constitution and hence this fundamental right cannot
be restricted on the basis of ones residency disorder of the lieutenant-governor highlights of conflict
between the office of the lieutenant Governor of Delhi government to the distribution of powers as far
as administration of the national capital region is concerned this development also highlight start the
Chief Minister of Delhi does not share the same powers as that of the chief ministers of other states
because in other states it is the Chief Minister who is the chairperson of the state disaster management
authority but in the case of Delhi the administrator of the NCR region that is the lieutenant Governor
access chairperson of the deadly disaster management authority and not the Chief Minister of Delhi is
also highlights the conflict between the office of the devil lieutenant Governor and the office of the
Delhi chief minister robot the distribution of powers.
• Delhi enjoy special status by virtue of being the national capital of India since it is the national capital
it acts as a seat of power for the central government and it also houses foreign missions and embassies
so in this regard Delhi enjoy a unique strategic value and ensuring it security is a great concern for the
central government the central government good naturally have the desire to secure the seat of power
and it also has an obligation to ensure the security of the foreign missions in the national capital the
centre would like to utilise land as it deems fit and make our locations for various government offices as
well as foreign embassies for the purpose of security law and order and control over land the central
government would desire to have control over three state subjects that is land police and public order
which otherwise would have been placed under the state list of the seventh schedule of the Indian
Constitution so the need of the centre to exercise control over the subjects of land police and public
order was fulfilled through the 69th constitutional amendment act was introduced article 239 a and
article 239 abi to the Indian Constitution this article outlines the special status that is given to Delhi it
establishes Delhi as the national capital region and it has been set up as a union territory with an elected
legislative Assembly it also provides that the NCR region would be administered by the office of the
lieutenant Governor who would be appointed as the administrator by the central government to the
office of the President of India essentially the lieutenant Governor of Delhi apps on the advice of the
president and the home affairs in order to administer the NCR region and established the control of the
centre over the three subjects but with regard to all the other state subjects it is the council of Ministers
who are drawn from the electric legislative Assembly is headed by the Chief Minister who would
exercise which restriction administrative powers but this unique distribution of powers lays the ground
for a conflict between the office of the lieutenant Governor and the Delhi government over the year
complaint of the Chief Minister of Delhi and Delhi government has always been that the central
government unnecessarily interferes in the administration of the NCR region by misusing the office of
the lieutenant Governor after a series of legal battle between the LG is office and the Delhi government
the matter was finally settled by the supreme court in historic ruling in 2018 in this case the supreme
court held that the lieutenant Governor has no discretionary powers of his own the supreme court made
it clear that as far as a subjects of land police and public order are concerned the lieutenant-governor
would be acting as per the directions of the ministry of home affairs issued to the office of the President
of India and apart from these three excluded subjects a lieutenant governor is bound by the advice of
the council of Ministers of Delhi government but despite this ruling of the supreme court the power
tussle between the office of the lieutenant Governor of Delhi government has continued in few areas for
example in 2019 there was another legal battle between these two institutions which had reached the
door steps of the supreme court this dispute was over the powers of the Delhi government to appoint
and transfer government officers and to exercise control over the Anti corruption bureau in this ruling
the supreme court Drew a boundary between the powers of the lieutenant Governor and the Delhi
government and it recognised that that Delhi government had the power to appoint and transfer
officers where as the lieutenant Governor enjoys jurisdiction over the Anti corruption bureau but still
there are a number of other areas and subjects were the conflict keeps coming up and this is one of the
reasons why the elected government of Delhi has always been demanding full statehood for the NCR
region but the centre has taken the opposite stand and it says that they NCR region cannot be granted
full statehood because it is the national capital of India and binding the national capital it acquires a
strategic value for the centre and it would be very essential for the central government to exercise
control over at least these three subjects as far as the administration of the NCR region is concerned so
yesterday's order of the lieutenant-governor overall in the decision of the Delhi government falls under
the same category the lieutenant Governor as the chairperson of the Delhi disaster management
authority has passed this order but however this code open up a new legal battle between the office of
the lieutenant Governor and the Delhi government.
• ****selling space****
• this article examples of opportunities and concerns raised by commercial space exploration and the
involvement of private corporations in the space sector recently space x the us-based private space
company established by popular entreprenuer Elon Musk achieved a major milestone it successfully
launched a batch of astronauts from American soil after a gap of 9 years because nearly A decade ago
NASA the public sector space organisation of United States has shut down its human space program and
and manned missions due to budget constraints since 10 national lost the capabilities to launch
astronauts from American soil and it have to rely upon Russia to send astronauts Andre supplies to the
international space station this arrangement between USA and Russia was costing NASA nearly 80
million dollars for putting one astronaut in space so this was not only a financial burden for the United
States that it was also technological and strategic disadvantage so in order to nurture a homegrown
human space programmes introduced financial implications NASA tied up with private space players
such as basics through public private partnership initiative and as a result of this type and as a result of
years of effort on the part of space x it has successfully managed to launch astronauts from space
American soil and this achievement has opened up numerous possibilities as far as commercial space
flights are concerned this achievement of space x and the success of this type between space and NASA
not only present financial advantage for NASA as compared to the expensive launch is offered by Russia
but it also presents an opportunity to open up numerous commercial possibilities in space it shows that
is private space corporations are allowed to flourish in collaboration with public space organisations that
it could open of numerous possibilities and numerous opportunities for the commercial exploitation of
space in the largest interest of mankind in fact Elon Musk has already made ambitious plants of
colonizing mars.through space x he manage to place a Tesla roadster carin an orbit around the sun has
also proposed to make space travel as simple and easy as a travel in fact a Japanese billionaire has
already tied up with spaces to potentially become the first commercial travel to the moon and back the
reason why commercial space flight se so exciting is because it represents the technological leap and
provides an opportunity for the emergence of new innovations in technology because the private sector
is always driven by the profit motive unlike the public sector and this would force private space
organisations to reduce their cost of operation by developing reusable technology and this word for the
make space travel more affordable INSAT spacex's already been a Pioneer in the development of
reusable technology after numerous experiments and failures spacex's manage to come up with
reusable rockets and boosters which can vi secondly reduce the cost of space travel to the development
of such reusable technology can open of the doors for more innovation and for the emergence of new
technologies the editorial says that the success of this public private partnership model in the United
States of a lesson for India as well because India recently opened at space sector for private
participation so the successful partnership between acid and space x offers a lesson for ISRO and India's
private players in fact in ISRO has already taken up number of initiatives in order to increase private
participation in India space centre ISRO has tied up with the number of private players in order to
outsource the manufacturing of various components that go into rockets and satellites ISRO is also
looking into outsource the building of launch vehicles because it has already perfect the design of the
launch vehicles HSD PSLV so instead of getting involved in routine tasks such as manufacturing of
components and building of launch vehicle ISRO can transfer this technology to the private sector and
private players can take over these routine tasks such collaboration between the public and private
sector will free of is Rose resources which could otherwise be dedicated for research and development
as well as for space exploration activities collaboration between the public and private space player
scored allowed the private sector to bring it technical expertise and this would create opportunities for
renovation and the emotions of new technologies and this presents numerous commercial possibilities
for India's space sector but such a collaboration between the public and private sector also rises and
number of concerns first and foremost space exploration is a very risky business and hence failures are a
part and parcel of space exploration so the question is will the Indian government is row and India's
private companies have the appetite to bear the cost of failures which is gone to occur when you players
enter the domain and when u r technologies are being carried out if you look at specific it did not
achieve overnight success with its rocket the Falcon and the dragon capsule IT took years and years of
effort and numerous failures to achieve success but all the time NASA and space explorer patient
enough to allow this failures to happen so if India is looking and promoting such public private
partnership models then it should have the appetite to bear the cost of sucks failures this failures are in
fact essential to promote innovation and to allow the emergence of new technologies the next concern
is that can a public private partnership model keep the cost under control because of life private sector
is always given by the profit motive and this could create an incentive for inflating cost which may have
to be Borne by the public sector this model me also create more opportunities for corruption especially
when it comes to the selection of private players by ISRO so in order to address these concerns the
government needs to take adequate care in order to strike a fine balance between private interest and
the objectives of the public sector so it would be essential for the government to promote a system that
is based on transparency and accountability in order to address these concerns surrounding public
private partnership in the space sector.
this column evaluates the pros and cons of diplomacy the pandemic has pushed private business schools
and colleges and even governments to conduct their businesses through virtual means by video
conferencing and the same holds good for the world of diplomacy and international relations as well
ever since a pandemic broke outvirtual summits between leaders have become the norm and we have
seen this with the SAARC summit that prime Minister Modi had called to discuss the Hobbit 1920 make
more recently biso virtual interaction between India and Australia and the same model was followed for
a meeting of the G20 leaders as well as the name countries in fact even other countries and
international organisations HSC United Nations the world health organisation excetra even they have
shifted to the virtual mode and this is completely transformed the shape of traditional diplomacy
diplomacy definitely bring the number of advantages first and foremost holding a virtual samay during a
panda make ensure safety of the top political leadership and prevent them from getting exposed to the
violence second it considerable brings down the cost involved in travel and in the organisation of the
summit and third it will save precious time for the leadership and we can count these are some of the
advantages of diplomacy but in the traditional world of diplomacy and international relations face-to-
face interaction between the leaders is highly valued that is reason why there is always a lot of height
associated with summit level interactions between the leaders because such events have an element of
personal connect which provides an opportunity for the two leaders as well as the diplomat on both the
sides to interact with the personal level this personal equation of fossil chemistry between the leaders in
the diplomats can actually set the tone for the entire relationship and it can also come in handy during
times of crisis also face to face summits between two leaders carries a lot of symbolic value and political
value because search some it's are usually high-profile events and the excitement surrounding such
summit can help the governments and shaping public opinion as well as for example the recent high
profile visit of Donald Trump to India similarly prime Minister Modi has carried out minister Sach hai
profile visits to other countries and such events carry a lot of political and symbolic value as well in fact
such face-to-face interaction between the two leaders is so preferred in the world of diplomacy that
there are strict protocols that govern the event and the interaction between the two leaders is tightly
choreographed thanks to the personal nature and the high profile nature of these events it usually
translates into substantial outcomes for by the for the bilateral relations take for example how the
personal interaction between prime Minister Modi and President XI jinping at the wahan informal
summit help the two leaders to resolve the doklam dispute and the even followed it up with other
informal summit at mamalapuram but in the case of diplomacy or virtual summit this element of person
interaction and the high profile nature of the event is completely missing so this has led to concerns
about the productivity of such virtual interaction between two countries leaders would also be
concerned that it diplomacy and virtual summit will not help them fulfill their political goals which could
be Touche public opinion as well as to term diplomatic issues into electoral issues then finally the
biggest concern with regard to diplomacy is cyber security because any interaction between two
countries and especially between two leaders is always confidential and there is no guarantee that in
the cyber domain confidentiality and secrecy can be maintained in such virtual submit could be
vulnerable to Cyber attacks which could be carried out by hostel countries but irrespective of these
concerns e diplomacy is the way forward for the time being as a result of the Phantom make and both
India and Australia have shown that substantial outcomes can still be achieved through virtual summers
as well because during this virtual interaction between prime Minister Modi and Scott Morrison number
of ki agreements have been signed between India and Australia spanning across various factors
including defence Maritime operation disaster management accept this shows that is Amit sar the way
to go for the time being or else bilateral relationship could start stagnating as a result of the pandemic.
• ****the e-diplomacy experiment***
•