MOHAMMED ABUBAKR

Sarfarosh

PEOPLE

POLITICS

SCIENCE

RELIGION

RESEARCH

JULY 2010

Do Indians Understand Democracy?

US Iran:
The two sides of the coin

Cloud Computing

http://sarfaroshthemagazine.spaces.live.com

This page is intentionally left blank.

Contents
Editorial..3

Do Indians Understand Democracy?............4

Mpemba Effect..11

US Iran: The two sides of the coin.15

A new beginning Speech by Barack Obama at Al-Azhar University Cairo.25 Open letter to American citizens by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad .37

Reserved India!...............................................................................42
Does paying taxes make you more Responsible towards the Nation?..............................................45
Cold War between US and China

Whats in for India?..........................................................48

Toilets in Incredible India53 Cloud Computing..58

Research papers @ ArXiv...61

Question to Readers....66

Quote of the month

Indian Government doesnt want to declare Naxalites as terrorists because they dont belong to a particular religion
2 -Anonymous (found it in a public forum)

Editorial
Dear Readers, I am thrilled to bring to you the first issue of this monthly e-magazine Sarfarosh. First of all, let me give you some background on who am I and why have I started this emagazine. About three years back, I was an aimless kid with crazy ideas. I wanted to change the world, discover new scientific laws, invent superhero machines, etc. however, circumstances changed me. Fell in love with a girl, took up a job, started behaving like a normal guy and tried to accept the reality. People around me referred that change as maturity. But on one fine day, a question popped up out of nowhere, is this life? What the ! I realized, for all that I have done in last three years, I wasnt being me and to make things worse, I wasnt getting the girl too! Thats when I decided, I got to bring that aimless kid alive again and give him a cause to fight for. As I wandered around, trying to find a cause, I wrote about everything I came across. That gave birth to Sarfarosh. In Urdu language, the word Sarfarosh means a person ready to sacrifice his/her life for a noble cause. This magazine is collection of observations I have made. In few articles I have tried to pour my heart out and in some expressed my helplessness. But there is one thing common in all articles. They all are written with an intension to bring a change and spread knowledge. I do understand that some of the articles might not go well and they might be offensive, however my intension isnt hurt or offend anyone. I get nothing by hurting or offending anyone. At the same time, if I have to say a truth and that would hurt people, I would repeat that truth again and again until those people accept and change. Having said that, there is also a possibility that some of my opinions might be incorrect and not well-thought. If you find any such discrepancy, please let me know via email. You can reach me at sarfarosh_the_magazine@live.com. I would be glad to rectify myself and would acknowledge your opinion in the next issue of Sarfarosh. Without consuming anymore words, I would like to express my thanks for taking out time to read this magazine. I hope, you would find the articles intellectually stimulating and worth reading.

Regards, Mohammed Abubakr Hyderabad, India. sarfarosh_the_magazine@live.com

Do Indians Understand

DEMOCRACY?
Power will go to the hands of rascals, rogues and freebooters. All Indian leaders will be of low caliber and men of straw. They will have sweet tongues and silly hearts. They will fight amongst themselves for power and India will be lost in political squabbles Winston Churchill, 15th August 1947, on the eve of Indian Independence. Having known that Churchill never had a good opinion about Indians, I didnt pay much attention to his quote when I first read it. But somehow, it kept coming back at me. Churchill is a Nobel laureate in literature and was widely considered as an intelligent man in Post-World War II era. Given his close proximity to Gandhi, Nehru and several other Indian leaders during pre-independence period, he should have considered India to be in safe hands; yet, he went on to make such remark. May be, he was upset about India getting liberated from Britain or maybe he had his reasons. I dont know. However, sixty years later, his remark does seem to be true. I have often asked myself, why is it all happening? Why is it that, we the people have become so weak and helpless before the corrupt and ruthless politicians? Why is our judiciary system so useless in punishing the criminals? The politicians who appear to be genuinely hardworking and honest dont get elected and the one who gets elected is often corrupt and rogue. And what is worse, the election agenda of most politicians is to divide people in the name of religion, language and caste. To quote an example, in the
4

recently held Parliamentary elections, a young politician gave discriminating speeches against a particular minority religion and was elected with overwhelming majority. After he won the elections, he did no good to the people who voted for him and not surprisingly he doesnt attend the sessions in Indian Parliament. Such is the state of our nation and such is choice of our people. In the Hindi movie Sarkar Raj, there is a dialogue describing the nature of Indians. The dialogues goes as logon ko development nahi entertainment chahiye (people need entertainment but not development). For some reason unknown, I question, if On 22 July, during the no-confidence vote in the Indian Parliament, opposition MPs showing the money they at all, Churchill had his reasons for have received as corruption to vote in favor of UPA. making such a remark predicting about future of India, what were they? Were there any indications during pre-independence era itself that hinted that India would go in the hands of goons? Was there a flaw in Indian Independence fight against Britain that led to this situation in India? Was there any concrete reasoning based on which Churchill made that remark? After days of research and making countless hypotheses, I arrived at some logical conclusions that indeed influenced Churchill in making such remark, back in 1947.
nd

Historically, people of India had never experienced something called democracy. Indian sub-continent was always been under the rule of kings, who followed a hereditary system of kingship. Even in case of assassination/death of a king, according to the caste systems prevailed in India, more than 90% of the people werent eligible to be the next King. So, the power could either go to the Kings closest kin or to the elite 10% of people, who considered themselves as upper caste (72% backward caste Hindus, 18% other religions). The rest of the people were considered as lower-caste and had no eligibility in either being or choosing the king. Moreover, the lower-caste people had no wealth, werent given equal human rights and lived in the worst living conditions. When British colonized India, for those 90% of the people, it didnt matter who the king was. Earlier they worked for the regional kings, now they were working for Queen of England. There wasnt any drastic change in their living conditions. They got discriminated by both Indian regional kings and the British. Also, it is well known that, during last two thousand years, India has been prone to lot of foreign attacks. Even though, the population of India has always been on the higher side, Indian kings seldom had a large army to protect the land. This is because of the fact that the lower-caste people werent allowed to be part of the army. When British Empire threatened to take over regional kings in India, at no point Indian kings thought
5

of expanding their army by recruiting low-caste people. Instead, they preferred to sign peace treaties with British Empire. The regional kings of India knew very well that, if the lower-caste people of India can take-up arms to fight against British, someday they would do the same against them. And then, they would demand equality and power. That would be catastrophic to the higher caste people, who contributed less than 10% of overall population. It was only after the intervention of Mahatma Gandhi, the regional kings and freedom fighters involved lower-caste people in the fight against British. It is to be noted that, Gandhis fight against British was of different kind. It was the non-violent fight. Somewhere, it offered assurance to regional kings and the upper caste people of India that, even if they involve lower-caste people in this movement, they will never come to power. This is also reflected in the fact that, there was no campaign or propaganda where people of India were told that they will be given equal rights in electing the government in post-independence. In fact, no substantial attempts were made by Indian leaders to educate people about powers of democracy during British rule. When India got independence from British, majority of the people had no clear idea about democracy. A situation was created, where it was more of emotional overflow than common sense. Several regional kings and landlords exploited this emotional overflow and lack of awareness among people regarding democracy. During the first general elections in India, several regional kings and landlords from the elite upper caste were elected to National Parliament and State Legislative Assemblies, unopposed in elections. From the second elections onwards, to be a parliamentarian became a sort of family business for the people elected earlier. This wasnt surprising to majority of Indians as per their religious views. As per the principles of Santana Dharma, a religion popularly known as Hinduism, after the death or retirement of father, his son or daughter takes over all his responsibilities. This is also reflected in caste system, according to which, if father belongs to a particular caste, it implies that the son will inherit the same caste. Even today, the same religious values exist in India and interchanging from one caste to another is strictly prohibited. Naturally, once a Parliamentarian retires or expires, majority of people in India prefer electing his son or daughter, irrespective of his/her caliber to lead people.

The first two decades of Indian politics saw several regional ex-kings, landlords and freedom fighters establishing their political career as family business. Soon, the politicians started realizing that, being a politician in India isnt a profitable business. Majority of Indians doesnt even have a remote idea to contribute funds to political parties. Most Indians, even today, continue to believe that politics is a social service. In such a scenario, survival of political parties became almost impossible. Contrary to general belief, democracy is a give and take relationship between people and political parties, where people contribute funds to the political parties of their choice so that political parties work towards peoples benefit. It is common sense to note, when people dont contribute funds, political parties do not work in the interest of the people. This is the basic rule of democracy and politics. This lack of awareness among people of India has forced politicians towards corruption.

Democracy is a give and take relationship between people and political parties, where people contribute funds to the political parties of their choice so that they work towards peoples benefit
Some of you would ask, why do people have to give funds to political parties? For a while, lets think from a political partys prospective. A political party not just consists of few hundred politicians but also consists of thousands of party workers and regional offices. Annual budget of a national political party in India ranges from 200 crore to 2,000 crore rupees, whereas for a state wide party, the budget is about 100 crore to 500 crore. This budget is used for monthly salaries of party workers, maintaining regional offices, arranging events and rallies, vehicles and advertisement campaigns. Have we ever think, how are the political parties affording such massive annual budgets? Also, lets think about election campaigns in India. Whenever elections are being held, each major party of India spends about 10 crore rupees per constituency for campaigning. Though these numbers are never made official, but one can easily calculate. To organize road shows, advertisements in print media and local TV channels, road side advertisement hoardings, extra volunteers, additional party offices in different localities, vehicles for campaigning and all other logistics come at a cost. Moreover, at some regions in India, political parties also have to give money to people in return of votes.
7

How the political parties are able to afford all these? When people of India are not contributing funds, then how the money for annual budget and election campaign coming from? In order to afford annual budget and election campaigns, political parties are forced to do (i) accept money from lobbyists or (ii) sale of election tickets to the highest bidder. Lobbyists contribute funds to political parties with their set of demands which are often against the public interest. Not surprisingly, the money used for lobbying is the unaccounted money (referred as black money). According to recent media reports, over 700,000 million rupees of Indian black money deposited in European banks, which can potentially be used as lobbying for political parties. The second option before political parties is the sale of election tickets to the highest bidder. Politicians who are sure of return of investment purchase tickets from the political parties. Sometimes, even though a political party wants to give tickets to honest politicians, has to make this compromise because an honest politician wont be able to feed the thousands of party workers. A corrupt politician will not only earn lot of money for himself but will also be able to provide livelihood for thousands of party workers. One might ask- when political parties and politicians are driven by lobbyists and corruption, then how the nation has progressed since independence. The answer isnt difficult. If you look at the sheer labor force and intellectual capabilities of India, it wouldnt take more than twenty years for the nation to become a developed country. But because of corruption and lobbyists, the progress rate has slowed down considerably. Also, think about this, development and growth of economy cannot be equated with better governance. In such a situation, imagine how hard it is for a young aspirant with a constructive agenda to enter politics. Without investing significant amount in advertising, it isnt easy to reach the people. Even for the sake of argument, lets say, someone is willing to invest his/her personal money in election campaign, what is the return for his/her investment? A mere fifty thousand rupees salary per month and few free air tickets? Anyone would invest his hard earned personal money only when he/she is sure about the return of investment. For example, an industrialist might invest his personal money in election campaigns so that after winning, he/she can acquire a non-industrial land in his constituency at a cheaper rate. But what about, young aspirants who want to really work for the benefit of people? Why should they spend their personal money in election campaigns? So, where does all this lead? This leads to a nation with chaos and no value for life. We are alive because the sheer probability helps our survival. When I say probability helps our survival I mean, there are like 1.2 billion people in India, even if 10 terrorists open fire at people, it might kill about 200 people, which means 1,199,999,800 (1.2 billion 200) people are still safe. This is the logic of survival in India. Think about this, as I
8

write this some terrorist might be planning to plot a bomb which will kill me tomorrow. Or maybe some hooligan will attack me because I dont speak a particular language or dont belong to particular religion. Or maybe I will lose a job, because I wasnt born in a particular region. Or maybe I will get killed in some false police encounter. Or maybe, I will get buried under a bridge that collapsed due to the use of faulty material. Or maybe, I will die with a contagious disease. Or maybe, I will die with food poisoning. Or maybe, I will get killed in a road accident, while trying to avoid a pot hole. Or maybe, my apartment will collapse due to a minor earth-quake. Or maybe, someone will kidnap me forcing my family to give away all their savings. I know, I have pointed out too many causes for my death and you might disagree with me. But the truth is this is happening with at least hundred Indians per day. You and I are alive because probability favors us as we werent among those 100 people out of 1.2 billion picked each day. My friends, the only way we can change our country is by establishing the true democracy. And to establish true democracy in India, we need to do two important things. 1. Start contributing funds towards political parties. 2. Bring a constitutional law in India called Death to the traitor (DoT) law. Let me explain what this DoT law is. In democracy, when people have right to elect political leaders as their representative, people also have right to kill the representative who has betrayed their trust. Also let me clarify, just like one person cannot elect the representative, a single person cannot kill the representative. As per the law, during the tenure of an elected representative, if the people are totally dissatisfied with his work, they can demand for a special election called DoT Elections. In DoT elections, people are given two choices, either to Save the Representative they have elected or Hang the Representative for betraying their trust. If majority of the people vote for Hang the representative, the representative is legally hanged under law. If majority of the people vote for Save the representative, then the representative continues his tenure. To avoid misuse and excessive expenditure, people are allowed to demand DoT elections only twice during five year tenure of the representative. All DoT elections should be held under the supervision of Indian President and Indian Army. This law is critical for the success of our nation and implementing the true form of democracy.

Note, DoT law can only be implemented if Indian citizens are willing to contribute funds towards political parties. If they cant give little money out of their pockets, they have no right to punish the representative they have chosen. But when they take out their hardearned money in support of their representative, then they also have a right to take away his life for betraying their trust and causing harm to the nation. The advantages of DoT law are: 1. It gives more power to the people. Ultimate power resides in the hands of people. If they can elect a representative trusting his words, they can also end his life for betraying their trust. 2. Each person contesting elections will feel the responsibility of taking the nation towards development. He/she will be aware at every point of time during his/her tenure that, they are answerable to the people. 3. After the successful completion of the tenure, each representative will rethink, whether he wants to continue the tenure or want to give chance to another person with fresh ideas. This will help the nation in producing new leaders from time to time. The existing scenario is that, same political leaders occupy seats for 30-40 years till they die. 4. To demand the DoT elections, people have to write to the President of India. Its the President of India with consultation with Governor of the State, takes the decision to conduct DoT elections in a State or not. This increases the powers of the President of India, who was earlier a mere rubber stamp. 5. Every time DoT elections are held in any constituency, it sends a message to the whole nation that Indians are not going to tolerate corrupt politicians who do no good to the nation. I dont want to conclude this article, as its just the beginning of a new idea a new revolution. Future articles of Sarfarosh, I will further elaborate my ideas around DoT Law and importance of funding political parties. Also, I am not saying this is the best solution to the problem. This is one of the solutions I found after lot of thinking and I believe if implemented properly it will transform the nation. If you feel this solution has flaws or you have a better solution, please email to me at sarfarosh_the_magazine@live.com. I will be happy to listen from you.

10

Mpemba Effect

n 1963, somewhere in Tanzania, a secondary school had just one refrigerator and hundreds of students competed for getting a slot in refrigerator to make an icecream. For little Mpemba, ice-cream was a craze but he was often left unsatisfied as the time-slot he used to get in refrigerator wasnt longer enough for ice-cream to be prepared. He wondered, if he could figure out a way to freeze the water faster. On one fine day, Mpemba experimented with something totally unexpected. He kept the boiled water in the freezer instead of cold water and to his surprise, it got froze within his allotted slot. Next day, he prepared the ice-cream using mixture of milk and warm water. To his surprise, the mixture of milk and warm water froze into ice-cream much faster than mixture of milk and cold water. Now, Mpemba was able to prepare the icecream in much lesser duration than his friends. Soon, the news spread around the
11

school. Mpemba asked his physics teacher for scientific explanation for warm water to freeze faster than cold water. The physics teacher had no answer to it. Mpemba didnt give up. His curiosity grew with time. During his primary school, he came across something called Newtons law of cooling, which clearly stated the rate of heat loss of a body is proportional to the difference in temperatures between the body and its surroundings. In simpler words it meant, it takes lesser time to cool a colder body than a hotter body. Soon Mpemba realized, by no means his observations can be correct as per the accepted laws of theoretical physics. However, he was still able to prove it experimentally. Mpembas obsession to understand the real reason behind his observations didnt go well with the physics teachers at his school. When Mpemba insisted, physics teacher told him All I can say is, that is Mpembas physics and not the universal physics. Since then, whenever Mpemba asked any question or made a mistake, it was criticized as that is Mpembas physics or that is Mpembas mathematics. However, criticisms didnt stop Mpemba from further experimenting. Six years later in 1969, Dr. Osborne, a physics professor visited Mpembas school. At the end of his talk, Mpemba innocently asked the question that has haunted him from last six years. He asked why water at 100C freezes faster than water at 35C? Dr. Osborne couldnt think of any possible scientific explanation to Mpembas question. Sometime later, out of curiosity, Dr. Osborne asked his lab assistant to conduct the experiment which Mpemba suggested. The results astonished him. Lab assistant reported that, hot water froze first and the same result was obtained even after several attempts. Dr. Osborne was quick to recognize the importance of the discovery but had no idea why it was occurring. He felt, it would be worthwhile to publish the results. In 1969, Dr. Osborne published a paper titled Cool in Journal of Physics Education, with due credit to Mpemba [1]. Physics community saw Mpemba effect with the eye of suspicion and mistrust. How can the laws of physics be so wrong? And more notably, if it is true, why did it take so long for this phenomenon to be discovered? It was soon identified that Mpemba effect was known from the times of Aristotle but has been ignored. In 350 BC, Aristotle wrote If water has been previously heated, this contributes to the rapidity with which it freezes; for it cools more quickly. Thus so many people when they want to cool water quickly first stand it in the sun and the inhabitants of Pontus when they encamp on the ice to fish. pour hot water on their rods because it freezes quicker, using the ice like solder to fix their rods. And water that condenses in the air in warm districts and seasons gets hot quickly In 13th Century, Roger Bacon, an English philosopher and advocate of scientific methods wrote in his book Opus Majus that

12

Moreover, it is generally believed that hot water freezes more quickly than cold water in vessels, and the argument in support of this is advanced that contrary is excited by contrary, just like enemies meeting each other. But it is certain that cold water freezes more quickly for anyone who makes the experiment. People attribute this to Aristotle in the second book of Meteorologics; but he certainly does not make this statement, but he does make one like it, by which they have been deceived, namely, that if cold water and hot water are poured on a cold place, as upon ice, the hot water freezes more quickly, and this is true. But if hot water and cold are placed in two vessels, the cold will freeze more quickly. Therefore all things must be verified by experience In 1637 AD, Descartes, a renowned mathematician, published in his work Les Meteores, quotes about faster freezing of hot water compared to cold water as We can see this by experiment, if we fill a beaker or some other such container having a long, straight neckwith hot water, and expose it to freezing cold air; for the water level will go down visibly, little by little, until the water reaches a certain level of coldness, after which it will gradually swell and rise, until it is completely frozen. Thus the same cold which will have condensed or shrunk it in the beginning will rarefy it afterwards. And we can also see by experiment that water which has been kept hot for a long time freezes faster than any other sort, because those of its parts which can least cease to bend evaporate while it is being heated After the publication by Descartes, Fermat (another renowned mathematician) questioned Descartes whether he actually did the experiment or was he simply stating the rumor. For which, Descartes replied I appreciate once again what you have written me that my reputation is at stake in my response to Mr. Fermat, in which I assure you that there is not one single word that I would like to have changed. . .I dare to assure you that there is nothing incorrect, because I did these experiments myself, and particularly the one which you commented on of the hot water that freezes more quickly than cold; where I said not hot and cold, but that water that one has held for a long time over the fire freezes more quickly than the other; because in order to correctly do this experiment, one must first have boiled the water, then let it cool off, until it has the same degree of coolness as that in a fountain, and having tested it with a thermometer, then draw water from that fountain, and put the two waters in the same quantity in same vases. But there are few people who are capable of correctly doing these experiments, and often, in doing them poorly, one finds the complete opposite of what one should find But for all these quotes from legendary figures, the question still remains, how did Mpemba effect remained as a mystery all these years? Why didnt physics tried to understand the actual cause of Mpemba effect? According to certain researchers, theory of heat transfer is so well established that scientists are skeptical about the claims and
13

refuse to even carry out advance experiments to understand Mpemba effect. Being a passionate physicist, I feel it is a disservice to physics, if researchers dont carry out experiments just because something contradicts the existing theories. Nonetheless, in recent times, there has been renewed enthusiasm in unraveling the exact cause of Mpemba effect. According to several papers published in this regard, Mpembas could be due to impact of evaporation, dissolved gasses, convection, surroundings and super-cooling on water. However, no author was able to confirm the exact reason. Recently, Brownridge published his experimental results on Mpemba effect [2]. The adjacent graph,
Figure from Brownridges paper [2]: Cooling curves of hot water (red) taken from Brownridge paper and cold water (blue). In the experiment, it took 120 minutes for hot shows, it took 120 minutes for water to freeze compared to 195 minutes for cold water to freeze. water at 76C to freeze compared to 195 minutes for water at 4C under experimental conditions. However, Brownridge argues that, changing the experimental conditions slightly can produce opposite results. On 6th May 2010, Vladan Pankovic and Darko V. Kapor have suggested a modification of Newtons Law of cooling to explain Mpemba effect [3].

As a student of science, it surprises me that, such a trivial effect has no exact explanation in theoretical physics. Mpemba effect continues to reminds us that, there is long way to go in theoretical physics. I am also deeply inspired by Mpemba, for his curiosity and persistent effort in understanding this phenomenon. He also reminded us that, instead of blindly following the textbooks and teachers, we need to question because answers can be found only when we question. References & Suggested Reading
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Mpemba, Osborne, "Cool", Physics Education vol. 4, 172-175 (1969). James D. Brownridge, A search for the Mpemba effect: When hot water freezes faster then cold water, arXiv:1003.3185v1 [physics.pop-ph]. Vladan Pankovic, Darko V. Kapor, A Modification of the Newton's Cooling Law and Mpemba Effect, arXiv:1005.1013v1 [physics.gen-ph] Monwhea Jeng, Hot water can freeze faster than cold?!?, Am. J. Phys. 74, 514 (2006). J. I. Katz, When hot water freezes before cold, arXiv:physics/0604224v1 [physics.chem-ph]

14

US IRAN
The two sides of the coin

n 17th May 2010, Iran surprised US and its allies by striking a Nuclear Storage deal with Turkey and Brazil. According to the deal, Iran will transfer 2,640 pounds of crude uranium to Turkey, where it will be stored for duration of one year. In return, Iran would be eligible to receive about 265 pounds of 20% enriched uranium from other countries. Technically, 20% enriched uranium can only be used for medical purposes such as treating cancer. To make nuclear weapons, uranium has to be enriched to 80-90%. Though there are several clauses in the deal, overall, the deal is very similar to the one proposed by US and France to Iran. However, the reaction from US about the deal has been severely discouraging. Obama administration has outright rejected the deal and has stuck to its pre-decided agenda on imposing UN economic sanctions on Iran. On 9th June 2010, under intense pressure from US, UN Security Council imposed economic sanctions on Iran. These sanctions include inspection of flights/ships moving in and out of Iran, barring investment by Iranian citizens in nuclear energy sector outside Iran and ban of sales of weapons of any kind to Iran by any country. Though US government intended to push the sanctions further, but Russian and Chinese governments have opposed to any sanctions that would affect Iranian economy. Overall it appears that, US desperately want to project Iran as a threat to world. Apparently, this isnt a new thing. Previously, US has projected Saddams regime as a threat to the world and had accused Iraq of possessing weapons of mass destruction. As we now know, it was just a ploy to wage a war to occupy the lucrative oil resources of Iraq, whereas weapons of mass destruction never existed. History is repeating itself. US
15

is now projecting Iran as a rogue country and is accusing Iran of trying to develop nuclear weapons that would pose a threat to the world. The ongoing US-Iran conflict raises concerns over prospects of another war in Middle-East. Does Iran pose a real threat to the world? Is this another ploy by US to take control over oil resources of Iran? Is there a diplomatic solution to this conflict? To answer all these questions, one needs to understand the root causes of US-Iran Conflict. In this article, I would like to provide some insights on relations between Iran and US since World War II and throw some light on American intervention in Middle-East. The story starts a century ago, at the beginning of 20th century. After 8 years of desert explorations in Middle-East, in 1908 British geologists stuck gold. They found large crude oil reserves in the deserts of Iran. This discovery led to the establishment of first oil refinery in Middle-East called Anglo-Persian Oil Company (APOC). (Trivia: This company is now known as British Petroleum and has been in news recently for oil spill in Gulf of Mexico). Trivia: Anglo-Persian Oil Company (APOC) is now Just like any other known as British Petroleum (BP). In last couple of colonial British months, BP is in news for oil spill in Mexican Gulf. companies, AngloPersian Oil Company was established to exploit Iranian energy resources. According to the deal imposed upon Iranian government, Iran would receive only 16% of the profits made by APOC. The production of refined oil began in year 1913 and continued for next 15 years. Starting from 1928, Iranian government started renegotiation with Britain about the profit sharing and higher wages for refinery workers but the talks yielded no positive results. The odds were against the favor of Iran. Back then, Iran had no technical expertise to establish refineries indigenously, which forced the government to comply with the demands of Britain. In year 1950, an American company established an oil refinery in Saudi Arabia, with 50-50 profit sharing deal with Saudi Government. As the news reached Iran, people started revolting against exploitation of Iranian resources by APOC. Under the pressure from people, Iranian government proposed a similar deal before Britain, however it was outright rejected. In order to protect Iranian oil reserves, Irans new democratically Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh nationalized oil resources of Iran in 1951. In his famous speech on 21st June, 1951, Mosaddegh quoted, Our long years of negotiations with foreign countries have yielded no results this far. With the oil revenues we could meet our entire budget and combat poverty, disease, and backwardness among our people. Another important consideration is that by the elimination of the power of the British company, we would also eliminate corruption and intrigue, by means of which the internal affairs of our country have been influenced.
16

Once this tutelage has ceased, Iran will have achieved its economic and political independence. The Iranian state prefers to take over the production of petroleum itself. The company should do nothing else but return its property to the rightful owners. The nationalization law provides 25% of the net profits on oil be set aside to meet all the legitimate claims of the company for compensation It has been asserted abroad that Iran intends to expel the foreign oil experts from the country and then shut down oil installations. Not only is this allegation absurd; it is utter invention This was a significant move by Iranian government for the benefit of its economy, however it severely angered Britain. As retaliation, Britain threatened to take legal action against any country that purchases oil from Iran, causing a severe economic crisis in Iran. By 1952, Royal family and parliamentarians in Iran forced Mosaddegh to resign for bringing the country on the verge of economic collapse. However, with overwhelming public support Mosaddegh was again re-elected to power. With the public support, Mosaddegh took measures to resurrect the economy and reduced the constitutional powers of Royal family in the matters of national policies. For these efforts to establish democracy in Iran and bringing economic stablisation of Iran, Time Magazine chose Mosaddegh as 1951s Man of the year. Just when Iran was recovering from the economic crisis, on 19th August 1953, Britain and US co-arranged a coup to oust the democratically elected government in Iran. This coup referred as Operation Ajax by Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was approved by US President Eisenhower and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. The propaganda then, in the words on Winston Churchill was Iranian government was increasingly turning towards communism, a threat to US during cold-war period. Prime Minister Mosaddegh was imprisoned for three years and was later put under house arrest until his death in 1967. Post-coup, a puppet government was established which chose General Fazlollah Zahedi as Prime Minister of Iran. It wasnt surprising that soon after General Zahedi became Prime Minister of Iran, he signed a deal with American and British Oil companies to carry out oil exploration in Iran and reestablished APOC. This is where the Iran-US conflict begins. Post 1953 coup, US and Britain helped the Royal family of Iran regain all its powers, making the King Mohammad-Rez Shh Pahlavi become the de facto leader of Iran. Pahlavi made several visits to US, strengthened Iran-US relations, recognized Israel as a nation and allowed US and British companies to take full control of oil reserves in Iran. Pahlavi also improved the education system in Iran by establishing Universities, granted voting rights to women and established good foreign relations. However, for people of Iran, Pahlavi was a puppet in the hands of US and Britain. He did what he was told to do. Soon opposition against Pahlavis autocratic rule started growing within Iran. In 1963, Ruhollah Mousavi Khomeini, a religious Shia leader publicly criticized Pahlavis rule and American involvement in Iranian internal matters. Subsequently, he was arrested and exiled. While on exile, Khomeini preached about principles of Shia Islam, wrote books about revolting against tyranny and injustice and proposed an Islamic
17

Identity for Iran, with the slogan Neither East, nor West Islamic Republic. His popularity within people of Iran grew day-by-day, however not to an alarming extent to overthrow the Pahlavis rule. But it all changed in 1978-79, a sudden outburst of Islamic revolution in Iran took everyone across the world by surprise. According to calculations of CIA and British intelligence agencies, the initial revolts werent strong enough to overthrow the government. However, contrary to intelligence reports, by January 1979, Pahlavis government was under severe threat by revolutionaries. On 16th January 1979, Pahlavi fled leaving the revolutionaries take control of Iran. Khomeini returned Iran from exile on 1st March 1979. The monarchy was abolished and Imperial Republic of Iran became Islamic Republic of Iran. Khomeinis sudden rise in Iran took US and Allied powers by total surprise. Post Islamic revolution, new constitution of Iran was introduced, which deserted all the trade relations with US and Allied powers established by Pahlavi. However, the most severe blow to Iran-US relations came on 4th November 1979, when group of revolutionaries held 52 Americans working at US Consulate in Tehran as hostages. For the revolutionaries, the members of US consulate were agents of CIA who organized the coup in 1953. If losing the oil resources of Iran wasnt enough, the hostage crisis created a severe anti-Iran sentiment among US and Allied powers. Khomeini put four demands before US in return of release of hostages, (i) an apology for the US role in 1953 Coup in Iran, (ii) release of Iranian assets in banks of America (iii) withdraw any legal claims against Iran arising from the embassy seizure and (iv) promise not to interfere in internal matters of Iran in future. After lot of negotiations and refusals, a deal was stuck between US and Iran under the supervision of Algerian Government on 19th January 1980. According to the deal, US agreed on three conditions out of four proposed by Iranian Government, refusing the first condition of an apology for 1953 coup. (A digital copy of Algiers deal is available at

18

http://www.parstimes.com/history/algiers_accords.pdf) All the hostages were released on 20th January 1980 after being held in captivity for 444 days. American Hostage crisis damaged the reputation of Iran and its political leadership internationally. In neighboring Arab nations, apparently ruled by puppet kings, Islamic rule in Iran was seen as a rise of Islamic power and popularity of Khomeini as a leader of Islam was fast increasing among people. Before a similar revolutionary Islamic movement catches up in surrounding nations, US along with several Arab nations conspired to fight a proxy war with Iran. For US, it was all about gaining control over oil resources but for the Arab nations it was ideological differences with Iran. The followers of Islam are divided into two main groups of thinking, the Sunnis and the Shias. Back then, except for Iran, all the Arab countries were ruled by Sunni Muslims. The rise of Iran was seen as rise of Shia Islam. This egoistic conflict played an important role in subsequent years. In September 1980, under the leadership of Saddam Hussein and weaponry support of US with Allied powers and financially supported for other Arab nations, Iraq attacked Iran. The war lasted for 8 years with over 1.5 million casualties

In 1986, UN security council made a declaration that members are profoundly concerned by the unanimous conclusion of the specialists that chemical weapons on many occasions have been used by Iraqi forces against Iranian troops and the members of the Council strongly condemn this continued use of chemical weapons in clear violation of the Geneva Protocol of 1925 which prohibits the use in war of chemical weapons". Ironically, US voted against the issuance of this statement.
and an estimated cost of $1 trillion. During the course of war, Iraq used chemical weapons with the support of US, which resulted in death of over hundred thousand citizens of Iran. As the Iran Iraq war concluded, US along with the allied powers had an interesting experience in Middle-East. Though the war did collateral damage to both Iran and Iraq resulting in death of over 1.5 million people and losses of $1 trillion, it economically benefited US and Allied Powers. American and European businesses realized that wars and conflicts in Middle-East can be highly profitable if the cards are played wisely. American and European Businesses realized that Whenever there is war in Middle-East, the overall economy of Middle-East collapses. Contrary to propaganda, as the economy of Middle-East collapses, international price of oil actually reduces, benefiting virtually every business in Europe and US
19

If there is a conflict between two nations in Middle-East, Allied Powers can provide arms and security to both the nations. This way, a major portion of money that is flowing into Middle-East due to sale of oil resources can be reclaimed back as expenses for providing the arms and security American and European companies would gain major chunk of reconstruction projects post-war

Annual defense budget of US is approximately $600 billion, out of which major amount is spent on research and development of weapons. It is estimated that nearly 50 million people in US directly or indirectly derive their livelihood working in companies that do research and manufacturing of weapons. If there is no war, not only the weapon companies (private contractors) would go bankrupt but also about 50 million people would lose their livelihood. To continue the American economy as it is, US has to participate in a major war every 5 years. Given that each war would cost, it is strategic to fight a war against a country which has abundant natural resources, so that whatever investment is done in the war, can be recovered post invasion or provide military services to the countries in resolving their conflicts through wars.
Sl. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2008 arms sales ($ million) BAE Systems 32,420 Lockheed Martin 29,880 Boeing 29,200 Northrop Grumman 26,090 General Dynamics 22,780 Raytheon 21, 030 17, 900 EADS 13, 020 Finmeccanica L-3 Communications 12, 160 10, 760 Thales Group United Technologies 9,980 SAIC 7,350 KBR 5,730 Computer Sciences Corp. 5,710 Honeywell 5,310 ITT Corporation 5,170 Rolls Royce 4,720 4,340 Almaz-Antei AM General 4,040 Navistar 3,900 Company 2007 arms sales ($ million) 29,860 29,400 30,480 24,600 21,520 19,540 13,100 9,850 11,240 9,350 8,760 6,250 5,000 5,420 5,020 3,850 4 580 2,780 2,670 370

(The above table was obtained from http://www.sipri.org/research/armaments/production/Top100 ) Now the task before the businesses was to convince their respective governments to act according to the above points. As they soon found out, it is much easier than they
20

thought. The obvious loophole in western democracy is that, political parties can be lobbied. The annual budget of two major political parties in US is nearly $9 billion and the budget of Presidential campaign is about $500 million. Political parties attract donations from people only during elections campaigns and the money raised isnt sufficient enough for the campaign itself. The harsh truth is, nearly 80% of the annual budget of political parties is supported by lobbyists. The same is true for almost all the European democracies. In such a scenario, its not the peoples government but rather a government supported by businesses. In other words, its a namesake democracy, where a political leader is elected by the people but he/she works towards benefit of businesses rather than people. As we now see, the businesses were successfully able to execute their plans in last two decades. President of America, often referred as the most powerful man on the planet, is actually a puppet in the hands of businesses with regard to foreign policies. In 1990, when Iraq invaded Kuwait, most countries in Middle-East saw it as an internal conflict between two Arab nations and were opposed to intervention of any outsider. However, US saw it as an opportunity to sell its weaponry and military services. Soon, they convinced Saudi Arabia of possible threat from Iraq. And as expected, with the funding of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, US waged a war against Iraq. This war, often known as first Gulf War was funded by Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. It is ironic to note that, most of weapons used by Iraq during the war were actually sold by US itself during Iran-Iraq War of 1980-88. After the end of first Gulf War, US and NATO convinced Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Jordon for establishing military bases in their region for their safety. The business model of selling weaponry and security services was working fine until late 2001. Twin Tower attacks forced US to settle the score with Afghanistan. As the occupation of Afghanistan began, businesses realized that the barren lands of Afghanistan had nothing to contribute to American economy. (Contrary to my initial predictions, according to recent reports, there are mineral resources worth $1 Trillion in Afghanistan). The losses in Afghanistan had to be recovered and it didnt take long for the Oval office to come up with a recovery plan. On 29th January 2002, amidst Afghanistan war, Bush delivered a speech, in which he went on to define the possible options, which he termed as Axis of Evil. Bushs Axis of Evil consisted of Iraq, Iran and North Korea, who were accused of developing weapons of mass destruction. The idea was simple, occupy one of these countries, exploit the natural resources and recover the investment done in Afghanistan. For the next one year, the propaganda of Weapons of Mass destruction was further promoted. Among the three nations defined as Axis of Evil, the most convenient nation to attack was Iraq. Invading Iran posed a threat to ongoing war with Taliban as it shares the common border with Afghanistan. North Korea was ruled out as China was

21

dead against the war, which means there was only one option left. Technically, following points went against Iraq 1. With the experience of first gulf war, US Army had good understanding about strengths and weaknesses of Iraqi forces. 2. With two unsuccessful attempts of occupying neighboring countries, Saddams government had hostile relations with every Arab country, which meant, it wont affect the US relations with other Arab nations. 3. Saddam was a known dictator and was cruel with people of Iraq, which meant, he can easily be projected as modern day Hitler before American people to garner public support towards the war.

4. Iraq has the Worlds fourth largest oil reserves

It didnt take along for the businesses and the puppet Bush Government to draft a plan for genocide in Iraq. On 5th February 2003, US Secretary of State Colin Powel lied to UN Security Council We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction; he's determined to make more. Given Saddam Hussein's history of aggression... given what we know of his terrorist associations and given his determination to exact revenge on those who oppose him, should we take the risk that he will not someday use these weapons at a time and the place and in the manner of his choosing at a time when the world is in a much weaker position to respond? The United States will not and cannot run that risk to the American people. Leaving Saddam Hussein in possession of weapons of mass destruction for a few more months or years is not an option, not in a post-September 11 world. In 2003, Iraq was invaded by coalition forces consisting of US, British, Polish and Australian army. No weapons of mass destruction were found. Two years later, Saddam Hussein was hanged. Iraq war was highly profitable for the oil companies and defense contractors. As the businesses involved in the war gained experience, they started being more ruthless. During the Iraq war, several decisions were made, that were against the will of people of US. For businesses, it wasnt about a people or nation, it was all about making profits. And if profits can be made exploiting the US tax payers money, so be it. The next big plan proposed by Allied Businesses was economic destabilization of Iran and occupation its oil resources. Iran holds worlds third largest oil resources and has had hostile relations with US since 1979. Also, it is the only country within Middle-East that isnt controlled by US. In last two years or so, Allied businesses have invested significant amount of money in projecting Iran as a rogue country in Western Media. Elections in Iran captured the headlines of nearly every newspaper in US. Attempts were also made by Allied businesses to fund candidates who would act as their puppets. When all attempts of sponsoring favorable candidates in Iranian elections didnt work out, US resorted to UN economic sanctions on Iran to destabilize Iranian economy.
22

Now, that brings to our another question, why US wants to destabilize Iranian economy by imposing UN sanctions or for that matter willing to go on a war against Iran? How does that benefit American businesses? Destabilization of Iranian economy might lead to following (i) Economic crisis in Iran would lead to downfall of its government and quite possibly Khomeinis decline. This would allow US and Allied powers to replace the existing government in Iran with puppets of their own, leading to indirect control of nations oil resources. Economic crisis in Iran would decrease its capability to afford the research and development of nuclear weapons. Hence, opens chances of invading Iran. % Oil Relations with Reserves US 466,700,000,000 19.78% Ally Saudi Arabia Canada 178,100,000,000 13.21% Ally Iran 136,200,000,000 10.10% Hostile 115,000,000,000 8.53% Occupied Iraq Kuwait 104,000,000,000 8.71% Ally 99,380,000,000 7.37% Hostile Venezuela United Arab 97,800,000,000 7.25% Ally Emirates 79,000,000,000 4.45% Diplomatic Russia Libya 43,660,000,000 3.24% Hostile Nigeria 36,220,000,000 2.69% Diplomatic Oil - consumption (bbl/day) World 85,980,000 United States 19,500,000 European Union 14,390,000 7,999,000 China 4,785,000 Japan 2,800,000 Russia 2,670,000 India Germany 2,569,000 2,520,000 Brazil 2,380,000 Saudi Arabia Canada 2,260,000 2,175,000 Korea, South Validity 2008 est. 2008 est. 2007 est. 2008 est. 2008 est. 2008 est. 2009 est. 2008 est. 2008 est. 2008 est. 2008 est. 2008 est. Reserves (bbl)

(ii)

Rank Country 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Rank Country/Region 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

23

On the other hand, having seen the invasion of Iraq and sensing the threat from US, Iran has silently pushed for enriching uranium to produce nuclear weapons. A nuclear powered Iran means The threat of a direct war with US will be eliminated. US cant go on a war with a nuclear powered Iran as it would pose a severe threat to existence of Israel. Opens up doors for negotiation. Once a nation acquires nuclear weapons and is ready to talk, other nations rather cant do much than coming to the table. India and Pakistan are prime examples of it. Provides security to its oil resources. China has already done lot of investment in energy sector of Iran. China doesnt consider a nuclear powered Iran as a threat, so it would be business as usual. So, in way, even if US and Europe decline to do trade with nuclear powered Iran, there are other nations who are willing to. Except for a short period, the economy of Iran wont be affected drastically.

However, given that Iran hasnt announced that they have successfully created nuclear weapons, it makes no sense to assume the American version of the story. From economic point of view, had Iran would have successfully created the nuclear weapons, it would have announced to the world. Even if Iran does have nuclear weapons and hasnt announced it, it possesses no threat to the world. Iran has enough common sense to realize, if it uses nuclear weapons against any other nation, for sure the rest of the countries in the world are powerful enough to wipe it off from the map. It remains to be seen, how the situation would unfold in next three years. For now, it is apparent that US has the upper hand. However, there is something that US has to be careful about, the war against Iran wont be seen as a fight between two nations. Unlike the Sunni-dominated Muslim countries who suffer from internal conflicts and ego clashes, Shia Muslims are far more united and intellectually superior. Though a minority in Pakistan and Afghanistan, the men in power are Shia and not to forget, power is being handed over to Shia in Iraq. That creates a huge portion of land being ruled by Shias! Anyhow, without speculating, I want to conclude that, rivalry between US and Iran is deeply rooted and will last until Iran successfully creates nuclear weapons. After that, the nations will come to table to negotiate! (I have included the transcripts of Obamas speech at Cairo and Ahmadinejads open letter to American citizens in this issue of Sarfarosh. Must read for those who are interested in World Politics)

24

Barack Obama
Al-Azhar University, Cairo 4th June 2009
I am honored to be in the timeless city of Cairo, and to be hosted by two remarkable institutions. For over a thousand years, Al-Azhar has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning, and for over a century, Cairo University has been a source of Egypt's advancement. Together, you represent the harmony between tradition and progress. I am grateful for your hospitality, and the hospitality of the people of Egypt. I am also proud to carry with me the goodwill of the American people, and a greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country Assalaamu-alaykum.

A new beginning Speech by President of United States of America

25

We meet at a time of tension between the United States and Muslims around the world tension rooted in historical forces that go beyond any current policy debate. The relationship between Islam and the West includes centuries of co-existence and cooperation, but also conflict and religious wars. More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations. Moreover, the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalization led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam. Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Muslims. The attacks of September 11th, 2001 and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights. This has bred more fear and mistrust. So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end. I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles - principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings. I do so recognizing that change cannot happen overnight. No single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor can I answer in the time that I have all the complex questions that brought us to this point. But I am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground. As the Holy Koran tells us, "Be conscious of God and speak always the truth." That is what I will try to do - to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces that drive us apart. Part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the Azaan at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith. As a student of history, I also know civilization's debt to Islam. It was Islam - at places like Al-Azhar University - that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe's Renaissance and
26

Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality. I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America's story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President John Adams wrote, "The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims." And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, served in government, stood for civil rights, started businesses, taught at our Universities, excelled in our sports arenas, won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim-American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers - Thomas Jefferson - kept in his personal library. So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn't. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear. But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America. Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words - within our borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: E pluribus unum: "Out of many, one." Much has been made of the fact that an African-American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected President. But my personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores - that includes nearly seven million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average. Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one's religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state of our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That is why the U.S. government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it.

27

So let there be no doubt: Islam is a part of America. And I believe that America holds within her the truth that regardless of race, religion, or station in life, all of us share common aspirations - to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God. These things we share. This is the hope of all humanity. Of course, recognizing our common humanity is only the beginning of our task. Words alone cannot meet the needs of our people. These needs will be met only if we act boldly in the years ahead; and if we understand that the challenges we face are shared, and our failure to meet them will hurt us all. For we have learned from recent experience that when a financial system weakens in one country, prosperity is hurt everywhere. When a new flu infects one human being, all are at risk. When one nation pursues a nuclear weapon, the risk of nuclear attack rises for all nations. When violent extremists operate in one stretch of mountains, people are endangered across an ocean. And when innocents in Bosnia and Darfur are slaughtered, that is a stain on our collective conscience. That is what it means to share this world in the 21st century. That is the responsibility we have to one another as human beings. This is a difficult responsibility to embrace. For human history has often been a record of nations and tribes subjugating one another to serve their own interests. Yet in this new age, such attitudes are self-defeating. Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail. So whatever we think of the past, we must not be prisoners of it. Our problems must be dealt with through partnership; progress must be shared. That does not mean we should ignore sources of tension. Indeed, it suggests the opposite: we must face these tensions squarely. And so in that spirit, let me speak as clearly and plainly as I can about some specific issues that I believe we must finally confront together. The first issue that we have to confront is violent extremism in all of its forms. In Ankara, I made clear that America is not - and never will be - at war with Islam. We will, however, relentlessly confront violent extremists who pose a grave threat to our security. Because we reject the same thing that people of all faiths reject: the killing of innocent men, women, and children. And it is my first duty as President to protect the American people. The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America's goals, and our need to work together. Over seven years ago, the United States pursued al Qaeda and the Taliban with broad international support. We did not go by choice, we went because of necessity. I am aware that some question or justify the events of 9/11. But let us be clear: al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet Al Qaeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in many countries and are trying to expand their reach. These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with.
28

Make no mistake, we do not want to keep our troops in Afghanistan. We seek no military bases there. It is agonizing for America to lose our young men and women. It is costly and politically difficult to continue this conflict. We would gladly bring every single one of our troops home if we could be confident that there were not violent extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan, [who are] determined to kill as many Americans as they possibly can. But that is not yet the case. That's why we're partnering with a coalition of forty-six countries. And despite the costs involved, America's commitment will not weaken. Indeed, none of us should tolerate these extremists. They have killed in many countries. They have killed people of different faiths - more than any other, they have killed Muslims. Their actions are irreconcilable with the rights of human beings, the progress of nations, and with Islam. The Holy Koran teaches that whoever kills an innocent, it is as if he has killed all mankind; and whoever saves a person, it is as if he has saved all mankind. The enduring faith of over a billion people is so much bigger than the narrow hatred of a few. Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism - it is an important part of promoting peace. We also know that military power alone is not going to solve the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is why we plan to invest $1.5 billion each year over the next five years to partner with Pakistanis to build schools and hospitals, roads and businesses, and hundreds of millions to help those who have been displaced. And that is why we are providing more than $2.8 billion to help Afghans develop their economy and deliver services that people depend upon. Let me also address the issue of Iraq. Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice that provoked strong differences in my country and around the world. Although I believe that the Iraqi people are ultimately better off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible. Indeed, we can recall the words of Thomas Jefferson, who said: "I hope that our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be." Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraq forge a better future - and to leave Iraq to Iraqis. I have made it clear to the Iraqi people that we pursue no bases, and no claim on their territory or resources. Iraq's sovereignty is its own. That is why I ordered the removal of our combat brigades by next August. That is why we will honor our agreement with Iraq's democratically-elected government to remove combat troops from Iraqi cities by July, and to remove all our troops from Iraq by 2012. We will help Iraq train its Security Forces and develop its economy. But we will support a secure and united Iraq as a partner, and never as a patron. And finally, just as America can never tolerate violence by extremists, we must never alter our principles. 9/11 was an enormous trauma to our country. The fear and anger that it provoked was understandable, but in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our
29

ideals. We are taking concrete actions to change course. I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early next year. So America will defend itself respectful of the sovereignty of nations and the rule of law. And we will do so in partnership with Muslim communities which are also threatened. The sooner the extremists are isolated and unwelcome in Muslim communities, the sooner we will all be safer. The second major source of tension that we need to discuss is the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world. America's strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied. Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald, which was part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed - more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today. Denying that fact is baseless, ignorant, and hateful. Threatening Israel with destruction - or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews - is deeply wrong, and only serves to evoke in the minds of Israelis this most painful of memories while preventing the peace that the people of this region deserve. On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people - Muslims and Christians - have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations - large and small - that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own. For decades, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive. It is easy to point fingers - for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought by Israel's founding, and for Israelis to point to the constant hostility and attacks throughout its history from within its borders as well as beyond. But if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth: the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security. That is in Israel's interest, Palestine's interest, America's interest, and the world's interest. That is why I intend to personally pursue this outcome with all the patience that the task requires. The obligations that the parties have agreed to under the Road Map are clear. For peace to come, it is time for them - and all of us - to live up to our responsibilities.
30

Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center of America's founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It's a story with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered. Now is the time for Palestinians to focus on what they can build. The Palestinian Authority must develop its capacity to govern, with institutions that serve the needs of its people. Hamas does have support among some Palestinians, but they also have responsibilities. To play a role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations, and to unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence, recognize past agreements, and recognize Israel's right to exist. At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop. Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure that Palestinians can live, and work, and develop their society. And just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel's security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress. Finally, the Arab States must recognize that the Arab Peace Initiative was an important beginning, but not the end of their responsibilities. The Arab-Israeli conflict should no longer be used to distract the people of Arab nations from other problems. Instead, it must be a cause for action to help the Palestinian people develop the institutions that will sustain their state; to recognize Israel's legitimacy; and to choose progress over a self-defeating focus on the past. America will align our policies with those who pursue peace, and say in public what we say in private to Israelis and Palestinians and Arabs. We cannot impose peace. But privately, many Muslims recognize that Israel will not go away. Likewise, many Israelis recognize the need for a Palestinian state. It is time for us to act on what everyone knows to be true. Too many tears have flowed. Too much blood has been shed. All of us have a responsibility to work for the day when the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see
31

their children grow up without fear; when the Holy Land of three great faiths is the place of peace that God intended it to be; when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed (peace be upon them) joined in prayer. The third source of tension is our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons. This issue has been a source of tension between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country, and there is indeed a tumultuous history between us. In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically-elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians. This history is well known. Rather than remain trapped in the past, I have made it clear to Iran's leaders and people that my country is prepared to move forward. The question, now, is not what Iran is against, but rather what future it wants to build. It will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect. But it is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a decisive point. This is not simply about America's interests. It is about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path. I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation - including Iran - should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear NonProliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the Treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal. The fourth issue that I will address is democracy. I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other. That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election. But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn
32

for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere. There is no straight line to realize this promise. But this much is clear: governments that protect these rights are ultimately more stable, successful and secure. Suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them. And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments - provided they govern with respect for all their people. This last point is important because there are some who advocate for democracy only when they are out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. No matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy. The fifth issue that we must address together is religious freedom. Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country. That is the spirit we need today. People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith based upon the persuasion of the mind, heart, and soul. This tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it is being challenged in many different ways. Among some Muslims, there is a disturbing tendency to measure one's own faith by the rejection of another's. The richness of religious diversity must be upheld - whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt. And fault lines must be closed among Muslims as well, as the divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq. Freedom of religion is central to the ability of peoples to live together. We must always examine the ways in which we protect it. For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat. Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit - for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism. Indeed, faith should bring us together. That is why we are forging
33

service projects in America that bring together Christians, Muslims, and Jews. That is why we welcome efforts like Saudi Arabian King Abdullah's Interfaith dialogue and Turkey's leadership in the Alliance of Civilizations. Around the world, we can turn dialogue into Interfaith service, so bridges between peoples lead to action - whether it is combating malaria in Africa, or providing relief after a natural disaster. The sixth issue that I want to address is women's rights. I know there is debate about this issue. I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality. And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well-educated are far more likely to be prosperous. Now let me be clear: issues of women's equality are by no means simply an issue for Islam. In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia, we have seen Muslim-majority countries elect a woman to lead. Meanwhile, the struggle for women's equality continues in many aspects of American life, and in countries around the world. Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity - men and women - to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice. That is why the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams. Finally, I want to discuss economic development and opportunity. I know that for many, the face of globalization is contradictory. The Internet and television can bring knowledge and information, but also offensive sexuality and mindless violence. Trade can bring new wealth and opportunities, but also huge disruptions and changing communities. In all nations - including my own - this change can bring fear. Fear that because of modernity we will lose of control over our economic choices, our politics, and most importantly our identities - those things we most cherish about our communities, our families, our traditions, and our faith. But I also know that human progress cannot be denied. There need not be contradiction between development and tradition. Countries like Japan and South Korea grew their economies while maintaining distinct cultures. The same is true for the astonishing progress within Muslim-majority countries from Kuala Lumpur to Dubai. In ancient times and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of innovation and education. This is important because no development strategy can be based only upon what comes out of the ground, nor can it be sustained while young people are out of work. Many Gulf States have enjoyed great wealth as a consequence of oil, and some are beginning to
34

focus it on broader development. But all of us must recognize that education and innovation will be the currency of the 21st century, and in too many Muslim communities there remains underinvestment in these areas. I am emphasizing such investments within my country. And while America in the past has focused on oil and gas in this part of the world, we now seek a broader engagement. On education, we will expand exchange programs, and increase scholarships, like the one that brought my father to America, while encouraging more Americans to study in Muslim communities. And we will match promising Muslim students with internships in America; invest in on-line learning for teachers and children around the world; and create a new online network, so a teenager in Kansas can communicate instantly with a teenager in Cairo. On economic development, we will create a new corps of business volunteers to partner with counterparts in Muslim-majority countries. And I will host a Summit on Entrepreneurship this year to identify how we can deepen ties between business leaders, foundations and social entrepreneurs in the United States and Muslim communities around the world. On science and technology, we will launch a new fund to support technological development in Muslim-majority countries, and to help transfer ideas to the marketplace so they can create jobs. We will open centers of scientific excellence in Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia, and appoint new Science Envoys to collaborate on programs that develop new sources of energy, create green jobs, digitize records, clean water, and grow new crops. And today I am announcing a new global effort with the Organization of the Islamic Conference to eradicate polio. And we will also expand partnerships with Muslim communities to promote child and maternal health. All these things must be done in partnership. Americans are ready to join with citizens and governments; community organizations, religious leaders, and businesses in Muslim communities around the world to help our people pursue a better life. The issues that I have described will not be easy to address. But we have a responsibility to join together on behalf of the world we seek - a world where extremists no longer threaten our people, and American troops have come home; a world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own, and nuclear energy is used for peaceful purposes; a world where governments serve their citizens, and the rights of all God's children are respected. Those are mutual interests. That is the world we seek. But we can only achieve it together. I know there are many - Muslim and non-Muslim - who question whether we can forge this new beginning. Some are eager to stoke the flames of division, and to stand in the way of progress. Some suggest that it isn't worth the effort - that we are fated to disagree, and civilizations are doomed to clash. Many more are simply skeptical that real change can occur. There is so much fear, so much mistrust. But if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward. And I want to particularly say this to young
35

people of every faith, in every country - you, more than anyone, have the ability to remake this world. All of us share this world for but a brief moment in time. The question is whether we spend that time focused on what pushes us apart, or whether we commit ourselves to an effort - a sustained effort - to find common ground, to focus on the future we seek for our children, and to respect the dignity of all human beings. It is easier to start wars than to end them. It is easier to blame others than to look inward; to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There is also one rule that lies at the heart of every religion - that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. This truth transcends nations and peoples - a belief that isn't new; that isn't black or white or brown; that isn't Christian, or Muslim or Jew. It's a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilization, and that still beats in the heart of billions. It's a faith in other people, and it's what brought me here today. We have the power to make the world we seek, but only if we have the courage to make a new beginning, keeping in mind what has been written. The Holy Koran tells us, "O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another." The Talmud tells us: "The whole of the Torah is for the purpose of promoting peace." The Holy Bible tells us, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." The people of the world can live together in peace. We know that is God's vision. Now, that must be our work here on Earth. Thank you. And may God's peace be upon you.

36

Open letter to American citizens by

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful. O, Almighty God, bestow upon humanity the perfect human being promised to all by You, and make us among his followers. 26th November 2006. Noble Americans, Were we not faced with the activities of the US administration in this part of the world and the negative ramifications of those activities on the daily lives of our peoples, coupled with the many wars and calamities caused by the US administration as well as the tragic consequences of US interference in other countries; Were the American people not God-fearing, truth-loving, and justice-seeking, while the US administration
37

President of Iran

actively conceals the truth and impedes any objective portrayal of current realities; And if we did not share a common responsibility to promote and protect freedom and human dignity and integrity; Then, there would have been little urgency to have a dialogue with you. While Divine providence has placed Iran and the United States geographically far apart, we should be cognizant that human values and our common human spirit, which proclaim the dignity and exalted worth of all human beings, have brought our two great nations of Iran and the United States closer together. Both our nations are God-fearing, truth-loving and justice-seeking, and both seek dignity, respect and perfection. Both greatly value and readily embrace the promotion of human ideals such as compassion, empathy, respect for the rights of human beings, securing justice and equity, and defending the innocent and the weak against oppressors and bullies. We are all inclined towards the good, and towards extending a helping hand to one another, particularly to those in need. We all deplore injustice, the trampling of peoples' rights and the intimidation and humiliation of human beings. We all detest darkness, deceit, lies and distortion, and seek and admire salvation, enlightenment, sincerity and honesty. The pure human essence of the two great nations of Iran and the United States testify to the veracity of these statements. Noble Americans, Our nation has always extended its hand of friendship to all other nations of the world. Hundreds of thousands of my Iranian compatriots are living amongst you in friendship and peace, and are contributing positively to your society. Our people have been in contact with you over the past many years and have maintained these contacts despite the unnecessary restrictions of US authorities. As mentioned, we have common concerns, face similar challenges, and are pained by the sufferings and afflictions in the world. We, like you, are aggrieved by the ever-worsening pain and misery of the Palestinian people. Persistent aggressions by the Zionists are making life more and more difficult for the rightful owners of the land of Palestine. In broad day-light, in front of cameras and before the eyes of the world, they are bombarding innocent defenseless civilians, bulldozing houses, firing machine guns at students in the streets and alleys, and subjecting their families to endless grief. No day goes by without a new crime. Palestinian mothers, just like Iranian and American mothers, love their children, and are painfully bereaved by the imprisonment, wounding and murder of their children. What mother wouldn't? For 60 years, the Zionist regime has driven millions of the inhabitants of Palestine out of their homes. Many of these refugees have died in the Diaspora and in refugee camps. Their children have spent their youth in these camps and are aging while still in the hope of returning to homeland. You know well that the US administration has persistently provided blind and blanket support to the Zionist regime, has emboldened it to continue its crimes, and has prevented the UN Security Council from condemning it. Who can deny such broken promises and grave injustices towards humanity by the US administration? Governments are there to serve their own people. No people want to side with or
38

support any oppressors. But regrettably, the US administration disregards even its own public opinion and remains in the forefront of supporting the trampling of the rights of the Palestinian people. Let's take a look at Iraq. Since the commencement of the US military presence in Iraq, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been killed, maimed or displaced. Terrorism in Iraq has grown exponentially. With the presence of the US military in Iraq, nothing has been done to rebuild the ruins, to restore the infrastructure or to alleviate poverty. The US Government used the pretext of the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but later it became clear that that was just a lie and a deception. Although Saddam was overthrown and people are happy about his departure, the pain and suffering of the Iraqi people has persisted and has even been aggravated. In Iraq, about one hundred and fifty thousand American soldiers, separated from their families and loved ones, are operating under the command of the current US administration. A substantial number of them have been killed or wounded and their presence in Iraq has tarnished the image of the American people and government. Their mothers and relatives have, on numerous occasions, displayed their discontent with the presence of their sons and daughters in a land thousands of miles away from US shores. American soldiers often wonder why they have been sent to Iraq. I consider it extremely unlikely that you, the American people, consent to the billions of dollars of annual expenditure from your treasury for this military misadventure. Noble Americans, You have heard that the US administration is kidnapping its presumed opponents from across the globe and arbitrarily holding them without trial or any international supervision in horrendous prisons that it has established in various parts of the world. God knows who these detainees actually are, and what terrible fate awaits them. You have certainly heard the sad stories of the Guantanamo and Abu-Ghraib prisons. The US administration attempts to justify them through its proclaimed "war on terror." But every one knows that such behavior, in fact, offends global public opinion, exacerbates resentment and thereby spreads terrorism, and tarnishes the US image and its credibility among nations. The US administration's illegal and immoral behavior is not even confined to outside its borders. You are witnessing daily that under the pretext of "the war on terror," civil liberties in the United States are being increasingly curtailed. Even the privacy of individuals is fast losing its meaning. Judicial due process and fundamental rights are trampled upon. Private phones are tapped, suspects are arbitrarily arrested, sometimes beaten in the streets, or even shot to death. I have no doubt that the American people do not approve of this behavior and indeed deplore it. The US administration does not accept accountability before any organization, institution or council. The US administration has undermined the credibility of international organizations, particularly the United Nations and its Security Council. But, I do not intend to address all the challenges and calamities in this message.

39

The legitimacy, power and influence of a government do not emanate from its arsenals of tanks, fighter aircrafts, missiles or nuclear weapons. Legitimacy and influence reside in sound logic, quest for justice and compassion and empathy for all humanity. The global position of the United States is in all probability weakened because the administration has continued to resort to force, to conceal the truth, and to mislead the American people about its policies and practices. Undoubtedly, the American people are not satisfied with this behavior and they showed their discontent in the recent elections. I hope that in the wake of the mid-term elections, the administration of President Bush will have heard and will heed the message of the American people. My questions are the following: Is there not a better approach to governance? Is it not possible to put wealth and power in the service of peace, stability, prosperity and the happiness of all peoples through a commitment to justice and respect for the rights of all nations, instead of aggression and war? We all condemn terrorism, because its victims are the innocent. But, can terrorism be contained and eradicated through war, destruction and the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocents? If that were possible, then why has the problem not been resolved? The sad experience of invading Iraq is before us all. What has blind support for the Zionists by the US administration brought for the American people? It is regrettable that for the US administration, the interest of these occupiers supersedes the interests of the American people and of the other nations of the world. What have the Zionists done for the American people that the US administration considers itself obliged to blindly support these infamous aggressors? Is it not because they have imposed themselves on a substantial portion of the banking, financial, cultural and media sectors?

I recommend that in a demonstration of respect for the American people and for humanity, the right of Palestinians to live in their own homeland should be recognized so that millions of Palestinian refugees can return to their homes and the future of all of Palestine and its form of government be determined in a referendum. This will benefit everyone. Now that Iraq has a Constitution and an independent Assembly and Government, would it not be more beneficial to bring the US officers and soldiers home, and to spend the astronomical US military expenditures in Iraq for the welfare and prosperity of the American people? As you know very well, many victims of Katrina continue to suffer, and countless Americans continue to live in poverty and homelessness. I'd also like to say a word to the winners of the recent elections in the US: The United States has had many administrations; some who have left a positive legacy, and others that are neither remembered fondly by the American people nor by other nations. Now that you control an important branch of the US Government, you will also be held to account by the people and by history. If the US Government meets the current domestic and external challenges with an approach based on truth and Justice, it can remedy
40

some of the past afflictions and alleviate some of the global resentment and hatred of America. But if the approach remains the same, it would not be unexpected that the American people would similarly reject the new electoral winners, although the recent elections, rather than reflecting a victory, in reality point to the failure of the current administration's policies. These issues had been extensively dealt with in my letter to President Bush earlier this year. To sum up: It is possible to govern based on an approach that is distinctly different from one of coercion, force and injustice. It is possible to sincerely serve and promote common human values, and honesty and compassion. It is possible to provide welfare and prosperity without tension, threats, imposition or war. It is possible to lead the world towards the aspired perfection by adhering to unity, monotheism, morality and spirituality and drawing upon the teachings of the Divine Prophets. Then, the American people, who are God-fearing and followers of Divine religions, will overcome every difficulty. What I stated represents some of my anxieties and concerns. I am confident that you, the American people, will play an instrumental role in the establishment of justice and spirituality throughout the world. The promises of the Almighty and His prophets will certainly be realized, Justice and Truth will prevail and all nations will live a true life in a climate replete with love, compassion and fraternity. The US governing establishment, the authorities and the powerful should not choose irreversible paths. As all prophets have taught us, injustice and transgression will eventually bring about decline and demise. Today, the path of return to faith and spirituality is open and unimpeded. We should all heed the Divine Word of the Holy Qur'an: "But those who repent, have faith and do good may receive Salvation. Your Lord, alone, creates and chooses as He will, and others have no part in His choice; Glorified is God and Exalted above any partners they ascribe to Him." (28:67-68) I pray to the Almighty to bless the Iranian and American nations and indeed all nations of the world with dignity and success. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad President of the Islamic Republic of Iran 29 November 2006

41

Reserved India!
India, as a civilization has had a long history. Like any other civilization, there have been historic wonders and blunders. One grave defect in Indian history is the division of people based on their profession and imposing a hereditary system that forces the offspring to continue his/her fathers profession whether he/she likes it or not. This historic blunder eventually resulted in what we now refer as caste system. More than 90% of the people in India were considered as lower-caste and werent given equal human rights, almost all throughout the history. Given the fact that, at no point in the history there has been a notable rebellion against caste system by the people, it would be safe to say, most Indians have got adapted to caste system. For many of them, their caste gives them a sense of identity of being part of a particular community. It was this sense of identity among people based on their caste that posed a threat to India being as a single nation post 1947. If Jinnah can incite a group of people of his faith to fight for a separate nation, why cant another leader from a particular caste incite the people of his/her caste to demand a separate nation? Such a rebellion can take the nation apart. Though, never expressed, this question lingered the best minds of India while defining the Constitution of India. As India was on the verge of receiving independence from Britain, majority of the people including future Prime Minister who controlled the power belonged to the elite upper caste. It became increasingly evident before the people that, independence was only for namesake, the power still remains with the same class of people, albeit in a different form. The situation was such that, all it needed was one capable leader from lower caste to start a civil war that would break the nation into pieces. The fear was evident but was unspoken in open. Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar was one such leader, who represented the educated voice of lower caste people of India. He openly criticized the way of life of people, raised his voice against customs of untouchability and demanded power for Dalits. Moreover, Dr. Ambedkar was one man who had guts to criticize even Gandhi in public and get away with it. He once quoted Dont call Gandhi a saint. He is a seasoned politician. When everything else fails, Gandhi will resort to intrigue. Also, Dr. Ambedkar made his intension clear in his book The Untouchables: A Thesis on the Origins of Untouchability, in which he quotes the Hindu Civilization is a diabolical contrivance to suppress and enslave humanity. Its proper name would be infamy. What else can be said of a civilization which has produced a mass of people... who are treated as an entity beyond human intercourse and whose mere touch is enough to cause pollution?. Top politicians in India were intelligent enough to sense the gravity of the situation. If Dr. Ambedkar was allowed to propagate his agenda, the nation would witness war for the rights of lower-caste people and the power would go away from the hands of elite
42

few. How can the elite upper class (caste) remain in power and yet give assurance to lower-class that there is a future ahead of them? Something had to be done before it becomes too late. Just when the doubts were being raised, Indian National Congress demonstrated its political acumen by making Dr. Ambedkar the Union Law Minister and Chairmen to draft the Indian constitution. The point to be noted here is, Dr. Ambedkar was not the member of Indian National Congress (INC) and had contested elections against INC during 1946 elections. Now, the ball was in the hands of Dr. Ambedkar. He is the one now who is drafting the laws of the nation; he can do all he wants to make the laws in favor of lower-caste people. Had Dr. Ambedkar not accepted the government post and fought for the rights of suppressed classes of people, today, he would have been considered the Nelson Mandela of India and probably would have been the first Prime Minister of India with Dalit background. Instead, he accepted the post of Union Law minister and drafted the Indian constitution. Dr. Ambedkar had several challenges before him. The foremost being, he wanted to abolish the caste system in India however, he soon realized, if caste system is abolished, then he cannot demand for special privileges for lower-caste people for the years of discrimination. Thats when he came up with the idea of classification of castes in terms of economic positions. He called the upper-castes as forward castes and lower castes as backward castes. With the new classification, it was easy for him to defend special privileges for backward castes. Dr. Ambedkar took the idea of reservations (the idea of reservations for certain castes existed in some parts of India since 1900) one step further. He drafted the constitution such that it allowed up to 50% of the public jobs and admissions to universities reserved for the people from backward castes. Obviously, Dr. Ambedkar knew the repercussions of reservations but for him, it was the safest way he could safeguard the rights of backward classes and project himself in good light. I say this especially because Indian constitution could have easily defined reservations to backward people instead of backward caste, which would have also helped in abolishing caste system in India. But Dr. Ambedkar felt, it is easier for him to justify reservations for backward castes than backward people. In all his technical work
43

towards Indian constitution, Dr. Ambedkar failed to realize, the precise reason why he was granted the position of Union Law Minister of India even though he wasnt from Indian National Congress. In the end, all he did was, solved the thorn for INC. With reservation system placed, Dr. Ambedkar made sure that - there is no uprising against the forward classes, who controlled the power. For last sixty years, no one has dared to remove the concept of reservations in Indian constitution; instead politicians have only strengthened it by using it for political gains. Flaws of reservation system have been openly discussed in public forums, internet chats and media. Narayan Murthy, the founder of Infosys and a potential candidate for President of India once remarked We have become, perhaps, the only nation in the world where people fight to be called backward rather than forward. It sounds all good for Narayan Murthy to give such quotation but no politician or peoples leader in India is dare enough to put forward the unspoken truth before people. It still remainsit is the reservations that have kept our nation as a single entity in last sixty years. Remove the reservations, the nation will break apart. In such a scenario, what best we can do for the development of nation? The answer is simple. The task is to create a path for development within the framework of reservation system. As politically correct as I may sound, thats the only way going forward. Also, reservations is not the actual problem, the problem is, how long will it continue? I humbly request all those people who arent backward anymore and yet continue to take advantage of reservations, to think about two things:
(i)

(ii)

No religion discriminates people and its the people who are culprits. Now, the time has given opportunity to everyone to follow their religion in proper sense. From the scriptures of Santana Dharma (thats the actual name of Hinduism, I bet more than 50% people who claimed to be following Hinduism doesnt know their religions actual name). I have read, it clearly states every human being is equal before God. Its time for the followers to read their scriptures and follow their religion in true sense. And when you truly start following the religion, you will realize that you need not force your children to be of your same caste. A Hindu can be a true Hindu without being part of any caste. Constitution of India grants you the right to choose any religion you want. If you still find yourself suppressed by caste system then you have the right to free yourself from it. You are free to choose any religion that gives you equal human rights or not follow any religion at all.

In the end I want to say, if you are not economically backward, it is ethically wrong to take advantage of reservation system.

44

Does paying

TAXES make you

?

more responsible towards nation

Soon after graduation, I took up my first full time job. A month later, a handsome amount was deposited into my bank account as my first month salary. Few days later, I found that a portion of my salary has been deducted as income tax. I remember, for the first time, I walked on the roads of my city (Hyderabad) with a sense of feeling that, now I have financially contributed to the development of the nation. It wasnt about how much I have contributed; the feeling was more about being responsible towards development of the nation. When I heard the news, some screwed up lady politician in India wanted to build her statues with public money, my instant reaction was whose money you are using for building your pathetic looking statues? I guess, almost every tax payer had a similar reaction. There is so much of poverty, illiteracy, unemployment and lack of health care in India, and yet precious tax payers money in being wasted in constructing statues! I soon realized, it wasnt just that one particular lady politician. Several other politicians have abused the tax payers money in India and its a very common thing. It made me wonder, do these politicians care for peoples money? How can people just remain silent when their hard earning money is being wasted? After a bit of analysis, I found that only 8% of Indians pay taxes, leaving about 92% (~1 billion people) who are either not eligible to pay taxes or found a way to escape taxes. So, we are part of a nation which has about 1 billion people who havent contributed even a paisa from their pocket towards the development of the nation. What is even worse, majority of these non-tax payers do not realize from where the government gets money to construct roads, irrigation projects, transport systems, etc. For them, its just government money. And when some political leader announces that he/she would give free electricity or gold, they jump to vote in his/her favor.

45

Clearly, there seems to be a disconnect between people who are paying taxes and the people who arent. The task before each one of us is, to bring a change in the attitude of people. This task cannot be successfully achieved just via educational campaigns. After giving a lot of thought, I have come to a conclusion that, by making every earning individual pay taxes, automatically we can change the attitude of the nation. Before we look at the proposed actionable plan, lets first understand, in terms of numbers, how income tax is being collected from earning individuals in India Income tax for financial year 2010-11
Up to 1,60,000 Up to 1,90,000 (for women) Up to 2,40,000 (for resident individual of 65 years or above) 1,60,001 5,00,000 5,00,001 8,00,000 8,00,001 upwards

Rate (%)
NIL 10 20 30

As per the current rules, any individual earning less than Rs.1,60,000 annually need not pay taxes. A small tweaking to the above tax system can dramatically change the attitude of people. Not taxing the individuals who earn less than Rs. 1,60,000 (1,90,000 and 2,40,000 for women and senior citizens respectfully) definitely reduces the burden on low-earning citizens. However, it is also resulting in lack-of-responsibility among majority of people. Keeping this in mind, I propose the following change in the tax system. Proposed Income tax for future
Up to 1,60,000 Up to 1,90,000 (for women) Up to 2,40,000 (for resident individual of 65 years or above) 1,60,001 5,00,000 5,00,001 8,00,000 8,00,001 upwards

Rate (%)
1 10 20 30

The new proposed tax structure does one dramatic change. It makes sure that every citizen who is earning should pay tax to the nation. A nominal tax of 1% should be collected from every individual who is earning less than Rs. 1,60,000 (Rs. 1,90,000 and Rs. 2,40,000 for women and senior citizens respectfully). I do understand this is a burden on everyone, especially for the individuals who are struggling to meet their ends. But at the same time, this would be a critical move towards the progress of the nation. Following are the advantages of making the tax mandatory 1. It brings a sense of responsibility among every citizen. It would automatically create an environment where people would protect the public property and
46

protest against any wastage of money by government. Currently, this feeling is missing among 92% of the Indians. As long as they are not directly being affected, they dont care about demanding accountability from government. 2. It will bring a sense of satisfaction among people that they have contributed towards development of the nation. This induces a feeling of demanding accountability from government and elected representatives. For every paisa collected via taxes, the government and elected representatives has to show the corresponding progress to the people. As they have directly paid an amount to the government in form of taxes, it inherently creates a feeling among citizens to ask for accountability and progress. 3. It will change the public service system in India. Public servants believe that they are being paid by Government and since 92% of the people havent directly contributed money to the government, they dont hold public servants accountable. But with mandatory tax system, public servants are directly accountable to the people. Also, there is one behavioral characteristic of Indians that needs to be changed. Generally, when people in India approach a politician, he/she always goes with folded hands, as if, they are begging for a favor from the politician. We need to change this mentality. A politician is doing a job and as a citizen of India, you have every right to demand. The part of the problem is, because majority of people in India havent contributed taxes, when they ask for a particular thing (ex: relief fund) from a politician, they think they are asking for a favor. This mindset would automatically change when there is a mandatory tax system in India. Given that, everyone has financially contributed, people would demand efficient use of funds and approach politicians with self-respect. I wish to see a lady from a village walking up to Rahul Gandhi and saying I give a damn about whether you sleep at a hut for a night or not. I want my village to have better drainage systems, zero electricity cuts and proper roads. Can you get it done within a year? If not, you better not visit this place again. And that courage would only come, when all of us pay taxes to the nation, irrespective of how much we earn.

47

Cold War between US and China

Whats in for India?

On 16th November 2009, Barack Obama visited China to enhance the bilateral ties and to discuss issues such as economy, trade and climate. However, as the talks proceeded, Obama reminded China about its responsibility as global power and put forward American interests such as economic sanctions on Iran for not abiding to nuclear nonproliferation treaty. Thats where, the talks took a turn. It was obviously clear that, China isnt interested in protecting American interests and it doesnt have to. Over the years, China has significantly invested in Irans energy sector and it has never perceived Iran as a potential nuclear threat. In such a scenario, imposing economic sanctions on Iran can only hurt the Chinese economy. At the end of the talks, Chinese President Hu Jintao quoted I underlined to President Obama that given our differences in national conditions, it is only normal that our two sides may disagree on some issues What is important is to respect and accommodate each other's core interests and major concerns.

48

As the talks concluded, it was evident that each nations interests were in conflict with each other. Since then, both the nations have reacted bitterly on different platforms. At Copenhagen Summit back in December 2009, US made every attempt to put international pressure on China to reduce its carbon emissions. As we now know, this was just the beginning. In last six months or so, several issues have caused public dispute between both the governments. In January 2010, ignoring the diplomatic ties with Chinese government, Obama administration announced a weapons deal with Taiwan worth $6.4 billion which includes 60 Black Hawk helicopters, 114 advanced Patriot air defense missiles, a pair of Osprey mine-hunting ships and dozens of advanced communications systems. China has harshly criticized this move by US and has threatened of economic sanctions, stating that the responsibility for the serious disruption in US-China ties does not lie with the Chinese side, but with the US." Peoples Republic of China (PRC) recognizes Taiwan (Republic of China) as its internal territory and doesnt recognize the government of Taiwan. Though Washington doesnt officially recognize Taiwan as a sovereign nation, but it has been its strong ally since formation of Taiwan Relations act back in 1979. Over the years, Taiwan has procured weapons and obtained military training from US. Chinese government has opposed the involvement of US in China-Taiwan issue and has criticized American government for sale of weapons. Obama administration has also criticized Chinese government for keeping its currency (Yuan) undervalued to gain unfair advantage in international markets. However, China has outright rejected the claims, referring that appreciation of currency depends on domestic markets. Responding to US criticism, Foreign minister of China stated at the moment, looking at international balance of payments and foreign exchange market supply and demand, the level of the Yuan is close to reasonable and balanced. Recently, Chinese President quoted We oppose all countries engaging in mutual finger-pointing or taking strong measures to force other nations to appreciate their currencies. Apart from Taiwan and Yuan issue, US government has also pushed Chinese government to act against North Korean aggression in North-Pacific. China continues to remain an ally of North Korea and has declined to take any actions in favor of US. On the other side, China has warned US against meeting Dalai Lama, who is

49

seeking to gather support for liberation of Tibet. Considering the overall situation, it is safe to assume that cold war between US and China has begun. In recent times, India has been highly strategic to economies of US and China. Slowly and steadily, India has come a long way in developing not just its diplomatic relations with countries across the world but also as a major provider of low cost human resources to all developed nations. Abundant availability of cheap labor in India and undemanding approach of Indians has attracted attention of the capitalists across the word. It is critical for the sustenance economies of US and China to make sure that India remains under-developed as it is but at the same time, there is no degradation in Indian economy. It isnt rocket science to understand neither developed India nor economically degraded India is of any use to US and China.

US Reaction to recent economic prosperity in India

Apparent improvement in the diets of people in India and China and consequent food export caps is among the causes of the current global food crisis - Condoleezza Rice, Former US Secretary of State

Prosperity in countries like India is good but it triggers increased demand for better nutrition which in turn leads to higher food prices.
-George Bush, Former US President

India, as of now India is one of the largest exporters of raw materials to China and US. India is dependent on US for nuclear fuel supply and technology for civilian energy needs. India provides educated and industrial labor to several US and Chinese companies at low wages. India is dependent on US and its allies for providing weaponry technology. Number of patents filed by Indians is considerably less compared to US and China. Number of patents, in a way

Economically Developed India India would be rather supplying furnished goods than raw materials. India would independently develop nuclear energy facilities to meet its civilian energy needs. Educated labor would demand higher wages. Possibility of Global companies being financed and controlled by Indians. India would indigenously develop weapons for its national security. With better economy, more funding will be available for research, resulting in drastic increase in patents filed by

Economically Backward India Backward economy would create internal conflicts in India affecting the continuous supply of raw materials at lower cost. Indian nuclear technology will pose a security threat to surrounding nations. India will not be able to produce educated labor force.

India will not be able to afford weapons purchase from US. Not applicable.

50

determines the technological advances made by the nation. An average American eats five times more nutritious food than average Indian. US and China are strategically partnering with under-developed countries for exploration of natural resources.

Indians. Hence, US, China and India would compete for every new technology. Indians would be eating nutritious food on par with Americans. This would result in global increase in food prices. India would join the US and China in exploration of natural resources available in underdeveloped countries, resulting in more competition for natural resources. With degrading economy, Indians will not be able to produce food for themselves, hence increasing the global food prices by importing food. Not applicable.

Cold war between US and China creates an exciting opportunity for India to create its own identity. This is a test for political and intellectual acumen of India. Following opportunities stand ahead of India 1. Strategic relations with US and China remain as critical as ever. India should continue to provide stable economic conditions for American and Chinese companies to invest in India. This should continue until a situation is reached where US and Chinese economies are absolutely dependent on Indian labor force. 2. India should advance its strategic relations with under developed countries where natural resources are available along with investing in exploration of resources. However, it should provide a fair revenue sharing model to the under-developed countries. India cannot afford to do the same mistake that US and China are currently doing. From the long term prospective, this is an absolute necessity. 3. India should slowly start reducing exports of crude minerals and should industrialize wherever possible. This should be done without triggering a confrontation with US and China. 4. India should reduce its dependence on global oil market and create a sustenance model with alternate fuels. Price of oil in global market is already being dictated by wars and foreign policies of nations. Unless India is interested in invading oilrich countries, too much dependence on oil imports is going to be catastrophic to nations economy.
51

5. Control over Kashmir valley has been a disputed issue between India, China and Pakistan. It is well known that Pakistan is diverting the funds received from US for promoting unrest and militancy in Kashmir valley. To retain peace in Kashmir valley, India has been spending major chunk of its annual budget for military deployment at Ind0-Pak border (LoC, 1972) and India-China LoC. Cold war between China and US gives an opportunity for India to resolve the Kashmir control crisis. India should negotiate deal with US, according to which UN peace keeping force would be deployed in Kashmir valley; US would establish a military base in Kashmir and US-India would jointly participate in mineral exploration in Kashmir valley. The deal would be win-win for both the countries as it would It would be strategic for US to have a military base in Kashmir as it shares the border with mainland China. Military base within India would give assurance to US that, India is its longterm ally. Given the presence of its military base in Kashmir, US would force Pakistan not to divert funds towards creating unrest in Kashmir valley. Attacks by Pakistan militants in Kashmir valley will now be seen as attacks on US military base. With US military base in Kashmir, India can significantly reduce down its military budget that was being spent in Kashmir valley. This budget can now be used for development of Kashmir valley. And most importantly, the deal would lead to peace in Kashmir valley and can result in rehabilitation of Kashmiri Pandits. Overall, this is an interesting situation. It all depends on whether Indian government acts bravely and wisely. Indian government should make the best use of this opportunity else India will be exploited by both American and Chinese government for their own benefits. Already, China has made the first move by signing the Nuclear Deal with Pakistan and fact that India hasnt been able to put any pressure on China from stopping such agreement itself indicates the weakness of Indian government. On a side note, nuclear deal with Pakistan is far more strategic to China, as Pakistan has been known as an American ally. It remains to be seen, how India responds to the challenges of Cold war and emerge as a global power.
52

Toilets in Incredible! India

In India, unhygienic and dirty public toilets are found everywhere. People have got habituated to uncivilized toilet manners and dont intend to change. Even if you educate them about the health risks posed by unclean public toilets, they hardly pay attention. Sometimes I fear that a major contagious disease might spread in India, killing several million people. Maybe after that catastrophe, the fear of death would change people in amending their uncivilized and unclean way of life. During my engineering, I visited twenty four engineering colleges across India for presenting research papers and at least at eighteen colleges, when asked about the feedback for the event, I told please improve the cleanliness of toilets. But what can college management do? They cant teach engineering students about the public manners on how to use toilets, thats supposed to be taught by the parents when they were quite young. And how can parents teach their kids about how to use toilets, when they themselves dont know about it! So, eventually, the reality is, we have grown-ups in India, who shit around and dirt the nation. As they say, great civilizations are known by the living habits of people. How can we even claim to be a great civilization when majority of us arent civilized enough to perform the most basic human act in a clean way? In rural India, situation is much worse than I can describe. Majority of the people in rural India do not feel the necessity of constructing toilets in their homes. Sometimes I wonder at the hypocrisy of people in rural areas, on one side they do not want their women to go outside of their home for employment or education but they are OK with their women going outside in the woods for nature calls. This is the heights of hypocrisy and idiocy among people. The fact is that, these problems have remained in India from hundreds of years and we never spoke it openly. For the outside world, we have always projected the image of a civilized nation with thousands of years of history, whereas, whatever that civilization that once prevailed has all vanished, what is left over is the meanness and lack of sense among people. Some of you might argue that, it could be because of the financial situation of these families but I strongly disagree. Recently, in the state of Haryana, according to a survey, 70% of the households had Television sets whereas only 40% had toilets. What does that mean? The survey speaks for itself. It is not because of financial problems its because

53

of the intent and lack of civilized nature. I bet if a survey is conducted across India, the results would be similar The problem of unclean toilets in India isnt just limited to public toilets. Roughly, the problem is 1. More than 600 million people in India do not have access to clean toilets. 2. Majority of the people in India do not have civilized toilet manners. This acute lack of civilized sense can be noticed at their way of using public toilets at railway stations, restaurants, airports, etc. 3. Even in the absence of public toilets, people do not hesitate to go about their business on roadside walls, beaches and open areas. To add further to the shame, they even encourage their kids to do the same.

Our respect before the outside world is day by day diminishing. Unfortunately, a lot of damage to the image of our nation is already done. In last few decades, millions of tourists who visited India have already noticed our pathetic toilet habits. A traveller from England quotes on a public travel forum there are riverbanks, beaches, railway lines and fields. The only public toilet Ive used in India was in Mysore, I found myself peeing on a dead dog. Restaurants are an option, but its usually best to wait till you get back to your hotel. In a discussion forum, another traveller to India quotes, why do Indians not clean the toilets? Ok, I can understand a public toilet which needs to be cleaned by some government employee who found a way to sneak off ... But in the restaurants, airplanes, trains etc.? Harpic and brushes are available, disinfectants are, and these little sponges with the green side to scrub - so why? Or rather: why not? Why is the need for cleanliness and fresh smells missing from the Indian idea of an acceptable life? I've always been wondering about it and after many years in India still haven't figured it out. Is it only about costs? To the one who can satisfyingly answer me this question I will ship a toilet brush! Another tourist pointed out an interesting observation, which I couldnt resist sharing with you. He says Worst airport
54

toilet award should go to the newly renovated Delhi airport toilets. You can find shit (fresh n steaming), dirt, mud water, urine or any combination of these on the toilet seat. What you wont find is a toilet with usable seat and he goes on to say I dont think its a good idea to have 80% toilets with western style seats when 95% of India uses squats and there are more than 50% Indians at the airport of capital city of India Recently, Jack Sim, founder of World Toilet Organization (WTO) quoted if you dont have good toilets to welcome tourists, they dont come and wont go to all your beautiful sites with reference to 2010 Commonwealth games. It is evidently clear, our unclean toilet manners are not just affecting our tourism industry but also reducing our reputation as a civilized society. A loss in tourism industry is temporary but loss of reputation will leave a permanent scar on our image as a nation. Also, lets not forget the potential risk of a health hazard that can be caused by unclean toilets. In this situation, the only thing that we can do is, bring a change. And change can only be brought with solutions that are economically feasible, achievable within a short period of time and acceptable to people. Generally in India, defensive campaigns are used to bring awareness among people. We need to realize that defensive campaigns about health hazards posed by unclean toilets dont work and even if they work, the results are too slow to be noticed within a lifetime. Government and NGOs have always been afraid of peoples reaction to an offensive campaign. Time has come for an offensive campaign to change the attitude of the people. Its time for us to tell the truth to the people, it doesnt matter if it hurts them. As I suggest few offensive approaches, I want to be very clear about one thing, my goal is developed and civilized India. If I have to temporarily hurt the people to achieve that task, I would do it wholeheartedly. Ultimately, every Indians happiness lies in India being a developed and civilized nation. Having said that, lets discuss some of the offensive approaches we can adopt to bring a change 1. Majority of the men in rural areas are very protective about women. Its an inherent feeling, existing from centuries among Indian men. Also, more than 90% of Indian households are financially supported by men and often they see themselves as head of the family and protector of women. A campaign should target this feeling. How can a man allow his mother or wife or daughter or sister
55

2.

3.

4.

5.

to go outside for a basic need? How shameful it is for the family? Providing a toilet in every home is the responsibility of a man, if he cant, he has no right to consider himself as head of the family. In Haryana, several NGOs have started no toilet, no bride campaign, a very rare offensive campaign in India. It didnt take long for the campaign to hurt the mens ego. Men and families saw it as a question of reputation in the society, resulting in instant results. This campaign should now be taken to national level. A home without a toilet isnt a home and no bride should marry a groom who cant provide her a home. Sometimes, even though people want to construct toilets in their homes, lack of drainage system halts their plan. Though the archeological evidence suggests that drainage systems in India were built as early 2nd century BC, the truth is even after two thousand years, 55% of India doesnt have drainage systems. Its pity that over the years governments and people havent done anything in this regard. To overcome this problem, I have a very offensive but yet a peaceful solution, its what I call as stand and deliver protest. Basically, the idea is, as many men as possible should assemble every day at Legislative Assembly /Secretariat/MLAs house/MPs house (which ever nearer) and urinate on the walls of Legislative assembly/MPs house until government shows results in improving the drainage systems. Though this idea sounds uncivilized, I strongly feel it will work. Sometimes, it becomes necessary to teach a lesson to uncivilized people in an uncivilized way. In all the urban areas of India there is shortage of public toilets and in rural areas, there arent any public toilets. Every year, each elected Member of Parliament (MP) gets 20 million rupees from Local Area Development fund, irrespective of whether he is elected from urban or rural area. Had these funds been properly channeled, by now, every locality in India should have had properly maintained public toilets. Ideally, I would recommend people to put their demands before the MP, however, if the MP doesnt oblige, people can do stand and deliver protest. Almost all the primary schools across India teach the students regarding the health hazards posed by unclean toilets. However, its only in theory. My guess is that, more than 70% of the schools in India dont have clean toilets. Its a joint responsibility of parents and school management to provide clean toilets to their

56

children. We are living in a capitalistic world, where kids are parents problem and if they cant take care of their kids, they should have used a condom. Fortunately or unfortunately, now that they have given birth to a child, they should act in a responsibly by teaching civil manners to their kids. Having said that, there are millions of parents in India who arent civilized themselves and when their kids grow-up with uncivilized manners, they become a problem to the society. Now, thats the reason, we have to collectively do something that would make the kids civilized irrespective of whether parents are civilized or not. The idea here is that, if few civilized among us can volunteer to visit different schools and somehow tell the kids, how uncivilized and careless their parents and school management are, it would dramatically change the mindset of kids. The rest of the things will fall in place automatically. 6. The biggest challenge of all is changing the uncivilized manners of educated people across the nation. These people have a tendency of assuming that they are super civilized and they are supposed to be respected. A well-planned campaign should target this inflated ego and respect of educated people in India. The idea is slightly complicated but executable. Let me give you a little context on how I arrived at this idea. In April-May 2009, when several racial attacks on Indians were reported in Australia, I was in Canberra on a business visit. One particular Australian news channel reported several reasons on why Indians are being discriminated in Australia. Among all the reasons, one particular reason was public toilet manners of Indians. According to the news report, Indians in Australia do not flush toilets, do not clean the toilet seat after they finish their business and carelessly flick water at people while washing their faces at public wash basins. If a campaign in held outside India (say, Australia) against the uncivilized toilet manners of Indians which is provoking racism, it wont take long for Indian media to make it a national issue. As cunning it might sound, such protest would make every educated Indian to think about his/her toilet manners. The above suggested offensive measures might never see the light of the day. We, the Indians werent offensive to British when they treated us like slaves, the question of being offensive for the sake of respect doesnt arise. I guess, thats how we were and are. But I dont know why, my heart says, we can change and we can be a civilized nation. Its just that, we need to start realizing our flaws and work on rectifying them. Realization of defects and urge towards perfection is a critical for the development of nation.

57

Cloud Computing

The latest buzz word in IT world is cloud computing and its been hailed as the paradigm shift for the industry. Before I elaborate further about cloud computing, let me clarify for those who arent familiar with IT industry, cloud computing hasnt got to do anything with either clouds or a new form of computing. As you know, IT folks have a habit of adding fancy words to their computer vocabulary, apparently cloud computing happens to be the latest. The word cloud is being used here to refer internet and the term cloud computing means computing services delivered via internet. Cloud computing is neither a new invention nor something unknown to IT industry. Ever since internet came into existence, it has existed; its just that we know it with other names. Yahoo Mail & Messenger, Hotmail, Gmail, Facebook, etc. are all examples of cloud computing. In fact, every internet application can be considered as an example of cloud computing. You might ask, then, why is it being considered as the next big thing? The answer has to do with something called marketing. In recent times, most of the software giants have realized that, small companies (both IT and non-IT) are unable to afford and maintain IT infrastructure for their online applications. This is due to increasing costs of reliable software, maintenance and administration costs along with additional costs such as space, electricity and high speed LAN connection. Note, here IT infrastructure refers to the datacenter, not to be confused with physical client computers.

58

As a solution to this crisis, several software giants such as Microsoft, Amazon, Google, VMWare, IBM, etc. have proposed the idea of renting IT infrastructure to companies on pay per use basis. However, unlike traditional renting of physical assets, IT infrastructure renting is slightly different. Here, companies dont pay for the IT infrastructure per se; they pay for the processing capabilities of IT infrastructure. Heres how it works. Company engages a service provider to host their web based application. Depending on the request, service provider allocates servers (computational resources) to the subscriber in the data center, while taking the entire responsibility of maintaining servers with latest software, data security and energy needs. Also, the subscriber is provided with the flexibility to reduce or increase the servers on the fly. Depending on the usage of the servers, subscribers pay to the service providers. For example, Microsofts cloud computing model is referred as Microsoft Azure. Azure allows companies to host their applications on Microsoft datacenters on pay-per-use basis. A company subscribing to Azure need not own IT infrastructure to host their application, all it needs to do is specify Microsoft about their IT infrastructure needs and Microsoft would be providing the same. The responsibility of maintaining the IT infrastructure, software upgrades, reliability, security and legal compliance of servers rests with Microsoft. This gives a good deal to subscribing companies, as they just have to take care about their application rather than all their IT infrastructure needs. Similar models have been proposed by Amazon, Google, VMware and IBM. If you still dont understand the model, let me give you another example. Lets say, you along with your friends want to play Cricket. Logistically, you would need a cricket kit and a cricket ground. Of course, you can purchase a cricket kit as it is affordable but what about a cricket ground? Would you purchase a land, hire a curator and create a cricket pitch or just rent a slot in a nearby cricket ground? Unless you have lot of money, purchasing a land, hiring a curator, and creating a cricket pitch for playing cricket doesnt make sense. Its just common sense to rent a cricket ground for playing cricket and pay for the time-duration you use. Similarly, for a company (IT and non-IT) to host

59

its applications over internet, its just common sense to take IT infrastructure on rent for hosting their applications and pay for the processing capabilities they want. If you look at the cloud computing scenario, you might question, why isnt this option available right from the beginning? It makes no sense for nonIT companies, who want to host web based applications to purchase and maintain IT infrastructure. Why wasnt this idea of renting IT infrastructure thought earlier? The answer to all these questions has to do with dependence. Just like, playing cricket on rented ground makes the game dependent on the pitch conditions, hosting their applications on the rented datacenters make the companies dependent on service providers. Each service provider of cloud computing model will have its own limitations and the subscribers have to comply with those limitations. Another reason that I see has played an important role in delaying the entry of cloud services in the industry is data security. What if the sensitive information stored on IT infrastructure owned by service provider gets compromised? Does the service provider give the guarantee of data security? These questions often play a major role in deciding on whether a company has to subscribe for cloud computing services or not. In the end, I want to say, cloud computing (or whatever other name we used to refer it) is here to stay and there is nothing too special about it. If implemented properly, it will be beneficial to everyone.

60

Research papers @ Ar

Xiv

ArXiv (http://arxiv.org) is an online repository for scientific research papers published in the fields of physics, mathematics, computer science, biology and statistics. It is currently being maintained by Cornell University however it does have mirrors sponsored by various universities across the world. The word ArXiv is pronounced as archive, where the X is considered as Greek letter Chi. Here, I would be posting abstracts of papers from ArXiv, which I had great time reading. Title: Authors: Abstract:

Quantum money from knots

Edward Farhi, David Gosset, Avinatan Hassidim, Andrew Lutomirski, Peter Shor Quantum money is a cryptographic protocol in which a mint can produce a quantum state, no one else can copy the state, and anyone (with a quantum computer) can verify that the state came from the mint. We present a concrete quantum money scheme based on superpositions of diagrams that encode oriented links with the same Alexander polynomial. We expect our scheme to be secure against computationally bounded adversaries. http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.5127

Full paper: Title: Authors: Abstract:

Can the photosynthesis first step quantum mechanism be explained?

Marco Sacilotti, Euclides Almeida, Claudia C. B. O. Mota, Frederico Dias Nunes, Anderson S. L. Gomes Photosynthesis first step mechanism concerns the sunlight absorption and both negative and positive charges separation. Recent and important photosynthesis literature claims that this mechanism is quantum mechanics controlled, however without presenting qualitative or quantitative scientifically based mechanism. The present accepted and old-fashioned photosynthesis mechanism model suffers from few drawbacks and an important issue is the absence of driving force for negative and positive charges separation. This article presents a new qualitative model for this first step mechanism in natural catalytic systems such as photosynthesis in green leaves. The model uses a concept of semiconductor band gap engineering, such as the staggered energy band gap line-up in semiconductors. To explain the primary mechanism in natural photosynthesis the proposal is the following: incident light is absorbed inside the leaves causing charges separation. The only energetic configuration that allows charges separation under illumination is the

61

Full paper: Title: Authors: Abstract:

staggered one between two materials or molecules. We explain why (e-, h+) interacting charges can be separated by using an energy staggered configuration, under illumination. Following this model, the green light of plants can be seen as related to the spent energy for charges separation. Green colour being mostly an emission and not a reflection as currently presented. The arguments mentioned below show why we cannot explain the photosynthesis first step mechanism, based on the presently accepted model, and therefore the alternative model is presented. http://arxiv.org/abs/1005.1337

The Significant Digit Law in Statistical Physics

Full paper: Title: Authors: Abstract:

Lijing Shao, Bo-Qiang Ma The occurrence of the nonzero leftmost digit, i.e., 1, 2, ..., 9, of numbers from many real world sources is not uniformly distributed as one might naively expect, but instead, the nature favors smaller ones according to a logarithmic distribution, named Benford's law. We investigate three kinds of widely used physical statistics, i.e., the Boltzmann-Gibbs (BG) distribution, the Fermi-Dirac (FD) distribution, and the Bose-Einstein (BE) distribution, and find that the BG and FD distributions both fluctuate slightly in a periodic manner around the Benford distribution with respect to the temperature of the system, while the BE distribution conforms to it exactly whatever the temperature is. Thus the Benford's law seems to present a general pattern for physical statistics and might be even more fundamental and profound in nature. Furthermore, various elegant properties of Benford's law, especially the mantissa distribution of data sets, are discussed. http://arxiv.org/abs/1005.0660

On the (Im)possibility of Preserving Utility and Privacy in Personalized Social Recommendations

Ashwin Machanavajjhala, Aleksandra Korolova, Atish Das Sarma With the recent surge of social networks like Facebook, new forms of recommendations have become possible -- personalized recommendations of ads, content, and even new social and product connections based on one's social interactions. In this paper, we study whether "social recommendations", or recommendations that utilize a user's social network, can be made without disclosing sensitive links between users. More precisely, we quantify the loss in utility when existing recommendation algorithms are modified to satisfy a strong notion of privacy called differential privacy. We propose lower bounds on the minimum loss in utility for any recommendation algorithm that is differentially private. We also propose two recommendation algorithms that satisfy differential privacy, analyze their performance in comparison to the lower bound, both analytically and experimentally, and show that good private social recommendations are feasible only for a few users in the social network or for a lenient setting of privacy parameters. http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.5600
62

Full paper:

Title: Author: Abstract:

Growth-Algorithm Model of Leaf Shape

David A. Young The innumerable shapes of plant leaves present a challenge to the explanatory power of biophysical theory. A model is needed that can produce these shapes with a small set of parameters. This paper presents a simple model of leaf shape based on a growth algorithm, which governs the growth rate of leaf tissue in two dimensions and hence the outline of the leaf. The growth of leaf lobes is governed by the position of leaf veins. This model gives an approximation to a wide variety of higher plant leaf shapes. The variation of leaf shapes found in closely related plants is discussed in terms of variability in the growth algorithms. The model can be extended to more complex leaf types. http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.4388

Full paper: Title: Author: Abstract:

One dimensional chain of quantum coherent molecule motors as a model for muscle fibre
Tieyan Si A quantum chain model of muscle fibre is proposed to derive the classical force-velocity relation and tension transients. The myosin motor molecule are viewed as giant quantum particles distributed regularly along a chain. The steady state solution of the Heisenberg equation of density operator leads to the microscopic force-velocity relation. For the quick release of fibre, this microscopic force-velocity relation is coincide with Hill's empirical relation. As a further application, both quantum two-level and three-level model are applied to explain the tension time course of cardiac muscle and insect flight muscle. Most of the experimental tension transients find their correspondence in the theoretical output of this quantum model. The quantum three-level model fits particularly well with the tension transients of water bug Lethocerus Maximus. New possible tension transient that does not appear in the existed experimental data is produced by this quantum model, we expect an experimental verification. http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.3120

Full paper: Title: Authors: Abstract:

Superrotation on Venus: Driven By Waves Generated By Dissipation of the Transterminator Flow

Hector Javier Durand-Manterola, Deni Tanibe Zenteno-Gomez, Hector Perez-de-Tejada The super-rotation phenomenon in the atmosphere on Venus has been known since the late 60's. But until now no mechanism proposed has satisfactorily explained this phenomenon. Objective: The aim of this research is to propose a mechanism, until now never considered, which could drive the atmosphere of Venus in its super-rotation. This mechanism involves the transfer of the trans-terminator ionospheric flow momentum to the lower atmosphere via pressure waves generated in the cryosphere of Venus. The mechanism proposed presents a source of energy sufficiently strong to allow the transfer of energy despite
63

Full paper: Title: Authors:

dissipation. Method: The energy flow which transports the transterminator flow and the energy lost by the viscosity in the super-rotating atmosphere were calculated. Both results were compared to establish if there is sufficient energy in the trans-terminator flow to drive the superrotation. Finally, the amplitude that the waves should have to be able to obtain the momentum necessary to induce super-rotation was calculated. Also an experimental model was made presenting some similarities with the process described. Results: The calculated power for the transterminator flow is 8.48x1010 W. The calculated viscous dissipation of the super-rotating flow is 1.4x109 W. Therefore, there is sufficient energy in the trans-terminator flow to maintain super-rotation. The amplitude of the waves generated in the cryosphere, necessary to deposit the power dissipated by the viscous forces, is 10-4 m for waves of 1 Hz and 10-8 m for waves of 104 Hz. These amplitudes imply that at the altitude of the clouds on the night side there must be a constant sound of 83 dB. If the superrotation of Venus were to stop, with the continuous injection of 1.4 x 109 W, the actual super-rotation would appear again in 1.4 x 106 years. http://arxiv.org/abs/1005.3488

The impact of a large object with Jupiter in July 2009

A. Snchez-Lavega, A. Wesley, G. Orton, R. Hueso, S. Perez-Hoyos, L. N. Fletcher, P. Yanamandra-Fisher, J. Legarreta, I. de Pater, H. Hammel, A. Simon-Miller, J. M. Gomez-Forrellad, J. L. Ortiz, E. Garca-Melendo, R. C. Puetter, P. Chodas On 2009 July 19, we observed a single, large impact on Jupiter at a planetocentric latitude of 55^{\circ}S. This and the Shoemaker-Levy 9 (SL9) impacts on Jupiter in 1994 are the only planetary-scale impacts ever observed. The 2009 impact had an entry trajectory opposite and with a lower incidence angle than that of SL9. Comparison of the initial aerosol cloud debris properties, spanning 4,800 km east-west and 2,500 km north-south, with those produced by the SL9 fragments, and dynamical calculations of pre-impact orbit, indicate that the impactor was most probably an icy body with a size of 0.5-1 km. The collision rate of events of this magnitude may be five to ten times more frequent than previously thought. The search for unpredicted impacts, such as the current one, could be best performed in 890-nm and K (2.03-2.36 {\mu}m) filters in strong gaseous absorption, where the high-altitude aerosols are more reflective than Jupiter's primary cloud. http://arxiv.org/abs/1005.2312

Abstract:

Full Paper: Title: Authors: Abstract:

The relevance of continuous variable entanglement in DNA

Elisabeth Rieper, Janet Anders, Vlatko Vedral We consider a chain of harmonic oscillators with dipole-dipole interaction between nearest neighbours resulting in a van der Waals type bonding. The binding energies between entangled and classically correlated states are compared. We apply our model to DNA. By comparing our model with

64

Full Paper: Title: Authors: Abstract:

numerical simulations we conclude that entanglement may play a crucial role in explaining the stability of the DNA double helix. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1006.4053v1

Molecular Communication Using Brownian Motion with Drift

Full Paper: Title: Authors: Abstract:

Sachin Kadloor, Raviraj S. Adve, Andrew W. Eckford Inspired by biological communication systems, molecular communication has been proposed as a viable scheme to communicate between nanosized devices separated by a very short distance. Here, molecules are released by the transmitter into the medium, which are then sensed by the receiver. This paper develops a preliminary version of such a communication system focusing on the release of either one or two molecules into a fluid medium with drift. We analyze the mutual information between transmitter and the receiver when information is encoded in the time of release of the molecule. Simplifying assumptions are required in order to calculate the mutual information, and theoretical results are provided to show that these calculations are upper bounds on the true mutual information. Furthermore, optimized degree distributions are provided, which suggest transmission strategies for a variety of drift velocities. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1006.3959v1

Search for plant biomagnetism with a sensitive atomic magnetometer

Eric Corsini, Nicolas Baddour, James Higbie, Brian Lester, Paul Licht, Brian Patton, Mark Prouty, Dmitry Budker We report what we believe is the first experimental limit placed on plant biomagnetism with a sensitive magnetometer. Measurements with an atomic magnetometer were performed on the Titan arum (Amorphophallus titanum) inflorescence known for its fast bio-chemical processes while blooming. We find that the surface magnetic field from these processes is less then ~0.6 microGauss. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1006.3578v3

Full Paper:

Thats about it. I would highly recommend reading a review of these research papers published at www.technologyreview.com, an online magazine published by MIT. Also, if you like to share a review of any research paper or details about the paper you have published, write at sarfarosh_the_magazine@live.com.

65

Question to Readers of Sarfarosh

Below is the map of Kashmir region. Do you think India should accept Line of control (LOC) as international boundary or recapture the area occupied by Pakistan and China? Send your answers to Sarfarosh at sarfarosh_the_magazine@live.com.

66

Some of the photographs/pictures used in Sarfarosh are taken from sources on Internet. These sources claimed that these pictures can be freely copied and distributed. If you find any picture violating any copyrights, please let us know at sarfarosh_the_magazine@live.com. All copyrighted pictures would be removed immediately.

67 http://sarfaroshthemagazine.spaces.live.com