Henderson brooks - Bhagat report.( Sino - Indian war of 1962)

Friends in this article we will discuss on HENDERSON BROOKS - BHAGAT REPORT.

This is a classified report prepared by two Indian Army officers , Lieutenant-General Henderson Brooks and Brigadier Premindra Singh Bhagat on Sino - Indian war of 1962.

This report is a 2 part report. The first part was leaked in 2014 by a retired journalist . Second Part deals with the enduring lessons of the Chinese aggression.

This report was supposed to be an " operations review" of the cause of the Indian Army's humiliating rout (a disorderly retreat of defeated troops) by the invading People's Liberation Army.

THE TWO INVESTIGATING OFFICER'S , HOWEVER , SKIRTED THE OPERATIONS REVIEW BY FOCUSING ON THE POLITICAL CAUSES OF THE ROUT OF THE WAR.

The report , instead of pinpointing the military aspects of the defeat , palmed off the blame on the political leadership.

In February 2014 , Australian Journalist Maxwell , released part 1 of the report where two Army chief's have recorded their opinions.The report blamed the indian political leadership for pursuing what the Chinese had called " forward policy" on the borders.

" According to at least one source who has seen the entire report and its annexures, there are telegrams and reports that may be embarrassing for the political and military establishment of those days. The source pointed out that most significant of them is some of the telegrams from Lt General BM Kaul, who disastrously commanded the newly-raised IV Corps along the border. 

These telegrams from Lt-Gen Kaul, sent to then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru among others, include references to his health, medical issues, weather etc at a time when he was supposed to be leading India's military operations in the latter part of 1962. The trivial conversations may not have been encouraged by Nehru but definitely not discouraged, the source said. 
Lt-Gen Kaul's tendency to sidestep his military chain of command and talk to the political masters directly is documented partially in the 126-page report that has become public now. Sans its annexures, the report was released earlier this week by Australian journalist Neville Maxwell, who worked in India during the war period for a British newspaper and later wrote a book on the topic. 

In fact, the report nails Lt-Gen Kaul's lack of respect for military hierarchy, his embarrassing leadership practices, and direct access to the political leaders. The report directly blames him for poor planning and conduct of operations. 

The report says the signal from the Army headquarters on October 4, 1962, announcing the formation of 4 Corps headquartered at Tezpur and appointing Lt-Gen Kaul as its chief was a surprise. This corps was given the responsibility for the whole Indo-Tibetan border in the Eastern Command on the same day. 

In one part of the report, it discusses a trip Lt-Gen Kaul undertook to Dhola area, along with many of his senior officers. Through most of the route Lt-Gen Kaul was carried by a porter, which did not leave a good impression among hundreds of soldiers who saw the bizarre journey of the general. 

The report gives a few instances of Lt-Gen Kaul's powerful political links in Delhi. On October 17 when he took ill, a special plane was flown from Delhi with a doctor to evacuate him. His immediate boss, the eastern army commander, and the chief of medical services of the command had no clue of the evacuation. The aircraft was sent by defence minister VK Krishna Menon, the report points out. A distant relative of Nehru, Lt-Gen Kaul was also Menon's favourite military general.  " (TIMES OF INDIA")

CRIMEAN CRISIS -

Friends in this article we will discuss one very important international matter.  I hope you might have heard in news about 2014 CRIMEAN Crisis, Pro-Russian protest in Ukraine, and about Russian military intervention in Ukraine. Let’s go through this matter in detail.

Ukraine is a country in Eastern Europe. It has an area of 603,628 km² (233,062 sq mi)—including Crimea, which is claimed and controlled by neighboring Russia—making it the largest country entirely within Europe. Ukraine borders Russia to the east, northeast and south, Belarus to the northwest, Poland, Slovakia and Hungary to the west, Romania and Moldova to the southwest, and the Black Sea and Sea of Azov to the south and southeast, respectively.

Ukraine has long been a global breadbasket due to its extensive, fertile farmlands. As of 2011, it was the world's third-largest grain exporter with that year's harvest being much larger than average. Ukraine is one of ten most attractive agricultural land acquisition regions. Additionally, the country has a well-developed manufacturing sector, particularly in aerospace and industrial equipment.

Ukraine–European Union Association Agreement

The Ukraine–European Union Association Agreement is a treaty between the European Union (EU) and Ukraine that establishes a political association between the two parties. The parties committed to cooperate and converge policy, legislation, and regulation across a broad range of areas, including equal rights for workers, steps towards visa-free movement of people, the exchange of information and staff in the area of justice, the modernization of Ukraine's energy infrastructure, and access to the European Investment Bank. The parties committed to regular summit meetings, and meetings among ministers, other officials, and experts.

The agreement commits Ukraine to economic, judicial and financial reforms to converge its policies and legislation to those of the European Union. Ukraine committed to gradually conform to EU technical and consumer standards. The EU agreed to provide Ukraine with political and financial support, access to research and knowledge, and preferential access to EU markets. The agreement commits both parties to promote a gradual convergence toward the EU's Common Security and Defense Policy and European Defense Agency policies.

The agreement comes after more than two decades in which both parties sought to establish closer ties with each other. On one hand, the European Union wants to ensure that its imports of grain and natural gas from Ukraine, as well as its exports of goods to Ukraine, are not threatened by instability in the region, believing that instability can eventually be reduced through sociopolitical and economic reforms in Ukraine. Ukraine, on the other hand, wants to increase its exports by benefiting from free trade with the European Union while attracting desirable external investments, as well as establishing closer ties with a sociopolitical entity to which many Ukrainians feel strong cultural connection.

The political section of the treaty was signed on 21 March 2014 after a series of events that had stalled its ratification culminated in a revolution in Ukraine and the ousting of the then incumbent President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych. This ousting was sparked by Yanukovych's refusal to sign the agreement under pressure from Russia—Ukraine's second largest trading partner—who instead presented an association with the Russian-led customs union between Belarus, Kazakhstan and Russia as an alternative.

  Crimean peninsula

  Russia

  Ukraine

Crimean Crisis –

The Crimean crisis is an ongoing international crisis principally involving Russia and Ukraine. Most developments apply to the Crimean Peninsula, a multi-ethnic region which until February 2014 was administered by Ukraine as the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the administratively separate municipality of Sevastopol, both are populated by an ethnic Russian majority and a minority of both ethnic Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars. Currently, the Crimean Peninsula is administered by the Russian Federation as the Crimean Federal District.

The crisis unfolded in late February 2014 in the aftermath of the Ukrainian Revolution, which resulted in President Viktor Yanukovych's impeachment by the Ukrainian parliament after his flight from the capital, setting May 25 for a new presidential election, the appointment of an interim President, and the formation of an interim government. The Yatsenyuk Government attained recognition from Western countries. However, the Russian government held that Yanukovych was illegally impeached and continues to regard him as Ukraine’s last democratically elected and legitimate president, while considering the Yatsenyuk government illegitimate and the result of a coup d'etat.

On 1 March, regional state administration buildings (RSAs) in various eastern Ukraine  were briefly occupied by pro-Russian activists. By 11 March, all occupations had ended, after units of the local police and the Security Service of Ukraine(SBU) re-took the buildings. In Donetsk, protests have descended into violence on multiple occasions, including on 13 March where one pro-Kiev protester was stabbed to death. In Kharkiv, Patriots of Ukraine members shot dead a pro-Russian protester and a passerby on the night of 15 March when pro-Russian protesters attacked the Right Sector headquarters.

According to officials and pro-government eyewitness accounts not all attendees of the protests are Ukrainian nationals; but a significant number of them are Russian citizens. Pro-Russian activists, meanwhile, say that pro-Ukrainian counter-protesters consist of paid attendees and students who are under threat of expulsion from their universities (if they fail to attend the pro-Ukrainian rallies).^] Donetsk oblast governor Serhiy Taruta alleges that rallies in Donetsk contain ex-convicts and others who traveled from Crimea. Ukraine's security forces and border guards since 4 March have denied more than 8,200 Russians into the country as of 25 March. On 27 March, National Security and Defense Council Secretary Andriy Parubiy said that between 500 and 700 Russians were being denied entry daily.

Following the events of the 2014 Ukrainian Revolution, a secession crisis began on Ukraine's Russian-leaning Crimean Peninsula. In late February 2014, unidentified armed forces began to take over the Crimean Peninsula in Ukraine. Ukraine and Western commentators identified the gunmen as Russian Special Forces and other paramilitaries.

Russia, which has various strategic interests in and historical ties to Crimea, insists that the forces did not include Russian troops, but only local self defense forces, and that the up to 25,000 troops Russia is allowed to station in Sevastopol and the Crimea under the 1997 Russia-Ukraine Agreement extended in 2010 at Kharkiv remained uninvolved and within the treaty's limits prior to the referendum and reunification of Crimea with Russia. Their subsequent open involvement was said to be in response to the will of the local population  and as a humanitarian effort to protect ethnic Russians in the region. Russia does not recognize the newly installed interim government in Ukraine, instead recognizing ousted-President Viktor Yanukovych  whose request for intervention has also been cited. The Ukrainian military reaction has been limited to a mobilization of Ukraine's armed forces and reserves. As of 3 March, Russia has stated that its troops would stay until the political situation was "normalised".

The Supreme Council of Crimea voted to secede from Ukraine, and held a referendum on 16 March 2014 on whether Crimea should join the Russian Federation or remain part of Ukraine with the autonomy it had in 1992. The referendum resulted in a reported turnout of over 81%, where over 95% of voters supported Crimea joining the Russian Federation. The events caused alarm among the Crimean Tatar ethnic group, whose members were deported en masse to Central Asia in 1944 under orders from Joseph Stalin, claiming a huge death toll. On 27 March 2014, a United Nations General Assembly resolution approved by 59% of the member states declared the Crimea referendum invalid and called on all States, international organizations and specialized agencies not to recognize any alteration of the status of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol on the basis of 16 March referendum.

Internationally, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Georgia, Moldova, Turkey, Australia  and the European Union condemned Russia, accusing it of breaking international law and violating Ukrainian sovereignty. The US, EU, and Canada threatened and later implemented sanctions against Russian individuals considered to be involved based on "Russia's clear violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity", to which Russia responded in kind. China, India and many developing countries remained relatively neutral.

Strategic Importance -

The Autonomous Republic of Crimea occupies most of the Crimean peninsula with only the Strait of Kerch separating it from Russia to the east by a short 15 kilometres (9.3 mi). Crimea is a part of Ukraine but, as an autonomous republic, it has its own constitution. According to the 2001 census, 58% of the two million residents of Crimea are ethnic Russians, 24% are ethnic Ukrainians, and 12% are Crimean Tatars. As tensions escalated in the region, Russia intervened under the justification that it must "protect Russian civilians and military in Ukraine".[a]

The Russian-Ukrainian Partition Treaty on the Status and Conditions of the Black Sea Fleet, signed in 1997 and prolonged in 2010, determined the status of the military bases and vessels in Crimea. Russia is allowed to maintain up to 25,000 troops, 24 artillery systems (with a caliber smaller than 100 mm), 132 armored vehicles, and 22 military planes, on the Crimean and Sevastopol. The Russian Black Sea fleet is allowed to stay in Crimea until 2042.

Location of the Port of Sevastopol and Kacha in relation to Crimea and Russia. Newly stationed soldiers have been posted inDzhankoy,[citation needed] a major transportation hubin the Crimean peninsula where two major railways and two major European highways pass. Dzhankoy is also home to many industrial factories and is considered an entry point to Crimea.

At the same time, the Port of Sevastopol and the town of Kacha are located in Sevastopol, a city in the southwestern area of the peninsula that does not belong to Crimea administratively. Both locations hold key strategic value for Russia, economically and militarily.[100] The Port of Sevastopol, which Russia currently leases from Ukraine, is considered a key hold for maritime routes between the Black Sea and the Sea of Marmara, and by extension the Mediterranean Sea and Atlantic Ocean.[101] It is also one of the few warm deepwater ports in the Black Sea available to Russia.

As the Ukrainian revolution unfolded—and as the newly installed Ukrainian government began to distance itself from Russia—it may have been the case that Russia felt that its access to the port and its military bases in the Crimean peninsula were in jeopardy, according to an analyst at the CNA corporation. On the other hand, the town of Kacha serves as military headquarters for Russia's 25th Independent Anti-submarine Helicopter Regiment (25th AHR) and the 917th Independent Composite Air Regiment (917th ICAR) of the Black Sea Fleet Naval Air Force. Ensuring access to the port and Russia's military bases in the Crimean peninsula may have been two of the main factors that sparked Russia's military intervention, according to an analyst at the CNA corporation, adding that it is however hard to speculate on motivations.

Petroleum resources

Crimea also possesses several natural gas fields both onshore andoffshore, all connected to Ukraine's pipeline system. The inland fields are located in Chornomorske and Dzhankoy, while offshore fields are located in the western coast in the Black Sea and in the northeastern coast in the Azov Sea .

Russian Prime Minister Medevdev pledged to make the peninsula’s development a “national priority”. A special government ministry has been created in Moscow to oversee Crimea’s development as a special economic zone with lower taxes and reduced bureaucracy to attract investor. Moscow would also subsidize air fares to make Crimea as popular with Russian tourists as it used to be in soviet times.

Russia and US have agreed to work for a diplomatic solution in the Ukraine crisis through an inclusive constitutional reform.

Friends most of the content is from Wikipedia and “ The Hindu “ news paper. I just consolidated it. You fill daily find update on this matter in leading news paper. So keep yourself updated.

JAI HIND..

5 mins with SSB interviewer..

Hello everyone.  I hope you all guys are fine n must be doing well in your life. Today I m writing this article after 6 or 7 months. First of all I want to apologies to all my readers for not replying to your mails but will surely do.

Friends I got shifted to Mumbai. Lovely city. Full of energy n enthusiasm. I met with various people n they all are very beautiful n lovely. In the flat in which I m staying is a flat of retired defense personal. Today I got chance to meet him. I spent some time with him n I m very lucky because I got so many things to learn. I would definitely like to share our conversation with you all.  I hope it will inspire n motivate you.

I was shaving when someone knocked at the door..

Me - coming .
( I opened the door having raser in my hand n shaving foam on my face. A sardar jee was standing. Around 6 feet tall wearing aviator n formal suit.)

Me - yes sir.

Sardar jee (sj) - Good morning.  I came to visit my flat. I m the owner. Can I come inside. Sorry for not informing you before coming here.

Me - please come inside.
 ( then we had normal chit chat n after that I asked what do you do sir n he replied that he is a retired defense personal. )

Me - wow great sir . In which wing of defense you were working sir?

Sj - I was in army . I was interviewer in ssb. Do you  know what ssb is?

(I was like ohh my god. Today I got an opportunity to speak to an interviewer from ssb . )

Me - yes sir of course I know about ssb's. Sir I want to know few things about this process of interview.

Sj -  Have you ever been to any ssb?

Me - yes sir. 1AFSB Dehradun n 14SSC Allahabad.

Sj - what was your result?

Me - sir I got recommended.

(Then he asked me the reasons n I told him. After listening me  he said HARD LUCK.)

Me - yes sir my hard luck.

Sj - No , it's our hard luck that you are not into services.

( the moment he said this I felt so proud n happy that I can't express n got little emotional)

I asked

Me- sir why it happens that sometimes you select a guy who  not at all deserve to become an officer of defense services. Many deserving candidates are waiting outside n they are much more talented. This attitude hurt them a lot . Why don't you guys give them a reason for not getting selected.

Sj -  we are there to select you guys . We need officers but we can't compromise with selection criteria. MAY BE YOU ARE HAVING ALL QUALITIES BUT HOW WOULD I COME TO KNOW IF YOU WILL NOT REPRESENT THEM GENUINELY. MOST OF THEM LIES. THEY THINK WE ARE FOOLS. SOME TRY TO DO EMOTIONAL BLACKMAIL FEW EVEN CRY ALSO. PLEASE BE GENUINE . DEVELOP THE QUALITIES WHICH YOU EASILY CAN.

Me - Sir do you think all the recommended candidates possess all officer like qualities?

Sj - We know they are young civilians . So we do not expect much. We will develop most of the qualities in our training academy but we need to make sure that this guy is genuine and can be trained n yes i do accept that some time we also commit mistake.

Sj - You know Utkarsh my own son applied 16 times but he didn't received his recommendation. I only suggest each n every aspirant to read a lot . To do what they think is very difficult or impossible for them so that they can develop trust n confidence which is the key to get into defense services n all above be truthful n genuine.

Me - Got it Sir.

Sj - Now i have to leave. Will meet you soon. It was nice talking to you.

Me - Thank you sir for sharing your knowledge n experience with me.

{ Then he left. Friends what i seeing now a days is that most of the youth are suffering from inferiority complex n at the same time they lack acceptability. They started lying to themselves. They know inside what is lacking in them but they do not want to improve it. Those who are suffering from inferiority they start loosing their confidence even if they are right. why this is happening? I am getting mails that aspirants want to speak to Fighter Pilots because they have some doubts. Some ask that whether they will get family accommodation or not after commissioning . Some ask about pensions also. Guys these all things are not important at this stage. First get into service or get recommended after that start thinking for family accommodation n  pension.

Before trusting SSB or any other person in this world , you should start trusting yourself first. Nothing is difficult my friends. Start achieving all those task which you think is difficult because once you will achieve , you will gain lot of self confidence. Trust Me.

You have decided that you will join armed forces it means you will join none of the force in this world can stop you until n unless you your self want to quit and let this world know my loved ones that WE NEVER QUIT.


                                             NEVER NEVER NEVER GIVE UP...


JAI HIND..

TASK FORCE..

Why this Task Force?

Naresh Chandra

It was setup by Mohan (PM) in 2011, and gave the report in 2012 (somewhere in August) to review the current the national security system to suggest measures to strengthen the national security apparatus. Naresh Chandra is a retired IAS and rest of the team has diplomats, defense experts, RAW, IB, army, navy officers etc.

Recommendations of Naresh Chandra Task Force on National security

[not exhaustive]

On the Enemies of India

On China

• China will become militarily more assertive and nationalistic as its economic and military power grows.
• China will continue to utilize Pakistan as part of its grand strategy for containing India in a “South Asian box”.
• United states will become more circumspect and accommodating in dealing with China.
• Therefore India should shift focus of national security strategy from Pakistan to China.
• Army be given management of Sino-Indian borders and India should become more assertive in dealing with China.

On Pakistan

• Pakistani military hasnot given up the use of radical Islamic groups to promote terrorism in both India and Afghanistan
• biggest concern is Pakistan’s ambition to use Afghanistan for strategic depth.
• India should spare no effort, politically, diplomatically, economically and through military assistance to ensure that Pakistani efforts to convert Afghanistan into an extremist run, pliant and client state are frustrated.

On Naxalites

Secret Talks

• government give up its pre-condition of cessation of violence for opening talks with Naxalites.
• Instead, Government  should try to secretly reach the pro-talks elements within the top Naxal leadership and tell them that the government will not be cowed down by their acts of violence and that dialogue is the best option to redress their grievances.
• Even if the peace efforts do not lead to solution, it’ll  lead to confusion and division within the “pro-talk” and “anti-talk” elements in Naxal leadership.
• Even during the talks and negotiations, the Area domination will have to continue and forces must keep track of the Maoist elements who come overground for the talks. [because in 2004 a short-lived ceasefire-cum-talks between the Andhra Pradesh establishment and CPI (Maoist) was conveniently used by the naxalites to regroup and rearm themselves.]

More army presence in Naxal areas

• Army should not involve in direct combat with naxals but army should establish more training institutes in Naxal areas.
• And then, from those traninig institutes, army should reach out to the tribals residing in surrounding villages by offering them facilities like schools, medical care and potable drinking water. This may help in eroding the support base of the Naxalites.
• Army training schools proposed in Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Odisha and Maharashtra will help train the central paramilitary forces engaged in counter-Naxal duties in jungle warfare.

Make More Institutions

Advanced Projects Agency (APA)

• to undertake high-risk futuristic military research.

• The head of APA will act as Scientific Advisor to Defense Minister. [scientific advisor to the Raksha Mantri (SA to RM).]

• APA will be assisted by
  • UGC (University Grants Commission)
  • CSIR (Council of Scientific and Industrial Research)
  • BARC ( Bhabha Atomic Research Centre
  • TIFR (Tata Institute of Fundamental Research)
  • Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore.

• APA would fund research in institutions like IITs, universities and private laboratories.
• APA will not be involved with DRDO
• DRDO must assume responsibility for managing the DRDO’s laboratories and research centres and ensuring the on-time delivery of projects undertaken there.

Bureau of politico-military affairs

• Defence ministry should set up a bureau of politico-military affairs
• this Bureau would be liaison with the ministry of external affairs (MEA) on issues and actions having foreign policy applications
• ministry of external affairs (MEA) should not work in isolation from other ministries, particularly with respect to securing access to strategic materials, hydrocarbons etc.

Defense university and Think Tank

• establish a National defense University (NDU)

• create a separate think-tank on internal security.
• A sub-group on defense technology, comprising representatives of DRDO, military, private sector, academia, military and other stakeholders.

FDI in defense

• Right now only 26%
• Need to increase it to 49%
• So that we can manufacture items in India, using the  latest technologies already developed by foreign entities.

Get more Staff [Personnel]

Overall

• Amend the Prevention of Corruption Act to reassure honest officers that they’ll not be harassed for making defence equipment purchases.
• Induct more foreign language experts into the intelligence and security agencies.
• Allow more cross-postings between  Service HQ (Army, Navy, Airforce) and Ministry of Defence

Diplomats

• The ministry of external affairs (MEA) doesn’t have enough diplomats to “anticipate, analyze and act on contemporary challenges”
• quality of new recruits (through UPSC) is often uneven
  • (for example UPSC topper Alok Ranjan Jha became IFS but allegedly got drunk and misbehaved with Air India staff in New York and thus he was recalled. Some other IFS officers showing their ‘mardaangi’ by beating up wives and maids and appearing in newspaper headlines every now and then.)
  • several recruits refuse to join the MEA.
  • It requires huge time and effort to train new IFS officers and making them proficient in English and other foreign languages. [IFS training takes around  3 years, while IAS/IPS  training done in about 2 years]
• Therefore, Ministry of External Affairs should accept officials from civil services and armed forces on short duration (five years) deputations rather than solely relying on UPSC.
• Indian embassies and missions, which are required to play a key role in issues such as acquisition of raw materials, hydrocarbons, should be staffed with “consultants with the requisite technical and technological background.

Chairman Chiefs of Staff Committee (CoSC)

Need COSC to keep an eye on China and Pak

• He will have a fixed tenure of two years and will be rotated among the three services (Army, Navy, Airforce).
• He’ll be in charge of making net assessment about the strengths and weaknesses of India’s adversaries—China and Pakistan—in a holistic manner
• Currently, the three services make their individual assessments [about China and Pak], which remains buried in files that never see the light of the day.

Special Forces

• a separate command structure under the chairman chiefs of staff committee.
• These special force will be dealing with foreign backed proxy wars and combat search and rescue operation or handling hostage crisis. [something like US NAVY SEALS that killed Bin Laden.]

( COPIED FROM MRUNAL)...

I AM WHAT I AM...

Dear Friends ,

Every day early morning i go for jogging and while returning back to my home i generally stop near a tea-stall ( Thapari / jhuggi) for a strong ginger tea. Today an interesting incident took place which i wanted to share with you all.

In morning i felt that winter is going to start. I wore my wind shitter and moved on. I jogged for few kilometers and went to tea-stall. The person saw me and started preparing tea for me. He gave me a smile and said in a cheerful welcoming manner " Good Morning Anna " . I replied and started reading a news paper which was kept beside me. Although this is a road side tea-stall but one can find various news papers here like regional newspaper ,Hindi newspaper , The Hindu , The Times of India , Hitwada , Nav bharat and few mores.

I just started reading news paper immediately a boy came near to me and started staring me.

Boy was in his school uniform. He was of around 8 or 10 years  . Firstly i ignored him but he was continuously staring me at last i asked..

Me - What happened?

Boy - .........................................( said something in telugu)..

Me - Telgu matledu . ( it means i do not know Telugu). I learned this to tell people that either speak in English or Hindi.

Boy - Hindi aata tumko? ( Do you know Hindi?)

Me - Yes..

Again i asked..

Me - Is everything fine with you? Why you are continuously staring me?

Boy - I am not staring you . My mother , my sister and I have planned to gift a mobile phone to my Dad on his upcoming birthday. So i was trying to read the advertisement on the news paper which you are reading . Is Nokia LUMIA ZOOM a good phone to gift my father? Do you have any idea ?

Me - It's very new in the market. I think it is quiet expensive also. Why you want to go for Nokia LUMIA only?

( Tea seller called me - Anna Ookati chai...I took my tea cup and asked the boy )

Me - Do you want something?

Boy - yes . One cup of horlicks... No No No... nothing...

Me - what happened?

Boy - My mother told me not to eat anything if any stranger offers.

Me - ohhhh.. true. but u can speak to stranger na?

Boy - Yes...

Me - So why you want to go for LUMIA???

Boy - Because I phone is very costly....and GALAXY is not that much good.

(  I was like wha............... For a second i started thinking that he is Richie of Richie Rich Cartoon. He is a school boy who is very young to talk on these topics . He is just a student but a second thought came to my mind that why a child like him will stand in a tea-stall.)

Me - What is your budget bhai??????

Boy - what is budget?

Me - I mean how much money do you have?

Boy - why you are asking this? ( Boy gave me very suspicious looks)

Me - Because all this cell phones are too expensive and you are very young for all this discussion.Let your mother decide this things. You concentrate on what kind of cake you want to order on your father's birthday.

Boy - My Rickshaw wala will come in few minutes.

me - Ok.

Boy - I do not like to go in that rickshaw. My friends tease me.

Me - why?

Boy - Because they all come in  expensive cars and good buses.

Me - So?

Boy - They will come to know that i am not that much rich and they will start avoiding me.

( Now i got the clear picture that the boy belongs to a middle class family but his parents admitted him in a very good school which is quiet famous for providing luxurious facilities and he learnt all this things like I phone , Nokia Lumia Zoom   from his rich friends and he is trying to show off to his friends that his family gifted an expensive hand set to his father on his birthday)

Me - Kid , Always love and believe what you are? Do not try to show off and  lie in front of any one. Those people who are with you because of your money and gadgets are not your friends. U know by doing this you are also dis-respecting your parents.

Boy - Hmmm...( He didn't got any thing what i said but still gave me a nod to make me fill satisfied)

( Rickshaw came and he said bye to me....)

Always respect and love what you are. No one can ever replace you because you are simply " THE BEST".


JAI HIND..

Cyberterrorism

What is Cyber terrorism?

- According to the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation, cyberterrorism is any "premeditated, politically motivated attack against information, computer systems, computer programs, and data which results in violence against non-combatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents."

- the politically motivated use of computers and information technology to cause severe disruption or widespread fear.

- Cyberterrorism is the use of Internet based attacks in terrorist activities, including acts of deliberate, large-scale disruption of computer networks, especially of personal computers attached to the Internet, by the means of tools such as computer viruses.

cyber-terrorist - a programmer who breaks into computer systems in order to steal or change or destroy information as a form of cyber-terrorism

After reading all this definition , explanation and what one can depict from the above pictures is that - Terrorist or any other Anti-social elements can use various ways to establish unrest , disturbance in any peaceful area. Example - ( Kokrajhar(Assam) violence case in which large scale exodus took place )

Developed , Developing nations and terrorist organizations knows it very well that the high potential of damage can be done by using this ever growing technology.

I doubt for our country -

"In early March, suspected Chinese hackers breached the computers of India's top military organisation, the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), in what was touted to be amongst the biggest such security breaches in the country's history. 

Defence Minister A.K. Antony ordered a probe into the matter, though an official statement denied any sensitive file had been compromised.

India has seen many such attacks on its critical installations and the misuse of social media and Internet has brought home the threat of cyber-terrorism, which cyber security experts say the country is poorly equipped to handle.

Experts believe the country is vulnerable to such cyber-terrorism attacks with some countries and vested interest groups bent on espionage and destruction.

According to Supreme Court lawyer and leading cyber law expert Pavan Duggal, while the threat of cyber attacks remains "imminent", the country lacks an institutionalised mechanism of a cyber army to deal with the threat.

"The recent DRDO breach was a classical case of cyber war attack rather than mere hacking. It was an attack on India's critical information infrastructure. Cyber warfare as a phenomenon is not covered under the Indian cyber law. Clearly, the country's cyber security is not in sync with the requirements of the times," Duggal told IANS.

Over the past few years, India has witnessed a growing number of cyber assaults, with government departments, particularly defence establishments, coming under attack.
Last year, hacker group 'Anonymous' carried out a series of Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks against a number of government websites, in retaliation against the alleged Internet censorship.

Hackers from Algeria also carried out an attack on websites run by the DRDO, the Prime Minister's Office and various other government departments last year. A group called 'Pakistan Cyber Army' had also hacked into several Indian websites.
"The threat landscape remains very threatening," said cyber law and cyber security expert Prashant Mali.
"India is awakening to the global threat of cyber warfare now. Our cyber security is still ineffective as mass awakening towards it is missing or inadequate. Even though NTRO and DRDO are mandated with cyber offensive work, only time will show effectiveness of these organisations," Mali told IANS.

Usually, cyber attacks follow the same modus operandi. An email is sent to an individual, or small group, within an organisation. Efforts are made to make the email look legitimate, that is, it will appear as though it was sent by somebody the recipient trusts and the content of the mail will often be related to the recipient's area of interest.

In order to install the malware, the user is tricked into either clicking a malicious link or launching a malicious attachment. In the more sophisticated attacks, the attacker will use a new "zero day vulnerability", in which attackers send email attachments which when opened exploit vulnerabilities in the Web browsers.

According to CERT-In (the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team), which is a government-mandated information technology security organization, an estimated 14,392 websites in the country were hacked in 2012 (till October).

In 2011, as many as 14,232 were hacked, while the number of websites hacked in 2009 stood at 9,180. About 16,126 websites were hacked in 2010.

With cyber security impacting the country's security, Shivshankar Menon, the national security adviser, announced last month that the government is putting in place a national cyber security architecture to prevent sabotage, espionage and other forms of cyber threats.

"The past few years have witnessed a dramatic shift in the threat landscape. The motivation of attackers has moved from fame to financial gain and malware has become a successful criminal business model with billions of dollars in play. We have now entered a third significant shift in the threat landscape, one of cyber-espionage and cyber-sabotage," Shantanu Ghosh, vice president at India Product Operations-Symantec corporation, which developed Norton AntiVirus, told IANS.

Ghosh said cyber security questions are no longer an exotic topic focussing primarily on spam messages and personal computers but have started to impact on the national security and defence capability of a country.

Rikshit Tandon, consultant at Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI) and advisor to the Cyber Crime Unit of the Uttar Pradesh Police, said: "Cyber terrorism is a grave threat not only to India but to the world."
"It can come to any country and, yes, proactive measures by government and consortium of countries needs to be taken as a collective effort and policy since internet has no geographical boundaries," Tandon told IANS.

Experts say the country spends a small amount of money on cyber security. The budget allocation towards cyber security was Rs.42.2 crore ($7.76 million) for 2012-13, as against Rs.35.45 crore in 2010-11.

In comparison, the US spends several billion dollars through the National Security Agency, $658 million through the Department of Homeland Security and $93 million through US-CERT in 2013.
(Haris Zargar can be reached at haris.z@ians.in)

South Korea's hosting the third international conference on cyberspace from October 16-18 with close to 90 countries, including India, participating in the event. South Korean ambassador Lee Joon Gyu spoke with Sachin Parashar about the conference's agenda including cybersecurity, tackling online terrorism - and India's significant role:
 
Could you tell us about this conference on cyberspace?

Well, cyberspace and the advance of the internet have brought new modes for the exchange of ideas and engines for economic growth - but the benefit of cyberspace has also brought threats. With the absence of clear rules and norms, it's resulted in nuisances like spam mails and spywares.

At a national and international level, cyberterrorism and industrial hacking could undermine the very foundations of the modern world. With this recognition of benefits and threats, the 'Conference on Cyberspace 2013' has been held in Seoul, South Korea, addressing the issue through the theme of global prosperity through open and secure cyberspace.
 
How is this different from earlier conferences held in London and Budapest?

The Republic of Korea, once a war-torn country, was able to achieve rapid economic growth. It is always willing to lend a helping hand to other developing countries and share its experiences with other nations.
In this respect, Korea extended a most cordial invitation to the countries of Asia, Africa, South America and the Middle East that previously did not attend. Through such participation, it is hoped that more robust discussions on cyberspace issues can be made.
In particular, capacity building has been newly introduced to utilise the vast potential of cyberspace for developing countries.
 
How much of a concern is cyber-security - and how do you hope to address issues like hacking and cyber-terrorism?

I believe the Seoul conference is quite timely. The global community is increasingly threatened with the disruption of internet and online transactions through computer hacking, illegal espionage and eavesdropping - and cyber-terrorism that can threaten modern society.
But at the same time, the continuous improvement of techno-logy provides evermore potential for its benefit to economic growth and development. It is at this juncture that the Seoul conference attempts to harness its great potential and at the same time, curtail side effects. The agenda discusses public-private partnership and international cooperation against security threats using developed ICT technologies.
 
What role do you see India playing in issues related to cyberspace?

India is definitely a forerunner and is expected to contribute greatly to the field of cyberspace - as a world leader in computer software, solutions and other IT-related areas, India commands respect globally for its innovative and creative approach. India also boasts a huge number of world-class programmers and experts in the IT field. With such expertise, it is highly anticipated that India will bring a large number of talented experts and contribute to the productive discussions of many issues that the world faces in the field of cyberspace.
Korea is globally acclaimed as possessing one of the most wired societies in the world, while producing top-notch IT hardware. India is a global powerhouse in software areas. Much can be achieved if the two countries cooperate.
Korea and India already have close relations, having forged strategic partnership relations in 2010. The bilateral annual trade volume stands at $20 billion. The two countries are celebrating the 40th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations this year - and are looking forward to a continued enhancement and deepening of relations.


" YOUR FUTURE IS CREATED BY WHAT YOU DO TODAY  NOT TOMORROW" .. 

JAI HIND..

A brief history of the Kashmir conflict

KASHMIR CONFLICT is a territorial dispute between INDIA , PAKISTAN and The KASHMIRI INSURGENT GROUP over the control of the Kashmir Region.

The Kashmir dispute dates from 1947. The partition of the Indian sub-continent along religious lines led to the formation of India and Pakistan. However, there remained the problem of over 650 states, run by princes, existing within the two newly independent countries.

In theory, these princely states had the option of deciding which country to join, or of remaining independent. In practice, the restive population of each province proved decisive.

The people had been fighting for freedom from British rule, and with their struggle about to bear fruit they were not willing to let the princes fill the vacuum.

Although many princes wanted to be "independent" (which would have meant hereditary monarchies and no hope for democracy) they had to succumb to their people's protests which turned violent in many provinces.

Because of its location, Kashmir could choose to join either India or Pakistan. Maharaja Hari Singh, the ruler of Kashmir, was Hindu while most of his subjects were Muslim. Unable to decide which nation Kashmir should join, Hari Singh chose to remain neutral.
 

Maharaja Hari Singh signed the Instrument of Accession in October 1947 under which he acceded the State of Jammu and Kashmir to the Union of India.

But his hopes of remaining independent were dashed in October 1947, as Pakistan sent in Muslim tribesmen who were knocking at the gates of the capital Srinagar.
Hari Singh appealed to the Indian government for military assistance and fled to India. He signed the Instrument of Accession, ceding Kashmir to India on October 26.
Indian and Pakistani forces thus fought their first war over Kashmir in 1947-48. India referred the dispute to the United Nations on 1 January. In a resolution dated August 13, 1948, the UN asked Pakistan to remove its troops, after which India was also to withdraw the bulk of its forces.
Once this happened, a "free and fair" plebiscite was to be held to allow the Kashmiri people to decide their future.
India, having taken the issue to the UN, was confident of winning a plebiscite, since the most influential Kashmiri mass leader, Sheikh Abdullah, was firmly on its side. An emergency government was formed on October 30, 1948 with Sheikh Abdullah as the Prime Minister.
Pakistan ignored the UN mandate and continued fighting, holding on to the portion of Kashmir under its control. On January 1, 1949, a ceasefire was agreed, with 65 per cent of the territory under Indian control and the remainder with Pakistan.
The ceasefire was intended to be temporary but the Line of Control remains the de facto border between the two countries.
In 1957, Kashmir was formally incorporated into the Indian Union. It was granted a special status under Article 370 of India's constitution, which ensures, among other things, that non-Kashmiri Indians cannot buy property there.
Fighting broke out again in 1965, but a ceasefire was established that September. Indian Prime Minister, Lal Bhadur Shastri, and Pakistani President, M Ayub Khan, signed the Tashkent agreement on January 1, 1966.
They resolved to try to end the dispute, but the death of Mr Shastri and the rise of Gen Yahya Khan in Pakistan resulted in stalemate.
In 1971a third war, resulting in the formation of the independent nation of Bangladesh (formerly known as East Pakistan). A war had broken out in East Pakistan in March 1971, and soon India was faced with a million refugees.
India declared war on December 3, 1971 after Pakistani Air Force planes struck Indian airfields in the Western sector.
Two weeks later, the Indian army marched into Dhaka and the Pakistanis surrendered. In the Western sector the Indians managed to blockade the port city of Karachi and were 50 km into Pakistani territory when a ceasefire was reached.
In 1972 Indira Gandhi, the Indian prime minister, and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, her Pakistani opposite number (and father of Benazir Bhutto, a later Pakistani premier), signed the Simla Agreement, which reiterated the promises made in Tashkent.
The two sides once again agreed to resolve the issue peacefully, as domestic issues dominated.
Both India and Pakistan had other important domestic problems which kept Kashmir on the back-burner. In 1975 Indira Gandhi declared a state of national emergency, but she was defeated in the 1978 general elections.
Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was overthrown and hanged in 1977; Pakistan reverted to military dictatorship under Gen Zia ul Haq.
The balance of influence had decisively tilted in Pakistan's favour by the late 1980s, with people's sympathy no longer with the Indian union as it had been in 1947-48 and 1965.
Mrs Gandhi's attempts to install puppet governments in state capitals, manipulating the democratic process in the state legislatures, deeply angered the Kashmiris.
The status quo was largely maintained until 1989 when pro-independence and pro-Pakistan guerrillas struck in the Indian Kashmir valley. They established a reign of terror and drove out almost all the Hindus from the valley before the Indian army moved in to flush them out. Meanwhile Indian and Pakistani troops regularly exchanged fire at the border.
Whereas in 1948 India took the Kashmir issue to the UN and was all for a plebiscite, by the 1990s it hid behind the Simla agreement and thwarted any attempts at UN or third-party mediation.
Over the decades the plebiscite advocated by India's great statesman Jawaharlal Nehru became a dirty word in New Delhi. These developments have led many to believe that Delhi has squandered the Kashmiri people's trust and allegiance.
India and Pakistan both tested nuclear devices in May 1998, and then in April 1999 test-fired missiles in efforts to perfect delivery systems for their nuclear weapons. Pakistan tested its Ghauri II missile four days after India's testing of its long-range (1,250 km) Agni II.
Although Pakistan claims that its missiles are an indigenous effort, in July 1999 Indian customs agents seized components shipped from North Korea which they claim were destined for Pakistan's missile programme.
Pakistan's later intermediate-range Ghauri III missile has a range of about 3,000 km.
When the Indian Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee, set out to Lahore by bus on February 20, 1999, inaugurating the four times a week Delhi-Lahore-Delhi bus service, the world felt that such a genuine effort at friendly neighbourhood relations would lower the tension along the Line of Control in Kashmir.



But, all hopes of diplomacy disappeared once the cross-LOC firing in Kargil began during the mid-1990s. The death toll , including both soldiers and civilians, was more than 30,000.
In the first week of August 1998 Indian and Pakistani troops exchanged artillery fire, described by locals as heavier than that of the 1948 and 1965 wars put together. An estimated 50,000 rounds of ammunition were expended and a large number of soldiers and civilians killed.
In the summer of 1999 hostility in Kargil went far beyond the now familiar annual exhange of artillery fire.
When India began patrolling the Kargil heights that summer, it found to its horror that many key posts vacated in the winter were occupied by infiltrators. A patrol was ambushed in the first week of May 1999. India belatedly realised the magnitude of the occupation - which was around 10 km deep and spanned almost 100 km of the LOC - and sent MiG fighters into action on May 26.
India contended that the infiltrators were trained and armed by Pakistan, and based in "Azad Kashmir" with the full knowledge of the Pakistani government - and that Afghan and other foreign mercenaries accompanied them.
Pakistan insisted that those involved were freedom fighters from Kashmir and that it was giving only moral support.
India ordered the jets not to stray into Pakistani territory; but those that did were shot down.
The conflict ended only after Bill Clinton, the US President, and Nawaz Sharif, Pakistan's Prime minister, met in Washington on July 4, 1999.
Meanwhile, the Indian Army had made significant advances, capturing vital territory on July 4. Despite the apparent efforts to mediate, the US maintained that it was not interfering in what India still claims to be a bilateral issue.
Pakistan withdrew its forces later that month. However, skirmishing continued, and in August India shot down a Pakistani reconnaissance plane, killing 16
The official number of Indian troops lost in Kargil was around 500, with almost double that number of "infiltrators" killed. Nevertheless, India did not declare war against Pakistan - instead, Mr Vajpayee ambigously announced a "war-like situation".
Yet this, by all accounts of soldiers and top Indian army officers involved, was a war in which India lost men engaged in hand-to-hand combat with Pakistani soldiers in the heights of Kargil - a war that could be compared with the one of 1948-49, which was limited to Kashmir, with the other border regions remaining peaceful.
Thus in 1999, in a war limited to one sector, India suffered casualities within its own territory. Despite much pressure from the military and the public, the government decided not to cross the LOC. Pakistan too suffered criticism at home for limiting its war to artillery fire across the LOC and shooting down Indian aircraft.
The fear of a full-scale war (with nuclear capability adding a deadly dimension), coupled with precarious economies and the knowledge of what international sanctions could do to them, may have prevailed in both countries.

India - Pakistan : Siachen Glacier Issue....

Hello Friends, Today we will discuss about the issue Siachen Glacier.

Pinki an Army aspirant today came to me and asked a question which really gave me a deep shock .

Pinki - UT what is the issue of sachin between india and pakistan?

Me - Sachin??????? Do you mean Sachin tendulkar??? I do not know???

Pinki - No ... No....Not sachin tendulkar...it was something related to ice , glacier....I forgot the name of that issue...

Me - Are you asking about SIACHEN GLACIER?????

Pinki - Yaaaa..That one....( I gave her a very stern look)

Me -  Siachen glacier is located at Karakoram Range..



Pinki - But why it is important?

Me - The glacier is considered to be the single largest source of fresh water in indian subcontinent. Siachen is near the karakoram pass, forming almost a triangle with india , china and territory occupied by pakistan touching the edges.It is the source of the Nubra river that eventually feeds the mighty indus ( the major water source that irregates the punjab plains in pkaistan.

Pinki - but why this is an issue between india and pakistan? How it started?

Me - India and Pakistan have a disputed border in J&K, most of it delineated as the line of control with troop position on either side.While most position were delineated as per the 1972 shimla agreement, the boundary line was specifeid to onlay a point called NJ9842 , till the area from where the siachen starts.The agreement stated that after this point , the boundary would proceed "north to the glaciers" without specifying which nation would have control over which area. The matter remained non-controversial until the  1980's when the indian army discovered that pakistan was issuing permission to foreign expeditions to trek in siachen . Indian intelligence agencied found out that pakistan's army under orders from General Zia was planning to conduct a military operation to capture siachen , from their supplier of high altitude mountain warfare gear provider in london ,  (as Pakistan had placed orders for Arctic gear from the same supplier) Thus the Indian army launched Operation Meghdoot and Indian troops belonged to the Kumaon Regiment were air-lifted and moved into the glacier.










pinki - ohhhhhh..so what's the current position???

Me -  India’s stance is that the LoC runs from point NJ 9842 along the watersheds formed by the Saltoro ridge that puts the entire Siachen glacier within Indian territory.
Pakistan claims that the line joins point NJ 9842 with the Karakoram pass that lies towards the northeast, putting Siachen within its territory.
The ground position now is that the Indian Army controls the entire Saltoro ridge. There is no presence of Pakistani troops on the Siachen glacier. In fact, the nearest Pakistani locations are on the lower reaches of the Saltoro ridge



 As India managed to get the upper hand, it currently controls all heights along the glacier on the Saltoro ridge and uses the glacier as a logistics base.
Since 2007, India has been promoting treks and expeditions by civilians and foreigners in the vicinity of the glacier to reaffirm its claim on the region.
The Army has given permission to several groups of mountaineers to climb peaks in the Eastern Karakoram range that adjoins the glacier. The Army also holds a civilian Siachen expedition every year and will in the future invite even foreigners to trek up the glacier.




Pinki - so now??//

Me - A year after India took over the glacier in 1984, talks started.
 
 After 13 rounds, both sides are now in agreement that the Siachen glacier should be demilitarized.
  
The disagreement is on how this withdrawal of troops will take place. The Indian position is that both nations should jointly demarcate the current troop positions in the region. This would involve an exhaustive process to determine and delineate current troops positions both on the ground and on a map. After this demarcation or “authentication” of troop positions, India believes, troops can be moved back to pre-1984 positions and the border issue can be solved with dialogue.

Pakistan agrees that the issue should be resolved with talks but is strongly against a demarcation of troop positions.
  
Pakistan believes that any joint demarcation or authentication of troops positions can be used as a claim by India for future talks to resolve the matter. It insists instead on a mutual withdrawal of troops to pre-1984 deployments for talks to begin.
  
India, however, has hardened its stance for authentication of troops positions after the 1999 Kargil conflict in which insurgents supported by the Pakistani Army occupied critical locations along the LOC.
  
India wants a demarcation so that it can take military action, if necessary, should Pakistan stealthily occupy troops positions even after vacating these as per the demilitarization plan.











Ref -

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/the-siachen-deep-freeze/962077/0 and Mrunal..


JAI HIND...