 |
IMAGE: YUNUS KAYMAZ/ANADOLU AGENCY/GETTY IMAGES
After Scotland, Catalonia Pushes Vote for Independence From Spain
BY THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Sep 19, 2014
Scotland's decision to stay within the United Kingdom cost separatists across Europe political momentum they could have gained for their own independence ambitions. But the regional parliament in Spain's Catalonia was still expected Friday to grant its leader the power to call a secession referendum denounced as illegal by the central government in Madrid.
The prospect of an independent Scotland would have served as an example of how to build a new nation, captivating European separatists in addition to Catalans who want to carve out their own Mediterranean nation.
They include pro-independence Basques in northern Spain; Corsicans who want to break away from France; Italians from several northern regions; and Flemish speakers in Belgium demanding more autonomy, independence or union with the Netherlands.
Scotland's independence rejection is a disappointment for the European separatists, but "does not mean the end of nationalist aspirations," said Marc Hooghe, a political science professor at the University of Leuven in Belgium.
"There is no decisive outcome at all. You might compare (it) with a soccer game (that) ends in a draw, and we go to extra time," he said. "But the nationalists have missed their once in a lifetime opportunity ... the Scots could have led the way for other regions."
In Catalonia's regional capital of Barcelona, regional president Artur Mas said he was rooting for a "Yes" vote in Scotland but stressed Catalans simply want the same chance as Scots who were given the right to vote. Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy has repeatedly said he will block a vote for Catalans in the wealthy northeastern region of 7.5 million people.
" What happened in Scotland and the United Kingdom is not a setback for us because what we really want in Catalonia is to have the chance to vote, What happened in Scotland and the United Kingdom is not a setback for us because what we really want in Catalonia is to have the chance to vote, the same possibility," Mas told reporters.
Later Friday, the Catalan parliament was expected to debate and approve by a wide margin a measure giving Mas the power to call a referendum despite vows by Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy to block planned Nov. 9 vote. He said he would then sign a decree authorizing the Catalonia referendum, but did not say when.
Retired hospital director and economist Lluis Enric Florenca was disappointed with the outcome of the Scotland vote and "would have liked the Yes to have won because we would have seen how Europe would have reacted" to a new nation outside of the European Union that would have most likely wanted to rejoin.
But Florenca said Scottish voters got a victory by getting their vote and settling the question of whether they wanted independence or not.
Britain-Scotland-Catalonia
Two men from Catalonia visiting Scotland to support the referendum on Sept. 18, 2014. Their T-shirts are printed with a design showing an "estelada" Catalan pro-independence flag, left, next to a Scottish Saltire flag.
"If we win in Catalonia, all the better," "If we win in Catalonia, all the better," Florenca said. "If we lose, then at least we know once and for all. What bothers me are the doubts," he said.
Rajoy didn't mention the situation in Catalonia in taped remarks Friday with his response to Scotland's vote, but congratulated "Scottish citizens who yesterday decided in a clear an unequivocal manner to continue being part of the United Kingdom, and consequently, the European Union."
Spain's constitution doesn't allow referendums that don't include all Spaniards and experts say Spain's Constitutional Court would rule the vote illegal if Rajoy's administration heads there to have the Catalan vote declared illegal.
Unlike the Scotland vote, the referendum in Catalonia wouldn't result in secession. It would ask Catalans whether they favor secession. If the answer is Yes, Catalan regional leader Artur Mas has said that would give him a political mandate to negotiate a path toward independence.
Despite sharing cultural traits with the rest of Spain, many Catalans take pride in the deep differences based on their language, which is spoken side-by-side with Spanish in the economically important region that is key to helping Spain emerge from its financial crisis.
Polls indicate Catalans are roughly evenly split on independence — but that figure drops significantly when people are asked if they favor an independent Catalonia outside the European Union.
Italy's secession-minded Northern League party sent a half-dozen observers to Scotland in hopes of sharing in a Yes victory that would have boosted the League's own push for greater autonomy — if not independence — for Italy's northern Veneto and Lombard regions.
These regions, home to some of Italy's financial powerhouses, resent that so much of their tax euros are diverted by the federal government in Rome to be spent on Italy's poorer south.
"We had hoped for a victory of the 'yes' votes, but at least the Scots went to the polls," said Matteo Mognaschi, one of the League observers in Edinburgh. "They won't even let us vote here."
|
Monday, September 29, 2014
AFTER SCOTLAND, CATALONIA PUSHES VOTE FOR INDEPENDENCE FROM SPAIN
Narendra Modi Outlines Goals for India on Eve of a Visit With Obama
ASIA PACIFIC
Narendra Modi Outlines Goals for India on Eve of a Visit With Obama
By SOMINI SENGUPTASEPT. 28, 2014
Over 19,000 people at Madison Square Garden in New York chanted and roared for Narendra Modi, who was elected in May. Some wore white Modi T-shirts over their clothes.
Credit Ruth Fremson/The New York Times
Narendra Modi, the prime minister of India, sold himself on Sunday as a onetime tea vendor who wanted to lift India to glory by cleaning up the country, clearing the way for business and preparing its young citizens to be the work force of an aging world. His speech at Madison Square Garden telegraphed a wish list on the eve of his first meeting with President Obama, while also deftly rallying an influential diaspora to his side.
Mr. Modi addressed a wildly enthusiastic audience that was largely made up of Indian-Americans, and played skillfully to their sentiments. He reminded the crowd of the taunts they had heard for years that India was a land of snake charmers, and he offered lavish praise for their success in the United States.
His remarks were directed equally at the folks back home, where Mr. Modi won a sweeping electoral victory in May, and at American officials and investors he is wooing.
Over 19,000 people at Madison Square Garden in New York chanted and roared for Narendra Modi, who was elected in May. Some wore white Modi T-shirts over their clothes.At Madison Square Garden, Chants, Cheers and Roars for ModiSEPT. 28, 2014
In an hourlong speech that was signature Modi, complete with rhetorical flourishes, soaring arms, and a good deal of snarkiness, the prime minister made fun of those who say he lacks “big vision.”
The Times asked Indian-Americans what Mr. Modi's trip to the U.S. means to them.
Manisha Verma, who lives in San Jose, Calif., has family from Ranchi, Jharkhand.
“Modi's upcoming trip brings a ray of hope for American Indians like me who face a conflicting reality of being part of one of the most successful and prosperous communities in the United States, and yet we carry the legacy of a poor third-world country and face biases in our adopted homeland. Modi brings hope of change in India which will help Indians have better self-esteem and image in the United States.”
Arun Gupta, who lives in New York, has family from Amritsar, Punjab.
“It's a visit by a head of state of a second-tier power that Washington is courting in terms of economic and political opportunities not the least of which is as a counterweight to China. In other words, it's business as usual.”
Vivek Pai, who lives in New York, has family from Bangalore, Karnataka.
“Today, thanks to the political expressions of 550 million Indians in the largest democratic electoral exercise in human history, the U.S. is being forced to eat the humble pie and welcome Mr. Modi as the leader of India. The greatest military and economic power on Earth had to bow to the democratic wishes of a half billion people. That represents the greatest triumph of democratic ideals during our times.”
Sheetal Ranjan, who lives in Teaneck, N.J., has family from Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
“It means that the U.S. now looks at India as a pivotal strategic partner in the world. And I am glad to be living in a nation where my origins are of value.”
Nikhil Desai, who lives in San Francisco, has family from Ahmedabad, Gujarat.
“Modi has not satisfactorily addressed the failure by his government to prevent the riots in Gujarat; presumably he has not done so because of his complicity in those events. His actions need to be scrutinized at the international level - his trip to the U.S. will likely suggest that the U.S. is with open-arms embracing Modi and won't press further into the charges.”
Sant Gupta, who lives in Lorton, Va., has family from New Delhi.
“Mr. Modi's trip will jump start the process of restoring respect and in fact admiration for Indian civilization, history, heritage and acceptance.”
Tenaz H. Dubash, who lives in New York, has family from Delhi.
“I have mixed feelings about Mr. Modi's trip to the U.S. His treatment of the minorities in Gujarat was deplorable. He is supposed to have a stellar grip on economic issues. Hopefully he can deliver economically while working tirelessly to make sure that India remains a secular democracy where all minorities are protected.”
Kayhan Irank, who lives in Jackson Heights, N.Y., has family from Mumbai.
“It means that America and Indian-Americans are actively denying the genocide that took place in Gujarat and are re-writing history regarding Modi's role in carrying it out.”
Saad Mohammad, who lives in Evanston, Ill., has family from Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh.
Asokan Vengassery Krishnan, who lives in Philadelphia, has family from Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala.
“The Modi visit is expected to strengthen the ties between the most powerful and the largest democratic nations. It will also be a sweet revenge for Modi who was long being treated as a pariah by the U.S. In turn, it is also the victory of the Indian identity and might in a post-colonial, post-Cold War era. Modi will prove that India has a dignified role to play in the new world order.”
Rama Krishna Ambati, who lives in Victor, N.Y., has family from Guntur, Andhra Pradesh.
“I believe India has so much potential but has been waiting for a dynamic leader to lead the nation. It happened now.”
Raghu C. Mudumbai, M.D., who lives in Seattle, has family from Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh.
“Mr. Modi's trip lays the ground work for Indian-American relations over the next 10 years at a time when the world economy continues to recover, when democratic nations seek the proper balance between security and protection of its citizens (and learn from each others experience), and when the world's largest democracy and the world's most powerful democracy seek to define their place in the new world order.”
“I tell them, ‘My friends, I came here selling tea,’ ” he said, and paused, as the audience leapt to its feet and clapped. “I’m a small man. My mind is busy doing small things.”
Mr. Modi is visiting at a time when India and the United States are each seeking big things from the other. Theirs was supposed to be what Mr. Obama once called the defining “partnership” of the 21st century. The relationship has withered since then, though, and both Washington and Delhi are trying urgently now to repair it, showering each other with the diplomatic equivalent of Champagne and roses during Mr. Modi’s five-day visit to America.
He has met with two mayors and three governors, and more than two dozen members of Congress attended his event at the Garden. He is scheduled to meet on Monday with 11 chief executives from companies like Boeing, Google and Goldman Sachs, and then to speak at the Council on Foreign Relations.
Mr. Modi is here to sell a new New India, with himself as the man who can be trusted to deliver on its promise. But it remains to be seen whether he is willing or able to bridge India’s wide differences with the United States on tax policy, climate change, outsourcing, intellectual property rights and other issues. Nor has India proved to be a trusted partner (India avoids the word “ally”) on American foreign policy priorities, including the conflict in Syria.
R. Nicholas Burns, who was a top State Department official in the administration of George W. Bush, put the question this way: “Can we reset, reboot, revive — use your word — this relationship? We have to.”
An administration official cast Mr. Modi’s visit as a chance to “reinvigorate” relations. Speaking on the condition of anonymity, the official said the new government in Delhi offered a fresh chance, not least because Mr. Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party won enough seats in Parliament to govern alone, without coalition partners. “We think this will be a pivotal moment and an opportunity for us to define how we can work together,” the official said.
Mr. Modi seems eager to establish something of a brain trust among influential Indian-Americans. He met Saturday evening with a dozen of them, including venture capitalists, technology executives, a college president and a former aide to Mrs. Clinton.
“You guys have achieved a lot here,” the prime minister told the group, according to one of the attendees. “I want to duplicate your success. What do we do to duplicate that success?”
On Sunday evening, he spoke to 700 Indian-Americans at a dinner at the Pierre Hotel. He said he did not need their dollars; he wanted every Indian-American to send five non-Indian friends to visit the country. Tourism, he said, can generate income for cabbies, auto-rickshaw drivers — “even tea sellers.”
Mr. Modi is keen to attract business deals that will create jobs in India, one of his main campaign promises in a nation where every month a million people turn 18 and join the labor force. For their part, American officials and executives want Mr. Modi to remove many of the obstacles that foreign companies face in doing business in India.
“The biggest thing the prime minister can do is to re-establish trust,” said Ajay Banga, chief executive of MasterCard, who has championed the cause of American business in India.
Stephen Ezell of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation said that Mr. Modi seemed to be the most business-friendly prime minister in India’s recent history, but that he had yet to take action on matters like trade policy and taxes. “If he is truly going to deliver on that vision, then he is going to have to make some very difficult decisions,” Mr. Ezell said.
Mr. Modi received resounding applause on Sunday for a promise to clear away red tape facing new businesses.
The stated purpose of Mr. Modi’s trip was to address the United Nations General Assembly, but every stop he has made in New York has been tailored to send messages to specific audiences. One of his first was at the 9/11 Memorial in Lower Manhattan, signaling India’s commitment to combating extremist groups. He has not said whether India supports the American-led airstrikes against insurgents in Iraq and Syria, but that issue is certain to come up in his meetings in Washington, administration officials have said.
India has not taken a side in the war in Syria, and it continues to do business with Iran. But in steps that American officials have noted, Mr. Modi has improved ties with Japan, cautioned China against expansionism and signaled that he can be trusted as a friend to the United States in fighting terrorism. He met with the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, on the sidelines of the General Assembly.
Both publicly and privately, Mr. Modi has listed his own priorities for India: building toilets, expanding Internet broadband access in the countryside, training young people for work and cleaning up the Ganges, a holy river in Hindu scripture.
“He is projecting an image of India that we haven’t seen in a while — that is, an India as a global player,” said Vishakha Desai, a former president of the Asia Society, who attended the Madison Square Garden speech on Sunday.
Mr. Modi’s emphasis on prosperity and cleanliness appealed to Rohit Sehgal of Secaucus, N.J. He said he hoped the changes Mr. Modi was promising would get his daughter’s generation to stop complaining about the roads and the garbage in India. “I want my daughter to want to go back to her country,” he said.
Not everyone was impressed. Outside the arena, a small group of protesters held banners denouncing Mr. Modi, who was chief minister of Gujarat in 2002 when sectarian rioting racked the state. He could not get a visa to visit the United States for nearly 10 years because of accusations that he had done too little to stop the violence.
Rekha Malhotra, 43, a popular disc jockey who was among the protesters, said she had turned down passes that she had been offered to see Mr. Modi speak. “I said thanks but no thanks — I’ll be outside,” she explained.
Sherry Hundal, 46, said she had come from Denville, N.J., to raise her voice against the prime minister. “I’m glad to be on the right side of history,” she said.
A version of this article appears in print on September 29, 2014, on page A4 of the New York edition with the headline: Premier Outlines Goals for India on Eve of a Visit With Obama.
Narendra Modi Outlines Goals for India on Eve of a Visit With Obama
By SOMINI SENGUPTASEPT. 28, 2014
Over 19,000 people at Madison Square Garden in New York chanted and roared for Narendra Modi, who was elected in May. Some wore white Modi T-shirts over their clothes.
Credit Ruth Fremson/The New York Times
Narendra Modi, the prime minister of India, sold himself on Sunday as a onetime tea vendor who wanted to lift India to glory by cleaning up the country, clearing the way for business and preparing its young citizens to be the work force of an aging world. His speech at Madison Square Garden telegraphed a wish list on the eve of his first meeting with President Obama, while also deftly rallying an influential diaspora to his side.
Mr. Modi addressed a wildly enthusiastic audience that was largely made up of Indian-Americans, and played skillfully to their sentiments. He reminded the crowd of the taunts they had heard for years that India was a land of snake charmers, and he offered lavish praise for their success in the United States.
His remarks were directed equally at the folks back home, where Mr. Modi won a sweeping electoral victory in May, and at American officials and investors he is wooing.
Over 19,000 people at Madison Square Garden in New York chanted and roared for Narendra Modi, who was elected in May. Some wore white Modi T-shirts over their clothes.At Madison Square Garden, Chants, Cheers and Roars for ModiSEPT. 28, 2014
In an hourlong speech that was signature Modi, complete with rhetorical flourishes, soaring arms, and a good deal of snarkiness, the prime minister made fun of those who say he lacks “big vision.”
The Times asked Indian-Americans what Mr. Modi's trip to the U.S. means to them.
Manisha Verma, who lives in San Jose, Calif., has family from Ranchi, Jharkhand.
“Modi's upcoming trip brings a ray of hope for American Indians like me who face a conflicting reality of being part of one of the most successful and prosperous communities in the United States, and yet we carry the legacy of a poor third-world country and face biases in our adopted homeland. Modi brings hope of change in India which will help Indians have better self-esteem and image in the United States.”
Arun Gupta, who lives in New York, has family from Amritsar, Punjab.
“It's a visit by a head of state of a second-tier power that Washington is courting in terms of economic and political opportunities not the least of which is as a counterweight to China. In other words, it's business as usual.”
Vivek Pai, who lives in New York, has family from Bangalore, Karnataka.
“Today, thanks to the political expressions of 550 million Indians in the largest democratic electoral exercise in human history, the U.S. is being forced to eat the humble pie and welcome Mr. Modi as the leader of India. The greatest military and economic power on Earth had to bow to the democratic wishes of a half billion people. That represents the greatest triumph of democratic ideals during our times.”
Sheetal Ranjan, who lives in Teaneck, N.J., has family from Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
“It means that the U.S. now looks at India as a pivotal strategic partner in the world. And I am glad to be living in a nation where my origins are of value.”
Nikhil Desai, who lives in San Francisco, has family from Ahmedabad, Gujarat.
“Modi has not satisfactorily addressed the failure by his government to prevent the riots in Gujarat; presumably he has not done so because of his complicity in those events. His actions need to be scrutinized at the international level - his trip to the U.S. will likely suggest that the U.S. is with open-arms embracing Modi and won't press further into the charges.”
Sant Gupta, who lives in Lorton, Va., has family from New Delhi.
“Mr. Modi's trip will jump start the process of restoring respect and in fact admiration for Indian civilization, history, heritage and acceptance.”
Tenaz H. Dubash, who lives in New York, has family from Delhi.
“I have mixed feelings about Mr. Modi's trip to the U.S. His treatment of the minorities in Gujarat was deplorable. He is supposed to have a stellar grip on economic issues. Hopefully he can deliver economically while working tirelessly to make sure that India remains a secular democracy where all minorities are protected.”
Kayhan Irank, who lives in Jackson Heights, N.Y., has family from Mumbai.
“It means that America and Indian-Americans are actively denying the genocide that took place in Gujarat and are re-writing history regarding Modi's role in carrying it out.”
Saad Mohammad, who lives in Evanston, Ill., has family from Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh.
“I am appalled that the U.S. government is sponsoring this criminal who has been complicit in pogroms. There are still hundreds of millions throughout India and millions in the diaspora that refuse to go along with the Modi and BJP agenda.”
Asokan Vengassery Krishnan, who lives in Philadelphia, has family from Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala.
“The Modi visit is expected to strengthen the ties between the most powerful and the largest democratic nations. It will also be a sweet revenge for Modi who was long being treated as a pariah by the U.S. In turn, it is also the victory of the Indian identity and might in a post-colonial, post-Cold War era. Modi will prove that India has a dignified role to play in the new world order.”
Rama Krishna Ambati, who lives in Victor, N.Y., has family from Guntur, Andhra Pradesh.
“I believe India has so much potential but has been waiting for a dynamic leader to lead the nation. It happened now.”
Raghu C. Mudumbai, M.D., who lives in Seattle, has family from Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh.
“Mr. Modi's trip lays the ground work for Indian-American relations over the next 10 years at a time when the world economy continues to recover, when democratic nations seek the proper balance between security and protection of its citizens (and learn from each others experience), and when the world's largest democracy and the world's most powerful democracy seek to define their place in the new world order.”
“I tell them, ‘My friends, I came here selling tea,’ ” he said, and paused, as the audience leapt to its feet and clapped. “I’m a small man. My mind is busy doing small things.”
Mr. Modi is visiting at a time when India and the United States are each seeking big things from the other. Theirs was supposed to be what Mr. Obama once called the defining “partnership” of the 21st century. The relationship has withered since then, though, and both Washington and Delhi are trying urgently now to repair it, showering each other with the diplomatic equivalent of Champagne and roses during Mr. Modi’s five-day visit to America.
He has met with two mayors and three governors, and more than two dozen members of Congress attended his event at the Garden. He is scheduled to meet on Monday with 11 chief executives from companies like Boeing, Google and Goldman Sachs, and then to speak at the Council on Foreign Relations.
Mr. Modi is here to sell a new New India, with himself as the man who can be trusted to deliver on its promise. But it remains to be seen whether he is willing or able to bridge India’s wide differences with the United States on tax policy, climate change, outsourcing, intellectual property rights and other issues. Nor has India proved to be a trusted partner (India avoids the word “ally”) on American foreign policy priorities, including the conflict in Syria.
R. Nicholas Burns, who was a top State Department official in the administration of George W. Bush, put the question this way: “Can we reset, reboot, revive — use your word — this relationship? We have to.”
An administration official cast Mr. Modi’s visit as a chance to “reinvigorate” relations. Speaking on the condition of anonymity, the official said the new government in Delhi offered a fresh chance, not least because Mr. Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party won enough seats in Parliament to govern alone, without coalition partners. “We think this will be a pivotal moment and an opportunity for us to define how we can work together,” the official said.
Mr. Modi seems eager to establish something of a brain trust among influential Indian-Americans. He met Saturday evening with a dozen of them, including venture capitalists, technology executives, a college president and a former aide to Mrs. Clinton.
“You guys have achieved a lot here,” the prime minister told the group, according to one of the attendees. “I want to duplicate your success. What do we do to duplicate that success?”
On Sunday evening, he spoke to 700 Indian-Americans at a dinner at the Pierre Hotel. He said he did not need their dollars; he wanted every Indian-American to send five non-Indian friends to visit the country. Tourism, he said, can generate income for cabbies, auto-rickshaw drivers — “even tea sellers.”
Mr. Modi is keen to attract business deals that will create jobs in India, one of his main campaign promises in a nation where every month a million people turn 18 and join the labor force. For their part, American officials and executives want Mr. Modi to remove many of the obstacles that foreign companies face in doing business in India.
“The biggest thing the prime minister can do is to re-establish trust,” said Ajay Banga, chief executive of MasterCard, who has championed the cause of American business in India.
Stephen Ezell of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation said that Mr. Modi seemed to be the most business-friendly prime minister in India’s recent history, but that he had yet to take action on matters like trade policy and taxes. “If he is truly going to deliver on that vision, then he is going to have to make some very difficult decisions,” Mr. Ezell said.
Mr. Modi received resounding applause on Sunday for a promise to clear away red tape facing new businesses.
The stated purpose of Mr. Modi’s trip was to address the United Nations General Assembly, but every stop he has made in New York has been tailored to send messages to specific audiences. One of his first was at the 9/11 Memorial in Lower Manhattan, signaling India’s commitment to combating extremist groups. He has not said whether India supports the American-led airstrikes against insurgents in Iraq and Syria, but that issue is certain to come up in his meetings in Washington, administration officials have said.
India has not taken a side in the war in Syria, and it continues to do business with Iran. But in steps that American officials have noted, Mr. Modi has improved ties with Japan, cautioned China against expansionism and signaled that he can be trusted as a friend to the United States in fighting terrorism. He met with the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, on the sidelines of the General Assembly.
Both publicly and privately, Mr. Modi has listed his own priorities for India: building toilets, expanding Internet broadband access in the countryside, training young people for work and cleaning up the Ganges, a holy river in Hindu scripture.
“He is projecting an image of India that we haven’t seen in a while — that is, an India as a global player,” said Vishakha Desai, a former president of the Asia Society, who attended the Madison Square Garden speech on Sunday.
Mr. Modi’s emphasis on prosperity and cleanliness appealed to Rohit Sehgal of Secaucus, N.J. He said he hoped the changes Mr. Modi was promising would get his daughter’s generation to stop complaining about the roads and the garbage in India. “I want my daughter to want to go back to her country,” he said.
Not everyone was impressed. Outside the arena, a small group of protesters held banners denouncing Mr. Modi, who was chief minister of Gujarat in 2002 when sectarian rioting racked the state. He could not get a visa to visit the United States for nearly 10 years because of accusations that he had done too little to stop the violence.
Rekha Malhotra, 43, a popular disc jockey who was among the protesters, said she had turned down passes that she had been offered to see Mr. Modi speak. “I said thanks but no thanks — I’ll be outside,” she explained.
Sherry Hundal, 46, said she had come from Denville, N.J., to raise her voice against the prime minister. “I’m glad to be on the right side of history,” she said.
A version of this article appears in print on September 29, 2014, on page A4 of the New York edition with the headline: Premier Outlines Goals for India on Eve of a Visit With Obama.
Sunday, September 28, 2014
British Parliament Backs Airstrikes Against ISIS in Iraq
British Parliament Backs Airstrikes Against ISIS in Iraq
By STEPHEN CASTLE and ALAN COWELLSEPT. 26, 2014
LONDON — The British Parliament voted overwhelmingly on Friday to approve airstrikes in Iraq against the militants of the Islamic State. The vote brought a country weary of international engagements belatedly into the American-led campaign against Sunni extremists.
Prime Minister David Cameron called Parliament back from recess to consider the motion, which authorizes the government to conduct air operations over Iraq. It does not authorize the deployment of ground troops, nor does it authorize action in Syria.
The decision was seen as significant, after British lawmakers voted last year not to join proposed strikes against Syria over its use of chemical weapons.
The vote last year dented Britain’s reputation as America’s closest ally in the fight against extremism, and the debate on Friday was seen as a test of Britain’s stomach for further military intervention after unpopular wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“In military terms, the vote has no significance whatsoever, but politically it has more importance,” said James Strong, a foreign policy expert at the London School of Economics and Political Science. “There is a sense in the United States that if even Britain thinks it is a bad idea, then it probably is.”
Among America’s European allies, France and the Netherlands have already said that they would take part in the bombing campaign in Iraq, and Denmark and Belgium did the same on Friday.
Wary of a defeat in Parliament and eager to avert opposition from the Labour Party, Mr. Cameron said on Friday that Britain would not, at present, join the United States in attacking targets in Syria, and would not commit ground forces to fight the Islamic State, which is also known as ISIS or ISIL.
Mr. Cameron said that while he did not believe there was a legal barrier to Britain conducting airstrikes in Syria, he was proposing action exclusively in Iraq for the sake of political consensus.
As he outlined his case for intervention, Mr. Cameron faced persistent questioning from lawmakers about the campaign’s objectives, the risk that the mission could expand beyond its initial scope, and the readiness of Iraqi forces to take advantage of air support. But some lawmakers also argued that the motion did not go far enough.
“We would want to see a stable Iraq and — over time — a stable Syria too; ISIL degraded and then destroyed as a serious terrorist organization,” Mr. Cameron said in Parliament. “But let me be frank: we should not expect this to happen quickly. The hallmarks of this campaign will be patience and persistence, not shock and awe.”
Mr. Cameron said the militant group had “already murdered one British hostage and is threatening the lives of two more,” adding that, for Britain, there “isn’t a walk-on-by option.”
Supporting the call for airstrikes, Ed Miliband, leader of the opposition Labour Party, said that he understood the unease in parts of Britain about another military engagement. “Let us be clear at the outset what is the proposition: airstrikes against ISIL in Iraq,” Mr. Miliband said. “Not about ground troops, nor about U.K. military action elsewhere. And it is a mission specifically aimed at ISIL.”
Continue reading the main storyContinue reading the main storyContinue reading the main story
He added that a “dismembered Iraq” would be more dangerous to Britain than taking military action now, and that Britain should pride itself on its “tradition of internationalism.”
Western nations hope that Iraqi government troops can be bolstered sufficiently to defeat the Islamic State’s fighters on the ground. In Syria, where the Islamic State is battling both with the government of President Bashar al-Assad and with other rebel groups, some of which have Western backing, the picture is more complicated. Western governments want to avoid any appearance that they are aligning with Mr. Assad or supporting his brutal efforts to crush the revolt against him.
Mr. Miliband said of the Syria situation that “when we are not talking about being invited in by a democratic state, it would be better — I put it no higher than that — it would be better to seek a U.N. Security Council resolution.”
In preparation, the Royal Air Force has had six Tornado warplanes flying surveillance missions over Iraq for several weeks, ostensibly as part of humanitarian efforts to help minorities threatened by the Islamic State.
Kenneth Clarke, the former Conservative cabinet minister, said Britain’s participation in the air campaign would be “almost symbolic,” but would help London to press other capitals to take steps against the Islamic State.
In the debate on Friday, several members of Parliament, mainly Conservatives, criticized the motion for not authorizing action in Syria, arguing that the Islamic State was based there and had all but erased the Syria-Iraq border. But others had different concerns, including John Baron, also a Conservative, who warned of a “real danger that we are going into a cul-de-sac” without “an exit strategy.”
Punch in the mouth- 3rd Gulf war
Patrick Cockburn
Patrick Cockburn is an Irish journalist who has been a Middle East correspondent since 1979 for the Financial Times and, presently, The Independent. He was awarded Foreign Commentator of the Year at the 2013 Editorial Intelligence Comment Awards.
=================
PATRICK COCKBURN
Thursday 25 September 2014
As the UK prepares for another war in Iraq, is its strategy any more coherent than in 2003?
Patrick Cockburn, who led the world in warning of the rise of Isis, wonders if David Cameron has really thought through his plans
Britain is set to join the air campaign against Isis in Iraq, but, going by David Cameron’s speech to the UN General Assembly, the Government has no more idea of what it is getting into in this war than Tony Blair did in 2003.
Mr Cameron says that there should be “no rushing to join a conflict without a clear plan”, but he should keep in mind the warning of the American boxer Mike Tyson that “everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth”.
The Prime Minister says that lessons have been learned from British military interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan but it is telling that he did not mention intervention in Libya for which he himself was responsible.
In fact, there is a much closer parallel between Britain joining an air war in Libya in 2011 than Mr Blair’s earlier misadventures which Mr Cameron was happy to highlight.
In Libya, what was sold to the public as a humanitarian bid by Nato forces to protect the people of Benghazi from Muammar Gaddafi, rapidly escalated into a successful effort to overthrow the Libyan leader. The result three years on is that Libya is in permanent chaos with predatory militias reducing their country to ruins as they fight each other for power.
Whatever the original intentions of Britain and the US, their armed intervention in Afghanistan in 2001, Iraq in 2003 and Libya in 2011 has been to produce devastating conflicts that have not ended.
It has become common over the years to describe Iraq as a quagmire for foreign powers and it is no less so today than when President Bush and Mr Blair launched their invasion 11 years ago.
Mr Cameron draws comfort from the fact that the UN Security Council has received “a clear request from the Iraqi government to support it in its military action” against Isis. But this is a government who lost five divisions, a third of its army of 350,000 soldiers, when attacked by 1,300 Isis fighters in Mosul in June. Its three most senior generals jumped into a helicopter and fled to the Kurdish Iraqi capital Arbil, abandoning their men. It was one of the most disgraceful routs in history.
Mr Cameron blames all this on the mis-government of former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, whose sectarian and kleptocratic rule has just ended. But it is doubtful if much has changed since Mr Maliki was replaced by the more personable Haider al-Abadi, whose government is still dominated by Shia religious parties. Mr Cameron’s stated belief that he is supporting the creation of a government that is inclusive of Sunni, Shia, Kurds and Christians is a pipe dream.
It is important to stress that there is little sign that US air strikes in Iraq, which Britain is planning to supplement, will be able to turn the tide against Isis. There have been 194 US air strikes in Iraq since 8 August but the militants are still advancing six weeks after the first bombs and missiles exploded.
In a little reported battle at Saqlawiya, 40 miles west of Baghdad, last Sunday, Isis fighters besieged and overran an Iraqi army base and then ambushed the retreating soldiers. An officer who escaped was quoted as saying that “of an estimated 1,000 soldiers in Saqlawiya, only about 200 managed to flee”.
Surviving Iraqi soldiers blame their military leaders for failing to supply them with ammunition, food and water while Isis claims to have destroyed or captured five tanks and 41 Humvees. The message here is that if the US, Britain and their allies intend to prop up a weak Iraqi government and army, it is misleading to pretend that this can be done without a much more significant level of intervention.
In 2003, Mr Bush and Mr Blair claimed to be fighting only Saddam Hussein and his regime and were astonished to find themselves fighting the whole Sunni community in Iraq. This could very easily happen again in both Iraq and Syria.
Many Sunni in Mosul and Raqqa, Isis’s Syrian capital, do not like Isis. They are alienated by its violence and primaeval social norms such as treating women as chattels. But they are even more frightened of resurgent Iraqi or Syrian armies accompanied by murderous pro-government militias subduing their areas with the assistance of allied air strikes. The Sunni will have no option but to fight or flee.
The US is hoping that it can split the Sunni community away from Isis in a repeat of what happened in 2007 when many Sunni tribes and neighbourhoods took up arms against al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI). But this is less likely to happen this time round because Isis is stronger than its predecessor and takes precautions against a stab in the back. Mr Cameron cited the example of the al-Sheitaat tribe in Deir Ezzor in eastern Syria, who rose up against Isis only for their rebellion to be crushed and 700 of their tribesmen to be executed.
Mr Cameron produced a laundry list of four measures that will make the present intervention in Iraq different from past failures. They are a ragbag of suggestions, high on moral tone but short on specificity and give the impression that Tony Blair may have been looking over the shoulder of Mr Cameron’s speech writer.
For instance, we should defeat “the ideology of extremism that is the root cause of terrorism”, but there is nothing concrete about the origins of this narrow and bigoted ideology which condemns Shia as heretics and apostates, treats women as second-class citizens and maligns Christians and Jews.
In fact, the belief system of Isis is little different from Wahhabism, the variant of Islam prevalent in Saudi Arabia. Supported by Saudi wealth, Wahhabism has gained an ever-increasing influence over mainstream Sunni Islam in the last 50 years. Politicians like Mr Cameron are much happier condemning school governors in Birmingham for religious extremism than they are complaining to the Saudi ambassador in London about the virulent sectarianism of Saudi school books.
In 2003 George W Bush and Tony Blair claimed to be fighting only Saddam Hussein In 2003 George W Bush and Tony Blair claimed to be fighting only Saddam Hussein (Getty Images)
The US and British alliance with Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain and Jordan – all Sunni monarchies – creates other problems. It is hypocritical for Mr Cameron to pretend that US and UK intervention are in support of democratic, accountable and inclusive governments when he is in a coalition with the last theocratic absolute monarchies on earth.
But the most short-sighted and self-defeating part of Mr Cameron’s justification for British intervention is to do with the war in Syria. He still claims he wants to change the government of Syria, a policy in which there is “a political transition and an end to Assad’s brutality”. He adds the shop-worn observation that “our enemies’ enemy is not our friend. It is another enemy.”
Since Mr Assad controls almost all the larger Syrian cities, he is not going to leave power. What Cameron is in practice proposing is a recipe for a continuing war and it is this that will make it impossible to defeat the jihadi militants, for Isis is the child of war.
Its leaders have been fighting for much of their lives and are good at it. They and their followers interact with the rest of the world through violence. And so long as the wars in Syria and Iraq continue, then many in their Sunni Arab communities will fear the enemies of Isis even more than Isis.
Mr Obama was uncompromising in his condemnation of ISIS in his address Mr Obama was uncompromising in his condemnation of ISIS in his address (AP)
What the plans of President Obama and Mr Cameron lack is a diplomatic plan to bring the war between the non-Isis parties in Syria to an end. The two sides fear and hate each other too much for any political solution, but it may be possible for the foreign backers of the two sides to pressure them into agreeing a ceasefire. Neither is in a position to win against each other, but both are threatened by Isis, which inflicted stinging defeats on both Assad and anti-Assad forces in the summer.
Britain should press for such a truce even if it is only engaged militarily in Iraq, because it is the outcome of the war in Syria that will determine what happens in Iraq. It was the Syrian war beginning in 2011 that reignited Iraq’s civil war and not the misdeeds of Mr Maliki.
If Isis is to be combated effectively, then the US, Britain and their allies need to establish a closer relationship with those who are actually fighting Isis, which currently include the Syrian Army, the Syrian Kurds, Hezbollah of Lebanon, Iranian-backed militias and Iran itself. The necessity for this is being made tragically clear in the Syria Kurdish enclave of Kobane on the Syrian-Turkish border, where Isis fighters have already driven 200,000 Kurds into Turkey.
If Mr Obama and Mr Cameron genuinely intend to rely on plans to combat Isis that they have just outlined, then they are, as Mike Tyson would have predicted, setting themselves and their countries up for a punch in the mouth.
Isis, we are told, is a 'clear and dangerous threat to our way of life'. I’m sorry, but I just don’t buy it
Mary Dejevsky
One of the country’s most respected commentators on Russia, the EU and the US, Mary Dejevsky has worked as a foreign correspondent all over the world, including Washington, Paris and Moscow. She is now the chief editorial writer and a columnist at The Independent and regularly appears on radio and television. She is an Honorary Research Fellow at the University of Buckingham.
Thursday 25 September 2014
Isis, we are told, is a 'clear and dangerous threat to our way of life'. I’m sorry, but I just don’t buy it
It’s absurd to suggest that we are fighting them ‘over there’ so that we won’t have to fight them ‘over here’
Of all the arguments advanced in favour of British military intervention abroad, the one that has always seemed to me most treacherous and least convincing is the one about “over there” and “over here”. It was much-used by Gordon Brown, when he was trying to persuade a sceptical public of the need for beleaguered UK troops to remain in Afghanistan, though it was current in the United States well before that. Now it is back, in nice time for today’s recall of Parliament.
The battleground is no longer Afghanistan, and the enemy is no longer al-Qaeda or the Taliban. The conflict has moved westwards to northern Syria and Iraq, and the new adversary is the self-styled Islamic State and its rampaging Caliphate. But the argument and the wording are practically identical.
As David Cameron told the UN General Assembly on Wednesday, in tones that strongly suggested a rehearsal for today’s unanimity-fest in the Commons, Isis constitutes “a clear and present danger to the United Kingdom”. He had earlier described the behavior of Isis to reporters as “psychopathic, murderous and brutal”.
Our new Defence Secretary, Michael Fallon, started preparing the ground last weekend. In an interview in The Spectator he said: “We’ve had attacks on the streets of London, on our transport system, at Glasgow Airport, the murder of Lee Rigby – how much more evidence do you need that this is a very clear and dangerous threat to our way of life and to all the democracies of the West? This is a new Battle of Britain.”
Now you are welcome to accuse me of a lapse in patriotism unworthy of my British passport, but I simply don’t buy this – any of it – even though, right on cue, there was a well-publicised round-up of terror suspects in London yesterday. And I regret, to say the least, that so many of our elected representatives seem to swallow the notion of a direct threat to Britain, the moment a Westerner (over there, mostly, and not over here) meets death by the particularly brutal means of beheading.
In cold, hard, logical terms, the rationale for fighting “there” rather than “here” simply does not stand up to scrutiny. First, all those responsible for the atrocities enumerated by Fallon were either born or educated in Britain. Any trigger for their actions should thus be sought “here” rather than “there”.
Second, they all gave testimony or left statements leaving no doubt as to their motive. Their world-view might embrace the idea of a caliphate, but the London and Glasgow bombers, and those who slaughtered Lee Rigby, had something more immediate in mind: to avenge the killing of Muslims by British troops. In his interview, Michael Fallon rejected “with a wave of the hand” the notion that attacks in Britain might reflect “blow back” from Iraq. But that is essentially what these killers said.
Third. Given the nature of the UK’s recent wars and its high international profile – such attacks remain very, very rare. Neither the UK, still less Western civilisation, is realistically threatened with serious destabilisation, still less extinction, by an extremist brand of Islam, raping, pillaging and beheading as it sweeps in from the east.
And fourth, if the threat is indeed to the relatively small area that is within our shores, why are we not concentrating our security efforts here, rather than sending troops and firepower to inflict tiny pinpricks on a vast swathe of territory that is not ours to defend? If the purpose is to show we are loyal allies to the United States, we should say so, not hide behind an exaggerated, even trumped-up, threat to the British way of life.
Now, it can and will be said that the relatively small number of attacks here is a result of assiduous work by our security services. And to the extent this is true, three cheers for them, and gongs all round. In defence of our politicians, it is also fair to say that you only need one malefactor to get through and you could be looking at destruction on the scale of 9/11. No Prime Minister wants Parliament – or, indeed, the Grand Hotel in Brighton – to be blown up on his watch. The security of the realm is a prime responsibility of any government.
But it is worth bearing in mind that there has been no repeat of 9/11; that lax airport security and intelligence overload were as much to blame as the lethal ingenuity of a small band of zealots, and that so-called asymmetric warfare is the natural product of a world in which vastly different levels of development exist almost side by side, and are visible to each other as never before.
One of the UK’s great assets is the resilience of its population. That, plus a modern level of security, is as much as can reasonably be done. Talk of fighting over there in order not to fight over here gets things precisely the wrong way round. Each of our recent interventions has unleashed forces of chaos, and alienated a small section of our own Muslim population.
It is too late to do much about the first. In Iraq, for instance, our disbanding of the Baathist power structures had the effect, 10 years on, of driving Western-trained soldiers into the ranks of Isis. But we can do something about the second: by not inflating the threat from militant Islam and not fuelling talk of a clash of civilisations. The malign forces “over there” should be left to play themselves out.
ஜெயலலிதாவின் திருட்டுச் சொத்துப்பட்டியல், மொத்தம் 300இல் முதல் 100!
ஜெயலலிதாவின் திருட்டுச் சொத்துப்பட்டியல்,
மொத்தம் 300இல் முதல் 100!
----------------------------------அரசு தரப்பில் தாக்கல் செய்யப்பட்ட ஜெயலலிதாவின் சொத்துப்பட்டியல் விவரம்.
1. சென்னை போயஸ் தோட்டம்- கதவிலக்கம் 36 ல் பத்து கிரவுண்டு 330 சதுர அடி நிலமும், கட்டடமும்
3. ஐதராபாத் ஸ்ரீநகர் அலுவலர் காலனியில் 651.18 சதுர மீட்டர் கட்டடம்.
3. ஐதராபாத் அருகே ஜிடிமெட்லா மற்றும் பஷீராபாத் கிராமங்களில் இரண்டு பண்ணை வீடுகள், பணியாளர்களுக்கான வீடுகள், மற்றும் திராட்சை தோட்டம் (11.35 ஏக்கர்)
4. ஆந்திரப் பிரதேசம் மேச்சால் வட்டம், பஷீராபாத் கிராமத்தில் சர்வே எண்.93/3 ல் 3.15 ஏக்கர் நிலம்.
5. செய்யாறு கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 366/2, 5, 6 ல் விவசாய நிலம் 3.4 ஏக்கர் நிலம்.
6. சென்னை பட்டம்மாள் தெரு, கதவிலக்கம் 19இல் நிலமும், கட்டடமும்.
7. சென்னை, சந்தோம், அந்து தெரு, ஆர்.ஆர்.அடுக்குமாடி குடியிருப்பில்,குடியிருப்பு எண் 7.
8. சென்னை, அண்ணா சாலையில், 602 ஆம் இலக்கத்தில் கடை எண். 14
9. சென்னை, நுங்கம்பாக்கம், காதர் நவாஸ்கான் சாலை, ஆர். எஸ். எண். 58/5, கதவிலக்கம் எண். 14 ல் மொத்தம் 11 கிரவுண்ட், 736 சதுர அடி நிலத்தில் பிரிக்கப்படாத பங்கு.
10. சென்னை, செயின்ட் மேரீஸ் சாலை, கதவிலக்கம் 213 - பி- இல் நிலமும் கட்டடமும். (1.206 சதுர அடி)
11. சென்னை, அண்ணா சாலை, எண் 602 இல் 180 சதுர அடி, கடை எண் 18; எண். 54/42656 இல் 17 கிரவுண்ட் பிரிவினை செய்யப்படாத நிலத்தில் பங்கு மற்றும் ஆர்.எஸ். எண். 3/10 மற்றும் 3/11 ஆகியவற்றில் மைலாப்பூர் கிராமத்தில் 1,756 சதுர அடி நிலம்.
12. தஞ்சாவூர் மானம்பூ சாவடி சர்வே எண். 1091 இல் 2,400 சதுர அடி நிலமும், கட்டடமும்.
13. தஞ்சாவூர் நகரம், 6வது வார்டு, டவுன் சர்வே எண். 1091 இல் 51 ஆயிரம் சதுர அடி காலிமனை.
14. தஞ்சாவூர் நகரம், மானம்பூ சாவடி, பிளேக் சாலையில் டவுன் சர்வே 1019 இல் 8,970 சதுர அடி காலி மனை.
15. திருச்சி, பொன்னகரம், அபிஷேகபுரம் கிராமம் டவுன் சர்வே எண். 107இல் 3,525 சதுர அடி நிலமும், கட்டடமும்.
16. தஞ்சை மாவட்டம், சுந்தரகோட்ட கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 402/2இல் 3.23 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
17. சென்னை, கிண்டி, திரு.வி.க. தொழிற்பேட்டையில் சர்வே எண். 55, 56 இல் 5,658 சதுர அடி நிலமும், கட்டடமும்.
18. சென்னை மைலாப்பூர் கிராமம், ஆர்.எஸ். எண். 1567/1இல் ஒரு கிரவுண்ட், 1407 சதுர அடி நிலமும், கட்டடமும்.
19. மன்னார்குடி, சர்வே எண். 93, 94 மற்றும் 95 ஆகியவற்றில் மொத்தம் 25,035 சதுர அடி நிலமும், கட்டடமும்.
20. சென்னை, பரங்கிமலை கிராமம், டி.எஸ். எண். 4535இல் 4604.60 சதுர அடி மனையும், கட்டடமும் மற்றும் திரு.வி.க. தொழிற்பேட்டையில் மனை எண். எஸ். 7.
21. சென்னை, காதர் நவாஸ்கான் சாலை, கதவிலக்கம் 14இல் பிரிவினை செய்யப்படாத 11 கிரவுண்ட், 1736 சதுர அடி நிலமும், கட்டடமும் மற்றும் நுங்கம்பாக்கம் கிராமம் ஆர்.எஸ். எண். 58 மற்றும் புதிய ஆர்.எஸ். எண். 55/5இல் 523 சதுர அடி கட்டடம்.
22. செகந்தராபாத் கண்டோன்மென்ட் அஞ்சையா தோட்டம், கதவிலக்கம் எண். 16இல் 222.92 சதுர மீட்டர் நிலமும், கட்டடமும்.
23. கிண்டி, திரு.வி.க. தொழிற்பேட்டை சர்வே எண். 86, 87, 88, 89, 91, 92 மற்றும் 93 ஆகியவற்றில் 12,462.172 சதுர அடி நிலமும், கட்டடமும்.
24. சென்னை, அண்ணா நகர், மனை எண். எல்.66, இளவரசிக்காக வாங்கப்பட்டது - மதிப்பு 2 லட்சத்து 35 ஆயிரத்து 813 ரூபாய்.
25. சென்னை, கிண்டி, திரு.வி.க. தொழிற் பேட்டையில் 0.63 ஏக்கர் நிலமும், 495 சதுர அடி ஆர்.சி.சி. மேற்கூரை கட்டடமும்; ஆலந்தூர் கிராமம் சர்வே எண். 89இல் 1,155 சதுர அடி ஏ.சி.சி. மேற்கூரை கட்டிடம்.
26. சென்னை, மைலாப்பூர் கிராமம், கிழக்கு அபிராமபுரம், மூன்றாவது தெரு கதவிலக்கம் 18இல் 1 கிரவுண்ட் 1475 சதுர அடி நிலமும் கட்டடமும்.
27. செய்யூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 366/4 மற்றும் 366/1 ஆகியவற்றில் 4.90 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
28. செய்யூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 365/3இல் 3.30 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
29. செய்யூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 365/1இல் 1.65 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
30. செய்யூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 362/2இல் 2.25 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
31. சென்னை 106இல் மகா சுபலெட்சுமி திருமண மண்டபம்.
32. நுங்கம்பாக்கம், காதர் நவாஸ்கான் சாலை, ஜெம்ஸ் கோர்ட் ஆர்.எஸ். எண். 58/5 இல் மொத்தம் 11 கிரவுண்ட், 1,736 சதுர அடி மனையில் 72/12000 பங்கு.
33. சென்னை ஈக்காட்டுத்தாங்கல், உள் வட்டச் சாலையில் ஆஞ்சனேயா பிரண்டர்ஸ்.
34. வேலகாபுரம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 198/180இல் 4.41 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
35. வேலகாபுரம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 198/180 எப். 3இல் 1.42 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
36. வேலகாபுரம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 198/180 எப். 12 மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் மொத்தம் 1.42 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
37. வேலகாபுரம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 198/180 எப். 11 மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் மொத்தம் 1.42 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
38. வேலகாபுரம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 198இல் 4.41 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
39. வேலகாபுரம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 198இல் 1.42 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
40. வேலகாபுரம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 198இல் 1.42 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
41. வேலகாபுரம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 198இல் 4.41 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
42. வேலகாபுரம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 198இல் 4.41 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
43. வேலகாபுரம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 198இல் 4.41 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
44. வேலகாபுரம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 198இல் 1.42 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
45. வேலகாபுரம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 198இல் 4.41 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
46. வேலகாபுரம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 198இல் 4.41 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
47. வேலகாபுரம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 198இல் 1.42 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
48. வேலகாபுரம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 198இல் 41 சென்ட் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
49. வேலகாபுரம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 364இல் 63 சென்ட்புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
50. நீலாங்கரை கிராமம், மனை எண். 7இல் 4802 சதுர அடி மனையும் கட்டடமும்.
51. தியாகராய நகர், பத்மநாபா தெரு, சர்வே எண். 301 மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் உள்ள மொத்தம் 1 கிரவுண்ட் 1086 சதுர அடி மனை மற்றும் கட்டடத்தில் 1/5 பங்கு.
52. தியாகராய நகர், பத்மநாபா தெரு, சர்வே எண். 301 மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் உள்ள மொத்தம் 1 கிரவுண்ட் 1086 சதுர அடி மனை மற்றும் கட்டடத்தில் 1/5 பங்கு.
53. தியாகராய நகர், பத்மநாபா தெரு, சர்வே எண். 301 மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் உள்ள மொத்தம் 1 கிரவுண்ட் 1086 சதுர அடி மனை மற்றும் கட்டடத்தில் 1/5 பங்கு.
54. தியாகராய நகர், பத்மநாபா தெரு, சர்வே எண். 301 மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் உள்ள மொத்தம் 1 கிரவுண்ட் 1086 சதுர அடி மனை மற்றும் கட்டடத்தில் 1/5 பங்கு.
55. தியாகராய நகர், பத்மநாபா தெரு, சர்வே எண். 301 மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் உள்ள மொத்தம் 1 கிரவுண்ட் 1086 சதுர அடி மனை மற்றும் கட்டடத்தில் 1/5 பங்கு. (51 முதல் 56 வரையிலான சொத்துக்கள் வெவ்வேறு உரிமையாளர்களிடமிருந்து தனித்தனியாக பத்திரங்கள் பதிவு செய்யப்பட்டுள்ளன.)
56. சிறுதாவூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 392/1, 2இல் 1.50 ஏக்கர் நிலம்.
57. சர்வே எண். 346/1 பி மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் 10 ஏக்கர், 41 சென்ட் நிலம்.
58. செய்யூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 364/8, 364/3, 364/9 ஆகியவற்றில் 2.02 ஏக்கர் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
59. செய்யூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 364இல் 54 சென்ட் புஞ்செய் நிலம்.
60. சிறுதாவூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 345/3பி மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் மொத்தம் 11 ஏக்கர் 83 சென்ட் நிலம்.
61. கருங்குழி பள்ளம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண், 48/2 மற்றும் சிறுதாவூர் கிராமம் சர்வே எண். 383 முதல் 386 வரை மற்றும் 393 ஆகியவற்றில் மொத்தம் 11 ஏக்கர் 28 சென்ட் நிலம்.
62. சிறுதாவூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 392/1 மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் மொத்தம் 10 ஏக்கர் 86 சென்ட் நிலம்.
63. சிறுதாவூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 379 மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் மொத்தம் 10.7 ஏக்கர் நிலம்.
64. 10.7 ஏக்கர் நிலம் வாங்குவதற்கு பத்திரப் பதிவில் குறிப்பிடப்பட்டதொகைக்கு மேலும் அதிகத் தொகை செலுத்தப்பட்டது.
65. சிறுதாவூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 339/1 ஏ மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் மொத்தம் 7 ஏக்கர் 44 சென்ட் நிலம்.
66. சென்னை டி.டி.கே. சாலை, கதவிலக்கம் 149இல் 2 கிரவுண்ட் மற்றும் 1230 சதுர அடி நிலமும் கட்டிடமும்.
67. சென்னை, டி.டி.கே. சாலை, ஸ்ரீராம் நகர், சர்வே எண். 3705இல் பகுதி.
68. ஈஞ்சம்பாக்கம் சர்வே எண். 18/4 ஏ 1இல் 1.29 ஏக்கர் நிலம்.
69. சோளிங்கநல்லூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 1/17இல் 16.75 சென்ட் நிலம்.
70. சென்னை, அடையார், கதவிலக்கம் எண்.189இல் 6.75 சென்ட் மனை.
71. சென்னை, அடையார், கதவிலக்கம் எண்.189இல் 16.50 சென்ட் மனை.
72. 5,30,400 ரூபாய்க்கு டிமான்ட் டிராப்டாகவும், 3.35 லட்சம் ரூபாய் ரொக்கமாகவும் திருமதி காயத்ரி சந்திரன் என்பவருக்குச் செலுத்தப்பட்டது.
73. சோளிங்கநல்லூர் ஆர்.எஸ்.ஓ. எண். 1/1 எப் மற்றும் 1/104 ஆகியவற்றில் 16.75 சென்ட் மனை.
74. 2,35,200 ரூபாய்க்கு டிமான்ட் டிராப்டாகவும், 3.35 லட்சம் ரூபாய் ரொக்கமாகவும் கே.டி. சந்திரவதனன் என்பவருக்குக் கொடுக்கப்பட்டது.
75. நுங்கம்பாக்கம் கிராமம், வாலஸ் தோட்டத்தில், சர்வே எண். 61/1 மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் பிரிக்கப்படாத பங்காக 6 கிரவுண்ட் 1087 சதுர அடி மனையில் 581 சதுர அடி மனை.
76. நுங்கம்பாக்கம் கிராமம், வாலஸ் தோட்டத்தில், சர்வே எண். 61/1 மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் பிரிக்கப்படாத பங்காக 6 கிரவுண்ட் 1087 சதுர அடி மனையில் 581 சதுர அடி மனை.
77. நுங்கம்பாக்கம் கிராமம், வாலஸ் தோட்டத்தில், சர்வே எண். 61/1 மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் பிரிக்கப்படாத பங்காக 6 கிரவுண்ட் 1087 சதுர அடி மனையில் 581 சதுர அடி மனை.
78. நுங்கம்பாக்கம் கிராமம், வாலஸ் தோட்டத்தில், சர்வே எண். 61/1 மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் பிரிக்கப்படாத பங்காக 6 கிரவுண்ட் 1087 சதுர அடி மனையில் 581 சதுர அடி மனை.
79. சிறுதாவூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 403/3 மற்றும் 401/2 ஆகியவற்றில் 3.30 ஏக்கர் நிலம்.
80. வெட்டுவாங்கேணி கிராமம் சர்வே எண். 165/88இல் 34 சென்ட் நிலம்.
81. வெட்டுவாங்கேணி கிராமம் சர்வே எண். 165/7 பி.யில் 34 சென்ட் நிலம்.
82. வெட்டுவாங்கேணி கிராமம் சர்வே எண். 165/9 ஏ இல் 34 சென்ட் நிலம்.
83. சென்னை, மைலாப்பூர், லஸ் சர்ச் சாலையில் கதவிலக்கம் 98/99இல் மொத்தம் உள்ள 10 கிரவுண்ட் 640 சதுர அடியில் பிரிக்கப்படாத பங்காக 880/72000
84. தியாகராய நகர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 5202இல் 4,800 சதுர அடி மனையும் கட்டிடமும்.
85. சோளிங்கநல்லூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 1/105இல் 5 கிரவுண்ட் மனை மற்றும் மனை எண்கள் 40,41 ஆகியவற்றில் 900 சதுர அடி மனையும், கட்டடமும்.
86. சேரகுளம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 436/6 மற்றும் பல சர்வே எண்களிலும் வல்லகுளம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 188/3 மற்றும் 221/1 ஆகியவற்றிலும் மொத்தம் 53 ஏக்கர் 66 சென்ட் நிலம்.
87. கருங்குழி பள்ளம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 43/2இல் 3 ஏக்கர் 51 சென்ட் நிலம்.
88. கருங்குழி பள்ளம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 46இல் 4 ஏக்கர் 52 சென்ட் நிலம்.
89. கருங்குழி பள்ளம் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 45இல் 4 ஏக்கர் 15 சென்ட் நிலம்.
90. கருங்குழி பள்ளம் கிராமத்தில் 4 ஏக்கர் 15 சென்ட் நிலம்.
91. திருவேங்கடநகர் காலனி சர்வே எண். 588/2 ஏ, 2 பி ஆகியவற்றில் 4380 சதுர அடி மனை, 520 அடி வீடும் சேர்த்து.
92. திருவேங்கடநகர் காலனி சர்வே எண். 588/2 ஏ, 2 பி ஆகியவற்றில் 4380 சதுர அடி மனை, 520 அடி வீடும் சேர்த்து. (பத்திரத்தில் குறிப்பிட்டதைக் காட்டிலும் அதிகமாக பணம் செலுத்தப்பட்டது).
93. வெட்டுவாங்கேணி & ஈஞ்சம்பாக்கம் கிராமத்தில் சர்வே எண். 165/9 பி.யில் 37 சென்ட் நிலம்.
94. சென்னை, டி.டி.கே. சாலை, கதவிலக்கம் 150இல் 2 கிரவுண்ட் 733 சதுர அடி நிலமும், கட்டடமும்.
95. பையனூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 392/6 மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் மொத்தம் 5.80 ஏக்கர் நிலம்.
96. பையனூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 391/1 மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் மொத்தம் 3.52 ஏக்கர் நிலம்.
97. பையனூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 384/1 மற்றும் சில சர்வே எண்களில் மொத்தம் 5.28 ஏக்கர் நிலம்.
98. பையனூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 383இல் 40 சென்ட் நிலம்.
99. பையனூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 383இல் 40 சென்ட் நிலம்.
100. பையனூர் கிராமம், சர்வே எண். 403/1இல் 2.76 ஏக்கர் நிலம்.
மொத்தம் முன்னூறு சொத்துப் பட்டியலில் முதல் நூறு சொத்துக்கள்
Jayalalitha, Prisoner No.7402,in VVIP cell 23
Updated: September 28, 2014 10:13 IST
Jayalalithaa, prisoner No. 7402, in VVIP cell 23
Nespresso™ Capsules Offer - Free P&P On Orders of 200 or More T&C's Apply - Order Online Today.nespresso.com/Capsule_Free_Delivery
PTIHer dinner included a Ragi ball, 200 grams of rice and two chapathis. However, she refused dinner and sought fruits instead.
Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa, who has been convicted in the disproportionate assets case, has been allotted the VVIP Cell number 23 in the Central Prison at Parappana Agrahara. She has been given prisoner number 7402.
Sources said the cell is located next to the women’s barrack. Jail authorities said the occupant was entitled to a bed, fan and separate bathroom facility. Ms Jayalalithaa was provided with a white sari as a convict.
Her dinner included a Ragi ball, 200 grams of rice and two chapathis. However, she refused dinner and sought fruits instead.
Others convicted in the case Sasikala, Ilavarsi and Sudhakaran were given prisoner numbers 7403 and 7404 and 7405 respectively. While Sasikala and Ilavarasi were assigned a cell, where Subha, convicted in the murder of a software engineer, is lodged, Sudhakaran was put up in a VIP cell next to former Karnataka Tourism Minister and mining baron G Janardhana Reddy, the officials said.
Sources said that Ms. Jayalalitha was subjected to medical examination in the prison premises as part of admission procedure. She was also explained the procedure of the prison rules. Since Ms. Jayalalitha complained of multiple ailments the prison authorities have assured necessary medical help.
Sources said that Ms Jayalalithaa will be the first occupant of the VVIP cell in the high security Central Prison. The Central Prison has two VVIP prisons cells that are categorised as high security zones while the prison also has five VIP cells that have been used to lodge former Chief Minister B.S. Yeddyurappa, former Ministers, G. Janardhan Reddy and S.N. Krishnaiah Setty.
RELATED NEWS
Tamil Nadu limps back to normalcy
The long road to justice
Violence across Tamil Nadu
Excellent verdict: Swamy
An association that cost Jayalalithaa dear
Not political vendetta: Anbazhagan
Jayalalithaa sentenced to four years in jail, fined Rs. 100 crore
Prison doctor treats Jayalalithaa
Jayalalithaa cannot contest polls for 10 years
BJP looking to strengthen base in Tamil Nadu
Rajnath refuses to comment on Jayalalitha’s conviction
Jayalalithaa conviction: As it happened
Jayalalithaa wealth case: Timeline of events
Jayalalithaa verdict: We respect judiciary’s decision, says Congress
When hope turned into despair
Crucial day for Jayalalithaa
Jayalalithaa wealth case verdict
Man of the moment is fifth judge in the case
Fixing a time limit for criminal cases
Is there political life after conviction?
The CM probables
Accused were not put into trauma during trial, says judge
Jayalalithaa unseated at her peak
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
காலநிலை அறிவிப்பு-பேராசிரியர் நா.பிரதீபராஜா
https://www.facebook.com/Piratheeparajah 03.12.2025 புதன்கிழமை பிற்பகல் 3.30 மணி விழிப்பூட்டும் முன்னறிவிப்பு இன்று வடக்கு மற்றும் கிழக்கு ம...
-
தமிழகம் வாழ் ஈழத்தமிழர்களை கழகக் கண்டனப் பொதுக்கூட்டத்தில் கலந்து கொள்ளக் கோருகின்றோம்! -
சமரன்: தோழர்கள் மீது எடப்பாடி கொலை வெறித்தாக்குதல், கழகம்...
