Strategic alliance to check assertive China

Grave security challenges and the risk of armed confrontation exist in South Asia. India must have potent politico-diplomatic deterrence, strategic alliances and the military wherewithal to ensure peace as well has ability to check adventurism by assertive neighbours or fight a war on two fronts.

India has had defence relations with the US since the Chinese attack in 1962. It was the US that India looked towards when Chinese troops were racing down towards the plains of Assam and Indian political and military leadership was paralysed. Americans airlifted badly needed weapons, equipment and a few fighter aircraft. Later, they equipped three mountain divisions with war equipment and there was a US military mission in New Delhi for a few years for the purpose.

During his November visit, President Barack Obama lifted sanctions against defence research and production establishments, including DRDO, paving the way for greater co-operation.

In the foreseeable future China and Pakistan would be India's main adversaries. There are significant differences in the fundamentals of these three societies, their value systems, religious beliefs and tolerance levels of others. India is a democracy and open society while China and Pakistan are comparatively closed societies, where military plays a dominant role. There is also economic competitiveness between China and India, though the Indian prime minister has repeatedly stated that there is enough room in the world for both China and India. In addition, there is a long-standing border dispute between China and India.
Lt Gen Harbhajan Singh (Retd)
Former Signal Officer-in-Chief of the Indian Army
Click here to read the full analysis in the Professional Matters Blog

Modern Engineering Marvels

Joyous Swiss celebrate longest-tunnel breakthrough

Swiss officials hug each other after a giant drilling machine beneath the Swiss Alps completed the world's longest tunnel Friday
By The Associated Press and Deutsche Presse-Agentur
SEDRUN, Switzerland — Workers hugged, cheered and set off fireworks as a massive drilling machine dubbed "Sissi" broke through the last stretch of rock deep in the Swiss Alps. There was delight at the end of the tunnel — the world's longest — when it was completed Friday.

The $10 billion, 35.4-mile tube will connect Europe's high-speed-rail network and is part of a larger effort to cut in half the number of trucks — now 1.2 million — that thunder through the Alps each year.

The pride felt throughout Switzerland over digging the Gotthard Base Tunnel reflected the one cause that unites the country's wealthy city dwellers with those living in traditional villages: Protecting the beauty of the mountains.

"Together, we risked a lot," said Swiss Transport Minister Moritz Leuenberger. "Together, we achieved a lot."

TV stations across Europe showed the event live. The embraces and cheers by the hard-hatted workers brought to mind the successful rescue of 33 miners this week in Chile.
Read More: Joyous Swiss celebrate longest-tunnel breakthrough

Soaring Hoover Dam bypass bridge finally complete

A soaring bridge that will let drivers bypass Hoover Dam - and steer clear of its security checkpoints and gawking tourists - is set to open after nearly eight years and $240 million worth of work. Julie Jacobson AP Photo

Dawna Robertson, of San Diego, Calif., takes a photo of Hoover Dam and the newly completed by-pass bridge from a Black Canyon River Adventures commercial raft on the Colorado River Tuesday, Oct. 12, 2010, near Boulder City, Nev. The bridge will be dedicated on Thursday and open to the public Saturday.

By OSKAR GARCIA; Associated Press Writer
Published: 10/14/1012:20 pm
BOULDER CITY, Nevada. A soaring bridge that will let drivers bypass Hoover Dam - and steer clear of its security checkpoints and gawking tourists - is set to open after nearly eight years and $240 million worth of work.

The 1,900-foot engineering wonder perched 890 feet above the Colorado River is expected to drastically cut travel time along the main route between Las Vegas and Phoenix, as motorists will no longer have to make their way across the dam's winding two-lane road at a snail's pace.

"I know that the Hoover Dam is one of the wonders of the world," U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said at a dedication ceremony Thursday. "I don't know who gives that designation, but I hope the bridge will become another wonder of the world."
Read more: Soaring Hoover Dam bypass bridge finally complete

Boeing Seattle Plant under Camouflage in WW II

HELLO EVERYONE - THIS SHOULD BLOW YOU AWAY IF YOU ARE OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER.
The person I received this from said she got back an interesting story about someone's mother who worked at Lockheed, and she as a younger child, remembers all this. And to this day, it is the first pictures of it she's seen... Another person who lived in the area talked about as being a boy, watching it all be set up like a movie studio production. They had fake houses, trees, etc. and moved parked cars around so it looked like a residential area from the skies overhead.

Hiding in Plain Sight
The idea of deceiving the enemy as to what you are doing is not new. Trying to hide individual items from observation is not new, trying to hide whole factories from aerial bombing during The Second World War was new.

Boeing Seattle Plant under Camouflage in WW II
B-29s under construction inside - and under- camouflage on
the Seattle production line in late 1945(?).
Dozens of B-29s are lined up on the tarmac.
After December 7, 1941 the Lockheed and Boeing aircraft factories along the West Coast were put under netting to try and hide them from Japanese aircraft attack. The Boeing plant went even further with fake houses and trees over the factory. The effectiveness of this was never tested - no Japanese aircraft got anywhere near these factories, but it did instill the sense of the war, the collective threat, to the people not on the front lines in those areas.

The Germans went to elaborate lengths to hide factories with netting and smoke screens - even so far as to build dummy oil refineries with similar reference points to fool bombardiers trying to hit it instead of the real factory a few mile further on - it actually known to have worked once.

However, asides from that rare case, hiding a factory would ONLY work if no aerial - or any type of images - of the factory was in possession by the enemy before the pre-mission photo-recon picture had been taken. Hiding a SINGLE item this big never worked - the bridges, rivers, prominent intersections etc would all still be there to allow a proper bomb drop on the factory. You have to hide everything around it within a mile so that the person toggling the bombs could not be sure exactly where it is. Off by 10 seconds means you miss the whole target. Thus you need to fake the scale in the camouflage or shift it over by 1/2 mile by making a new complete factory along with roads, intersections etc to match the original.

Oblique view of Seattle Boeing Plant in World War Two
Looking East from around 1500 feet at the production plant.
A B-29 is on the tarmac, one on the runway a B-17
on the other side of the field.
Early in the war they may not have helped - 60% of American bombs dropped often missed the real target aiming point (a 1000 foot circle) and hit everywhere around it so doing the camouflage work then may have actually caused more damage. By late 1943 it had changed so that 60% of bombs dropped usually hit within the 1000 foot radius of the aiming point.

Early in the war a typical mission would have between 250 to 350 B-17s hitting a single target - which means anywhere from 3,000 to 4,200 individual 500 pound bombs exploding within 1000 feet of the aiming point - which would utterly destroy any target. This never happened. The longer the distance flown the less bombs carried. So a deep raid would have only eight 500 lb bombs in the bombay and the 1/2 filled with extra fuel tanks. With the accuracy so poor higher numbers of aircraft had to be sent so that statistics would ensure enough actually hit the target. By late 1944 they would send a single group - 56 a/c, to hit a single target and it would be destroyed. The accuracy had gone up due to better ballistic calculations and training of the bombardiers plus better bombing formation tactics employed.

Workers walking over the camouflaged Boeing plant
Under this detailed walkable camouflage roof of fake housing, Boeing B-17F Flying Fortresses were being produced in 1942-1945. The two women show the detailing done to make it look real.
John Stewart Detlie, a Hollywood set designer, helped "hide" Boeing's Seattle plant using his Hollywood design techniques with this camouflage. The fake housing development covered nearly 26 acres with netting, plywood and other material over the Seattle plant.

Boeing plant aerial photo taken from around 5000 feet.
This was taken in either 1944 or 1945. You can see the
B-29s on the tarmac and other aircraft around the field.
As bombing became more accurate deception techniques actually worked better since every second of flying meant at least a 227 foot error. A person at 25,000 feet looking through a scope cannot see both ahead to see what is coming up and the immediate view of the traversing ground at the same time. A bombardier had just 120 seconds to line up and drop after the IP. Thus if the target comes into view just 10 seconds earlier than he thought it would and he drops - and at this time of the war the whole group dropped on the signal of the lead plane's smoke marker - so the whole group drops early and you can save the real target.

B-17 Flying Fortress at Seattle on the tarmac
G model Flying Fortresses just off the production line in Seattle await delivery to the combat modification center in Kansas. You can easily read the B-17G tail numbers 297385, 297386, 297387 on these natural finish Flying Fortresses so an exact date can be obtained of the picture with a little research.
In January of 1944 a change in policy stated that all aircraft were to be left in a natural metal finish. This cut down the production time (no painting) plus it saved weight - which meant either more fuel or bombs could be carried. The weight of paint could reach 500 lbs or more on a Flying Fortress. Modern pigment paint weights up to 10 pounds per gallon and it takes only 2 mil of coverage at the high end to cover the surface. The primer that goes on first weights about the same. The real high tech modern paint (see http://www.loehle.com ) weights 1/2 as much at 4.89 pounds / gal with a coverage 530 sq ft / gallon. This is the Endura paint which is a two-component polyamine primer. A B-17 has 1420 square feet of wing area on top, and for the bottom, about the same for the rest of the a/c so that puts it around 4200 square feet of surface. Modern paint would add around 100 lbs of extra weight if the $300 gallon type is used.

I have not been able to find an authoritative source as to the weight of paint used during WW II, though I have crewman reports anywhere from 65 to 500 lbs of paint. but if it was 20 lbs/ gal at around 200 sq feet a gallon, that would add in around 500 pounds of paint.
Hiding in Plain Sight

Consequences of Pakistan racing towards a failed state

Murder on the Khyber Pass express
President Joe Biden, India, China and Iran. They are all terrified of facing a failed state with nuclear weapons, and prefer a functioning but treacherous one.

The released papers - described as one of the biggest leaks in US military history - detail military operations between 2004 and 2009.

The "everybody" involved in this case seems to exclude whomever actually leaked the documents, presumably some element of the US military, which has to absorb the effect of Pakistan's double game in the region in the form of body bags for enlisted men and shattered reputations for commanders. Like the Rolling Stone magazine interviews that led to the firing of General Stanley McChrystal, the America commander in Afghanistan, the WikiLeaks documents suggest a degree of disaffection of the American military with civilian leaders deeper than anything in living memory.

To exit the Afghan quagmire in a less than humiliating fashion, the United States requires Pakistani help to persuade the Taliban not to take immediate advantage of the American departure and evoke Vietnam-era scenes of helicopters on the American Embassy roof. The politicians in Washington know they have lost and have conceded to the Taliban a role in a post-American Afghanistan. They can only hope that once the country plunges into chaos, the public will have moved onto other themes, much as it did after the Bill Clinton administration put Kosovo into the hands of a gang of dubious Albanians in 1998.

India does not want America to call Pakistan to account. In the worst case, Pakistan might choose to support the Taliban and other terrorist organizations - including Kashmiri irredentists - openly rather than covertly. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, of whom the Economist on July 25 wrote "the strength of his coalition depends largely on how weak he is as Prime Minister", does not want to confront Pakistan. If Pakistan's support for anti-Indian terrorism became undeniable, India would have to act, and action is the last thing the Congress party-led coalition in New Delhi wants to consider.

China has no interest in destabilization in Pakistan; on the contrary, Beijing lives in fear that radical Islamists in Pakistan might infect its own restive Uyghurs. And Iran, which shares the fractious Balochis with Pakistan on their common border, lives in terror that a destabilized Pakistan would free the Balochis to make trouble.

Balochis comprise little over 2% of Iran's population, but they have demonstrated their talent at bomb-making on several recent occasions, including the bombing this month of a Shi'ite mosque in southeastern Iran in which 28 people were killed and hundreds wounded. Iran has accused Pakistan of sponsoring Balochi terror attacks, but intelligence community sources in Washington insist that the Pakistanis would never be so reckless as to put bombs into Balochi hands.

With 170 million people - more than Russia - and a nuclear arsenal, Pakistan is too big to fail, that is, too big to fail without traumatic consequences for its neighbors. Whether it can be kept from failure is questionable. Half its people live on less than a dollar day, and half are illiterate. It is riven by religious differences - a seventh of Pakistanis are Shi'ite - as well as ethnic ones.
Read more:
Murder on the Khyber Pass express: courtesy Asia Times Online
By Spengler

Internal and External Security: Do we have a National Strategy?

Here are some media highlights that illuminate our National Strategy Spectrum

Should Army be used to tame Naxalism and Maoism?
Prime Minister and Cabinet Committee on Security, while taking the final call on the ‘larger mandate’ sought by the Home Minister, should deeply ponder and ask two critical questions before ordering militarization of Dandakaranya forests and Army marching over tribal territory. One is whether it would not signify collective and complete collapse of civil governance? And the second, will not the world opinion justifiably equate India with Pakistan, which is considered a ‘failed state’? Do we really need this dual shame?
Writer is a former Army and IAS officer
Read the detailed analysis:
Army against Maoists- Pros and Cons by M.G.Devasahayam

NDTV: Army to tackle Naxals?
Latest News: Will the Cabinet send in the Army to tackle Naxals?

Indian Army not meant to fight own citizens
The government faces its gravest internal security problem in recent times with the Maoists or Naxalites executing a series of brazen attacks against security personnel and civilians in the last two months. The incidents have given fresh impetus to the debate on whether the Indian Army should be deployed in countering the Maoist threat.
Lieutenant General D B Shekatkar, PVSM, AVSM, VSM a distinguished soldier and commander with a vast experience in combating insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir and the Northeast, feels the deployment of the army in combating the Maoists would be a wrong step.
Deploying Army against Naxals would be a wrong step

Army not for Policing own citizens
Want to pass on Government's incompetence to the army? Army should take a considered view only on the advisory role. Otherwise when things go wrong it will be very easy to fire a colonel or dismiss a major. Dealing with Naxals is not the army's job, it will be extremely bad for the country to get the army involved in this mess. This is a politically created problem. The solution needs to be political, backed by the police and judicial system. Prosecute the people involved and stop this thing from spreading. No one has even heard of any arrests or punishment for perpetration of crimes in the Naxal/ Maoist affected areas.

Obama has gone further than Bush on India
If India worries that it is being treated as a mere regional power, the US is willing to discuss global issues, even the Middle East, with India. As for the permanent membership of the UN Security Council, the US is willing to consider India's claim. No further commitment can be given since the US is not sure what course the inter-governmental negotiations will take in New York.
The Obama Platter: Obama has gone further than Bush on India

A new approach for India in Afghanistan
India’s stakes in Afghanistan are multi-faceted and India’s policies there will affect the way other countries perceive India”, says Raja Karthikeya, one of the lead authors of the report
A new approach for India in Afghanistan

Breadth Of US Talks Is Sign Of Progress
US policy toward militarised Pakistan is still one of solicitousness and is likely to remain so. And yet, both secretary of state Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama sought to reassure external affairs minister S.M. Krishna, who led the dialogue for India, that the US did not see ties with India only in the Pakistan and Afghanistan context, and indeed it was made clear that the Indian and US perspective on Afghanistan had moved a lot closer and included helping build a democratic and sovereign Afghanistan “without outside interference”.
Breadth Of US Talks Is Sign Of Progress

The world yearns for a New Pakistan
Pakistan of the 1971 vintage is becoming an increasing threat to the homeland security of many nations of the world- in the West as well as the East, in the Ummah as well as in the non-Islamic world. One has to work for a reduced Pakistan to make this threat manageable and ultimately eliminate it.
Wanted: A New Pakistan By B. Raman

Lot of hype Obama style: Anderson not addressed still elusive
Joint Statement issued after the conclusion of U.S. - India Strategic Dialogue

For US, India is just a market

Daily Poineer Thursday, June 3, 2010 by Shobori Ganguli
Once feted as a “natural” and “strategic” partner of the United States, India must prepare to reconcile itself to the changed terms of relevance that the Americans have now laid out for this partnership. Even as External Affairs Minister SM Krishna and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton meet in Washington for the inaugural session of their Strategic Dialogue through this week, media reports and opinion-makers in the US point to an element of mistrust and pessimism that has crept into Indo-US relations of late. This, largely owing to the Obama Administration’s disposition towards China and Pakistan — the former, India’s biggest challenge to the number one position in Asia; the latter, an imploding neighbourhood with a committed anti-India policy.

Indeed, India’s relevance to the US must be re-measured according to President Barack Obama’s priorities which, as things stand today, are somewhat different from those of his predecessor, Mr George W Bush. The first, of course, is Mr Obama’s AfPak policy. Having committed a complete withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan by 2011, Mr Obama envisions a Pakistani role in that country to be played purely to American direction. In this scenario, India seems a stumbling block to Mr Obama as it seeks a legitimate and rightful role in Afghanistan’s reconstruction, as much for strategic depth in the region as to contain Pakistan’s influence in that country. This is clearly not to Mr Obama’s liking as he would ideally wish Pakistan, after all a proxy state, to wield greater influence in Afghanistan once the Americans have technically vacated that theatre. Therefore, any attempt by India to enhance its relevance in Afghanistan would not be a truly welcome step for the US.

Another source of discomfort to Mr Obama, of course, is India’s attempt to paint Pakistan into a corner on the issue of terrorism. While New Delhi has done its share of protesting against Islamabad’s sponsorship of terror in India, Washington has remained largely unimpressed. The official US position is that terrorism is a “shared challenge that the United States, India, Pakistan, other countries have”. Such is Mr Obama’s compulsion to keep Pakistan in good humour on this so-called war against terror that he actually put pressure on India to cede ground after the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack and invite Pakistan for resumed negotiations on all issues, including Kashmir, as Islamabad so pointedly boasted about. Clearly, India is expected to de-prioritise its concerns about Pakistan and maintain peace on its western border only so that the latter is not distracted from its job — that of securing American interests in the AfPak arena.
Read more: For US, India is just a market
Readers Comment
This is the way the US Presidents operate. For Obama and the Democratic Party, the most important thing is his re election.
Also USA is so concerned about the economic, financial and military potential of China. India has made itself not so relevant in the critical schemes of things for the US President. The Americans also know that India is a paper elephant!!!
Pakistan is playing to the US tune and is critical for any stability in Afghanistan. Even though the US Authorities know the double game always played and being played by Pakistan, they need Pakistan.
Good Indo-US relations can help in keeping Pakistan under control. During the cold war US did not trust Indian leadership. Hence agreeing to US requests like starting dialogue with Pakistan is not too big a price to pay. Of course the Indian leadership has to always weigh, how much to go along!!
So India should take care of its own interests. We need tough leadership.
Lt Gen Harbhajan Singh (Retd)

Middle East: Iran, Sun Tzu and the dominatrix

THE ROVING EYE May 22, 2010
Iran, Sun Tzu and the dominatrix By Pepe Escobar
Let's face it: Hillary Clinton is one hell of a dominatrix.
At first the United States Secretary of State said the Brazil-Turkey mediation to get Iran to accept a nuclear fuel swap was destined to fail. Then the US State Department said it was the "last chance" for an agreement without sanctions. And finally, less than 24 hours after a successful agreement in Tehran, Hillary whips the UN Security Council into submission and triumphantly proclaims to the world a draft resolution for a fourth UN round of sanctions against Iran has been reached.
Read more: Iran, Sun Tzu and the dominatrix By Pepe Escobar

Mahatma is Obama’s hero

Power Profiles showcase successful people who you can learn from. If there is any golden rule to follow, take advice from people who are already there.
The Hindu: Thursday, Sep 10, 2009
WASHINGTON: United States President Barack Obama has said if given a chance he would like to have a meal with his “real hero” Mahatma Gandhi, although the apostle of peace did not eat a lot.

Mr. Obama’s response came to a question from a ninth grade student at the Wakefield High School in Arlington, Virginia, who asked him if he could have dinner with anyone, dead or alive, who it would be.

“Dinner with anyone dead or alive? Well, you know, dead or alive, that’s a pretty big list,” he said amidst laughter. “You know, I think that it might be Gandhi, who is a real hero of mine,” Mr. Obama said. “Now, it would probably be a really small meal because he didn’t eat a lot.”

He said Gandhiji was someone who has inspired people across the world for the past several generations. “He [Gandhiji] is somebody whom I find a lot of inspiration in. He inspired Dr. King [Martin Luther], so if it hadn’t been for the non-violent movement in India, you might not have seen the same non-violent movement for civil rights here in the United States,” he said. — PTI
Mahatma is Obama's hero

Corruption kills creativity in developing nations

Friday, July 10, 2009
Here is what America's immigrant billionaires are made of
Devon Pendleton, Forbes

When New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg welcomed visitors to the newly accessible crown of the Statue of Liberty recently, he paid special tribute to the millions of immigrants who passed by the icon en route to America."The great business formations taking place today are done by people who value the opportunities that America gives them," the city's billionaire chief executive said.

Bloomberg was born in Boston, but dozens of his comrades on the Forbes list of the 400 Richest Americans immigrated to the U.S. armed only with creativity, energy and fierce ambition. Decades later they've built empires in technology, media, real estate and health care, created thousands of jobs and contributed billions of dollars to the U.S. economy.

Grocer and property baron John Catsimatidis, whose parents immigrated from Greece when he was six months old, credits his hardworking father for setting an example of what it takes to be successful."Growing up, my dad worked seven days a week as a busboy," he says. "There was no room for failure, that was instilled in me from the beginning."

Catsimatidis took a job as a grocery store clerk while studying at NYU, and dropped out in his senior year after a friend offered him a chance to buy a piece of his family's store. Catsimatidis owned 10 markets by age 24 and was making $25 million a year in revenue. He plowed $5 million into Manhattan real estate in 1977, and today owns hundreds of millions of dollars of property around the country.

"There is no question that there's a connection between one's drive and search for opportunities and having a foreign beginning," says California real estate magnate Igor Olenicoff. This is particularly true if your early years were spent in a poor country with a strong class system, he says. Olenicoff's Russian family fled to Iran after the 1917 Revolution.

Within Iranian society, "we would never be able to excel or achieve wealth," Olenicoff recalls. It was a sharp contrast to the U.S., where Olenicoff found opportunity--and credit--in abundance when he arrived in 1956.

Both Catsimatidis and Olenicoff say it's tough to instill the ambition and scrappiness bestowed on them by their foreign roots in their children, who have been raised with all the benefits--and trappings--of wealth. "To this day I go around the apartment shutting off lights at night," Catsimatidis says. "Until recently I cleaned my own plate. My kids wouldn't do that."

Tech-savvy immigrants have had a particularly profound impact on today's hyper-connected world. Had Google ( GOOG - news - people ) co-founder Sergey Brin not moved with his family from Moscow to Maryland in 1979, his fortuitous partnership with Larry Page and their subsequent founding of the world's most influential Internet company might never have happened.

Also crucial to Google's success is Iranian immigrant Omid Kordestani, often called the company's "business founder" for his success transforming Google's brand into a mainstream verb.

Yahoo was also the brainchild of foreign-born talent: co-founder Jerry Yang moved to California from Taiwan with his mother and brother in 1978. Ten years old at the time, Yang claims to have known only one word of English. Today he's worth more than $1 billion.
Here is what America's immigrant billionaires are made of

Obama a messiah for Chennai family

Press Trust of India
Sunday, January 25, 2009 1:40 PM (Chennai)
US President Barack Obama may have won more hearts around the world while running for Presidency, but for a Chennai family, he became a messiah five years ago when he helped a woman get a US visa.

For Sujatha Adsumilli, Obama has a special place in her heart. She even prayed for the success of the Illinois Senator after the Democrat was named for the Presidential race.

Sujatha wanted to fly to the US in 2004 for her son A Vijay Kumar's house warming ceremony, but officials at American consulate denied her a visa as she was a widow and they considered her a "potential immigrant", her elder son A Ramesh Kumar told PTI.

"Officials feared she could end up living there with my brother Vijay Kumar, who has US citizenship. Vijay wrote to then Illinois Senator Obama, telling him of the problem, who wrote to the State Department and the Consulate in Chennai asking them to consider the matter under Department of state guidelines," he said.

This was enough to spur the officials into action to grant her a 10-year multiple entry visa to the US.

Sujatha left for US in 2005 for the "grahapravesam" and also tried to personally thank Obama, but in vain. She rues missing the opportunity to meet him "as he had just left his office."

"But the staff at his office extended great hospitality and promised me that they would convey my greetings to him," Sujatha said.
Obama a messiah for Chennai family

Obama Inauguration speech
Watching him deliver his memorable speech with spontaneity, clearly gave an indication of his sincere feelings to serve not only the nation but also the humanity. Every word he spoke exuded confidence.

It is never easy for a leader to comment on issues like corruption and deceit, but the newly elect President was bold enough to say, "To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history, but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist."

They have Leaders and we have Readers

Barack Obama delivers his inaugural address after being sworn in as president of the United States. Photograph: Win McNamee/Getty Images
In a bold and at times sombre 18-minute inaugural speech, Mr Obama pledged to rally Americans to a "new era of responsibility", lamenting a profound "sapping of confidence across our land – a nagging fear that America's decline is inevitable, and that the next generation must lower its sight".
Barack Obama vows to rebuild America in inaugural address

Dear Friend,
Like millions, nay billions, of other mortals on this planet, I sat glued to the TV watching the 'coronation' of Obama yesterday. The speech of the President was, indeed, a befitting climax to the regal proceedings. Every word which he spoke came straight out of his heart and went where it was intended to go; deep into the souls of the listeners. I was moved to tears; not once, but several times. And I suspect, I was not alone.

When I retired to the bed, a friend rang up and asked a rather innocent question. "When will we have a leader who can speak like this?" The candid answer is, "Never" Our leaders are not allowed to say what they please. They are required to read the speeches that are written out for them by people whom we shall never know. And therefore, even though our Rashtrapati Bhawan is quite comparable with the White House, and the Vijay Chowk complex can easily accommodate two million people, it is most unlikely that we shall ever have a Kennedy or an Obama to lift our spirits. And what our Presidents do is emulated by leaders down the line. Dignitaries at all levels read speeches.

I once heard of a public figure who was invited to inaugurate an exchange. Since he knew nothing about telecommunications, he directed a specialist in his staff to write a 15 minute speech for the occasion. With due grace and dignity, he delivered his speech. The only 'f***up' was that the speech took 30 minutes, and the audience became restive. Some people were even yawning by the time he wound up. Upon his return to his office he asked why the script was so long. And prompt came the rather sheepish reply, "Sir, the speech was for only 15 minutes, but as per the office orders, I had attached a spare copy!"
Long live, our 'readers' Republic!

Maj Gen Surjit Singh (Retd)

Gore Aims High on Renewable Energy Goal for United States

Former Vice President and Nobel laureate Al Gore outlined a bold climate goal for the nation Thursday, challenging the US to create every kilowatt of electricity through renewable energy sources within 10 years.

"Our dangerous over-reliance on carbon-based fuels is at the core of all three of these challenges -- the economic, environmental and national security crises," Gore saidin his speech in Washington. "We're borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf to burn it in ways that destroy the planet. Every bit of that's got to change."
Gore Aims High on Renewable Energy Goal for US