Posted on 09 February 2012 by Tea Server
Posted on 09 February 2012 by Tea Server
Head of the Department of Philosophy, Government College for Women University of Mysore, Mandya-571401 (Karnatika).
Re-printed from “Islam and Modern age”, Hydrabad, March 1978.
Posted on 08 February 2012 by Tea Server
S&P finally downgraded France’s credit rating several weeks ago along with some other EU Member States. Such decision by S&P could undeniably cost Sarkozy’s reelection in May 2012. Many see the downgrade of France’s credit rating as Sarkozy’s sole responsibility. But May 2012 is still very far away from a political standpoint. Since his election in 2007 Sarkozy has been a very polarizing political figure in France as proven by the large variety of nicknames given by the media such as President Bling-Bling, Sarko l’Américain, and so on. This blog will put into perspective Sarkozy’s first and maybe last mandate as French President by assessing his contribution to the construction/safeguard of the EU (in defense and security questions), advancing French foreign policy, and the buildup of the transatlantic relations.
Sarkozy, son of a Hungarian immigrant, rose to the highest political sphere quite quickly and unconventionally in French standard. He started his political life in the mid-1970s in the Municipal Council of Neuilly-sur-Seine, one of the richest suburbs of Paris, wherein a large segment of France’s political, economic, industrial and financial elites live. The fact that Mr. Sarkozy’s political life started surrounded by the French elite was considerable for his political career. The creation of an intellectual and support base traditionally takes place in the famous Grandes Ecoles, such as Ecole Nationale d’Administration (ENA), as it has been the case for previous French presidents and ministers, and certainly is the case of François Hollande, the Socialist Candidate. Sarkozy was able to compensate this lack with its Neuilly connections. The latest scandal connecting Sarkozy with the L’Oreal heiress, Liliane de Bettencourt, is one example of his powerful network. A paper produced by the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute counts some interesting facts on the rise of Sarkozy and his understanding of politics.
Following his election in May 2007, Nicolas Sarkozy appeared to have changed radically the direction of France’s foreign policy, especially towards the US. Sarkozy’s decision to re-establish ‘cordial’ relations with the US, still under the presidency of Bush, was in direct rupture with his predecessor, Jacques Chirac. The latter opposed his American counterpart, President Bush, in 2003 on the hot topic of the invasion of Iraq. The 2003 transatlantic and European split was real and substantial. The European unity was only reinstituted with the approval of
the 2003 European Security Strategy, which symbolizes the agreement between EU Member States of a common agenda and united security vision. As per Donald Rumsfeld, US Secretary of Defense at the time, Europe was then divided between Old and New Europe; France being one of the old members considering its opposition to the Iraq war. The tensions between the US and France remained high until the election of Sarkozy. Some talked at the time of ‘Sarko l’Américain,’ as he expressed at many occasion during and after the presidential race his admiration for the American model. However, Justin Vaïsse of the Brookings, argued that in fact the Americanism of Sarkozy is much more embedded into Hollywood and Elvis Presley rather than the admiration for the American political system.
The transatlantic relations between France and the US can be divided into three periods. First, from 2007 to 2008, the last part of the Bush administration, which I often refer as the ‘good Bush period,’ was favorable for a rapprochement between the two sides of the pond. Second, after the election of Obama, the honeymoon was extremely short. Very early in his presidency, Obama reoriented the attention of the US foreign policy from Europe to Asia. Such strategic move by Obama has affected the relations with his European counterparts. And the third period was since the G8 summit in Pittsburgh, following the collapse of the financial system in 2008, with closer relations on dealing at the international level with the financial crisis and with Iran. However, in general, the rupture with Chirac was
over-emphasized, as Sarkozy did not change that much the direction of the French foreign policy. Sarkozy’s decision to fully reintegrate France within the military structures of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was a moderate signal of his Atlanticism considering that France was always an active and core member of the alliance. The debate in France about such move was certainly excessive.
France was also a key actor during the summer 2008 crisis in Georgia. Following the invasion of Georgia by Russia, Sarkozy played an important role in monitoring Russia-West relations and in limiting a major split between the former Cold War enemies. Sarkozy did play a central role, but made some costly decisions and compromises for not only Georgia, but also the field of international law and human right. At that time France held the EU Presidency and was the voice of the EU, undermining Javier Solana’s role. Russian-French relations have historically been good since the late 19th century and remain quite stable. The latest part of this love story was the sale by France of a French Mistral class amphibious assault ship, creating criticism on both sides of the Atlantic.
One of the highest points of his presidency will remain the gamble on the Libyan campaign. Following a disastrous beginning of the year 2011 with total miscalculations and evaluations of the importance and reality of the Arab spring in Tunisia and then Egypt, Sarkozy decided to be proactive in the support of the rebels in Libya fighting Colonel Qaddafi. The miscalculation by the prestigious French diplomatic corps and intelligence services will remain as a stain and most likely become a cas d’école of diplomatic failure for future generations. Sarkozy did play a crucial role in getting the UN Security Council to agree on the UNSC Resolution 1973 allowing the implementation of a no-fly zone over Libya. Sarkozy was then able to bring the Americans on board and get NATO involved in the war in Libya. The use of NATO was critical for the success of the mission as French and British armies, navies and air forces have been considerably affected by budget cuts. For example, as of today Britain does not have an aircraft carrier, which seems quite contradictory to its historical strategic culture and heritage as a maritime power. The Libyan mission was a success and will become a template for future military interventions: short, precise, highly technologized, multilateral, and quite cheap. However, Sarkozy’s decision to use NATO was a major setback for the EU, which was completely bypassed by London and Paris, as well as discredited. The best example of the CSDP weakness is the fact that EUFOR Libya was created, but never deployed. Thus, HR Ashton remained quiet and irrelevant throughout the different steps of the Libyan campaign.
What next for 2012? Sarkozy does have a busy schedule until the first round of the presidential election. The year starts quite well for France
and ultimately Sarkozy considering the fact that India decided to buy for $20bn of France fighter jet, Rafale, at the expense of the EADS’ Eurofighter Typhoon. Such contract is a true illustration of Sarkozy’s understanding and mastery of politics. The Financial Times published an outstanding article on the dogfight taking place backstage in order to sale the fighter jet. In addition to his reelection campaign, several topics need to be addressed, or at least discussed: first, Iran. What should France do about it? Is it the time to empower the EEAS led-by Lady Ashton and use the similar approach of 2003 EU3+1 implemented during Solana’s mandate? Or is it the time to discuss military operation within NATO? What is certain is that Sarkozy will not get a UNSC Resolution as China and Russia will definitely oppose it. Second, the mission in Afghanistan. France has been progressively removing its troops from Afghanistan, but has actively contributed to the European Gendarmerie Force (EFG) in charge of training the Afghan National Police and Afghan National Army. With the announcement by the US to remove the troops by 2014, the Europeans will soon be following this trend. Will the EGF remain or should it come back home as well? Third, Syria. The violations of international law by the Syrian government are undeniable and some members of the Arab League monitoring team have even expressed their anger and opposition to the Assad regime. Avoiding and sidelining Syria could haunt Sarkozy in the future, the same way the Rwanda genocide has been haunting French political elites for over 15 years, but for different reasons. Sarkozy understands that the UNSC will not agree on a Resolution, but decision needs to be taken on the matter. Unfortunately until today China and Russia have favored sovereignty over humanity. Could it be done outside the laws with a NATO-led operation as it was done in 1999 in Kosovo? It would be ethically a right mission embodying the R2P concept, but wrong as it would violate international law. Fourth, Turkey. Franco-Turk relations have been at their lowest since the adoption by the French Assembly of the recent law criminalizing the denial of the Armenian genocide. Poor bilateral relations with Turkey will ultimately hurt and affect the overall EU and NATO relations. Turkey could block, as it has done in the past, Berlin Plus type NATO operations. Sarkozy must address the matter with Turkey and find new common ground. Fifth, the economic crisis has been painful for the Euro-Atlantic community. The Eurozone is still not safe and saved, as the financial and economic situations of Greece, Spain, Italy and Portugal remain volatile. Sarkozy with his German counterpart, Ms Merkel, have a lot of work in readjusting and agreeing on the rules of
the game and reforming the Eurozone. Sixth, the British headache. Since the gamble of Prime Minister Cameron back in November, the relations between Britain and France have not been of the most pleasant. The Franco-Anglo relations are central for the construction of the common EU defense polict as it was the case in the 1998 Saint-Malo Treaty creating the ESDP, and in the 2010 Defense Treaty. Both actors need one another in order to maintain their active foreign policies and keep the construction of the CSDP going. 2012 will be interesting to see how France and Britain readjust their relations either with the reelection of Sarkozy; or with the election of Mr. Hollande.
Even though, I have not been a supporter of Mr. Sarkozy’s domestic and social policies as well as fundamentally disagree with his leadership and governing style, I have to admit that he has been an interesting international leader. His approach to foreign policy is quite in the continuity of French Gaullist heritage. However, the case of the French operation in Ivory Coast, last April, has been completely under-studied and under-covered by global media. Some have argued that the Libyan mission was a simple cover-up for the real mission and French interests, Ivory Coast. I would also criticize his lack of commitment to the construction and strengthening of the EEAS. It is true that Ms. Ashton has not been the best representative as well as has been unable to establish a common EU vision, however she was appointed by the 27 Heads of State and Government. Sarkozy was part of the appointing committee, and privileged at that time the securing of the DG Internal Market to Michel Barnier rather than getting a French HR. Sarkozy’s priorities were set: French’s influence over the common market, even though the Directors are theoretically not supposed to represent their national government; l’Europe de la defense after.
Until then there is one thing that I can’t wait to see: who will be representing France at the NATO summit in May in Chicago?
Posted on 01 February 2012 by Tea Server
This week I met with an Israeli military official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, about Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu’s leadership. While he lauded his economic acumen and abilities as a politician, the official continually said that Bibi is insincere about peace with the Palestinians and unable to make the tough and unpopular decisions. “He says he wants peace and is willing to do what is necessary, but he doesn’t follow up. His father believed in greater Israel and so does he. Regardless of whether they are ready for a state, the Palestinians can’t be occupied forever. Look at the Arab Spring.” The official also commented that Bibi deflects the issue by hiding behind rhetoric of Israel’s strength, security dilemma with Iran, and his ability to standup to the Obama administration.
By comparison, this sounds very similar to what was transpiring with Golda Meir and her policy towards the Arab states in the lead up to the 1973 Yom Kippur War. Golda felt very empowered and believed that her Arab counterparts wouldn’t dare strike against Israel given the outcome of the 1967 War. She made comments about wanting to make peace but found reasons to evade it. Like Bibi, she used Israeli security and strength as an excuse to not engage her enemies. Like Bibi, she downplayed American pressures to make peace. So what happened in the end? She ignored the signs of an impending war and over 2,000 Israeli’s lost their lives.
For the sake of Israel, Bibi (left) needs to have more foresight than the late Golda Meir (right). If not, than Israeli society should vote him out of office in the next election.
It is also worth noting that like Bibi, Meir continually turned a blind eye and found meandering excuses for settlement construction, legal and illegal.
To return to the topic at hand, some believe peace with Egypt would not have been possible without the Yom Kippur War. However, that suggests that it took a war to get Israeli leadership out of the clouds. Had Golda and her advisors been more balanced and flexible, they may have accomplished the peace accord without the bloodshed.
There is of course no one definitive answer on how to make peace with the Palestinians; and not everything is within Israel’s, or Bibi’s, control (Hamas). That does not change the fact, though, that he has proven unwilling to make the tough decisions needed to make progress with the Palestinians. Bibi, and Israeli society, should reflect on the 1973 Yom Kippur War and take heed in the words of Spanish born poet and philosopher George Santayana, “those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”
Posted on 31 January 2012 by Tea Server
The Dassault Rafale fighter jet,The process
to determine the L1 (lowest bidder) has been completed, and sources
indicate that the final contract is expected to be signed in the next
financial year. The first 18 aircraft will be bought off the shelf. The
rest 118 will be manufactured in partnership with an Indian company.
There
were six contenders for the world's biggest defence deal which included
the Russian MiG- 35,Lockheed Martin's F-16 Falcon, Boeing's F-18
Hornet, the Swedish Saab Grippen, Euro-Fighter Typhoon and Rafale.
Of
these, the European EADS Eurofighter Typhoon and Dassault Rafale were
in the final race for the global tender for a medium multi-role combat
aircraft (MMRCA). The Eurofighter bid was backed by four partner nations
including Germany, Spain, Italy and the United Kingdom while the
Dassault Rafale was backed by the French Government.
Posted on 30 January 2012 by Tea Server
If it is forgiven today, wait for the Indus River to turn red with Pakistani blood. If the government can violate the constitution so audaciously to destroy the country, why can’t our military do the same to save Pakistan?
This is a guest column by Zaid Hamid
In 1487, Abu Abdallah Mohammad was the 22nd sultan of the great city of Alhambra. Known to the Spaniards as Boabdil, his tiny physique also won him the nickname el chico. In that year, he sought foreign help against his father and uncle. He wrote a memo to Ferdinand and Isabelle, the most powerful sovereigns in the region, to seek help and promised assistance in helping them take over Spain. He offered to make his emirate a tributary kingdom under Ferdinand and Isabella.
His wish was granted. But within five years, in 1492, Ferdinand and Isabella turned to Alhambra and forced Abu Abdallah, or Boabdil, to surrender and leave for exile.
Boabdil was the author of the treacherous memo. The name of his prime minister was Yusuf.
Under another Yusuf, a memo was written last year to a foreign power, seeking help to weaken Pakistan’s military and intelligence. In exchange, a promise was made to make Pakistan a denuclearized vassal of that foreign power.
Five hundred years after Boabdil’s memo, history is being repeated. Another memo has been written on identical terms.The only difference is that the Pakistani memo has been exposed.
But even then the courts and opinion makers are playing games, while the Pakistani military watches.
A compromise or a deal on the Memo would fatally damage Pakistan. There is no turning back now. The ghosts of Agartala still haunt us after 40 years.
Treason-democracy-elections-rebellion-civil war-invasion-defeat-dismemberment-humiliation! Memo is today’sAgartala. If it is forgiven today, the dreaded sequence would turn Indus River red with Pakistani blood. The war would annihilate us as it did in 1971. Pakistani media must wake up and see how history is repeating itself.
The Pakistani nation must clearly understand that a sinister web of treachery is being woven against Pakistan and ISI by the government and its allies in political parties and media. The Memo case has almost been killed. Now the Asghar Khan/Mehran Bank case has been revived. The authors of The Memo wanted this case revived to divert attention away from The Memo and to take revenge from the military.
The links and timings between memo case and the Mehran Bank case are stunningly clear. Also, the missing person’s case is also being used as a tool to settle scores against ISI. The traitors, snakes and idiots have all joined hands to attack, humiliate and destroy the last defense wall of Pakistan. Memo is a reality just as the Agartala conspiracy was. But back then, too, the political parties joined hands against our military and protected the main accused, the Husain Haqqani of that time, Sheikh Mujeeb.
The result was elections and war and breakup.
History is being repeated today. Political parties and media are ignoring The Memo, attacking ISI and demanding elections when Pakistan is encircled for war. Shame on our politicians, media, judges and the ulema of this nation who have willingly decided to ignore and bury The Memo. Those who compromise their honor, freedom and faith deserve to be invaded.
For God sake, wake up.
The Supreme Court of Pakistan has already declared NRO unconstitutional. The court has also declared voting lists as bogus. These were the voting lists that brought this government to power in 2008.
What is the moral standing of a government that has come to power through unconstitutional and bogus means?
If the government can violate the constitution so audaciously to destroy the country, why can’t our military do the same to save Pakistan? Overthrowing the government is no more a legal or constitutional issue. It is a national duty and patriotism.
This article, edited by PakNationalists.net, is based on series of text messages and Facebook status updates by Zaid Hamid, a Pakistani analyst.
Posted on 25 January 2012 by Tea Server

The monumental mosque has, however, been the subject of diverse opinion about its origin. According to Ajmer Historical and Descriptive (by Dewan Bahadur Harbilas Sarda) it is claimed to be a Saraswati Mandir which is said to have been built in 1153 A. D. by Raja Visaldeva who was the first Chauhan Emperor of India. But according to the Arabic inscription appearing on the marble arch in the centre of the mosque and the convincing arguments advanced by the author of Main-ul-Arifin (P. 150-154) it is recognised to be a mosque ever since its origin which was built by Sultan Shahabuddin Ghori in 595 A. H. (12th century A.D.) wherein Hazrat Khwaja Muinuddin Chishti himself (who came to Ajmer in 587 A. H.) is said to have offered his prayers for a considerable time. Later on, Sultan Shamsuddin Altamish of Delhi (607 to 633 A. H.) is reported to have built its present massive structure of red stone which was completed in 614 A. H. by Ali Ahmed mason under the supervision of one Mohammed Ariz – a claim which is also substantiated by another Arabic inscrition on its central arch. (Ahsan-us-Siar, P. 87-92). In any case, this magnificent mosque is one of the rare historic monuments of India.
General Cunningham., Director of Archaeology Government of India, who inspected this mosque in 1864 A. D., appears to have fallen into the error of accepting the common belief that it was built in Dhai-din i.e. two and a half days, as its name implies out of the material released from some demolished temples – a judgment which is difficult to believe in view of its extensive and massive stony structure replete with extremlely fine and most intricate workmanship on stone. It seems that only the smaller marble arch in the centre of the mosque may have been finished in 2-1/2 days to meet an emergency but the whole massive structure, with its elaborate Arabic tracings and delicate engraving details, is definitely a work of many years sustained labour.
Writing of the beautiful details of this marvellous edifice, Mr. Furgusson, author of the Eastern and Indian Architecture (P. 513 ) says – “As example of surface decoration, the Jhonpra and the mosque of Al-tamish at Delhi are probably unrivalled. Nothing in Cairo or in Persia and nothing in Spain or Syria is so exquisite in detail and can approach them for beauty or surface decoration. The gorgeous prodigality of ornamental work , the fascinating richness of tracery, the delicate sharpness of finish, the fascinating richness of tracery, the delicate sharpness of finish, the endless variety of detail and the accurate and laborious workmanship, are eternal credit to its past Indian engineers and masons”. There is a rich variety of Quranic verse inscribed all over the building to tax the brains of both inquisitive historians and the antiquarians alike . In short, it is a model of excellence in the art Indian architecture.
Posted on 18 January 2012 by Tea Server
The last two years were a bumpy ride for the European security policy. One may claim that the Europeans once again failed not only to convey a clear message about their security goals to the foreign partners, but also to take concrete actions in order to stave off the creeping erosion of the Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP). Do we really face a European strategic decay in that domain? Indeed, some serious doubts about this statement may be raised. Therefore, it is high time to debunk three prophecies about European security in 2012.
1. Do worry, do not be happy. The Polish Presidency did a good job. The last six months have been the most fruitful and substantial for CSDP since the French Presidency in 2008. The joint conclusions of the Council of the European Union of December 2011 gave a vivid signal that the EU Member States are still willing to further develop the CSDP concept and necessary capabilities (personnel, assets, intelligence analytical support.) It was not easy to reach a consensus as there are multiple visions of European security and the pace in which it should evolve. Despite that fact the current message is a bit more optimistic than a year ago: Be of good cheer! After two years of stagnation there is a light of hope for CSDP. However, there are still a lot of obstacles on the European way toward ultimate success. One of them are financial constraints.
2. Crisis will impede everything. Against the backdrop of current financial constraints, the challenge for Europe is to do better with less while making good on its responsibilities. The crisis has inevitably made it more difficult for politicians to sell the benefits of the ongoing defense integration to the wary public. The crisis has blunted the importance of Europe in the world, exposed the Old Continent to numerous risks and threats, but also put it to the critical test that it cannot fail. The biggest challenge for Europeans remains the weakening of mutual trust between the Member States. The Weimar initiative from December 2010 – which sought to strengthen CSDP – has to some extent filled the gap. Poland, France and Germany were able to build a coalition of the willing and able (e.g. Finland, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Romania) to spark a new wave of trust that may empower CSDP. However, crisis can only be overcome by concrete actions. Therefore, without a visible sign of progress in the implementation of the pooling and sharing initiative in 2012 it will be hard to revamp CSDP. In fact, an agreement on at least basic issues (e.g. support structures required for education, training and exercises) is a must.
3. The EU will diminish its external security policy engagement. To be fair, a glance at the number and locations of the past and current EU missions around the world reveals the union’s clear desire to live up to its ambitions in terms of crisis management policy. Since 2003, the EU has launched 25 civilian and military missions, in such far-flung countries as Chad and the Central African Republic in 2008-2009 and Guinea-Bissau from 2008-2010. Currently, the EU’s engagement in the world stretches from the Balkans, in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo; through Eastern Europe, in Georgia and Moldova; to the Middle East, in the Palestinian territories; up to Africa, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Horn of Africa and Uganda. In 2011, as a result of budget cutbacks, the EU has struggled at least to maintain the status quo of its foreign operational engagements. Some experts even thought that the EU was likely to adopt an even less expeditionary posture in the future. On the contrary, the 2012 agenda looks both ambitious and promising. Besides, the ongoing operations the EU will remain committed to addressing the security challenges in the Sahel with a view to start a CSDP mission to reinforce regional security capabilities, in close cooperation with the African Union. A second operation, in South Sudan (with a focus on airport security), is also being prepared. Finally, the Polish Presidency has facilitated the amendment process of the Athena mechanism which administers the financing of common costs of EU operations having military or defence implications. Therefore, it will be now easier than before to set up a mission.
On paper it all seems doable and easy. But, as diplomats say: Paper is patient. After the Libyan crisis there is a growing sense of ambiguity about the real outcome of the EU’s crisis management policy. Therefore, it is more than certain that the development of CSDP will be a long process. But Europeans should not forget that they are approaching a “do or die” moment for Common Security and Defense Policy.
Dominik P. Jankowski serves as Expert Analyst at the National Security Bureau of the Republic of Poland and is pursuing a doctorate at the Warsaw School of Economics.
The opinions, findings and conclusions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the National Security Bureau of the Republic of Poland.
Posted on 17 January 2012 by Tea Server
Standard and Poor’s rating agency has lowered the credit ratings of 9 eurozone members, including formerly AAA-rated France and Austria. The move is significant, affecting as it does the future of the eurozone’s bail-out fund, the French presidential election, the roll-over of existing European sovereign debt, and more. However, the downgrade is not really a catastrophe for the nations downgraded nor for the European economy’s prospects. Our purpose here is to understand what the downgrade is, what it means and what it may not mean.
First off, what is a sovereign credit rating and what does a downgrade mean? There are numerous entities in finance that offer their well-informed (or otherwise) opinions about a variety of investment instruments. What we are concerned with here are the three main credit rating agencies: S&P, Fitch and my former employer Moody’s. What they do is issue a rating, that is an alphanumeric symbol, that encapsulates the agency’s detailed analysis of a debtor’s ability and willingness to repay a debt. In that sense, their ratings aren’t a whole lot different from the FICO score you have that is supposed to tell lenders about your creditworthiness.
While the methodologies vary a bit from one agency to another, the ratings scales of each are comparable by and large. For example, AAA is the best rating possible (Aaa at Moody’s). Junk status is about 10 notches below that at BB+ (Ba1 Moody’s) , and default is another 10 or so notches down. Because these agencies have been in the business of issuing ratings for decades (Moody’s was founded in 1900), it is possible to tie actual default experiences to the ratings. S&P’s can be found here.
On Friday, France and Austria fell one notch from AAA to AA+, Italy fell a couple of notches from A to BBB+, Spain went down one from AA- to A, Cyprus dropped two notches to BB+, Portugal’s two notch fall leaves it at BB (junk status, and it also has a negative outlook), Malta went down one notch to A- from A, Slovakia fell a notch to A from A+, and Slovenia is one notch lower at A+ from AA-. The other members of the eurozone retain their ratings. That means Germany, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Finland kept their AAA. For the record, the other members states and their S&P ratings are: Belgium (AA), Estonia (AA-), Greece (CC) and Ireland (BBB).
What is extremely important to remember is that the downgrades were only to the ratings issued by S&P. Moody’s and Fitch did nothing. In their eyes, France and Austria (and the USA for that matter) are still AAA. Split ratings, when the agencies don’t agree exactly, are rather common. And in every regulation where ratings agencies are mentioned, two different agencies’ opinions matter, not three. So, there is a real question as to whether Austria and France are still AAA or not. The market, of course, is not focused on the dog that didn’t bark – it’s paying attention to S&P despite it having the minority opinion.
Be that as it may, the S&P downgrades for France and Austria are economically inconvenient but not really all that important for investors. Yes, both will have to pay a bit more in interest to fund their debts. However, a study by JPMorgan Chase looking at the nine sovereign borrowers that lost their AAA ratings between 1998 and the US downgrade in August shows an increase of 2 basis points (or 0.02%) in the following week. Is it a make or break situation if your mortgage is 4.12% or 4.14%? France and Austria will face no funding problems as a result of the downgrade. And indeed, the US saw its borrowing costs actually decline immediately after S&P downgraded it a few months ago.
The reason for this minimal change lies in the default record of AA+ issuers. According to the chart cited above, issuers rated AAA will default 0.00% of the time in the next 12 months. An issuer with a rating of AA+ has the same default rate over 12 months. Over a 5-year period, the default rate for AAA issuers is 0.10%; for an AA+ debtor, it’s 0.15%. In other words, if you lend to France or Austria by buying a 3-year bond, you still have a 99+% chance of getting paid back in full with interest on time.
Where the downgrades do become problematic is in the political sphere. In three months’ time, the French will go to the polls to elect a president. France lost its AAA rating on Nicholas Sarkozy’s watch, and whether justly or not, he will take some blame for it – the leftish newspaper Liberation ran a headline calling him S_RKOZY, having lost an “A” of his own. He currently trails socialist candidate Francois Hollande by 10% in the polls. With 53% of the electorate believing that the loss of the AAA rating is a serious matter, the downgrade only makes his re-election more difficult.
In the end, though, the ratings come back to the issue that undermined them in the first place – the euro. The bail-out fund that has kept Greece, Ireland and Portugal afloat so far, the European Financial Stability Facility, was rated AAA because of its backing from AAA-rated sovereigns. However, 16 January 2012, S&P dropped that rating to AA+ because of the French and Austrian downgrades. S&P said that the EFSF could get its AAA back if it could obtain more guarantees (from whom I wonder?) or if it raised less money that would be better protected by the existing guarantees. A smaller bail-out fund, however, is less likely to succeed at stabilizing the eurozone. At the same time, a fund rated less than AAA will have to pay more for its funds, and that will make the bail-out fund less effective as well.
So what does it all mean? Objectively, the difference between AAA and AA+ is very small, and it should not have much impact. Markets, however, are never objective. They are fueled by greed and fear. S&P’s downgrade of these nations has made the eurozone’s problems harder to solve.
Posted on 10 January 2012 by Tea Server
Relevant links is one of the most heard concepts in link building. Online marketing aficionados will no doubt have heard it at least multiple times during their career, especially when they have just started out grasping the basic concepts of search engine optimization. A simple glance at any SEO forum can prove that as users engage in hot debates about how it is always only about relevancy links and about how you should always focus on obtaining links from 100% related websites. Otherwise, those links you just obtained will be merely a huge waste of time.
Do Check: Importance of Link Building

However, the issue of relevancy in link building is largely a myth as I will demonstrate in this article. There is obviously a certain advantage in obtaining truly relevant links but to argue that “irrelevant” links are useless is farcical. A link is a link, whether it comes from a relevant website or not. If you are starting out on link building and are worried about the issue of relevant versus irrelevant links, you should thus take the time to know exactly what the debate entails.
A relevant link is described as one that come from a website that deals with the same subject. As a simple example, taking the concept of relevant links into consideration, you should aim to obtain links from travel websites for your own travel blog or website. Taking this relevancy even further, if your website deals with travel to Mauritius, it would then be a great idea to obtain links from websites that also deal with travel to Mauritius (which typically is not going to happen). As such, there are actually various degrees of relevancy when it comes to links.
A hotly debated link building and search engine optimization topic is that only relevant links work. This side of the argument advances the fact that search engines will disregard links that are not relevant to the topic of the linking website or give these less weight. However, while search engines are now indeed extremely complex and can understand tons of things, it is still difficult for them to actually properly deal with relevancy in most cases. This is made even harder due to the fact that it is downright impossible to take into account people’s linking behavior.
For example, someone may be running a football blog from London in the United Kingdom and wish to link to a car rental website in Spain after traveling there to watch a football match. He might be thrilled to link to this particular website for football fans who want to rent a car during their holiday in Spain. While the websites in this example have absolutely nothing in common and this is technically an irrelevant link, it is actually a completely genuine link and. Moreover, in this specific case, the link to the car rental website is a true popularity vote as there was no link building or link baiting involved.
Similarly, we need to remember that just because someone runs a kind of website, that does not mean that is all he is interested about. It is also now becoming increasingly common for websites to deal with multiple topics that often have nothing in common. In these cases, the concept of relevant links become even harder to enforce, and search engines have no foolproof ways of knowing exactly when to count and disregard links other than to look for the Nofollow tag.
Moreover, the advent of social media is disputing the relevancy theory even more as links obtained through social networks cannot be given any relevancy measure. As such, you should not waste too much time worry about relevancy when developing strategies to earn links. You should instead focus on simply earning links and making sure those links will stay. Your search engine ranking will duly rise whether or not these links come from truly relevant websites.
The author writes on behalf of the Région Réunion website, which is very notable for fans of Reunion island for its exhaustive Culture Réunion and Economie Ile de la Réunion editorials.
Similar Posts:
Posted on 07 January 2012 by Tea Server
Posted on 02 January 2012 by Tea Server
It seems that Indian airforce is more content with Rafale than the Eurofighter, As reported by Deccan Chronicles :
Just why has the Indian Air Force (IAF) short-listed the French
Rafale and the Eurofighter Typhoon ahead of four other contenders,
including the US F-16 and F/A-18 fighters, for the Rs 42, 000 crore
medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) contract?
The down selection at the end of a prolonged evaluation of the six
fighter jets was evidently based on the fact that the Rafale and the
Typhoon were the most modern airframes and better equipped compared to
F/A-18 Super Hornet and F-16 IN of the US, MiG-35 of Russia, and JAS-39
Gripen of Sweden.
The Rafale and the Typhoon met most of the 630 technical attributes
mentioned in the request for proposal (RFP) by the ministry of defence,
while the others lacked either in performance or had limitations in
terms of future upgrades.
“Rafale figures a notch higher than Typhoon in terms of performance
and involves easier adaptability as it is logistically and operationally
similar to Mirage-2000, used extensively by our boys during the Kargil
conflict in 1999. The French government has also cleared the technology
transfer, including the AESA (active electronically scanned array)
radar,” sources in the IAF told Deccan Chronicle.
The other discreet offering by Dassault Aviation too made sense: save
on the $1.5 billion project to upgrade 52 Mirage-2000 jets by acquiring
the Rafale.
Interestingly, all six fighters were in the race till April 17, the
deadline for submission of modified offset proposals. The
representatives of these firms were informed of the Union government’s
decision to relax the offset policy mentioned in the request for
proposal (RFP).
The original rider that half the value of the $ 10.5 billion contract
be passed on to domestic firms was modified, fixing it at 30 per cent
of the deal. “We were all expecting a word on extension of commercial
proposals on the last day, April 28, but got to know that only Dassault
Aviation and Eurofighter have been invited for discussions,” said a
representative of Saab AB.
Those who lost out have made it known that they would raise issues
concerning the price and other attributes of Rafale and Typhoon. The two
aircraft are said to be the highest priced among those in the contest
when looked at from a unit price point of view. Second, the
Eurofighter’s AESA radar is still under development. Only the two US
fighters have operational AESA radars on them.
If India finally picks the Rafale, it would be only the second air
force after the French Air Force to induct these fighters into its
fleet.
India has asked Dassault SA and Eurofighter GmbH to hold their price
bids until the end of the year. The deal is expected to be signed by
March 2012.
The Final Two
Eurofighter Typhoon – Germany/Britain/Italy/Spain
Dassault Rafale — France
Out of the contest
Lockheed Martin’s F-16IN – USA
Boeing’s F/A-18 Super Hornet – USA
SAAB’s Gripen JAS-39 – Sweden
Mikoyan-Gureywich’s MiG-35 – Russia
Posted on 01 January 2012 by Tea Server
Many things could be said about the past year, but at the very least it could not be considered boring. Within two weeks of the new year, protests over government corruption in Tunisia ousted its long standing dictator, Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali. That event, which took many observers by surprise, triggered a wave of protests throughout the region. As the year went on, protests in Egypt overthrew Hosni Mubarak and brought on a NATO intervention in Libya while the Yemeni, Syrian and Bahraini governments responded to discontent in their countries with increasing violence and Morocco introduced a new constitution. Of course such protests were not limited to North Africa and the Middle East; as early as January similar protests against corruption and authoritarianism were seen in Gabon before spreading to Mauritania, Djibouti, Uganda, Malawi, Swaziland and Senegal. Further north, protest movements emerged in Spain and Greece against government austerity measures and high unemployment, while Israelis took to the streets over the summer in record numbers in the name of social justice and protests grew in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. By the end of the year, the Occupy movement broke out in the US and Canada against the large involvement of money in politics and the lack of economic opportunity for the average citizen while large student protests over educational reform broke out in Colombia and Chile. And finally, in December protests against government corruption reached all the way to the doors of the Kremlin in Russia. So numerous and active has the protest calendar been over the past 12 months, it is quite possible to narrate the entire year only in major protest movements and events.
Of course, other events happened in the field of human rights. The drama of last year’s contested presidential elections in Cote d’Ivoire continued into 2011 with open fighting between parties loyal to each of the candidates. Just two weeks after the UN Security Council approved a no-fly zone over Libya, it also adopted Resolution 1975 which allowed the French-supported peacekeeping mission there to use all necessary measures to protect civilian life. Two weeks later, incumbent president and 2010 election loser Laurent Gbagbo was arrested by UN forces in his home, ending the standoff. In late November, Gbagbo was transferred to the International Criminal Court in The Hague following an arrest warrant for crimes against humanity. His transfer means that it is likely he will be the first former head of state to stand trial at the ICC.
Both the UN intervention in Cote d’Ivoire and the NATO intervention in Libya gave the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine a boost. While some debate whether NATO overstepped its UN authorization in its campaign, possibly hurting the effectiveness of the doctrine, these two events illustrated that even the international community can learn from its past mistakes when facing imminent civilian carnage, even if the application of the policy is uneven.
Elsewhere in Africa, the Republic of South Sudan officially became independent in July after a referendum in January that saw over 98% of the population vote for independence. Yet as South Sudan celebrated a new chapter of their own history and the end of a six-year long peace process, the UN declared a famine in parts of Somalia following an ongoing drought throughout the entire region and new violence broke out along the just created border between Sudan and South Sudan.
Of course, disasters – both manmade and natural – were not limited to the Global South. In July, Anders Behring Breivik set off a car bomb in Oslo and attacked a summer camp on the Norwegian island of Utøya, killing 87 people and shocking the normally calm Nordic country. In August, a small protest against police brutality spun out of control and set off four days of rioting across the United Kingdom.
Looking at this brief summary of the past year, it is easy to understand why the UN High Commissioner of Human Rights, Navi Pillay, declared 2011 as the year where “human rights went viral.” However not all of year’s events treated human rights kindly. The execution of Muamar Gaddafi at the hands of rebel forces in Libya, and the cheers that came from some corners at the online footage of his abuse at the hands of his captors, reminded us that even monsters deserve compassion and we all have it in us to deny others basic dignity. In the US, the execution of Troy Davis brought the death penalty back into the spotlight, but even a sustained media campaign on the apparent shortcomings of the case against him could not save his life. The year was also not a good one for journalists, as the Committee to Protect Journalist announced that 45 journalists were killed in 2011, with Pakistan being the most dangerous country for journalists this year. And while some claimed 2011 to be the year of social media, that also came with tragic consequences as citizen journalists and online activists found themselves in the crosshairs of various groups, from drug cartels in Mexico to government forces in North Africa and the Middle East.
Finally, while there were many positive developments over the past 12 months, the year ended on a sour note with news that President Obama signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act, including the troublesome provision that allows the government to indefinitely detain US citizens in the United States if they are suspected of terrorism. There are many problematic aspects to this provision, not just for human rights but also for the basic principles of democracy and due process in the US. If nothing else, this quiet act at the end of 2011 will give activists a new cause to start 2012 with.
As no Year in Review would be incomplete without a list, here are some of my top picks for 2011:
Most Unexpected event
As I noted at the start, this year has been an incredibly active one for protests, the type of year that probably hasn’t been seen since 1968. Even still, 2011 has been more remarkable in many ways because of the diverse locations where these movements have sprung up and in how they built upon each other throughout the year, aided by relationships forged through social media and increased global communications. While analysts may have suggested that major uprisings or protests were due in some of these countries for a while, I doubt that any of them would have – or even could have – predicted the way these protests merged and multiplied, both online and in the streets. There is no single name for this trend or phenomenon, but that is my choice for most unexpected event of the year.
Most important person or group
Closely related to my choice for most unexpected event, my pick for the most important person or group is actually a generation. Whatever you choose to call them – Generation Y, Millennials, Generation Next, or some other iteration – their presence has been undeniable in shaping major events of the past year. In 1966, Robert F. Kennedy gave a speech at University Cape Town where he memorably stated, “Few will have the greatness to bend history, but each of us can work to change a small portion of events. And in the total of all those acts will be written the history of a generation.” After years of being mostly defined by their consumer habits and entertainment choices, this past year saw this generation find its voice against injustice, as well as the courage to work towards a different world.
Book of the year
My choice for book of the year highlights the aborted Persian Spring rather than this year’s Arab Spring. “Then They Came For Me” by Maziar Bahari tells of his months in Iran’s infamous Evin Prison for his journalistic coverage of the 2009 Iranian Election Protests. While his period in prison was Kafkaesque at times, the story also highlights the humanity of the protestors and ordinary Iranians in their search for dignity in a country that they love.
What to look for in 2012…
While 2011 was a major game-changer in some ways, on the other hand I find that my outlook for 2012 is not much different from what I predicted last year. I’m comfortable with that since much of what I predicted for 2010 came true this past year (and being only a year off is fine with me).
Digital rights and what freedom of expression means in the 21st century will continue to be a major human rights issue, especially after the EU quietly passed the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Act earlier this month and the possibility that the US House of Representatives will pass the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the new year.
Likewise protests are also likely to continue in 2012. The four countries that managed to overthrow their dictators this year – Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Yemen – still face significant battles in stabilizing their governments and bringing about a full democratic transition. Protests and subsequent crackdowns by the government continue in both Bahrain and Syria, with no end in sight for either. The only country in North Africa to largely escape the protests that swept the region is Algeria, but already some are predicting that may change soon. Similarly, the Occupy movement is determined to not fade away in the new year as they come up with new methods of protest even as many of their camps are disbanded. As this past year demonstrated, protests movements in one corner of the globe can bring about new movements elsewhere, so what is in store for 2012 remains a mystery to even the most astute analysts.
Corporate involvement and influence in politics is also likely to be an ongoing issue. This is the central focus of the Occupy movement, but there have been other indications that more people are focusing on corporate accountability as well. In particular, the increasing evidence of Western technology firms selling surveillance equipment to repressive regimes have raised new questions about what responsibility for-profit organization have in the consequences of their products. Elsewhere, there is growing attention on the long term impact that increased involvement of Chinese firms in Africa may have for both political and economic democracy in the region and the growth of human rights. No matter where you look, corporations are facing more scrutiny which in unlikely to go away anytime soon.
In the end, what I am left with in the final hours of 2011 is how much more optimistic I am about this coming year than I was last year. So much has happened in the past 12 months that it can boggle the mind. But while some events were heartbreaking, most of the past year has been uplifting and at times, even inspiring. If 2011 was the year when “human rights went viral” then it is now on us to make 2012 the year when the world finally consolidated those rights and made them count.
Posted on 28 December 2011 by Tea Server
The IPad 2 is the derivative of the original IPad model and is used for presentations, movie viewing, as well as reading books and periodicals. Apple, Inc. announced the advent of the IPad 2 in March 2011, as well as in twenty-five other countries soon thereafter. The second-generation IPad has a lithium battery that lasts for ten hours, and an A5 processor that is nine times faster than the processor of the original IPad.

Two versions of the IPad 2 are in existence currently: the IPad 2 wi-fi and the IPad 2 3G. The IPad 2 wi-fi model offers Internet access in the event that a wi-fi Internet connection is available. This makes the IPad 2 wi-fi a perfect reader in coffeeshops, coffeehouses, and bookstores such as Barnes and Noble. In contrast to the IPad 2 wi-fi model is the IPad 2 3G model, a version of the IPad 2 that can work in any setting, regardless of whether wi-fi Internet exists or not.
Those who rely on the IPad 2 wi-fi will find themselves surely disappointed when they enter a zone that has no wireless Internet. Though the IPad 2 3G may cost more, it is worth the price when you deliberate whether or not to have an Internet connection or not at a perfect place like the library or bookstore. If you want technology with you everywhere you go, the IPad 2 3G is the perfect device for you.
The IPad 2 3G not only stands out with its “everywhere” wireless Internet, but also its international shipping capabilities are also applaudable. Since the IPad 2 3G connects you to the World Wide Web without the presence of Internet, you can take it anywhere—even overseas. However, note two things: first, you can possess international shipping capabilities only with the IPad 2 3G. The wi-fi model will not work as far as international shipping goes. Next, even with the 3G model, you will still need to purchase a micro SIM card in whatever country you find yourself travelling.
“SIM” stands for “Subscriber Identity Module,” and is a circuit chip placed inside your IPad to reveal information about you to the carrier. The Subscriber Identity reveals information about you (the subscriber), your identity, to the IPad: phone number, billing information, and other security data. Subscriber Identity Modules ease the process of buying a new IPhone or even a new IPad because, no matter the technological equipment, your SIM card will always register you as the person of the new IPad or IPhone.
The SIM card is only 0.76mm in size and runs at a speed of 5 Mhz. It turns out that the little chip in your IPad 2 makes all the difference in the world!
The SIM card, though little, matters a lot. If you do not possess a SIM card, you will need to buy one in the country you’re in when you travel overseas—whether to Spain or France, for example. The SIM cards in other countries are most likely prepaid cards, which means that you pay the cost of Internet up-front without any later fees.
How exactly can you internationally ship? Think about it: if you have an IPad from America, but you travel to Germany for a one-month vacation, you can buy something from a German company online and send it to your address in the States. The absence of the SIM card (and the IPad 2 3G) removes all this. You need 3G capability because you are outside of American wi-fi range; you need the SIM card so that your IPad knows that you are the current user (though you are not in your current living range).
Do Check: Affordable Laptops: How to Get the Best Value for Your Money
The Internet has revolutionized the way we think of distance. Prior to the Internet’s advent, we always believed that life had barriers—geography and time separated one place from another. Today, we believe the opposite, and distant places could not seem any closer. This is all due to the invention of the World Wide Web, as well as devices like the IPad 2 3G—devices that remind us of the impact of globalization and the gripping truth that life is, literally, in our own backyard.
The article is contributed by Calvin Scott. Calvin love for technology can’t be explained in words, it’s seamless like ocean. Visit his site for zeecontainer kopen and container verkoop.
Similar Posts: