Acknowledgment on the United States Congress Repeal of DADT

December 18, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

Congratulations! To Gay and Lesbian Armed personnel serving in the United States Defense force on the historic legislation passed to end Don’t Ask Don’t Tell discriminatory policy.

The honorable Congress members in the House and the Senate, the military high command and the activists’ passionate plea led to the landmark achievement allowing gay service men and women to openly serve in the United States military.

The legislation repealing the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy is acknowledged with profound gratitude.

The distinguished Congress members, President Barack Obama and the United States Defense Force – Thank you for enacting the commendable act.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant
—————————————————————————————
Don’t Ask Don’t Tell Repeal – Senate Approval

By Padmini Arhant

The legislation allowing the gay service members to openly serve in the military is at the last segment of the process – Senate approval of the law.

Many discussions have been held by the honorable Congress members, military high command, activists and gay armed personnel passionately urging the lawmakers to end the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy in the military.

As elaborated in the earlier post – Don’t Ask Don’t Tell – Repeal December 5, 2010 under Humanitarian Issues on this website,

The gay men and women in uniform have demonstrated exemplary commitment in their service to this great nation and not faltered in DADT compliance even though the practice unfairly promotes segregation and denies these patriots the integrity to retain their identity.

While the rest of the military admirably are at liberty to disclose their faith, race and socio-economic background, the same freedom is not extended to the gay armed forces thereby confirming the violation of basic human right and the constitution governing the defense department under federal government.

Reiterating the fact that the gay armed personnel in the U.S. defense have strengthened the representation in statistics and now with DADT removal the equality status will be established enabling the U.S. military to claim further acknowledgment as a distinguished institution pledged to safeguard individual rights besides national security.

In civil society the citizens are protected against prejudice with the statutory law prohibiting employers from targeted social reservations about a person or groups through the fair and equal opportunity act.

Similar legislation in the defense force is long overdue and the present moment provides the U.S. Congress to exercise the power granted by the gay community as part of the society in DADT termination.

U.S. Congress as the duly elected representatives in a democratic society bears legislative and moral responsibility to ensure that every member regardless of personal characteristics is treated with respect and dignity in any discipline.

Unfortunately the prevalent DADT deprives gay service men and women from such experience due to hypothetical concerns among the minority in the military establishment.

However the majority including the highest ranking officials of the U.S military have come forward and articulated the requirement to end DADT conforming to the existing laws in the American society.

According to the latest reports the sixty Senate votes were available with the agreement from moderate Republican members viz. Senator Olympia Snowe and Senator Susan Collins of Maine, Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts.

These lawmakers’ bipartisan support towards the historic legislation is praiseworthy and will be remembered for their cooperation in preserving the constitution guaranteed equal rights.

It’s a defining period for the United States Congress members and military institution to restore the American democratic values cherished by many and made possible by the valiant armed forces comprising the gay and lesbian members as well.

In conclusion the esteemed United States Senate is respectfully requested to uphold the constitutional law and repeal the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell discriminatory policy granting the United States defense a landmark achievement with a new chapter on gay service members’ right to voluntary disclosure during military recruitment and duty.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Humanitarian | Leave a Comment 

Unemployment Benefits, Tax cuts with Skyrocketing Deficit

December 17, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The bill is passed in the Senate and currently making its way in the House of Congress despite the legislation’s long term repercussions on national deficit and social security.

In the deal struck between the current Republican minority and the White House – the deficit spending through tax cuts extension for the 1% wealthiest including estate tax concessions is hailed as a bipartisan victory against the overwhelming public opposition to the reckless compromise.

As stated earlier in the article titled Bush tax cuts, Unemployment benefits and National deficit, December 7, 2010 published on this website – the average Americans are burdened with the liability from the tax credit to the super-rich.

They are being punished for the unemployment benefits extension, child tax breaks and college tuition credits in the bill – the combined costs of these desperately required provisions is significantly lower than the over $700 billion expense from the tax cuts to the top 1% wealthy in the country resulting in the total spending of $858 billion added to the skyrocketing national debt.

The two year tax cuts to the affluent members in the society are expected to become permanent and the social security with payroll tax holiday targeted for privatization potentially wiping out the only safety net for the retirees while the retirement period prolonged to offset national spending.

It is a remarkable win for the Republican minority soon to be the majority in the House with further representation in the Senate.

Unfortunately the voices for the average Americans in Congress are drowned by the political agenda to implement policies aimed at gains in the short-run with no due concern for future ramifications on the fiscal irresponsibility.

The strange partnership with similar motives is a sheer betrayal having been elected with the overwhelming democratic base votes and thus far delivering to the campaign financiers in Wall Street and military industry complex.

Beginning with Health Care Reform – the mandatory health care subscription without reining in on the health insurance industry and Bigpharma protocol alone is a huge setback for the vulnerable majority – the sick, the middle income and the senior citizens.

Likewise in the financial sector regulation – the $19 billion tax exemption to Wall Street – the primary source for the global economic recession is a major boost to conduct business as usual weakening the regulatory impact.

The Republican vote favoring Wall Street sought by the White House against a democratic vote seeking robust measures blocking loopholes to avert repeat economic disaster is disillusionment and disappointment for the electorate anticipating real change that also in part contributed to the midterm election outcome.

In the areas of warfare and foreign policy – the Bush-Cheney hawkish strategies vigorously carried out tarnishing the national image and seriously jeopardizing credibility in the international domain.

Now with the Bush tax cuts agreement to protect the wealthy is an affirmation of the ideological priorities substantially affecting the national deficit in addition to widening the gap between the haves and the have-nots.

It is clear from these developments that democratic aspirations in terms of industry regulation, effective economic policy, peace and diplomacy against nuclear threats continue to remain far-fetched objectives when acceding to Republican demands and upholding oligarchy principles – profit by any means even if it is proved detrimental to vast population and national interest.

Considering the status quo the only hope to restore democratic values and pragmatism is the substantial public participation in the legislative process through various communication channels conveying the message not only to their elected representatives but also the executive branch for the evident complacency.

Only the citizens’ will to enforce change at the political, economic and social fronts could lead to desirable progress in a democratic system.

Democracy is functional when the government of the people committed to the electorate entrusting power for collective actions benefiting all rather than the privileged members in the society.

History is testimony to the fact that people power never failed in challenging any rule other than the republic.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Economy | Leave a Comment 

COP 16/CMP 6 UN Climate Change Conference Cancun 2010

December 11, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The two week conference from November 29 to December 10, 2010 on climate change strived to approach the global environmental challenge by adopting UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) and Kyoto treaty mandating the carbon emission reduction below 2 degrees Celsius or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit in addition to COP15 Copenhagen proposals such as –

Industrialized nations $100 billion pledge by 2020 towards financial assistance to the poorer nations in combating environment disasters.

The Green Climate Fund for technological aid and forest preservation appear to have been recognized leading to a consensus among the negotiators.

Although the fund sources and management details have not been presented as yet, the preliminary step to provide economic relief to poor and developing nations is a positive measure.

The debate arising from the once contentious issue is – expediting funding and setting the eligibility criteria due to the demand from many nations seeking financial help under ‘vulnerable’ category that could potentially deprive the precarious recipients from qualifying for adequate benefits.

Hence it is essential to arrive at a conclusion on the specific content and fund allocation to the qualifiers in desperate situation as part of the post-Cancun agreement.

Further there is an urgent requirement to accelerate the transformation from fossil dependency to green energy economy.

Unfortunately the political will necessary to enforce the change is controlled by corporate investments denying the people in the rich and developing nations an opportunity to a clean energy economy and lead the less affluent nations achieve similar status.

No climate meetings are meaningful without addressing the catastrophic incidents from mining to off shore and shallow water oil exploration.

Wars and relentless military operations continue to have devastating impact on the environment in the economically struggling regions of the world. The use of deadly weapons and incessant bombings in retaliation is attributed to extreme environmental damage.

Pakistan for instance experienced the worst floods recently amid explosions and ongoing drone attacks exacerbating the flood victims’ plight. These are fundamental reasons to hold international forum to discuss never ending conflicts resulting in widespread destruction and loss of life.

Environment cannot be safe and secure without ending violence claiming innocent lives through prolonged artillery attacks and use of explosives.

Peace and healthy environment are inter-linked in the evolutionary process.

The Cancun summit emphasis on the Kyoto treaty renewal in 2012 is vital to realize the environmental goals.

Japan and Russia’s objection in this regard is related to the major carbon emitters’ viz. China and United States non-commitment to the Kyoto accord ratification.

Kyoto agreement is currently reported to have 37 signatories representing 27% of the carbon emission in the atmosphere. Unless the remaining pollution contributors unconditionally endorse the Kyoto Protocol and exemplify through actions, the climate talks would not be entirely purposeful.

Other members’ efforts and determination could easily be offset by those in violation of the environmental standards with no accountability for their dominant role in the negative impact.

During Copenhagen negotiations, the economic powers elected voluntary emission control rather than a universal policy and at Cancun the checks and balances to that effect is hopefully enacted for fair verifications.

While it is encouraging to witness the powerful nations’ acknowledgment on the individual obligation only the demonstration would confirm the facts.

The mandatory reporting scheduled every year in June could be more effective when an independent international committee comprising scientists, environment activists, economists and ethicists appointed to review the progress or the lack thereof by each nation.

It could also possibly eliminate mistrust and political influence in the monitoring and assessment of the vital environment regulation.

Considering the grim forecast on the ozone depletion and ocean rising it is imperative to sustain greenhouse gas emission below 1.5 degrees Celsius against 2 degrees Celsius or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit and incrementally drop to pre-industrial level at 280 parts per million from the present 390 ppm.

Community awareness and involvement in basic programs such as tree planting, recycling and green job creation with eco-friendly products and services in the market evolving into a national environment protection plan are crucial in the immediate and long run.

Industrial wise, the recommendation for greenhouse gas levy on aviation and maritime transportation would not only generate revenue but also contain carbon and other gas emission.

United States clean energy legislation is predicted to be a foregone conclusion given the Republican majority in the House following the mid-term elections.

The scenario is no different from last year with the reversal and the climate bill was still regarded a tall order that precipitated COP 15 failure.

Washington gridlock is predominantly sponsored by special interests with their investments in both political parties. The elected representatives bear responsibility for their decisions in national and international issues.

It is incumbent upon United States to establish a track record as the leader of innovative green economy and environment bastion in the twenty first century.

Political blockade in passing climate bill is endangering self and the future generation survival.

Scientific data and prevalent weather patterns with 2010 declared the hottest year in a long time proves the relevance to reconcile terms with reality.

Ignoring the ramifications on the island nations and other inhabitants could eventually hurt the origin in the human manufactured greenhouse gas causing global warming.

There are no winners for there will be no survivors in the profit motivated environment degradation. With the escalating temperatures and melting glaciers the alternatives are conservation and preservation of natural resources.

Nevertheless, it is a refreshing start to gain assurance from China, United States, India, Brazil, EU…in accepting Cancun climate deal despite selective terms and conditions applied to suit the domestic agenda.

Mexico deserves credit for the exceptional organization of the global event and successful mediation between international delegates in arriving at mutual concurrence on some key elements in the climate matter.

Congratulations! To Ambassador Patricia Espinosa Cantellano, President of the COP16, President of the United States of Mexico Felipe Calderon, the Honorable delegation from 194 nations, NGO’s and every participant at the sixteenth United Nations Climate Change Conference in Cancun, Mexico for the solidarity and initiatives in reaching a preliminary agreement.

The transparency and inclusiveness reflected in the United Nations sixteenth conference is praiseworthy setting precedence for forthcoming summit in 2011 – Durban, South Africa.

Please Save the Planet – the only habitat for all.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Environment | Leave a Comment 

Bush Tax Cuts, Unemployment Benefits and National Deficit

December 7, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The 111th Congress with Democrats still in control of the House and Senate is challenged by the White House capitulation to the Republican unsustainable deal on Bush tax cuts.

Fortunately the House passed the bill per initial democratic plan – allowing tax cuts to the wealthy expire and granting permanent tax cuts to the families with income $250,000 and below.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi leadership and the House representatives’ commitment to the middle class America is commendable.

‘Political Irony in Republican Congress Victory’ – Article published on November 18, 2010 under ‘Politics – United States’ category on this website highlighted the specifics on Bush Tax Cuts and Protecting Social Security for America.

There are different proposals from the majority and the minority in Congress.

Republican members unanimously dedicated to the top 2% wealthy Americans getting wealthier at the rest of America’s expense pushed tax cuts extension for the multimillionaires while disregarding their irresponsible claim’s devastating impact on the ballooning deficit – the primary political slogan that enabled Republican victory in the recent mid-term election.

Unlike the Republican minority, the Democrat majority are divided on this issue.

The Senate Democrats have laid few options – Some favor the House version which is the initial Democratic strategy outlined above. It is unequivocally a pragmatic solution to the status quo.

Other Senate Democrats are considering $1 million threshold for tax cuts redefining the middle class category that is contradictory to reality.

Yet another democrat’s perspective opposes any tax cuts alongside rising deficits.

“We can’t afford any of these tax cuts,” says Rep. Bobby Scott (D) of Virginia. “It is hard to imagine that extending all of the tax cuts at a cost of $3.7 trillion is fiscally irresponsible but extending $3 trillion worth of tax cuts [to families earning less than $250,000] is somehow fiscally sensible.”

It’s obvious that the opposition to tax cuts for middle class America stems from blanket assessment of the fiscal crisis without any consideration to the slow economic growth and rising unemployment predominantly affecting the poor and the middle class not the super-rich.

According to the latest reports the deal between the White House and Congressional Republican members comprises the following;

Bush tax cuts extended at all income level for two years – the cost of this compromise is estimated at $700 billion over the next two years.

Estate tax capped at 35 percent after $5 million exemption to each wealthy individual – This alone would deprive the economy of the desperately required revenue contributing further to the alarming deficit.

The Republican two year extravagant tax breaks to the wealthiest is in exchange for the jobless benefit to the long-term unemployed up to 13 months at the anticipated $60 billion cost and last but not the least,

Social Security payment is diverted from retirement savings and added to the present income through 2% payroll tax reduction for workers.

However, this detrimental step is substituted for the general tax relief provided to the middle and lower income groups in the previous year economic stimulus.

Otherwise the bill eliminates last year tax credit from the middle and lower income families’ paychecks and utilizes their only safety nest thus far – the Social Security for consumer spending in the payroll tax diversion.

It’s a dangerous precedence with the possible depletion of reliable income to the baby boomers nearing retirement notwithstanding the easier access to Republican goal in privatizing Social Security and increasing the retirement age similar to the unpopular Pension bill enforced upon the people in France.

The contentious issues are the disproportionate concession to the 2% with an extraordinary disposable income mostly invested in personal holdings against harsh imposition on the 98% hard working middle and lower income groups burdened with not only diminishing income, spending cuts on life dependent programs, savings replaced for tax credits but also expected to pay substantially towards national debt mainly accumulated from irrational economic and defense policy.

Above all the Republican members’ euphoria on the pending bill –

‘Not raising taxes on anyone in the country’ is ideological for it rejects the ramifications on national deficit. Again the issue presented as pivotal to the conservative agenda during the 2010 election.

If there are no tax hikes for two years, the essential unemployment aid up to 13 months in the provision combined with a magnanimous estate tax credits,

How do the decision-makers of this deal propose to trim the burgeoning national deficit?

Are the Republican members complacent to the Borrow and Spending concept that was targeted against the Democrats in the past two years irrespective of the Democrats Pay-go rule to fund the key economic legislations?

Given the undercurrent in the U.S and China relationship from currency devaluation to North Korea skirmishes – China the major U.S. creditor may not volunteer to be the Santa Claus.

Who is then expected to bailout the wealthiest Americans in the GOP sponsored –

Who wants to be a billionaire contest?

It’s imperative to dispel the myth surrounding the bizarre agreement that Republican minority have control over the crucial legislation when the Democrats are the majority in the legislative branch and the White House currently has the power to do the right for the suffering Americans as demonstrated by the House Democrats on this bill.

Republican legislators assuming cart blanche to steer the critical economic decision despite the catastrophic effects on their constituents and the nation at large is purely political besides betrayal of the electorates’ trust in the Republican action to protect self-interest over the average American interest.

In fact, Republican party awaiting House dominance and increased Senate representation is on national watch to deliver their campaign promise on containing the growing deficit, coordinate efforts in easing unemployment not excluding jobless aid to the millions who elected them in the fall election and transcend Washington partisan culture visibly promoted by special interests.

The Speaker-elect John Boehner emotional speech upon victory reminiscing the hard times experienced to achieve the American dream is a common factor in the contemporary society.

Relevantly, Republican lawmakers’ allegiance to the campaign financiers instead of the people they are elected to represent clearly revealed in their failure to address the American plight.

In the difficult economic period the GOP priority to undermine main street struggles is regrettable sending a strong message to the electorate to exercise diligence during election since Washington is not amenable to change.

Therefore the people power must exert pressure on the elected representatives with a reminder about the legislative responsibility towards the constituents and the nation they are elected to serve during their term in office.

The republic position in this matter is absolute and that being “No deals on tax cuts for the wealthy.” Overwhelming electorate disapprove the GOP reckless demand to shift the economic liability on the average Americans – the driving force of the economy.

Hence the Senate Democrats and moderate Republicans focused on fiscal constraints have a unique opportunity to exhibit bipartisanship in passing the House approved Bush tax cuts bill.

Ignoring public concerns is a political misstep and often realized in the electoral results. If GOP won in November 2010 then it does not take long for the political tide to turn against them and that is politics.

It is incumbent upon the esteemed Senate to acknowledge the American families’ hardships and the escalating deficit when casting votes on this particular bill evidently vital for national and global economic recovery.

Good Luck! To the Congressional members for a successful passage of the prudent economic legislation.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Economy | 7 Comments 

Don’t Ask Don’t Tell – Repeal

December 5, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The U.S. armed forces are served by brave hearts demonstrating loyalty and patriotism for the nation they defend at different frontiers.

Gay service men and women are equally dedicated in serving the nation alongside their heterosexual counterparts.

Yet, the ‘don’t ask don’t tell’ policy aimed at the Gay members is not only discriminatory but also contradictory to the military code of conduct that prohibits intolerance towards race, religion, gender and other identifications.

The U.S. defense is well known for disciplinary code during and after the training, preparing the personnel to deal with civil and combat situation.

The lifestyle orientation is not alienated from the general human characteristics and the rejection of one against another confirms the individual attitude rather than the institutional rule.

Recently, the U.S. military adopted rigorous steps to promote unity among the troops representing the diverse American society.

Further, the U.S. high command has appropriately been sensitive to the defense force’ ethnic and religious backgrounds lately to maintain harmony in the entire military while not being unanimously forthcoming in the long overdue DADT repeal.

In the political context, the ideology driven opposition to DADT ban is unconstitutional considering the defense department under federal government is governed by the constitution that guarantees equal rights to all citizens.

Accordingly the decision lies with the Congressional lawmakers elected to honor the constitution and uphold individual rights regardless of personal reservations in this matter.

Besides the disproportionate defense budget is taxpayer funded and not provided by private sector.

Allowing a federal run organization implement prejudicial policy towards specific groups foments isolation which could affect the victims’ performance due to the social stigma induced emotional stress.

When no gay member has been involved in incidents jeopardizing defense image or functionality, the procrastination in eliminating gay troops seclusion is counterproductive and cultivates preferential treatment in national security force serving together to ensure freedom and equality for all.

Although reports on abusive behavior against women and certain minorities at the training institutes and overseas stations surface,

The military has transformed since last century when African American personnel had similar experience with segregation and endured apathy to their social plight.

Likewise there is an urgent requirement to make inroads on DADT issue in tandem with the new millennium progress.

Human knowledge in science exploration and entrepreneurial expertise has revolutionized life.

However, socially the contemporary society is still struggling to reconcile terms with reality in acknowledging the fact that;

All are created equal and deserve mutual respect along with acceptance.

The Senate hearing on December 3, 2010 shed light on the perceptions regarding DADT. The Army Chief of Staff George Casey and U.S. Marine Corps Commandant James Amos reportedly shared apprehensions about repealing DADT claiming that delaying action might be beneficial right now and upon Congress approval they recommended gradual repeal over a time period.

Poignantly, the Army Chief and U.S. Marine Corps Commandant concerns are hypothetical and not factual for there has been no evidence to the concept on DADT removal having negative influence over the remaining personnel.

Therefore it’s imperative for Congress to address the DADT continuation from the constitutional standpoint that unequivocally invalidates injustice against anyone with a stark reminder about the core principle upon which the United States of America is founded – liberty and justice for all.

Pursuing a pragmatic course to end the inhumane and un-American rule would aptly satisfy the Congressional obligation to abide by the constitution thereby strengthening the role of democracy.

Don’t Ask Don’t Tell strategy is unethical and divisive with a superficial reasoning used by the minority within the national defense.

It’s time for the U.S. military to conform to the twenty first century social achievements in deep appreciation of the gay troops’ exemplary sacrifice to protect civil rights – ironically being denied to them.

Please repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy once and for all to restore American democratic values.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Humanitarian | Leave a Comment 

Korean Peninsula Peace Strategy – The Unified Korea

November 29, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The recent skirmishes in the Korean Peninsula evolved into a deadly attack on the South Korean port Yeonpyeong.

According to the news reports – South Korea suffered casualties with two civilians and two marines killed in the North Korean firing forcing many residents to leave for the mainland.

Further the U.S and international news agencies also reported that prior to the attack, the North Korean authority and their ally China warned the United States to refrain from conducting military exercises with South Korea on the Yellow sea, the disputed territory between North and South Korea.

The joint naval drill on the economic route was characterized as ‘provocative’ by China and its key trading partner North Korea.

North Korean subsequent artillery response revived emotions among South Korean citizens affecting the latest diplomacy between the once unified nations.

Regardless of the military operation on the West sea of Korea, the North Korean action resulting in fatalities is reprehensible. The real victims in the avoidable quagmire are the South and North Korean population.

Simultaneously, it is important to highlight the missed opportunity following the former President Jimmy Carter visit to North Korea in September 2010.

The North Korean leadership’s unprecedented peace message through President Jimmy Carter requesting Washington to hold peace talks and Pyongyang eagerness to commit to de-nuclearization including permanent peace treaty with the United States and South Korea was not pursued leading to the status quo.

The urgency to move forward with the initiative was elaborated in the article titled:

‘Special Acknowledgment – President Jimmy Carter North Korea Visit’ published on this site on 09/20/10 under International Politics.

Had United States given North Korea the benefit of the doubt then it would have clarified Pyongyang’s sincerity or the lack there of considering the protocol through U.S. ex-President that emphasized serious and the highest possible communiqué even if it was not representative of the current administration.

It’s regrettable that invitation for peaceful dialogue is ignored fomenting military option as the preferred reaction to the twentieth century cold war generated political standoff.

When diplomacy is not the priority for the primary negotiator, it promotes belligerence accompanied by tragic loss of life as witnessed in the present discord.

Any attempts to salvage the situation in the aftermath appear disingenuous jeopardizing the trust factor among the participants expected to resolve the contentious issue.

After the Korean War (1950-1953) – the communist North Korea is a nuclear state with reportedly 8 to 12 nuclear arsenals in possession and preparing to strengthen its nuclear capability.

In April 2010, there were allegations against North Korea on the South Korean warship, the Cheonan drowning that claimed 46 sailors’ lives.

North Korea has exhibited missile stunts causing tensions in the Peninsula and now this time around the attack is detrimental to the humanitarian developments comprising South Korean food aid to North Korea notwithstanding tourism and trade relations benefiting both nations.

Similarly, South Korea and U.S. military activities foster hostility even though the defined purpose is stated as – restrain North Korea and remind its dependable partner China to intervene in the conflict to deter North Korean aggression.

China’s reluctance to comply with US demand is perceived as an act intended to protect national interests using North Korea to challenge United States in the multilateral entreaty.

It is clear from the existing situation that adversarial approach exacerbates the crisis with undesirable results such as deaths and destruction. There is tremendous display of power politics and self-interest contributing to the escalating turmoil in the region.

Evidently procrastination serves none except allowing North Korea to enhance nuclear armament leaving vast majority in abject poverty and isolation while South Korean citizens remain fearful and frustrated from the confrontation.

North Korea is extremely vulnerable despite the indicated nuclear proliferation and constant harassment of South Korea – the neighbor and trading partner. The impending power transition is yet another uncertainty in the political domain.

Therefore, North Korea could thrive from renouncing violence against the people of South Korea otherwise their relatives across the border. In all these years, the saber rattling is proved counterproductive and withheld economic progress.

Although both nations rely heavily on the external powers – i.e. Communist North Korea seeking China’s assistance and Capitalist South Korea dependent on the United States, they fail to recognize the fact that they could end the conflict today on their volition through bilateral peace treaty.

South Korea as a sovereign nation is at liberty to establish peace accord with North Korea irrespective of the international effort. The peaceful strategy would insure the democratic government pledge to improve security and reunite the families split across the border.

Hence, the reconciliation between the two nations could be aimed at the unification process with South Korean economy and North Korean defense power enabling a strong and prosperous Korea as one nation.

The achievement would be analogous to Germany – When the Berlin wall demolition facilitated the East and West Germany merger with significant advantage prevalent in the EU member.

Upon reunion with North Korea, South Korea could stimulate the domestic economy through local growth and consumption like China. The people in North Korea would at last be emancipated and become a valuable resource for the South Korean market economy.

North Korean military personnel would adequately address the national security concerns for the united Korea. It would be a phenomenal success for the people in terms of political stability, economic prosperity and social equality.

Tranquility in Korean peninsula would permeate to other parts of Asia and guarantee peace for all other nations in the continent.

North Korean commitment to nuclear disarmament could come to fruition in the course of constructive and meaningful engagement by the Korean leaderships.

In this context, the independent South Africa exemplified the smooth nuclear dismantling setting precedence for other nuclear powers to adopt ‘non-nuclear’ concept.

South Africa deserves praise for the monumental decision favoring humanity.

The nuclear free zone is the only effective policy for global peace and security.

North Korea peace offer could be directly presented to the people of South Korea and the deal finalized in good faith to demonstrate the leadership’s affirmation for solidarity yielding a unified Korea.

Sincere condolences to the South Korean families grieving for their deceased members and,

Best Wishes to North and South Korea for peaceful existence as one nation.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under International Politics | Leave a Comment 

Afghanistan Troop Withdrawal in 2014

November 27, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

Afghanistan troop withdrawal was discussed during the NATO press conference last week i.e. 11/20/10 indicating the timeline in 2014.

Again, this topic has been extensively covered under various articles on this site.

The military decision was presented as the evaluation on the ground defining the persistent threat from Al-Qaeda and Taliban forces, preparing the Afghan security personnel and armed forces and ensuring political stability across the nation…in semblance to Iraq.

With respect to Al-Qaeda – the CIA accounted for a meager 100 militants in Afghanistan and the northwestern Pakistan combined together against over 120,000 formidable U.S. and NATO coalition.

As for the Taliban containment, the Pakistan ISI and military intervention to prevent peace talks between Afghan Taliban and the Afghan government is common knowledge.

Even the U.S. leading press reported the Pakistan intelligence having misused the U.S. agents in tracking down the Afghan Taliban chief only to foster the Taliban and Afghan government standoff by holding the captive in a secret location unbeknown to U.S. intelligence.

Amid such activities, the foreign power still maintains Pakistan – an ally in the war on terror providing $2 billion military funding rather than channeling the aid towards desperately required social and economic development.

Pakistan ISI and military have long profited from the militancy within and across the borders with Afghanistan and India predominantly due to the U.S. military aid further distributed in lucrative arms sales to Al-Qaeda and militants including the Afghanistan and Pakistan based Taliban.

The carefully configured operation has contributed to cyclical violence in armed conflict, suicide bombings in Pakistan and Afghanistan as well as terrorism against India and Iran.

Today on November 26, 2010 the Mumbai terror victims’ families mourn their relatives’ deaths from the brutal attack in public square two years ago.

The perpetrators like David Headley from the U.S. and terror masterminds in Pakistan are granted impunity despite evidence confirming the charges.

The Pakistani military, intelligence and the political establishment’s evasion to bring the Mumbai terrorists to justice is no different from U.S. and NATO avoiding questions about Osama Bin Laden in the 9/11 terrorism.

Afghanistan was invaded to eliminate Al-Qaeda and capture Osama Bin Laden dead or alive.

Now a decade later, the most sophisticated military might – the U.S. and NATO are still in Afghanistan with the war spilled over to Pakistan and Yemen.

Al-Qaeda and Taliban continue to be the reason for the prolonged occupation in Afghanistan.

U.S and NATO ambiguous timetable for troop withdrawal set in 2014 is suggestive of two possibilities.

It is ambiguous because of the U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki Moon and NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen underscoring the statement that the withdrawal commitment will not be “calendar driven.” Otherwise it could be beyond 2014 and not any sooner.

Per U.S. and NATO accounts – Given the inferior ammunition and significantly lower combatants Al-Qaeda and Taliban are essentially winning the war on terror in Afghanistan depriving the nation the long overdue political stability which in turn is contradictory to the U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton’s position that:

“U.S. policy in Afghanistan is working” implying that NATO and U.S. choice of political leadership – President Hamid Karzai has the situation under control through efficient governance.

Then why is the troop withdrawal scheduled for 2014 and not 2011?

Alternatively ‘truth’ being the first casualty in war and politics, the U.S. and NATO leadership with the U.N. chief are not being forthright to the people in Afghanistan, the U.S. and ally taxpayers notwithstanding the increasingly frustrated press as the voice for democracy.

Afghanistan political woes persist with the central power challenging the latest election results while the Afghan President Hamid Karzai publicly acknowledged the cash flow from Iranian regime and U.S. officials to his administration.

It is imperative to highlight the Iranian influence in two war zones – Afghanistan and Iraq.

Iran alliance with the U.S. appointees – Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai and Iraqi President Nouri al-Maliki is not without a reason.

Afghanistan and Iraq being the strategic location for military strike against Iran – the impending U.S. war policy with an unequivocal worldwide catastrophe is being maneuvered by Iran through financial assistance to Afghanistan and political ties with Iraq.

U.S. overtures to Afghanistan and Iraqi leaders in spite of their performance track record and against respective population dissent is the bedrock for insurgency, militancy and incessant warfare in both nations.

The Taliban is emboldened with the local population forced to accept the corrupt and inefficient political system or become a recruit for the militant group.

Afghan population plight exacerbated with the deteriorating social, economic and political conditions. The report on Afghan women self-immolation attributed to atrocities and social injustice towards them is a major credibility factor for the U.S. backed Afghan administration.

Besides President Hamid Karzai as the U.S. and NATO appointee is complacent to foreign occupation whereas resisted by Taliban.

To a large extent the Afghan population find themselves between the rock and a hard place.

Hence raising the relevant questions:

What is the real purpose behind the ten year old Afghan war?

With Osama Bin Laden being no longer the intended target and skeletal Al-Qaeda operatives relocated to Somalia,

Why is the troop withdrawal set in 2014 instead of 2011?

Why the pullout in 2014 is explicitly stated as not ‘calendar driven’?

What is the precise strategy to reverse Afghanistan status quo in particular with women, children and youth population?

With the existing corruption scandals, what transformation has transpired under the present Afghan administration?

If the U.S. policy is working in Afghanistan as claimed by the U.S. Secretary of State, then,

What is the explanation for the social crimes against women?

When will Afghanistan be truly independent and recognized as a sovereign nation?

Finally, what is so auspicious about 2014 that cannot be carried out sooner to save life?

Peace to the grieving families in Mumbai, India and distressed Afghan society.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under International Politics | Leave a Comment 

Health Care Reform effective 2014

November 26, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

In the health care reform, the ramifications are currently experienced by a vast majority dealing with the health insurance industry detrimental policies on premium hikes and care denial, if not delaying treatment on preventable and serious illnesses.

The health care victims’ anguish cannot be ignored and expecting them to endure the health industry unfair practices for another three years is harsh and already affecting many patients’ lives.

As discussed in the July 10, 2010 post titled “Health Insurance Industry Policy between 2010-2014 – Impact on the Average American Life,” published on this site – the American plight is elevated rather than alleviated in the present environment and,

Beyond 2014 the health insurance industry with a large client base through mandatory insurance are yet to demonstrate that quality health care at competitive costs will be available to all regardless.

The BigPharma deal on prescription drugs and general medications having direct impact on senior citizens and chronically ill patients share similar conundrum with others in the health industry.

These are critical concerns among the suffering individuals and families that need to be addressed effectively by the authorities behind the health care reform and more importantly the health industry – the real beneficiary in the immediate and long run.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Health | Leave a Comment 

Happy Thanksgiving!

November 25, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

Today is a special day to thank the people for their love, compassion and actions that positively impact the recipient’s life.

In this respect the nation ought to thank the brave men and women in harm’s way for their sacrifices in many different ways most importantly their precious life.

Within the community there are many benevolent individuals dedicating their time and resources for others welfare. They deserve the beneficiaries’ acknowledgment.

Then the family unit – the relationship is strengthened with genuine care, affection and understanding for each other unconditionally reciprocated in a subtle or profound manner.

Politically, the elected officials at the state and national legislature possess the power and responsibility to deliver the campaign promise and improve citizens’ life as an expression of their gratitude to the electorate electing them to office.

Economically, the business leaders are obligatory to the workers and employees who are also the consumers contributing to the business financial success. Their recognition of the peoples’ plight could be addressed through job oriented investments so that they too benefit from the profits.

Personally, I appreciate the opportunity to serve the people at home and around the world through the innovative technology made possible by the genius minds and entrepreneurship in the contemporary world.

I’m thankful to all the visitors to this website for their extensive support and encouraging remarks that help me strive hard to enhance my contribution at various levels. While compliments are incentives to exceed the expectations, constructive criticisms on the other hand are a reminder for self-evaluation besides representing the checks and balances. I respect the different perspectives and accept them accordingly.

Finally, the popular tradition nurtures the charitable act of giving and sharing with the less fortunate on this American holiday. Society prospers with better living standards experienced by all and not just the privileged members.

Happy Thanksgiving to all.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Humanitarian | Leave a Comment 

Iraq Political Quagmire following Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki Appointment

November 21, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

Iraqi Parliament reportedly commenced its fractured session on November 11, 2010 with Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki appointed for the second term against the electoral mandate.

The Parliamentary ominous beginning resulting in a walkout by the secular leader Ayad Allawi and other political party members disappointed with the Maliki government default on a range of issues is indicative of the so-called agreement notably imposed upon the Iraqi people represented by the elected officials rather than allowing the democratic course to choose a leadership capable of governing a diverse state exhausted from wars and sectarian violence.

The Iraqi election held in March 2010 yielded a narrow victory for the secular Shia leader Ayad Allawi political party unified with the Sunni, Kurdish, Assyrian and other minorities in the country.

However, the reports confirmed that the incumbent Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki was nominated as the head of the state with the blessings from the United States administration and not from Iran as predicted.

According to the news reports –

“Mr. Allawi’s walkout occurred even as Obama administration officials praised the deal in a conference call with reporters. Two American officials later played down the walkout, saying that Mr. Allawi’s bloc remained committed to the agreement, despite what one of the officials called a “hiccup.”

For better or worse, the agreement reflected the still-potent American influence here, despite assertions by some that the United States was losing sway to Iran.

When the leaders met on Wednesday night to broker the agreement — however tenuous it seemed — it was the American ambassador, James F. Jeffrey, who was in the room, not the one from Iran, according to Antony J. Blinken, the national security adviser to Mr. Biden.”

Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki Shia centric party alliance with anti-American cleric Muqtadā al-Ṣadr currently a resident in Iran was not approved in the Iraqi political circle most importantly on the streets of Baghdad and across Iraq –

Due to Prime Minister Maliki led Shia government’s poor track record against the minorities especially the Sunni population contributing to insurgency that has claimed thousands of innocent Iraqi lives until now.

Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki is the leader of the Islamic Dawa Party – stated as a Shia political party sworn to build an Islamic State in Iraq and combat secularism.

Although the party is known to have strong ties with the Iranian theocratic leadership – Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and believed to receive financial assistance to date, it could not win in March 2010 democratic electoral process.

The Iranian ally and anti-American cleric Muqtadā al-Ṣadr co-operation with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki did not strengthen the political representation in Iraqi Parliament with qualified concerns about the Iraqi leadership ability to maintain law and order, achieve legislative victories or promoting solidarity in national interest.

It was evident during the Parliamentary vote for Kurdish President Jalal Talabani to serve the second term.

In a 325 member Iraqi Parliament, the legislative impasse apparently ended with a simple majority of 195 votes for it failed to secure the two thirds majority – attributed to the discord between Prime Minister Maliki and other political factions.

As for the democratically elected non-sectarian Shia leader Ayad Allawi with strong Sunni and other demographic votes – the leader is eliminated and not even considered for any worthy position by the Maliki administration thereby explicitly rejecting the electorate will.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki characterized as ‘dour and divisive’ leader lacking voter confidence and political support across the nation is appointed for the second term reflecting the U.S. foreign policy contradictory to the democratic reality in a war torn nation.

Power politics is the contemporary trend displayed through interventional tactics even if it proved detrimental to the vast majority struggling to emerge from the ravaged war and incessant suicide bombings.

The Iraqi situation is best summarized as the fragile democracy assigned to the republic opposed political leadership with a doomed forecast facilitating the never ending occupation to curb the inevitable sectarian tensions not to mention the regional threat from the incumbent’s formidable partnership with Iranian cleric rule.

But the euphoria on the status quo is an irony.

Antony J. Blinken, the national security adviser to Vice President Joe Biden.

“The result — an inclusive government, all blocs in and a redistribution of power — was exactly what the Iranians didn’t want,” Mr. Blinken said in a telephone interview.”

People in Iraq have a responsibility to unanimously decline the foreign power intrusion in national politics and exercise the democratic right to be governed by the unifying and not polarizing leadership.

Iraqi population could change the present political dilemma by enforcing the electoral victory declaring the secular coalition to power.

The Iraqi electorates’ verdict in March 2010 was loud and clear denying Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki opportunity to derail progress, prolong U.S. occupation and revive Iranian instigated militancy – essentially resisting the counterproductive domestic and international policies implemented under Maliki leadership with foreign coercion.

Iraq is a sovereign nation and at liberty to determine the political future with fair representation that guarantees peace, economic prosperity and social equality for all.

Any political party refusal to accommodate the national requirements and address issues effectively benefiting the entire nation is a serious challenge to a democracy.

Considering the bloodshed and over a million Iraqi civilian lives lost since invasion, every Iraqi citizen is obliged to protect their individual freedom by working together as one national force regardless of the religious denomination and identity.

Iraq has tremendous potential to deal with crisis provided the central leadership is unanimously recognized and accepted as the trustworthy governing authority.

The minority skepticism and fear from the political bias could lead to perpetual sectarian conflicts depriving the majority a peaceful existence.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki might be the head of the state but the legitimacy is arguably at stake based on the political fragmentation and public disapproval in the government formation.

Poignantly, the anti-American cleric Muqtadā al-Ṣadr response following the U.S.
involvement in the political decision and effort to encourage Maliki leadership in severing affiliation with Sadr movement could lead to the merger collapse.

The similarities between Iraq and Afghanistan with the foreign troops presence, training the police and the armed personnel for security, entrusting power to unpopular leadership, political uncertainties…cannot be ignored.

Hence the Iraqi non-sectarian coalition is the only reliable power to govern the state traumatized by the sectarian warfare, carnage and destruction in the absence of secular leadership.

Peace and political stability to the people of Iraq.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under International Politics | Leave a Comment 

« Previous Page — Next Page »

PadminiArhant.com