Tata Group Goes Worldwide Growth Through Acquisition

Introduction: The Tata Group and Its Story The Tata Company, whose headquarters are based in India, deals with the steel processing and production. According to the existing records, the company started its growth after purchasing the shares for Corus, an Anglo-Dutch steel company (Freeman, Gopalan, Bailey, 2009, p. 2).Advertising We will write a custom critical writing sample on Tata Group Goes Worldwide: Growth Through Acquisition specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More The Current Strategy in the Global Context: Taking a New Course At present, two major tendencies can be observed in Tata, i.e., the tendency for growth and acquisition. Concerning the benefits: stretching worldwide There is no doubt that the acquisition through growth strategy opens a whole pool of new opportunities for Tata, one of which is joining the world market. To start with, the Tata Group’s authority is going to grow increasingly with every new acquisiti on (Trivedi, 2012). Another obvious advantage that the chosen strategy involves being able to analyze the chosen market closer and learn more about what customers demand. After processing the data concerning customers’ demands obtained from different affiliates of the Tata Group, one will be able to provide the products that will satisfy the needs of the majority of the target population (Vora, 2013). The last, but definitely not the least, the power of such brands as Jaguar, whose shares Tata Group has recently bought, will also add to the profitability of the company. It is worth mentioning, though, that Tata should As Bajaj explains, â€Å"Tata Motors appears to have succeeded in large part because it did not seek to run Jaguar Land Rover from Tata headquarters here.Advertising Looking for critical writing on business economics? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Instead, it has left day-to-day management in the hands of executives in England† (Bajaj, 2012). Assessing the risks: financial policy and the related issues Among the most obvious obstacles that the company is likely to face in the course of adapting towards the specifics of the world market and, more importantly, merging with the companies that exist in differently cultural settings. The PEST evaluation will be required to represent the issue more graphically: Political The Tata Group is likely to face a number of issues when negotiating with the companies set in different countries and, therefore, following different principles and laws Economic When choosing its new partners, Tata risks greatly. Since the Tata Group budget cannot stretch far enough to get the most influential steel companies to join it, Tata has to invite less influential firms, whose potential is not quite clear. Social The members of the Tata Group will have to deal with unavoidable misunderstandings that will inevitably appear in the course of commun icating with the Tata’s subsidiaries. Technological To conquer the market, Tata will require the latest technological advances concerning steel production, such as plant engineering (Uemura Shirai, 2003). To achieve this, the Tata Group will have to make sure that each of the subsidiary companies has been equipped accordingly. Therefore, the company’s financial policy should be reconsidered. Judging by the above-mentioned evaluation of Tata’s greatest risks concerning the growth through acquisition plan, the Tata Group’s greatest risk is signing the wrong company up for partnership. To avoid this risk, the company will have to develop a flexible system of risk assessment. Conclusion: There Is Yet Much to Strive for Judging by the current situation, there is still a number of steps to be made for the Tata in order to achieve worldwide success. However, to the company’s credit, it has enough potential to achieve success; and, which is even more important, Tata is worth this success. Having much to offer to its customers, the company definitely has the potential for further development. Reference List Bajaj, 2012. Tata Motors Finds Success in Jaguar Land Rover. Web.Advertising We will write a custom critical writing sample on Tata Group Goes Worldwide: Growth Through Acquisition specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Freeman, K, Gopalan, S, Bailey, J 2009, ‘Achieving global growth through acquisition: Tata’s takeover of Corus,’ Journal of Case Research in Business and Economics, vol. 1 no. 1, pp. 1–17. Trivedi, A 2012,’Ratan Tata, the man who brought Tata to the world,’ India Ink, n.p. Web. Uemura, A Shirai, M 2003, ‘New Technologies for Steel Manufacturing Based upon Plant Engineering,’ NKK Technical Review no. 88, pp. 37–45. Vora, S 2013, ‘India’s Tata Group maps U.S. expansion,’ India Ink, n .p. Web. This critical writing on Tata Group Goes Worldwide: Growth Through Acquisition was written and submitted by user Cassidy Vinson to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly. You can donate your paper here.

African Nobel Prize Winners

African Nobel Prize Winners 25 Nobel Laureates have been born in Africa. Of those, 10 have been from South Africa, and another six were born in Egypt. The other countries to have produced a Nobel Laureate are (French) Algeria, Ghana, Kenya, Liberia, Madagascar, Morocco, and Nigeria. Scroll down for a full list of winners. The Early Winners The first person from Africa to win a Nobel Prize was Max Theiler, a South African man who won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1951. Six years later, the famed absurdist philosopher and author Albert Camus won the Nobel Prize for Literature. Camus was French, and so many people assume he was born in France, but he was in fact born, raised, and educated in French Algeria. Both Theiler and Camus had emigrated out of Africa at the time of their awards, however, making Albert Lutuli the first person to be awarded a Nobel Prize for work completed in Africa. At the time, Lutuli (who was born in Southern Rhodesia, which is now Zimbabwe) was the President of the African National Congress in South Africa and was awarded the 1960 Nobel Peace Prize for his role leading the non-violent campaign against apartheid. Africas Brain Drain Like Theiler and Camus, many African Nobel Laureates have emigrated from their countries of birth and spent most of their working careers in Europe or the United States.   As of 2014, not one African Nobel Laureate has been affiliated with an African research institution at the time of their award as determined by the Nobel Prize foundation. (Those winning awards in Peace and Literature are not typically affiliated with such institutions. Many winners in those fields were residing and working in Africa at the time of their award.)  Ã‚   These men and women provide a clear example of the much-discussed brain drain from Africa. Intellectuals with promising research careers frequently end up living and working at better-funded research institutions beyond Africa’s shores. This is largely a question of economics and the power of institutions’ reputations. Unfortunately, it is hard to compete with names like Harvard or Cambridge, or the facilities and intellectual stimulation that institutions like these can offer. Female Laureates Including the 2014 awardees, there have been 889 total Nobel Laureates, meaning that individuals from Africa make up only about 3% of Nobel Prize winners. Of the 46 women to ever win a Nobel Prize, however, five have been from Africa, making 11% of female awardees African. Three of those awards were Peace Prizes, while one was in Literature and one in Chemistry. African Noble Prize Winners 1951   Max Theiler, Physiology or Medicine1957   Albert Camus, Literature1960   Albert Lutuli, Peace1964   Dorothy Crowfoot Hodgkin, Chemistry1978   Anwar El Sadat, Peace1979   Allan M. Cormack, Physiology or Medicine1984   Desmond Tutu, Peace1985   Claude Simon, Literature1986   Wole Soyinka, Literature1988   Naguib Mahfouz, Literature1991   Nadine Gordimer, Literature1993   F.W. de Klerk, Peace1993   Nelson Mandela, Peace1994   Yassir Arafat, Peace1997   Claude Cohen-Tannoudji, Physics1999   Ahmed Zewail, Chemistry2001   Kofi Annan, Peace2002   Sydney Brenner, Physiology or Medicine2003   J. M. Coetzee, Literature2004   Wangari Maathai, Peace2005   Mohamed El Baradei, Peace2011   Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Peace2011   Leymah Gbowee, Peace2012   Serge Haroche, Physics2013   Michael Levitt, Chemistry Sources Used in this Article   Ã¢â‚¬Å"Nobel Prizes and Laureates†, â€Å"Nobel Laureates and Research Affiliations†, and â€Å"Nobel Laureates and ​Country of Birth†all from Nobelprize.org, Nobel Media AB, 2014.

The History of Root Beer and Inventor Charles Hires

The History of Root Beer and Inventor Charles Hires According to his biography, Philadelphia pharmacist Charles Elmer Hires discovered a recipe for a delicious tisane- a form of herbal tea- while on his honeymoon in New Jersey. Not long after, he began selling a dry version of the tea blend but it had to be mixed with water, sugar, and yeast and left to ferment for the carbonation process to take place. On the suggestion of his friend Russell Conwell (founder of Temple University), Hires began working on a liquid formulation for a carbonated root beer beverage that would be more appealing to the masses. The result was a combination of more than 25 herbs, berries, and roots that Hires used to flavor carbonated soda water. At Conwells urging, Hires introduced his version of root beer to the public at the 1876 Philadelphia Centennial exhibition. Hires Root Beer was a hit. In 1893, the Hires family first sold and distributed bottled root beer. The History of Root Beer While Charles Hires and his family contributed greatly to the popularity of modern root beer, its origins can be traced to pre-colonial times during which indigenous tribes commonly created beverages and medicinal remedies from sassafras roots. Root beer as we know it today is descended from small beers, a collection of beverages (some alcoholic, some not) concocted by American colonists using what they had at hand. The brews varied by region and were flavored by locally grown herbs, barks, and roots. Traditional small beers included birch beer, sarsaparilla, ginger beer, and root beer. Root beer recipes of the era contained different combinations of ingredients such as allspice, birch bark, coriander, juniper, ginger, wintergreen, hops, burdock root, dandelion root, spikenard, pipsissewa, guaiacum chips, sarsaparilla, spicewood, wild cherry bark, yellow dock, prickly ash bark, sassafras root, vanilla beans, hops, dog grass, molasses, and licorice. Many of these ingredients are still used in root beer today, along with added carbonation. There is no single recipe for root beer. Fast Facts: Top Root Beer Brands If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then Charles Hires would have a lot to feel flattered about. The success of his commercial root beer sales soon inspired competition. Here are some of the most notable root beer brands.A W: In 1919, Roy Allen bought a root beer recipe and began marketing his beverage in Lodi, California. A year later, Allen partnered with Frank Wright to form AW Root Beer. In 1924, Allen bought his partner out and obtained a trademark for the brand that is now the top-selling root beer in the world.Barqs: Barqs Root Beer debuted in 1898. It was the creation of Edward Barq, who along with his brother Gaston were the principals of the  Barqs Brothers Bottling Company founded in the New Orleans French Quarter in 1890. The brand is still owned by the Barqs family but is currently manufactured and distributed by the Coca-Cola Company.Dads: The recipe for Dads Root Beer was created by Ely Klapman and Barney Berns in the basement of Klapmans Chicago-area ho me in the late 1930s. It was the first product to make use of the six-pack packaging  format invented by the Atlanta Paper Company in the 1940s.Mug Root Beer: Mug Root Beer was originally marketed as â€Å"Belfast Root Beer† during the 1940s by the Belfast Beverage Company. The product name was later changed to Mug Old Fashioned Root Beer, which was then shortened to Mug Root Beer. Currently manufactured and distributed by PepsiCo, Mugs brand mascot is a bulldog named â€Å"Dog.† Root Beer and Health Concerns In 1960, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration banned the use of sassafras as a potential carcinogen. Sassafras is one of the main flavoring ingredients in root beer. However, it was determined that the potentially dangerous element of the plant was found only in the oil. Once a method to extract the harmful oil from the sassafras was found, sassafras could continue to be used without harmful repercussions. As with other soft drinks, classic root beer is classified by the scientific community as a sugar-sweetened beverage or SSB. Studies have linked SSBs to a number of health concerns including obesity, hypertension, Type 2 diabetes, and tooth decay. Even non-sweetened beverages, if consumed in too great a quantity, have the potential for negatively impacting health.

Summary of Recent Research 7 Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Summary of Recent Research 7 - Assignment Example The data available for the study consisted of the clone types, and the different months during which the measurements were taken. The signed rank test was settled for since the distribution of the data sets could not be established using the normal parametric tests. The researchers avoided making assumptions on the data since they could not establish its distribution. The difference in metal (aluminum) content in the wood was found to be significantly different from zero. The median change from August to November (3.1 micrograms Al/g wood) is significantly different from zero (W=16, P=0.040) (McDonald 2009). By the difference in content being significant, it implies that there was significant variation in concentration between the times of the year when the two measurements were taken. Han, X. et al. (2011). Metabolomics in Early Alzheimer’s Disease: Identification of Altered Plasma Sphingolipidome Using Shotgun Lipidomics. Lipidomics in Alzheimer’s Disease. Vol 6. Issue 7. p. 7. Nishiumi, S. et al. (2012). A Novel Serum Metabolomics-Based Diagnostic Approach for Colorectal Cancer. Metabolomics for Colorectal Cancer. Vol. 7, issue 7. p. 4. Plichta, S. B., Kelvin, E. Munros Statistical Methods for Health Care Research. Statistical Methods for Health Care Research. (6th edition). (2012). Smith, G. L. et al. (2012). Association Between Treatment With Brachytherapy vs Whole-Breast Irradiation and Subsequent Mastectomy, Complications, and Survival Among Older Women With Invasive Breast Cancer. The Journal of the American Medical Association. par 17.

International Terrorism and terrorist organizations Essay

International Terrorism and terrorist organizations - Essay Example These acts driven by the ideas of a group causes terror in the lives of a larger set of people and is commonly termed as terrorism. This essay would concentrate on various perceptions regarding terrorism that covers international terrorism, the structure and organization of terrorist groups, their views in the support of their actions, historical events that possibly led to revolutions which in turn gave rise to terrorism. A list of possible actions that can be taken to combat against terrorism is presented at the end. Defining the term terrorism would be a relatively tougher task. Not because of the political and emotional charges that the word carries but because of the flexibility in which the word could be (Hans, 1988). This had been defined by many organizations and institutions and individuals. The US army's study in 1988 counted that about 109 definitions of terrorism existed (Schmidt, 1988). In these definitions almost 22 different elemental definitions were found. A study in 1999 by terrorism expert Mr. Walter Lacquer also concluded that more than a hundred definitions of this word existed and focused on a point that the only general characteristic common to all the definitions about terrorism was that terrorism is closely associated to violence or threat of violence (Hans, 1988). Terrorism is different from criminal activities done for various purposes and it is important that this difference be brought out while defining terrorism. Many regions, countries have taken this issue into cons ideration while defining the word terrorism. Now let us brood over some important definitions of terrorism. The word terrorism happens to have its first appearance in "The Times" on 30th January 1795 (Hans, 1988). It was put in an excerpt to signify the changes taking place during rising of revolutionary government in France. One of the early definitions of terrorism was given by Maximilian Robespierre in 1794 which says that terror is nothing other than justice, prompt, severe, inflexible and it is not a unique principle (Schmidt, 1988). He regarded this as the consequence of democracy. The word terrorism got its place in English dictionary in the year 1798 and had a meaning "Systematic use of terror as policy". However it is interesting to see that the usage of the word terrorism and its meaning are quite controversial (Hans, 1988). The definitions used at found in the recent days are biased in a sense that they do not clearly specify the dividing line between groups who use the v iolence to achieve political goals that include government and other terrorist groups. Terrorism is labeled with tags that denote lack of legitimacy and morality. Let us first look at how the United Nations defines the word terrorism. United Nations does not accept any predefined definition of this word however, the UN academic consensus definition by Alex Schmidt is widely used by socialists and it is as follows "Terrorism is an anxiety-inspiring method of repeated violent action, employed by (semi-) clandestine individual, group or state actors, for idiosyncratic, criminal or political reasons, whereby - in contrast to assassination - the direct targets of violence are not the main targets."(Schmidt, 1988) Its short definition is the peacetime equivalent of war crime. However on 17th March 2005 the UN described that

Bosnian War Exploring Motives And Behaviour Of Perpetrators Criminology Essay

Bosnian War Exploring Motives And Behaviour Of Perpetrators Criminology Essay The main aim of this essay is to explore the motive, behaviour and policy of the perpetrators towards civilians and their enemy in the Bosnian Civil War from 1992 until 1995. The essay emphasizes common traits, behaviours of the perpetrators and identifies factors and elements that relate to their motives and aggression to commit mass killing and crimes against humanity. This essay will also explain the factors that drive people, who formerly co-habited harmoniously, to committing brutal acts of violence against their friends, neighbours and compatriots. The primary focus will be on three different ethnic groups in Bosnia during the conflict; the Serbs, the Bosnian Muslims and the Croats and the essay will focus more on the conflict between Serbs and Muslims. It will also focus upon violent acts committed by Serbs against Muslims; although as the war developed, Serbs also became victims of specific kinds of Croat and Muslim violence. Sometimes, it is difficult for scholars to determine the real reasons or motives that make ordinary people with no previous criminal record commit sudden brutal acts of violence. Focusing on the particular case of the ethnic conflict in Bosnia, this essay aims to demonstrate why behaviour and demeanour of the perpetrators of genocide and war crimes is important. This will help to highlight the personality of perpetrators and to illustrate the complexity of perpetrators behaviour and way of thinking. The perpetrator-focused research in Bosnia can be justified on a combination of moral, cognitive and practical grounds; it emphasizes the importance of circumstances as an explanation for perpetrator conduct; and suggests that Erwin Staubs concept of a continuum of destruction  [1]  reflecting the fact that a perpetrators behaviour can rapidly fluctuate between acts of cruelty and kindness.  [2]   The Bosnian Civil War was very complex and full of tragic events including the forced migration and killings of inhabitants based on their ethnicity, also known as ethnic cleansing. To achieve the objective on controlling territories, the perpetrators, usually with the full support from the largest ethnic group, violently displaced or killed members of other ethnic groups who stood in their way  [3]  . In all cases, assault on civilian populations was both an aim and instrument of war. The perpetrators included regular military, paramilitaries, militias, reservists, police, internal security forces or armed civilian group. The war in Bosnia was waged by ultranationalists who targeted civilians because they stood in the way of the idea of their national interest. This was achieved by ethnic cleansing, using violence and deportations of other ethnic communities who had previously lived together peacefully in Bosnia. For example, the Srebrenica massacre, the most infamous violent ac t by the perpetrators during the war, was described as the worst atrocity witnessed in the history of modern European world after the World War II  [4]  and the largest single war crime in Europe.  [5]   By demography, Bosnia is a multiethnic nation, in which there was no majority ethnic group. Out of the population of 4.4 million, Bosnian Muslims constituted 43.7 percent, Serbs constituted 31.4 percent, while Croats constituted 17.3 percent. Before the conflict erupted in 1992, Bosnia was an example of a harmonious society where Muslims, Serbs and Croats lived side by side, free of social subordination.  [6]  There had not been serious ethnic conflict after the World War II, and even though after the election in 1990 have made the ethnic relationship became more salient, the groups tried to resolve any conflict without any element of violence.  [7]  As a result, the vast majority of people in Yugoslavia co-existed in peace regardless of their ethnic or religious group. From one perspective, the war in Bosnia could be viewed as a clear-cut case of civil war which is an internal war among ethnic groups unable to agree on arrangements for sharing power. Similar to other civil wars, different parties who fought in this war had enjoyed substantial political and military backing from neighbouring states. The Serb and Croat paramilitaries involved volunteers from Serbia and Croatia, and were supported by nationalist political parties in those countries.  [8]  Although Bosnian independence was fully recognized by the United Nation, neither Serbia nor Croatia accepted the resolution. A further case could be made that the Bosnian Serb army was under the de facto control of the Yugoslav Army and Belgrade and was therefore an instrument of external aggression. A key factor to the conflict in Bosnia is the role of leaders as voices of extremism or nationalism. The attitude of Serbian leaders in Serbia and Bosnia played a crucial role in channelling the behaviour of ordinary Serbs against the Muslims and Croats. Shortly after the break-up of Yugoslavia, they led a nationalist movement, shape the progressions of events and made the decisions to lead the aggression against other ethnic groups. As an authority in the highest position, leaders could command the trust and obedience of their fellow ethnic, while the ordinary man could claim that there were just following orders from the authority.  [9]   Leaders in both Serbia and Croatia, sometimes aided by journalist, academics, and military organization, deliberately revived and exploited painful memories of the history of the former Yugoslavia in spreading the propaganda to create fear and hatred between ethnic groups. They exploited the brutality and atrocities among each other in the past especially in the Second World War and inflamed national sentiments between ethnic groups.  [10]  The Serb nationalist revival also led to intense public discussion of World War II about the atrocities of the Ustasha against Serbs. During 1980s, when tension among ethnic groups started to escalate, Serbs were often reminded about the massacres, betrayal, and continued hostility between Serbs, Croats and Muslims. In order to plant the seed of nationalism among fellow Serbs, Ustasha killings has been portrayed frequently in mass media, memoirs, plays, and history, and it became obvious when Milosevic ignited the fire of the Serbian nationali sm in everyday life especially on television.  [11]  Each side fears that they will be the victim of genocide if others gain political and military power in Bosnia and this reason has been justified by Serbian and Croatian nationalists to push their people into wars of self-defence.  [12]  Leaders of ethnic groups such as Franco Tudjman of Croatia, Alija Izetbegovic of Muslims, and Slobodan Milosevic and Radovan Karadzic of Serbia inflamed the sentiments on their people by taking several actions and implementing some policies which favoured on their side.  [13]  For example, Radovan Karadzic had warned the Bosnian government that if they choose independent, They will disappear. That people will disappear from the face of the earth.  [14]   In general, perpetrators are those who initiate, facilitate, or carry out acts of genocide or crimes against humanity. During the Bosnian conflict, the motive of the perpetrators could be classified into various categories. In order to eliminate what the respective perpetrators believed as a real or potential threat, as well as to spread terror among real or potential foes, mass killing and other atrocities were used.  [15]  It is quite difficult to fully understand the motives of the perpetrators because the individual and group changes that lead to increasingly vicious acts may become not only more comprehensible, but even seemingly natural. Perpetrators make many small and great decisions as they progress along the continuum of destruction. They choose leaders, adopt ideologies, create policies and plans, and engage in harmful and violent acts and their circumstances and characteristics move them in certain directions.  [16]   In order to facilitate the intention of expulsion or killing of other ethnic groups, military and paramilitary organizations were used as a common institutional structures. Such organizations enforce obedience, encourage conformity, provide training, desensitize their members responses to killing, and planted the ideology of the struggle to all member of the organization. All parties to the conflict in Bosnia are actually guilty of perpetrating abuse and violence, although to varying degrees. The main perpetrators of the abuses may vary from certain circumstances depending on which forces are in control in the particular territories. On the whole, however, the main aggressors have been the Serbian military and paramilitary forces. As the main offenders, they are in a position to inflict great damage and their policy of ethnic cleansing with the intention to dominate the whole Bosnia. For example, the infamous Arkans Tiger, one of the most ferocious Serbian paramilitary organizations which responsible for crimes committed to Muslims and Croats all across Bosnia, is a Belgrade-backed paramilitary organization where soldiers under his command brutally imprisoned, beat, raped, and executed non-Serb persons.  [17]  During the war, majority of the territory in Bosnia forcibly came under Serb domination and large segments of the Muslim population were either killed or expelled by paramilitary which actively participated in these operations in order to secure Serb control over territories.  [18]   While most of the Serbian perpetrators were conducted by a larger groups which is paramilitary or militia, the abuses attributable to Croats and Muslims were usually perpetrated by individual and do not associated with certain groups. Bosnian Croat and Muslims also found guilty of serious abuse of human right and crime against humanity. The destruction of Serbian property, removal by force, the detention and killing of the inhabitant in many cases appear to be known but little had been done to prove it. For example, by committing the crime against Serbs in Kravica and for other atrocities committed around the region, Naser Oric, a Bosnian Muslims, was convicted by the International Court Tribunal for failing to take measures to prevent the murder and cruel treatment of Serb prisoners.  [19]  As for the Croat atrocities, the terrifying violence perpetrated against the Serbian populations in Krajina after its recapture by the Croatian HVO organization led by Mladen Markac in August 1995 will not be easily forgotten.  [20]   Many of the abuses attributed to Serbian perpetrators have long followed a recognizable pattern that has come to be known as ethnic cleansing.  [21]  The primary aim of Serbian forces is to capture or gaining complete control of the whole territory and forcibly removing or killing non-Serbs the area. In most Serbian-held territories of Bosnia, pattern of abuses against non-Serbs were very clear and the method of abuses including rounding up the inhabitant, detaining in the concentration camp or just simply killing the civilian taken. Even though much of the abuses committed by the Serbs were done in group, there were such abuses were been done by individual soldiers or single military, policemen and home guard  [22]  . The nature of the abuses, and the pattern and frequency which take place indicates that there was no command from the superior to stop the abuses. The patterns of behaviour of the perpetrators during the conflict were obvious when the tension escalated during the war. During the conflict, behavioural patterns among ordinary soldiers indicated patterns of racial hatred and prejudiced, manifested both in their actions against their victims and their feelings towards each other. The decision to utilize a large number of perpetrators may also be influenced by certain political objectives. Those who initiate genocide may seek to gain support for their actions by allowing elements of society to satisfy their passions and greed at the expense of the victims.  [23]  By plunging large numbers of the population into murder, the forces encouraging the mass killing may more tightly bind the perpetrators to the regime. The perpetrators have emphasised on collectivistic value that make group membership central to personal identity. Such regimes have been particularly adept at using such collectivistic values to highlight boundaries between in-groups and out-groups by making extreme categorical judgements based on the polar opposites of good us versus bad them.  [24]  They have set in their mind that their cause is sacred; while the enemies are evil, they themselves as righteous, innocent or victimized; and others are wicked, guilty, and the victimisers. It is clear in this conflict that the Serbs always portrayed themselves as the victim of the evil regime of Ustasha that murdered hundreds of thousands of Serbs during World War II.  [25]   There were varieties of practices used by the perpetrators to make their reprehensible conducts acceptable and to distance them from the moral implications of their actions. For instance, there is a moral justification in which mass murder is made personally and socially acceptable by portraying it as serving socially worthy or moral purposes. Perpetrators may believe this rationalisation to such an extent that their evil is not only morally justifiable, but became a moral one.  [26]  Perpetrators can then justify their evil as essential to their own self-defence, in order to protect the cherished values of their community, fight ruthless oppressors, preserve peace and stability, save humanity from subjugation, or honour their national commitments. Moral disengagement is also facilitated by the dehumanisation of the victims.  [27]  By doing this, perpetrators categorized a group as inhuman when the target group can be readily identified as a separate category of people belonging to a different race, ethnic, religious or political group that the perpetrators regard as inferior or threatening. These isolated groups are stigmatised as subhuman and memories of their past misdeeds, real or imaginary, are activated by the dominant group. The dehumanisation of victims helps perpetrators to justify their aggressive, sadist and brutal behaviour. A common form of dehumanisation is the use of language to redefine the victims so they will be seen as warranting the aggression. The moral disengagement of the perpetrators is complemented by a vulgarity of language that dehumanises the victims. Consistently, perpetrators dehumanised their victims that the words themselves become substitutes for perceiving human beings. For example, in most cases, Serbs described the Muslims in derogatory term as Balijas'(dirty), Turkish yoke, uncultivated and wild dog.  [28]   One of the shocking elements in this conflict was that many of the violence and abuses were perpetrated by their own neighbours. Violence against neighbour emerges as a major theme in numerous accounts of war and ethnic cleansing in Bosnia, amidst cordial and amicable relations between Bosnian Muslims, Serbs and Croats. Before the conflict, ethnic relations in Yugoslavia is at satisfactory level, and many recall friendly and warm relations between neighbours, colleagues, or acquaintances of different ethnic or religious identities. Even once war began, many recognized that people of different ethnic or religious identity were not necessarily their enemies, and they believe that they can still get along together throughout the war.  [29]   At a glance, Serbs, Croats and Muslims saw each other as acquaintances, colleagues, neighbours, friends, and sometimes even relatives. However, deep in reality, they identified others as members of groups marked by history as enemies. These groups did not intend to make war, but there was an underlying latent and long lasting anger. This deep hatred were told by a Serb employee in the American Consulate to the American diplomat about his real feeling on Croat sometimes when he looked into their eyes, he could not help recalling the blood that stained the hands of those responsible for the slaughter of Serbs during the Second World War  [30]  . The War in Bosnia developed into a nightmare for the different ethnic groups, which had lived there in relative peace since the end of the Second World War. The peace was not meant for last forever, as ethnic leaders had created an atmosphere of mutual fear and hatred that led to three and a half years of conflict and terror  [31]  . Many survivors of ethnic cleansing during the conflict have told a series of attacks by their former neighbours. Rezak Huzanovic, a former detainee in Omarska camp, writes in his memoir about his Serbian neighbour who joined in the killing and torture. They were our neighbours and then they burnt our houses. At Prijedor, local Serbs joined in murders and ethnic cleansing.  [32]  Refugees repeatedly told about series of attacks by friends or neighbours they knew well. In Foca in Southern Bosnia, one woman told about her Serbian neighbour showed up in her family home late night with machine gun and detained his husband. In fact, we had coffee with him a day before.  [33]   Multiple similar accounts both at the time of ethnic cleansing and afterwards make clear the strong grassroots element to ethnic cleansing and violence which were carried out in various parts of Bosnia. It is true that neighbours did not carry out ethnic cleansing alone. Witnesses, reporters, and investigators working for human rights group also made clear how paramilitary forces and militia swept through many Bosnian communities, carrying out violent act and killing, and the fighters in these forces included teenagers, peasants, locals who had also grown up in this multiethnic Yugoslavia pledged to the concept of brotherhood and unity.  [34]   A point to note that the same neighbour of everyday life can mutate into an enemy when seen as a figure in a long-term historical narrative of nationalist struggle. Accounts of close relations between neighbours typically recall scenes of everyday life, of individuals as friends, classmates, and colleagues. Stories of ethnic rivalry, on the other hand, present narratives in which the same individuals function as members of enemy nations. This same paradox of a friendly neighbour who kills can be described with the concept of cognitive frames or a mental structure which situates and connects events, people and groups into a meaningful narrative.  [35]   Apart from that, a particular structure of nationalism plays a key role in generating ethnic cleansing in Bosnia. As an ideology of ethnic cleansing, nationalism is more a story than simply a form of identity. Within national narratives, the nation as an entity is viewed as the real protagonist. National narratives tend to be similar in their structure; they present their hero, the nation, as unique in suffering; and they depict the national narratives of rival nations as valid.  [36]   Concerning the perpetrators motives, they emphasized of betrayal and victimization that links to national narratives. Stories of national struggle recount attacks and even treason by other nations. These stories display hatred of the enemies of the ethnic groups, and for this reason they can be described as national hate narratives.  [37]  The nations enemies are inherently and irredeemably bad, and for this reason the problems created by the hated group can be resolved by its removal, disappearance, or destruction. For Serbs, they were being indoctrinated as the victims of the Ustasha and Muslim atrocities during the Second World War. They saw other ethnic groups as a real threat, and in order to ensure that the history would not happened again, and to ensure their own survival, they collectively eliminate the threat by killing others  [38]  . The Bosnian conflict brought the practice of killing based on ethnicity suggests that these violations were not random acts carried out by a few dissident soldiers. This policy has been masterminded by Serbian political and military leaders which is being systematically planned and strategically executed with the support of the Serbian and Bosnian Serb armies and paramilitary groups to create a Greater Serbia which will resulted in a religiously, culturally, and linguistically homogenous Serbian nation.  [39]   Some scholars, politician and commentators were quick to point out that the war was caused by the ancient hatreds that the various ethnic groups bore toward one another.  [40]  This is inaccurate, because the multi ethnic groups of former Yugoslavia did not coexist in ancient times at all; they were only joined together after the creation of the Yugoslav in 1918. Contrary to some world leaders, commentators and scholars claims that this ancient hatreds stemming from a long history of conflict and ethnic cleansing in the Balkans were responsible for the conflict  [41]  , the reality, however was different. Rather than ancient hatreds, the conflict in Bosnia reflected a combination of various factors. The term ancient ethnic hatreds were manipulated by opportunist during the break-up of Yugoslavia, exploited and revitalized by ethnic group leaders such as Slobodan Milosevic in Serbia, Radovan Karadzic in Bosnia and Franjo Tudjman in Croatia as their hold on power slipped. Each of them felt that the idea of establishing an ethnically pure state would contribute of the expansion of their political power and to strengthen their position as a leader of each nation.  [42]   A generation of historians and social scientists has come out with the idea that the factors of ancient hatreds had broken apart Yugoslavia. In some cases, the discussions of ancient hatred made actual violence inevitable, but the key episodes in narratives of national victimization were already well known before the Titos death, and these episodes came from many periods and places rather from any one region such as Bosnia. For Serbs, the key events of ancient hatred depicted in a narrative of national struggle and victimization included the Battle of Kosovo of 1389, the First World War, and Serbs mass killing by Usthasa and the Partisan in the Second World War in Bosnia. The war in Bosnia cannot be explained by theories of inevitable ethnic hatreds, even when such explanations conveniently excuse outsiders from the responsibilities of intervening. Previously, there were several racial and historical disputes in the former Yugoslavia but it was put down wisely by Tito. The rhetoric of national interest became increasingly nationalist in the sense of defining one group and its goals in opposition to another.  [43]   The sentiment of being oppressed where clearly documented in Memorandum of the Serbian Academy Arts and Sciences which was a draft published by Serbian intellectual and scholars in 1986. This memorandum became controversial because it underlined the discrimination of the Serbs in Yugoslavia and had claim that Serbs were inferior to other ethnic groups in the Republic of Yugoslavia. This seventy four page memorandum, which became a bible for Serb nationalist, incited nationalism among Serbs in Yugoslavia. Serbs claimed that Titos policies had discriminated Serbia and also weakened Serbia politically and economically in the Republic. Serbs, especially nationalists, inspired by the memorandum, argued that the time had come for all Serbs to restore their national pride by becoming the dominant ethnic groups in Yugoslavia.  [44]   Apart from eliminating the real threat of the enemy, the perpetrators also wanted to spread terror among the enemies in order to show their dominance and authorization. To show their supremacy, mass rape and other forms of sexual violence were conducted as an act of dehumanizing the ethnic rivals.   When committed on a mass scale and in certain patterns, such as in front of family members or in public, sexual violence can communicate an intent to destroy the group, or the very foundation of a particular group, and this is particularly true perhaps in social, cultural and religious communities where acts of sexual violence not only shame and humiliate the victim, but also tear the core foundation of that community.  [45]  It appears that when committed on a mass scale and in certain patterns, sexual and gender-based violence may have communicative value and as such may have something to say about the intention of the perpetrator. The systematic rape of women from other ethnic gr oups was purposely designed to reach the very foundations of the group.   The main motive of systematic rape is to show the more powerful ethnic groups to demoralize the others through terror and humiliation. Rape and sexual assault on women were common during all stages of the conflict and occurred on all sides, but a lengthy report compiled by United Nation Commission of Experts had found extensive evidence of Bosnian Serbs sexual assault on Muslim women. Mass and systematic rape took place often in a detention camp and in all, UN Commission compiled reports of mass rape cases from fifty seven different location in Bosnia.  [46]   Sexual violence perpetrated against Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat women during the Bosnian conflict was intimately tied to the process of destruction of their ethnic group. The mass scale, the extremely public and humiliating nature of the rapes and the systematic nature in which they were committed, clearly shows the violation of the core foundation of the group. This systematic rape were not only destroying womens capacity to reproduce, but some rapes also resulted in what both victim and perpetrator considered to be children of a new ethnicity.   In patriarchal societies such as in the Balkans, the perpetrators of rape knew that the victim and her community would experience forced pregnancy as a way to transmit a new ethnic identity to the child.   Perpetrated on a systematic scale, this pattern provides persuasive evidence of intent to violate the very foundation of the group.  [47]   However, most above all, the motive of the perpetrators to commit such violent act was based on a belief or an ideology. Inflamed by the rhetoric of nationalism sentiment of their leaders, the perpetrators of such violence are usually clear about their objectives to established a pure single ethnic nation and anxious to exclude non-nationals and potentially disloyal minorities. The intention of the force removal of different ethnic population is very clear, which is to benefit the more powerful groups or ethnic in order to establish a single ethnic nation. Despite removing others from their existing place, the roots of practice are more closely tied to ideology.  [

Indian Role in Afghan and Its Implication of Pakistan Essay

1.Afghanistan continues to be a proxy ‘playing ground’ for diverse outside powers with Russia in near vicinity and US in West. The decade old US meddling after the failure of Russian invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 has yielded more familiar results i.e. ethnic and cultural tensions, warlordism, drug-trafficking and rampant corruption. It is not that these traits did not exist in the Afghan society before US invaded Afghanistan but US invasion provided a surge in these attributes. 2.Afghanistan is a fault line where many outside powers are jostling for both influence and position. Some of this jostling remains overt, as in the case of US and its allies, and some of it is not, as in the case of Indian proxy war on Pakistan through Afghanistan. The Indian activities in Balochistan and FATA got a boost when US homed on to it for replicating its mandate in Afghanistan and preserve its interests post withdrawal. After intense interaction between the respective national security advisors, India agreed to fit into American boots. By doing so India would be benefited on two counts i.e. by safeguarding US interests in Afghanistan, it can accrue more American favors ranging from military to nuclear technology and it will expand its anti-Pakistan network in Afghanistan and continue sponsoring terrorist activities across borders into Pakistan. As a first step to place India in Afghanistan, US helped India sign an accord with Karzai titled ‘Strategic Partnership Agreement’ that would allow India exploit its provisions to cement its involvement in Afghan military and civil affairs. 3.AIM. 4. SEQ PART 1 INDIAN ROLE IN AFGHANISTAN PART 2 IMPACT ON PAKISTAN PART 3 ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATION PART 1 INDIAN ROLE IN AFGHANISTAN 5.The regional security dynamics in South Asia are driven by the conflict between India and Pakistan. Pakistan fears strategic encirclement by India if the Afghan government leans too much towards India, while India is afraid of Pakistan using Afghanistan as a convenient strategic staging area and a back door. Giving a military role to Indians in Afghanistan will simmer the existing tensions between the two countries on various issues while America wraps up its Afghan venture. With the added dimension of nuclear-armed India – Pakistan rivalry combined with likely strife taking place between the warlords and the central government in Kabul and a perpetual conflict between the warlords and the Taliban may create a civil war that no one would like to happen. 6.On October 4, 2011, New Delhi and Kabul have signed a historic Agreement on Strategic Partnership (ASP) which will further strengthen the relations between the two neighbors. India is the fifth highest donor in Afghanistan with $2billion of aid and also engaged in various development projects in Afghanistan and the recent visit by Afghan President Hamid Karzai also marks the collaboration of expanding the training of Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF). The growing partnership between New Delhi and Kabul has ensured some anxious moments with in Pakistan who doubts Indian presence in Afghanistan as a threat to them. 7.India is now geared up to impart extensive training to the fledgling Afghan National Army at training institutions across the country. Three areas have been identified under the ‘Agreement’ so far i.e. increase in number of Afghan trainee officers, specialized training to already serving mid and higher-level officers in ANA and training Afghan soldiers in counter insurgency and counter terrorist operations. The Indian military institutions earmarked for the purpose comprise the Commando School in Belgaum in south India, the Counter-Insurgency and Jungle Warfare (CIJW) School in Mizoram in the north East and the High Altitude Warfare School in Sonamarg, Indian Occupied Kashmir. 8.The relations between India and Afghanistan were strengthen more after the visit by Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh to Kabul , which was after the gap of six years and he sent the message that, unlike the West, New Delhi has no ‘exit strategy’ from Afghanistan and will stay here to bring peace and stability in the country as well as in the region. There are also active negotiations taking place between the US and India to replace US trainers in Afghanistan for providing continuity in training of Afghan security forces once US withdraws from Afghanistan. 9.The fall of the Taliban regime in 2001 allowed India to expand its influence in Afghanistan dramatically. Its engineers and IT specialists poured in as part of its most ambitious aid package – worth more than $1.5 billion – to build remote mountain roads, establish telephone, internet, and satellite links and reopen schools and hospitals. Washington encouraged India’s involvement and believed it could use the soft power of its popular Bollywood film industry and other cultural links to encourage tolerance and pluralism in the country. Meanwhile, Delhi’s contribution towards Afghan reconstruction cannot be denied. The country’s four landmark projects are the Delaram-Zaranj road, transmission lines providing Uzbek electricity to Kabul, the hydroelectric Salma Dam and a new parliament building in Kabul – the latter two of which are still under way. The $500m newly committed aid by India will be used for development and infrastructure projects in agriculture and mining. Through its provision of education, medical treatment and small-business support, India has projected considerable soft power in Afghanistan. It provides 2,000 scholarships to Afghans annually for schooling and training in India, including for 500 Afghan civil servants. More than 100 Indian-supported but Afghan-owned small development projects are being implemented. Indian medical missions in Kabul, Jalalabad, Kandahar, Herat and Mazar-e-Sharif provided free treatment for more than 350,000 Afghans in 2009-10. PART 2 IMPACT ON PAKISTAN 10.Much distrust exists between Islamabad and Delhi over their respective activities in Afghanistan. Islamabad perceives New Delhi’s presence and influence as a deliberate attempt to encircle Pakistan and prevent it from attaining the strategic depth it needs in Afghanistan. Pakistan’s government often accuses India’s embassy and four consulates in Afghanistan of carrying out clandestine operations against Pakistan in its tribal areas and restive province of Baluchistan. Pakistan has claimed that India arms and funds Baluchi rebels and the Pakistani Tehrik-e-Taliban (TTP), which India denies. Pakistan resents the goodwill of Afghans towards Indians. For its part, Delhi sees Pakistan as attempting to force it from Afghanistan. The Indian government charges that ‘elements’ in Pakistan – essentially its Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) directorate – planned the 2008 and 2009 terror attacks on the Indian embassy in Kabul (which Islamabad denies) and says that the Pakistan-based Haqqani terror network was responsible for carrying them out. 11.Indians replicating the role of US trainers in Afghanistan spells danger for Pakistan. The placement of Indian trainers may create more rifts in the already volatile bilateral relationship between India and Pakistan. Some of the opinion makers even go to the extent to term it on par with Kashmir. Some simplistic and narrow analyses have also linked the signing of the ASP to the worsening of US-Pakistan relations following the attack on the US embassy in Kabul, and of Afghan-Pakistan relations following the assassination of former President Rabbani and the suspension of the peace process with the Taliban thereafter. What has missed the eye is that the ASP was long in the making to address the Afghans’ long-standing demands. On the other hand, Islamababad did refrain from commenting on the Indo- Afghan partnership but the Pakistani defense analyst Ayesha Siddiqa says that â€Å"despite not commenting on this issue, the fact is that Pakistan does not like what has happened as they are crying for so long that Indian presence in Afghanistan would hurt Pakistan interests†. 12.India and Afghanistan’s problem is that Pakistan doesn’t agree and that sees India’s involvement in Afghanistan is a threat to its ‘strategic depth’ according to a concept in which Afghanistan is acknowledged as Pakistan’s backyard in which India has no right to hang out, whereas for India, which had been frozen out under the Taliban regime as a supporter of the Northern Alliance’s warlords, Afghanistan holds the keys to the Central Asian mineral and energy reserves it needs to sustain its rapid economic growth. To that end, and to increase its chances of gaining access to Afghanistan’s own rich reserves of iron ore, India has pledged another half a billion dollars in aid and the same is really affecting Pakistan’s and the things are even getting more worsen. Afghanistan is also keen to encourage India in this and it doesn’t want Pakistan to be its sole customs guard or jailer, and it has seen how vindictive its twin can be. When India’s Kabul embassy was blown up by a suicide bomber in 2008, killing 41, including India’s defence attachà ©, American officials said they had evidence that members of Pakistan’s ISI intelligence service had been involved in the plot. 13.There was a time when India was quite taken aback by that change of mood among regional neighbours that forced her to immediately seek new avenues to intervene. Indian psychological anguish, sense of alienation and feelings of failure in Afghanistan have revamped Indian diplomatic efforts with enhanced lobbying and manipulative methodology to mark their presence in Afghanistan. In this backdrop, Afghan Foreign Minister Dr. Abdullah Abdullah’s recent statement that India has a critical role to play in their country is a sign of persistent Indian clout in Afghanistan. Hence, Indian diplomatic efforts in Kabul to drive a wedge between Pakistan and Afghanistan to ensure that mutual relationship between the two inseparable neighbors remain tense. In this context, India aggressively propagates that al-Qaeda and Taliban are having safe heavens in major cities of Pakistan to show Pakistan in bad light and create ill feelings between the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan. India’s Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao talking at a South Asia initiative talk on â€Å"India’s global role† in Harvard University a few months back said: â€Å"We have direct interest in Afghanistan, not because we see it as theater of rivalry with Pakistan but because of the growing fusion of terrorist groups that operate from Afghanistan and Pakistan and their activities in India†. PATR 3 ANALYSIS 13. The reality is what meets beyond the eyes. India has interest in Afghanistan but not in its stability and for this purpose Indian intelligence agencies have been trying to create rift among various segments of society in Afghanistan. The instability in the Afghan society will not only help India consolidate its place in Afghanistan but also facilitate in destabilizing the arch-rival Pakistan and energy rich Central Asian Republics (CARs). In the pursuance of same, India invested over a billion US dollars to have an economic clout in Afghanistan and surged its presence in terms of intelligence cooperation through opening of new consulates. These consulates are used to continue destabilization of both Pakistan and Afghanistan and their respective interests. New Delhi’s billion dollars aid to Kabul is being actually dispersed among Indian companies working in Afghanistan for use in the projects that would help India consolidate its place in Afghanistan and Central Asia. 14.For instance, construction of road linking Chahbahar Port in Iran with Afghanistan was part of the encirclement plan and to secretly ship explosives, arms and ammunition from India in the name of construction material. India has also started showing its friendly gestures to Iran as well. In a bid to make Iran forget that India voted against its nuclear programme in the IAEA and supported sanctions on Iran, New Delhi is now often found advocating that Iran has a right to peaceful uses of nuclear energy. All this flattery is to keep Afghanistan accessible through the Iranian corridor. Afghanistan is important to India to achieve its vested interests in the region. India’s long and tumultuous history of capturing and grabbing natural resources and territories, which includes valley of Jammu & Kashmir and state of Nagaland, in order to expand its size and power, is no more a hidden fact. The expansionist agenda of India disqualifies it to be a regional power what to speak of assigning her a greater role in regional peace initiatives. 15.Had India been that justified mediating power and peace lover, it would not have back-stabbed Iran on nuclear issue merely on the basis that another nuclear armed country in the region is not in India’s interest. Also Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan, and Maldives would not have been a victim of Indian bully. Indian occupied Kashmir is another burning example of Indian usurpation. Northeast India, a region not very well known outside South Asia, is a hotbed of Indian state terrorism and numerous armed insurgencies. Recommendations 16.It will be in the interest of the region if the US reconciles with the India-Pakistan milieu in the Afghan context and leave Afghanistan to the Afghans to decide their own fate. As the Agreement on Strategic Partnership (ASP) was signed between New Delhi and Kabul, there was an immediate reaction from Islamababad that in such an agreement â€Å"the fundamental principle of ensuring the stability in the region must be taken in the account†. This shows that how anxious Islamababad is over the growing Indian presence in Afghanistan. India’s engagement in Afghanistan has been painted by many western analysts as a zero-sum game vis-à  -vis Pakistan. Yet, despite being the largest regional donor in Afghanistan, and the fifth largest internationally, India finds it increasingly difficult to operate in Afghanistan. There have been two suicide bombings of its embassy in Kabul, the first of which killed two senior Indian diplomats, two security personnel and 50 Afghans. A terror plot targeting the Indian consulate in Jalalabad was foiled. Since 2001, 20 Indian nationals have been killed. But New Delhi is also aware of the fact that until all the groups engaged in stopping the violence the path of development and progress will not be achieved. New Delhi is also aware of the fact that the role of Pakistan is also very crucial in bringing stability in the region but is also aware of the fact that any peace process will succeed only when the violence is completely shut. CONCL In short, India has no legitimate interests in Afghanistan but is keen to have a permanent role in Afghanistan in order to fulfill its vested agenda to destabilize Pakistan – major irritant in the way of establishing Indian supremacy in the region – and to have significant influence over central Asian states. From Indian side, anything that is being projected, promoted or displayed through media and friendly gestures is merely eyewash. So in view of these bitter realities, is India worth assigning a greater role in regional peace initiatives? In view of the past experience, Iran can be fool enough to walk hand in hand and in sync with India on Afghanistan? Would Kabul keep on closing its eyes on facts and will remain in state of denial vis-à  -vis New Delhi? It is time to realise that India is not a compulsion, all that is needed to make a right choice. The relation between India and Afghanistan is entering into the new horizon and it will be interesting to see how Pakistan will respond to this new growing relationship. The coming days will be the testing times for India and Afghanistan as United States is preparing to leave Afghanistan which will enable Pakistan to use its clout in Afghanistan for their strategic interests.