Wednesday 20 December 2017

2G Spectrum Scam Case Verdict : A Raja, M Kanimozhi Acquitted

 2G Spectrum Scam Case Verdict Live Updates: A Raja, M Kanimozhi Acquitted

NEW DELHI: A Delhi court will give its verdict today on whether former Telecom Minister A Raja was behind the 2G scam, believed to be India's biggest ever scam, which came to light six years ago.

Mr Raja is accused of allocating airwaves and licenses for cellphone networks in exchange for kickbacks and causing the state a loss of Rs. 1.76 lakh crore. A Raja who was from Tamil Nadu-based regional party - DMK, has, however, denied allegations of corruption and said the decisions were taken after apprising then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and were based on inputs from DoT, other Cabinet Ministers and the then Solicitor General. Several other politicians and executives of some of the top telecom companies, are named in the case. M Kanimozhi, the daughter of DMK chief M Karunanidhi -- is also an accused in the case.


Dec 21, 2017 

A special court acquitted on Thursday all accused in the 2G spectrum allocation scam cases on Thursday, deciding the fate of former telecom minister A Raja and DMK MP Kanimozhi among others.

Special CBI judge O P Saini gave judgements in separate cases lodged by the CBI and the ED in the infamous scam that rocked the UPA government.

The scam relates to the granting of 2G spectrum licence allocations in 2007-08 which caused, according to a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, a loss of Rs 1.76 lakh crore.

The trial in 2G spectrum scam case started six years ago in 2011 after the court had framed charges against 17 accused in the CBI’s case for the offences which entails punishment ranging from six
months in life imprisonment.

The court says the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the case against all accused.
All accused are acquitted in the case.

US National Security Strategy- 2017, indicates shift in US view of India

 Firstpost

Donald Trump's National Security Strategy indicates shift in US view of India and Pakistan over two years
Karan Pradhan Dec, 19 2017

The National Security Strategy (NSS) of the United States of America was released on Monday. This 60-odd-page document, the first of its sort by the Donald Trump administration, seeks to outline the US' internal and external challenges and lay out a roadmap for the year ahead. According to the Goldwater-Nichols Defense Department Reorganisation Act of 1986, the publishing of the NSS is meant to be an annual affair. However, barring Ronald Reagan, no president has produced a new NSS every year. In fact, the eight-year tenure of Trump's predecessor, Barack Obama, only saw two such reports being published. And while these documents rarely translate fully into policy, they are indicative of Washington's mindset and shall be examined accordingly.

Getting back to the 2017 edition, there are a number of a notable features of Trump's 'strategy of principled realism that is guided by outcomes, not ideology', like the absence of anything relating to climate change — the document instead dwells on the merits of fossil fuels — and a suspicious view of China and Russia. Most relevant to South Asia, however, are the references to India and Pakistan, particularly when seen as an evolution of how Obama's NSS of 2015 viewed both countries.



On India

In the 2015 iteration of this text, India found itself mentioned six times — half of which referred to the growing bilateral relationship, something that blossomed during the Obama presidency and has the potential to go even further under Trump.

Stating that the US was "primed to unlock the potential of (its) relationship with India", the document listed that there were several areas of strategic and economic convergence — "particularly in the areas of security, energy, and the environment" and the "rebalance to Asia and the Pacific". It went on to add that the US recognised the effect "India's potential" would have on the future of major power relations. Further, along with supporting India's role as a regional security provider, the document backed its "its expanded participation in critical regional institutions".

The most palpable theme to emerge was that Washington saw 'potential' in New Delhi, but largely saw India as a work-in-progress rather than the finished article.

Flash-forward to 2017 and Trump's NSS paints India in a very different light: "We welcome India’s emergence as a leading global power and stronger strategic and defence partner," it proclaims and adds that the US will "support its leadership role in Indian Ocean security and throughout the broader region".

For starters and from the language used, it would appear that the US now sees India as less of a work-in-progress and slightly more as an almost-finished article.

The NSS goes on to state, "We will expand our defence and security cooperation with India, a Major Defence Partner of the United States, and support India’s growing relationships throughout the region" and "We will seek to increase quadrilateral cooperation with Japan, Australia, and India." And finally, "...we will encourage India to increase its economic assistance in the region."

And having seen India as an almost-finished article and made all the right noises (see: leading global power), it's time for the country to make itself useful. The allusion to quadrilateral cooperation and India's 'growing relationships throughout the region' can be seen as a thinly-veiled reference to the country's role in the US' China strategy. And the bit about economic assistance is unmistakably linked to Afghanistan. More on this shortly.

Donald Trump speaks on national security in Washington on Monday. APDonald Trump speaks on national security in Washington on Monday. AP

On Pakistan

* "We will also work with the countries of the region, including Pakistan, to mitigate the threat from terrorism and to support a viable peace and reconciliation process to end the violence in Afghanistan and improve regional stability."
* "(W)e will continue to work with both India and Pakistan to promote strategic stability, combat terrorism, and advance regional economic integration in South and Central Asia."

These were the only two references to Pakistan in Obama's NSS of 2015 and it's not entirely unthinkable to imagine that Pakistan was still seen — if one goes by the document — as one among a set of countries that could be relied upon to bring about peace to the region. Not, it must be added, as a country responsible for instability or for fostering terrorists.

The NSS of 2017, however, is a very different story. So much so, that it had Pakistani NSA Nasser Khan Janjua up in arms and led to him alleging that the US was showing preferential treatment to India.

But what was it that raised his hackles?

The very first mention of the country refers to the threat from "militants operating from within Pakistan" and the very final one to the fact that the US will "insist that Pakistan take decisive action against militant and terrorist groups operating from its soil". The US, the document adds, seeks "a Pakistan that is not engaged in destabilising behaviour". It goes on to add that Washington will press Islamabad "to intensify its counterterrorism efforts" and promises that trade and investment relations will be built "as security improves and as Pakistan demonstrates that it will assist the United States in our counterterrorism goals".

Finally, the document flags a potential India-Pakistan "military conflict that could lead to a nuclear exchange" as an area of grave concern and urges Islamabad "to continue demonstrating that it is a responsible steward of its nuclear assets".

If it wasn't just the insinuations against Pakistan, with which Page 50 of the NSS 2017 is replete, that got Janjua's goat, it's quite likely it was the tone of the statements about the country that did. It appears to be, in equal parts, an admonishment and a threat. Accusing Pakistan of being engaged in 'destabilising behaviour', warning it against being irresponsible with its nukes and 'insisting' that it cracks down on terrorists (something, it is implied, Pakistan has shown no inclination to do so far) and challenging it to show continued responsibility with nukes comes across like a school matron disciplining an errant child. The part about the desire to build trade and investment ties can be read as a threat because the wording of the text implies that this won't happen unless security improves and Pakistan 'demonstrates' that it will be part of the counterterrorism effort.

Contrasting the glowing references to India with the nearly-damning ones to Pakistan goes some way in showing just why Janjua reacted the way he did.

Trump's National Security Strategy dwelt on Russia and China, but its references to India and Pakistan were instructive. APTrump's National Security Strategy dwelt on Russia and China, but its references to India and Pakistan were instructive. AP

So what to make of all this?

The Trump administration — and more specifically, the man at the helm of it — has been talking tough on Pakistan ever since it took over in January this year. For instance, in August, when the US approved a $255-million aid package for Pakistan (having provided nearly $33 billion since 2002), Trump said, "We can no longer be silent about Pakistan’s safe havens for terrorist organisations, the Taliban, and other groups that pose a threat to the region and beyond... We have been paying Pakistan billions and billions of dollars at the same time they are housing the very terrorists that we are fighting. But that will have to change, and that will change immediately." Secretary of State Rex Tillerson added, "We’re going to be conditioning our support for Pakistan and our relationship with them on them delivering results in this area."

With that in mind, it's unsurprising to see the sort of language used in various public utterances manifest itself on the pages of the NSS. For the near future, it looks like this public war of words between Islamabad and Washington will continue... largely in the press. Trump or a member of his Cabinet will fire off a salvo at Pakistan. Foreign Minister Khawaja Asif or Janjua or someone else will return fire. Frostiness will reign supreme and then a bilateral visit by a secretary or minister will smooth things over until the next salvo. Will this iteration of the NSS make a difference to Pakistan's relationship with terrorism emanating from its own soil? Hard to be certain, but for now, it seems rather unlikely.

What all this means for India is very different. It would be easy for New Delhi to thumb its nose at China — that took a bit of stick in the NSS — and pat itself on the back about how mighty it has become on the world stage that even the US acknowledges its majesty and gives it the proverbial bhaav. Unfortunately, it looks like the reality is very far removed from this interpretation.

Admittedly, Trump — or his NSS at the very least — acknowledges India as a leader and a partner. However, the lines about India that follow and a cursory reading of the rest of the document indicate that there are three clear areas (and one slightly fuzzy one) in which the US now needs India:

First, as a part of the US strategy to counter China: The references to leadership in the region, New Delhi's growing relationships in the region and quadrilateral cooperation make this part very clear. Washington is wary of Beijing's growing clout and using New Delhi as its 'guy on the inside' will ostensibly help the US 'contain' China, particularly in the South China Sea, without getting its own hands too dirty.

Second, as a part of the US strategy to curb terrorism emanating from Pakistan: All that talk of regional and global leadership when read alongside the lines on Pakistan indicate that the US is not too pleased with Pakistan. And by demonstrating this state of displeasure while talking up India — all publicly, the document gives the impression that Washington has picked a side. In doing so, the effort could be to embolden India to carry on with its actions against Pakistan. Once again, this would save the US the effort of actually getting its hands dirty.

Third, the allusion to India's economic assistance in the region clearly refers to Afghanistan: New Delhi and Kabul share cordial, if not outright warm, relations and Washington is not unaware. The US drawdown from Afghanistan has been a nightmare that keeps on giving (grief, that is) and costing American taxpayers millions every year. What better way than to pull out of yet another botched endgame in that country than by getting a willing neighbour to foot the bill?

And the fuzzy fourth, three references to the India-US defence partnership in a document that is fairly critical of Russia, could hint at Trump's willingness to take Moscow (New Delhi's largest source of arms imports over the years) out of the game by striking better defence deals with India. Despite still having a great deal of warmth and positivity, the India-Russia relationship is at its lowest point since Independence. Could the US be planning to replace Russia in India's mind space? Perhaps, but it's far too early to even contemplate the remotest notion of all that.

Of course, there is the fact that India is obviously not going to unquestioningly and obediently follow the US' instructions on foreign policy. But, the NSS is a good indicator of the roles Washington sees other countries playing. To sum it all up, it's true that there's been a major shift in the way the US perceives of India — Washington sees New Delhi as a far more useful player in its game than ever before. It is still too premature and extreme to use the word 'pawn' just yet.

Published Date: Dec 19, 2017 Firstpost
-----------------------------------
ENB Link
US National Security Strategy Document

ENB Document - US National Security Strategy 2017

Transcript:Trump’s National Security Speech

Transcript:Trump’s National Security Speech
Donald Trump delivers remarks on the National Security Strategy at the Ronald Reagan Building on Monday [Joshua Roberts/Reuters]

Transcript:Trump’s National Security Speech
18 Dec 2017

The following is a White House transcript of US President Donald Trump's speech on Monday on his administration's national security strategy:

We're here today to discuss matters of vital importance to us all: America's security, prosperity, and standing in the world. I want to talk about where we've been, where we are now, and, finally, our
strategy for where we are going in the years ahead.

Over the past 11 months, I have travelled tens of thousands of miles to visit 13 countries. I have met with more than 100 world leaders. I have carried America's message to a grand hall in Saudi Arabia, a great square in Warsaw, to the General Assembly of the United Nations, and to the seat of democracy on the Korean Peninsula. Everywhere I travelled, it was my highest privilege and greatest honour to represent the American people.

Throughout our history, the American people have always been the true source of American greatness. Our people have promoted our culture and promoted our values. Americans have fought and sacrificed on the battlefields all over the world. We have liberated captive nations, transformed former enemies into the best of friends, and lifted entire regions of the planet from poverty to prosperity.

Because of our people, America has been among the greatest forces for peace and justice in the history of the world. The American people are generous. You are determined, you are brave, you are
strong, and you are wise. 

When the American people speak, all of us should listen. And just over one year ago, you spoke loud and you spoke clear. On November 8, 2016, you voted to make America great again. You embraced new leadership and very new strategies, and also a glorious new hope. That is why we are here today.

But to seize the opportunities of the future, we must first understand the failures of the past. For many years, our citizens watched as Washington politicians presided over one disappointment after another. Too many of our leaders - so many who forgot whose voices they were to respect and whose interests they were supposed to defend - our leaders in Washington negotiated disastrous trade deals that brought massive profits to many foreign nations, but sent thousands of American factories, and millions of American jobs, to those other countries.

Our leaders engaged in nation-building abroad, while they failed to build up and replenish our nation at home. They undercut and shortchanged our men and women in uniform with inadequate resources, unstable funding, and unclear missions. They failed to insist that our often very wealthy allies pay their fair share for defence, putting a massive and unfair burden on the US taxpayer and our great US military.

They neglected a nuclear menace in North Korea; made a disastrous, weak, and incomprehensibly bad deal with Iran; and allowed terrorists such as ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) to gain
control of vast parts of territory all across the Middle East.

They put American energy under lock and key. They imposed punishing regulations and crippling taxes. They surrendered our sovereignty to foreign bureaucrats in faraway and distant capitals.

And over the profound objections of the American people, our politicians left our borders wide open. Millions of immigrants entered illegally. Millions more were admitted into our country without the
proper vetting needed to protect our security and our economy. Leaders in Washington imposed on the country an immigration policy that Americans never voted for, never asked for, and never approved - a policy where the wrong people are allowed into our country and the right people are rejected. American citizens, as usual, have been left to bear the cost and to pick up the tab.

On top of everything else, our leaders drifted from American principles. They lost sight of America's destiny. And they lost their belief in American greatness. As a result, our citizens lost something as
well. The people lost confidence in their government and, eventually, even lost confidence in their future.

But last year, all of that began to change. The American people rejected the failures of the past. You rediscovered your voice and reclaimed ownership of this nation and its destiny.

On January 20th, 2017, I stood on the steps of the Capitol to herald the day the people became the rulers of their nation again. Thank you. Now, less than one year later, I am proud to report that the
entire world has heard the news and has already seen the signs. America is coming back, and America is coming back strong.

Upon my inauguration, I announced that the United States would return to a simple principle: The first duty of our government is to serve its citizens, many of whom have been forgotten. But they are
not forgotten any more. With every decision and every action, we are now putting America first.

We are rebuilding our nation, our confidence, and our standing in the world. We have moved swiftly to confront our challenges, and we have confronted them head-on.

We are once again investing in our defence - almost $700bn, a record, this coming year. We are demanding extraordinary strength, which will hopefully lead to long and extraordinary peace. We are
giving our courageous military men and women the support they need and so dearly deserve.

We have withdrawn the United States from job-killing deals such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the very expensive and unfair Paris Climate Accord. And on our trip to Asia last month, I announced that we will no longer tolerate trading abuse.

We have established strict new vetting procedures to keep terrorists out of the United States, and our vetting is getting tougher each month.

To counter Iran and block its path to a nuclear weapon, I sanctioned the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps for its support of terrorism, and I declined to certify the Iran Deal to Congress.

Following my trip to the Middle East, the Gulf states and other Muslim-majority nations joined together to fight radical Islamist ideology and terrorist financing. We have dealt ISIS one devastating
defeat after another. The coalition to defeat ISIS has now recaptured almost 100 percent of the land once held by these terrorists in Iraq and Syria. Great job. Great job. Really good. Thank you. Thank you. We have a great military. We're now chasing them wherever they flee, and we will not let them into the United States.

In Afghanistan, our troops are no longer undermined by artificial timelines, and we no longer tell our enemies of our plans. We are beginning to see results on the battlefield. And we have made clear to Pakistan that while we desire continued partnership, we must see decisive action against terrorist groups operating on their territory. And we make massive payments every year to Pakistan. They
have to help.

Our efforts to strengthen the NATO Alliance set the stage for significant increases in member contributions, with tens of billions of dollars more pouring in because I would not allow member states to be delinquent in the payment while we guarantee their safety and are willing to fight wars for them. We have made clear that countries that are immensely wealthy should reimburse the United States for the cost of defending them. This is a major departure from the past, but a fair and necessary one - necessary for our country, necessary for our taxpayer, necessary for our own thought process.

Our campaign of maximum pressure on the North Korean regime has resulted in the toughest-ever sanctions. We have united our allies in an unprecedented effort to isolate North Korea. However, there is much more work to do. America and its allies will take all necessary steps to achieve a denuclearisation and ensure that this regime cannot threaten the world. Thank you. This situation
should have been taken care of long before I got into office, when it was much easier to handle. But it will be taken care of. We have no choice.

At home, we are keeping our promises and liberating the American economy. We have created more than two million jobs since the election. Unemployment is at a 17-year low. The stock market is at
an all-time high and, just a little while ago, hit yet another all-time high - the 85th time since my election. 

We have cut 22 regulations for every one new regulation, the most in the history of our country. We have unlocked America's vast energy resources.

As the world watches - and the world is indeed watching - we are days away from passing historic tax cuts for American families and businesses. It will be the biggest tax cut and tax reform in the history of our country. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

And we are seeing the response we fully expected. Economic growth has topped three percent for two quarters in a row. GDP growth, which is way ahead of schedule under my administration, will be one of America's truly greatest weapons.

Optimism has surged. Confidence has returned. With this new confidence, we are also bringing back clarity to our thinking. We are reasserting these fundamental truths:

A nation without borders is not a nation.

A nation that does not protect prosperity at home cannot protect its interests abroad.

A nation that is not prepared to win a war is a nation not capable of preventing a war.

A nation that is not proud of its history cannot be confident in its future.

And a nation that is not certain of its values cannot summon the will to defend them.

Today, grounded in these truths, we are presenting to the world our new national security strategy. Based on my direction, this document has been in development for over a year. It has the endorsement of my entire Cabinet.

Our new strategy is based on a principled realism, guided by our vital national interests, and rooted in our timeless values.

This strategy recognises that, whether we like it or not, we are engaged in a new era of competition. We accept that vigorous military, economic, and political contests are now playing out all around
the world.

We face rogue regimes that threaten the United States and our allies. We face terrorist organisations, transnational criminal networks, and others who spread violence and evil around the globe.

We also face rival powers, Russia and China, that seek to challenge American influence, values, and wealth. We will attempt to build a great partnership with those and other countries, but in a manner that always protects our national interest.

As an example, yesterday I received a call from President Putin of Russia thanking our country for the intelligence that our CIA was able to provide them concerning a major terrorist attack planned in
St Petersburg, where many people, perhaps in the thousands, could have been killed. They were able to apprehend these terrorists before the event, with no loss of life. And that's a great thing, and the way it's supposed to work. That is the way it's supposed to work.

But while we seek such opportunities of cooperation, we will stand up for ourselves, and we will stand up for our country like we have never stood up before. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

We know that American success is not a foregone conclusion. It must be earned and it must be won. Our rivals are tough, they're tenacious, and committed to the long term. But so are we.

To succeed, we must integrate every dimension of our national strength, and we must compete with every instrument of our national power.

Under the Trump administration, America is gaining wealth, leading to enhanced power -- faster than anyone thought - with $6 trillion more in the stock market alone since the election -- $6 trillion.

With the strategy I am announcing today, we are declaring that America is in the game and America is going to win. Thank you.

Our strategy advances four vital national interests. First, we must protect the American people, the homeland, and our great American way of life. This strategy recognises that we cannot secure our
nation if we do not secure our borders. So for the first time ever, American strategy now includes a serious plan to defend our homeland. It calls for the construction of a wall on our southern border;
ending chain migration and the horrible visa and lottery programs; closing loopholes that undermine enforcement; and strongly supporting our Border Patrol agents, ICE officers, and Homeland
Security personnel.

In addition, our strategy calls for us to confront, discredit, and defeat radical Islamic terrorism and ideology and to prevent it from spreading into the United States. And we will develop new ways to
counter those who use new domains, such as cyber and social media, to attack our nation or threaten our society.

The second pillar of our strategy is to promote American prosperity. For the first time, American strategy recognizes that economic security is national security. Economic vitality, growth, and
prosperity at home is absolutely necessary for American power and influence abroad. Any nation that trades away its prosperity for security will end up losing both.

That is why this national security strategy emphasises, more than any before, the critical steps we must take to ensure the prosperity of our nation for a long, long time to come.

It calls for cutting taxes and rolling back unnecessary regulations. It calls for trade based on the principles of fairness and reciprocity. It calls for firm action against unfair trade practices and intellectual property theft. And it calls for new steps to protect our national security industrial and innovation base.

The strategy proposes a complete rebuilding of American infrastructure - our roads, bridges, airports, waterways, and communications infrastructure. And it embraces a future of American energy
dominance and self-sufficiency.

The third pillar of our strategy is to preserve peace through strength. We recognise that weakness is the surest path to conflict, and unrivalled power is the most certain means of defence. For this reason, our strategy breaks from the damaging defence sequester. We're going to get rid of that. 

It calls for a total modernisation of our military, and reversing previous decisions to shrink our armed forces - even as threats to national security grew. It calls for streamlining acquisition, eliminating bloated bureaucracy, and massively building up our military, which has the fundamental side benefit of creating millions and millions of jobs.

This strategy includes plans to counter modern threats, such as cyber and electromagnetic attacks. It recognises space as a competitive domain and calls for multi-layered missile defence. This strategy outlines important steps to address new forms of conflict such as economic and political aggression.

And our strategy emphasises strengthening alliances to cope with these threats. It recognises that our strength is magnified by allies who share principles - and our principles - and shoulder their fair share of responsibility for our common security.

Fourth and finally, our strategy is to advance American influence in the world, but this begins with building up our wealth and power at home.

America will lead again. We do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but we will champion the values without apology. We want strong alliances and partnerships based on cooperation and
reciprocity. We will make new partnerships with those who share our goals, and make common interests into a common cause. We will not allow inflexible ideology to become an obsolete and
obstacle to peace.

We will pursue the vision we have carried around the world over this past year - a vision of strong, sovereign, and independent nations that respect their citizens and respect their neighbours; nations
that thrive in commerce and cooperation, rooted in their histories and branching out toward their destinies.

That is the future we wish for this world, and that is the future we seek in America.

With this strategy, we are calling for a great reawakening of America, a resurgence of confidence, and a rebirth of patriotism, prosperity, and pride.

And we are returning to the wisdom of our founders. In America, the people govern, the people rule, and the people are sovereign. What we have built here in America is precious and unique. In all of
history, never before has freedom reigned, the rule of law prevailed, and the people thrived as we have here for nearly 250 years.

We must love and defend it. We must guard it with vigilance and spirit, and, if necessary, like so many before us, with our very lives. And we declare that our will is renewed, our future is regained, and our dreams are restored.

Every American has a role to play in this grand national effort. And today, I invite every citizen to take their part in our vital mission. Together, our task is to strengthen our families, to build up our
communities, to serve our citizens, and to celebrate American greatness as a shining example to the world.

As long as we are proud - and very proud - of who we are, how we got here, and what we are fighting for to preserve, we will not fail.

If we do all of this, if we rediscover our resolve and commit ourselves to compete and win again, then together we will leave our children and our grandchildren a nation that is stronger, better, freer, prouder, and, yes, an America that is greater than ever before.

God bless you. Thank you very much. Thank you. 

After elections, Nepal back on frontier market investor radar


NEPAL ANALYSIS

CPN (Maoist Centre) chair Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’
After elections, Nepal back on frontier market investor radar

By GARY KLEIMAN DECEMBER 20, 2017

After disappearing from early emerging-market investor radar screens in the 1990s with a prolonged plunge into civil war and political instability, followed by an epic earthquake and a border closure with traditional ally India two years ago, Nepal is back in view, having just completed local and national elections won handily by the leftist alliance of the nominal Communist and Maoist parties.

According to initial results, the alliance took control of six of seven provinces and 70% of parliament, crushing the Nepali Congress formerly in power and an array of fringe opponents including anarchists and royalists.

Workers abroad in the Middle East and Asia, whose remittances account for one-third of output, did not vote despite court authorization, but likely would have reinforced the pro-left margin, since the
coalition’s campaign focused mainly on infrastructure development and economic modernization rather than revolutionary rhetoric.

Following provisions of the new constitution, no-confidence motions, a staple of the previous system that resulted in endless cabinet and government reshuffles, will not be allowed for two years to offer unaccustomed calm.

Lowland Madhesis, among the country’s poorest citizens, continue to advocate for more rights and support under the charter, but the incoming administration, to be headed again by veteran former
prime minister K P Oli, has vowed to be more inclusive both of ethnic and income groups and neighbors in the subcontinent.

In his 2015 term, Oli signed trade and investment agreements with China, and recently signaled that a stalled hydropower joint venture may go ahead to diversify from historic Indian dominance.

In his victory speech, K P Oli promised ‘never-witnessed private-sector cooperation’ alongside a higher social-spending agenda, as the sleepy Nepal Stock Exchange index stayed flat after the poll
awaiting concrete economic growth and reform breakthroughs

In his victory speech he promised “never-witnessed private-sector cooperation” alongside a higher social-spending agenda, as the sleepy Nepal Stock Exchange index stayed flat after the poll
awaiting concrete economic growth and reform breakthroughs.

Nepal’s Chambers of Commerce and Industry have been dubious in the absence of an “implementation framework” for the socialist economy enshrined in the constitution, amid talk of double taxation at the federal and provincial levels to cover increased social-welfare payments.

Oli and his team plan public-private partnerships for large projects and small business, commodity and tourism promotion without specifying policies, as capital flight may spike while the vacuum lasts, according to critics.

They also worry about an expected rise in domestic borrowing, which has been capped at 5% of gross domestic product annually, and favoritism toward cooperatives associated with ruling-coalition
leaders.

Independent economists argue that the government should focus on better managing earthquake reconstruction after 650,000 homes and more than one-third of output were destroyed, the World

Bank estimated. This month it approved a US$300 million credit to follow on the $200 million approved in the quake’s immediate aftermath, to pick up the pace for the more than 350,000 residences still slated for rebuilding.

Economists urge renegotiation of ventures such as the $2.5 billion dam suspended with the Chinese over contract irregularities on more concessional rather than commercial terms, even though
foreign debt is low compared with other low-income economies, in the view of the International Monetary Fund’s latest Article IV report in March.

The IMF described Nepal as “trapped in a low growth and investment equilibrium,” with GDP expansion averaging 4% the past decade as a regional laggard. Inflation and the fiscal deficit are under control, but state banks and enterprises got almost 2% of GDP in equity support in recent years which should be curbed, the analysis advised. Decentralization under the new constitution could raise budget risks, and without electricity tariff adjustment power supply will stay compromised, it added.

On monetary policy, the Nepalese currency’s peg with the Indian rupee was praised as a “transparent anchor” as demonetization fallout continues to hit local households and firms, but Nepal has been “overly accommodative,” with annual credit growth reaching 30% to spur recent tightening.

The central bank introduced an interest-rate corridor in 2016 to keep medium-term inflation within the 7% target range, and uses repos as a liquidity instrument, with banks experiencing shortages
around the election period. Financial-sector reform was jointly identified as a priority by the IMF and regulatory officials, with plans to modernize prudential standards and enforcement for lending,
securities and insurance.

On the stock exchange, this month the government revived a pledge to divest its 35% ownership and finalized rules for margin trading, but frontier-market investors after decades out of the action will
hold off for at least another few months waiting for clearer weather before mounting a daring expedition.

Source: Asia Times
-------------------------
ENB is not responsible for the opinions, facts or any media content presented by contributors.

GUJARAT - Narendra Modi has won, but not really.


INDIA GUJARAT ELECTIONS

India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi managed to barely hold on to his home state of Gujarat despite a vigorous election campaign. Photo: Reuters / Amit Dave
In victory, BJP smells defeat, while Congress tastes an opportunity

Prime Minister Narendra Modi managed to barely hold on to his home state Gujarat, but the main opposition Congress party is now energized

By DARSHAN DESAI DECEMBER 18, 2017

Rahul Gandhi has lost, but not really. Narendra Modi has won, but not really. In a nutshell, that is what the Gujarat election verdict was all about. The Bharatiya Janata Party on Monday huffed and
puffed its way to a difficult victory in Prime Minister Modi’s home state of Gujarat in an election where his policies during his three years as Prime Minister and 12 years in the State took center stage.

As results trickled in, the BJP was struggling with 99 seats ahead of the main opposition Congress Party, which was leading in 83 constituencies. This is only a shade better than a simple majority of
92 in a State Assembly of 182 seats.

Just 48 hours ago, all exit polls had predicted a massive victory for the ruling BJP. But the results left Congress tantalizingly close to victory. The BJP had set a dream target of Mission 150. But their
hopes of dominance were dashed as the day unfolded.

A narrow victory

The story of the day was not about the BJP’s sixth consecutive term since 1995, but about a revived Congress coming so close to victory. This was evident during the campaign forcing the Prime Minister to junk a “development” platform and instead polarize the vote on sectarian lines.

The biggest consolation for the BJP in this victory was the monumental effort to ensure that Gandhi, the newly appointed President of the Congress party, didn’t get to walk away with a clear win in
their tallest leader’s home state.  To add to the BJP’s woes and Congress’ advantage, there was 24-year-old Hardik Patel’s pitched two-year-old Patidar caste agitation seeking reservation in government jobs for his community. A similar move by Other Backward Caste (OBC) leader Alpesh Thakore and Dalit leader Jignesh Mevani, led to a rare and powerful alliance for the Congress. This
is a unusual since Patidar, OBC and Dalit leaders have rarely come together in the past.

Under the name of caste assertion, the three, as well as Gandhi, tapped into the growing disenchantment over unemployment, expensive privatization of education, farmers revolting over the collapse of key crops, and the poor state of Gujarat’s fabled small-scale and medium scale industries. The demonetization and the Goods and Services Tax proved to be twin blows for voters in the rural and semi-urban areas, while the cities continued to firmly back Modi.

The overall vote share of the BJP nosedived from 60.11% in the 2014 general elections to 49%, in a state the party considers invincible. The Congress, on the other hand, clocked a share of 41.5% against 33.45% in 2014.

As vote counting started earlier, Congress briefly took the lead and sent stock markets plunging by 850 points. Although the BJP recovered, it barely passed the half-way mark of 92 seats required for
a simple majority.

The major takeaway for the Congress was the victory in the Saurashtra and Kutch regions, where it picked up 15 seats more than the 2012  state elections to win 30 out of 54 seats, leaving one to BJP and another to a Nationalist Congress Party candidate.

All the issues of the influential Patidar community, the widespread anger among farmers, and effects of the ill-conceived demonetization and GST were more pronounced in this region than other parts
of Gujarat. The Congress victory here also indicated that the BJP was losing its grip over the rural areas of Gujarat.

This fact coincides with the recent victory of the BJP in the elections to local self-government bodies in India’s largest state, Uttar Pradesh, where the ruling party won the majority of urban centers
even as rural areas slipped away.

The major takeaway for the BJP is that it won in spite of the Modi Government’s record, which had become the major election issue for Congress. In response, Modi shrewdly played the “son of the
soil” card, which probably helped ease the damage.

Modi converted every attack on his government’s policies as though it was a collective insult of the people of Gujarat, and asked voters, “Do you wish to tolerate an insult to your son of the soil? Can

you tolerate it? Can you tolerate it if someone calls me a ‘neech’ (lowly) man? It is an insult of entire Gujarat.” It had the desired impact and the fence-sitters voted for him, if not for the party.

Congress could not convert the anger against the Modi Government at the national level, and by proxy, in Gujarat, mostly because it could not present a credible Chief Ministerial candidate. Had they done so, the results could have been different.

An energized Congress

Gandhi carried himself with uncanny dexterity during the campaign. He made the right noises at the right time and, for a change,  connected with the masses. However, he failed to counter Modi’s
“Insider-versus-Outsider” strategy.

Modi’s BJP has every reason to celebrate this much-needed victory in the Prime Minister’s home state. A failure here could have meant a country-wide loss of face, even as three crucial states go to
the polls next year.

For Congress, this is yet another loss in Gujarat as well as one more for Gandhi. The big consolation for Gandhi and his party is that for the first time they put the previously invincible Modi on the
back-foot over his policies.

So one lost, but not really. Another won, but not really.

NYT TELLS JOURNALISTS TO AVOID WORDS “GENOCIDE,” “ETHNIC CLEANSING,” AND “OCCUPIED TERRITORY''

LEAKED NYT GAZA MEMO TELLS JOURNALISTS TO AVOID WORDS “GENOCIDE,” “ETHNIC CLEANSING,” AND “OCCUPIED TERRITORY” Amid the internal battle over...