Prime Minister's Media Statement during Joint Press Interaction with President of United States of America

Mr. President and members of the media, It is a great pleasure and privilege to welcome back President Obama and the First Lady in India. Mr. President, we are honoured that you accepted our invitation to be the Chief Guest for our Republic Day and I know how busy you are. It is special because on this day we celebrate the values shared by the world`s two largest democracies. You are also the first United States President to visit India twice in Office. It reflects the transformation in our relationship. It shows your deep personal commitment to this partnership. It tells us that our two nations are prepared to step forward firmly to accept the responsibility of this global partnership – for our two countries and for shaping the character of this century. The promise and potential of this relationship has never been in doubt. This is a natural global partnership. It has become even more relevant in the digital age. It is needed even more in our world of far-reaching changes and widespread turmoil. The success of this partnership is important for our progress and for advancing peace, stability and prosperity around the world. From the turn of this century, we have begun transforming our relationship. But, we have to convert a good start into lasting progress. This requires translating our vision into sustained action and concrete achievements. Mr. President, in the last few months, I see new excitement and confidence in this relationship. I see renewed energy in our engagement. I thank you for your leadership and for setting the tone last September, when I visited White House. The civil nuclear agreement was the centrepiece of our transformed relationship, which demonstrated new trust. It also created new economic opportunities and expanded our option for clean energy. In the course of the past four months, we have worked with a sense of purpose to move it forward. I am pleased that six years after we signed our bilateral agreement, we are moving towards commercial cooperation, consistent with our law, our international legal obligations, and technical and commercial viability. President Obama has also assured me of strong U.S. efforts in support of India`s full membership of the four international export control regimes at the earliest. Today, we have also decided to take our growing defence cooperation to a new level. We have agreed, in principle, to pursue co-development and co-production of specific advanced defence projects. These will help upgrade our domestic defence industry; and expand the manufacturing sector in India. We will also explore cooperation in other areas of advanced defence technologies. We have renewed our Defence Framework Agreement. We will deepen our cooperation on maritime security. Terrorism remains a principal global threat. It is taking on a new character, even as existing challenges persist. We agreed that we need a comprehensive global strategy and approach to combat with it. There should be no distinction between terrorist groups. Every country must fulfil its commitments to eliminate terrorist safe havens and bring terrorists to justice. Our two countries will deepen our bilateral security cooperation against terrorist groups. And, we will further enhance our counter-terrorism capabilities, including in the area of technology. President Obama and I agree that a strong and growing economic relationship is vital for the success of our strategic partnership. Economic growth in our two countries is becoming stronger. Our business climate is improving. This gives me great optimism about our economic ties. In addition, we have established a number of effective bilateral mechanisms to identify opportunities and also help our businesses trade and invest more. We will also resume our dialogue on Bilateral Investment Treaty. We will also restart discussions on a Social Security Agreement that is so important for the hundreds of thousands of Indian professionals working in the United States. For President Obama and me, clean and renewable energy is a personal and national priority. We discussed our ambitious national efforts and goals to increase the use of clean and renewable energy. We also agreed to further enhance our excellent and innovative partnership in this area. I asked him to lead international efforts in making renewable energy more accessible and affordable to the world. President and I expressed hope for a successful Paris Conference on climate change this year. We will continue to deepen our collaboration in science, technology, innovation, agriculture, health, education and skills. These are central to the future of our two countries; and also give us an opportunity to help others around the world. Indeed, our strategic partnership will only be complete if we assume our responsibility to work together to promote development and connectivity in our vast region. President Obama and I agreed to pursue this goal with a sense of priority. President and I had an excellent discussion on global and regional issues. In particular, we renewed our commitment to deepen our cooperation to advance peace, stability, prosperity in Asia, Pacific and Indian Ocean Region, which is critical for the future of our two countries and the destiny of this world. We will also work closely to help Afghanistan through its transition. Our relationship stands at a new level today. We have outlined a broad vision for our friendship and cooperation that reflects the opportunities and challenges of this century. As Lord Buddha said, noble friends and companions are the whole of the holy life. We have decided to give this critical partnership a new thrust and sustained attention. For this, we have agreed that India and the United States must have regular summits at greater frequency. And, we will also establish hotlines between myself and Barack and our National Security Advisors. At the beginning of this year we start a new journey. Let me welcome you once again, Mr. President. It is a great pleasure to have you with us. Thank you.

Gallantry Awards to Army on 26 January 2015

The President of India, Shri Pranab Mukherjee has approved the award of one Ashok Chakra, three Kirti Chakras and nine Shaurya Chakras to the Indian Army personnel on the occasion of Republic Day 2015. In addition, award of Ashok Chakra to Major Mukund Varadarajan which was announced on 15 Aug 14 and will be conferred by the President on 26 Jan 2015, has been included in the list of citations.

Placed below are the citations and photographs in respect of the above Gallantry awardees : 

Awardees

Ashok Chakra

Naik Neeraj Kumar Singh (Posthumous), 57 Rashtriya Rifles (RAJPTANA RIFLES)

Major Mukund Varadarajan (Posthumous), 44 Rashtriya Rifles (RAJPUT REGIMENT)- Announced on 15 Aug 14.

Kirti Chakra

Capt Jaidev, 3 Rashtriya Rifles (10 PARA SF).

Subedar Ajay Vardhan (Posthumous), 14 GARHWAL RIFLES.

Naib Subedar Kosh Bahadur Gurung, 15 Rashtriya Rifles (1 GORKHA RIFLE).

Shaurya Chakra

Lieutenant Colonel Sankalp Kumar (Posthumous), 24 PUNJAB.

Major Mukul Sharma, 4 PARA (SF).

Major Abhijai (Posthumous), ENGINEERS, 39 (I) R&O Flight.

Major Ashutosh Kumar Pandey, 44 Rashtriya Rifles (RAJPUT).

Major R Vamshi Krishnan, 50 Rashtriya Rifles (ENGINEERS).

Major Bibhanshu Dhondiyal, 5/5 GR (FF).

Naik Swarup Kumar Ghorai, 20 MAHAR.

Paratrooper Balvinder Singh (Posthumous), 1 PARA (SF).

Rifleman Manga Ram, 3 JAMMU & KASHMIR RIFLES.

WEEKENED BATCH FOR UKPCS-2012 MAINS,SAMVEG IAS

UPPCS-2015 EXAM CALENDER,SAMVEG IAS

Dear candidates 
start preparing for uppcs.here is 2015 schedule of exam by uppcs

From mud to medicine A major breakthrough in antibiotics

The discovery of a new antibiotic with a unique anti-bacterial action has altered the perspective in the endless war on disease. The recent announcement of the discovery ofteixobactin has led to hopes that an entirely new class ofantibiotics that does not trigger drug resistance could be deployed, by using a new approach which makes it easier to culture antibiotics. There have been no new classes of antibiotics released as prescription drugs for 32 years. Although new antibiotics have been discovered in that time, none had promising drug potential and most could not be easily cultured. In that time, a wide range of bacteria has mutated to develop resistance to most of the commonly used antibiotics. This has led to the resurgence of diseases such as pneumonia and tuberculosis in new "superbug", drug-resistant forms, as well as the emergence of new superbugs such as MRSA (Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus) and the so-called Delhi superbug. Drug-resistant superbugs kill an estimated 700,000 people every year.

The new antibiotic, teixobactin, seemed to tackle drug-resistant superbugs effectively in its initial clinical trials with mice. It also seems to do this without setting up detectable resistance within the bacteria. The implication is that this antibiotic may actually have evolved in such a fashion that pathogens will not develop immunity to it even after long exposure.

What is more, teixobactin was isolated and cultured using new methods. There is the promise that more new powerful antibiotics, with good drug-potential, might be found using such an approach. It is early days and it may take two years or more before teixobactin is tested and cleared for clinical trials with humans. It could take five years or so to become a prescription drug, assuming all goes well. But this discovery definitely creates the possibility of deploying new weapons against superbugs, just when it looked as though drug-resistant bacteria would gain the upper hand.

The researchers who found the drug and pioneered the new approach were drawn from several academic institutions. The team was led by Kim Lewis and Slava Epstein, of Northeastern University, Boston, who co-authored the technical paper, published in Nature. It included scientists from the University of Bonn, and researchers from pharmaceutical development lab, NovoBiotic Pharmaceuticals, set up by Prof. Epstein and Prof. Lewis.

Antibiotics have generally been discovered by screening micro-organisms present in the soil. Penicillin was found by accident in bread mould, back in 1928. But very few natural antibiotics can be cultured in the laboratory and many have dangerous side-effects. The team has developed new means of growing and studying bacteria and antibiotics in their natural environment - literally in dirt. They have built a tool they call the iChip ("isolation chip") which allows single cells of an antibiotic to be isolated and cultured. They have so far found 25 new antibiotics, of which teixobactin is the most promising. The new antibiotic is produced by a bacterium called eleftheria terrae, which was found and cultured using iChip technology in a field of grass. Teixobactin has an unusual action, which allowed it to destroy a range of drug-resistant pathogens in mice by multiple attacks on the cell walls. Despite lengthy exposure, these pathogens did not mutate to develop strains that were subsequently resistant to teixobactin's action. Teixobactin itself will need to be studied in much greater detail.

The iChip (which is patented by Northeastern University and licensed to NovoBiotic Pharmaceuticals) will need to be deployed on a wider scale across multiple geographical and climatic regions to see if it can be used to culture more such drugs. If these antibiotics do work, they will have to be deployed with care to ensure that pathogens don't eventually develop some new resistance to their actions. Despite those caveats, this is potentially an enormous breakthrough which could transform drug research.

Nehru, Indira and the Indo-US legacy

Both Nehru and Indira Gandhi developed an antipathy to the US for personal reasons. US policy had very little to do with itLike a score of other heads of state before him, US PresidentBarack Obama is about to face a gruellingly boring couple of hours on January 26. It probably serves him right for ignoring India ever since he became US President. Stupidly, he even forgot to mention India in his latest State of the Union address, delivered two days before he comes here.

Many old-fashioned Indians, especially retired foreign services types, will sigh in quiet contentment. For them, this will be India's long-awaited revenge on America.

After all, it is no secret that until Rajiv Gandhi became prime minister, Indian diplomacy was predicated on a simple formulation: American governments are anti-Indian.

Over the years, I frequently tried to find out how this perception had grown. My question was simple. Please cite just one instance of when US actions and or/advice had done India actual harm?

No real answer was forthcoming, even though many words were spoken. The burden of the song was that the US ignored us.

Then one day, a few years ago, I got an answer: a retired foreign secretary said the only thing he could think of - that did actual harm instead of an imaginary one - was the advice John F Kennedygave to Jawaharlal Nehru to not to use the Air Force against the Chinese in 1962.

And, yes, we must not forget: it was the Americans, and not our bosom friends, the Russians, who came to our aid in 1962. They sided with China.

That aside, as harmful US acts go, many have muttered about 1971 when the US openly sided with Pakistan. But, remember, no harm came to India as a result of that support.

Prejudiced Indian
What explains the anti-US attitude in Indian officialdom? Hundreds of thousands of words have been written about it, but when you come right down to it, the prejudice came from the very top.

Both Nehru and Indira Gandhi developed an antipathy to the US but for entirely personal reasons. US policy had very little to do with it.

The late Sarvepalli Gopal, historian and biographer of Nehru, has written that Nehru was most upset that the US gave exactly the same sort of reception - confetti to confetti almost - to Liaquat Ali Khan, the Pakistani Prime Minister in 1952, as it had to Nehru. His ego was deeply hurt.

Likewise, Indira Gandhi became anti-US despite US help on the food front (PL-480) and defence (1962-64). This happened when, after she had personally negotiated the rupee devaluation of 1966 on the promise of aid, it was withheld. In case you are interested, Volume 2 of the Reserve Bank of India's history has a brief account of her negotiations.

Lyndon Johnson treated her badly, though he did ask her to dance with him. That annoyed her even more. Richard Nixon also treated her shabbily.

She turned firmly anti-American after that. Also, during 1969-71, she was dependent on Communist support in Parliament for survival.

More amazingly, even as they claimed non-alignment, both Nehru and Indira Gandhi turned to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) and then blamed the US for being nasty to India. But the USSR's technology was useless. Its support, except when it used the veto in the UN Security Council, was also useless. The KGB interfered in internal affairs. Worse, it collapsed in 1990.

And guess who India turned to after that? Not Cuba, for sure.

Un-ugly American
All this happened despite the fact that US advice - when taken - actually helped India enormously. One now-forgotten instance is the advice given in the mid-1960s, which eventually led to the Green Revolution and liberation from famines.

The US also throughout gave us the same industrial advice as it did to East Asia - go for labour-intensive, export-oriented production. They took it and prospered. We didn't and failed.

In 1948, the US had offered preferential access to Indian goods in return for some mess of pottage from India. Nehru failed to act on it because of other preoccupations.

In 1978, China also took the advice that the East Asians had taken. It has emerged as a global power that is challenging the US. We didn't and a billion Indians are paying the price.

The irony
There is, however, one major instance when US actions led to a lot of harm being done to India. This was in the 1980s when, ironically, Rajiv Gandhi had decided to reverse India's persistent anti-American attitude.

One, of course, was the tacit go-ahead to Pakistan's nuclear programme. This has been widely documented.

The other is less well known: the acceptance of Zia ul-Haq's condition that in return for help in Afghanistan, Pakistan would be free to do as it pleased against India, short of a 'military adventure'. The US agreed.

Pakistan started with Punjab and went on to Kashmir. It is only recently - after Pakistan-based terrorism started to hurt it - that the US has taken back that support.

The only mitigating aspect of our absurd US policy is that every genuine friend of the US has behaved in exactly the same way with it.

How to enable disruption

India has one of the world's most inefficient supply chains for products. The supply chain and logistics costs for instance are 12 per cent of our GDP, vis-à-vis six to seven per cent for developed countries. In developed countries, retailers like Walmart, Tesco, and so on have become the channel masters of the food supply chain, taking over from the manufacturers. In India, there is no equivalent. Practices like data integration, financial flow management, supply-demand matching, forecasting, efficient transport scheduling etc., need to be integrated into our system. This would make the supply chain more efficient, giving the customer better pricing and the farmer a better realisation for his products.

The story of ground transportation in India is no different. Public transportation, save and except a few stray cases, continues to be abysmal. All of us thus have to deal with errant and arrogant autowallahs on one side or on the other have to endure the trappings of owning a vehicle - EMIs, fuel, maintenance, etc. Enter the cab aggregators - Uber, Ola, Taxi for Sure, and so on. Barring stray instances, they offer customers a good vehicle on demand, a courteous driver, transparent and convenient billing and at a cost that is comparable to local autos and cabs, all through a click or two. Not only are they trying to disrupt the model of car ownership but are also offering an alternative to the obnoxious auto and cab drivers who refuse passengers with impunity or charge arbitrarily. The reason behind this metamorphosis is the "platform play", where a marketplace for demand and supply has been created and made efficient, resulting in the customer getting a better value for money and clearly a superior experience.

Historically, middlemen have fulfilled an important role in getting goods from the manufacturer to the end-user. Because the intermediaries don't really change the physical attributes of an item, the only function they seem to perform is moving information. Electronic commerce thus reduces the cost of goods through the elimination of brokers and distributors, by automating the exchange of information directly between the producer and the user.

The proliferation of the internet and smartphones has led to massive consumer empowerment. With 250 million internet users in India and an expected growth rate of 39 per cent in rural and 29 per cent in urban areas, and with the smartphone user base expected to grow by 45 per cent next year, the internet is powering businesses and disrupting them. It has shifted the supplier-distributor relationship from a hierarchically layered structure to an open structure, the magnitude of which is still underappreciated. Many technological innovations have enabled businesses to expand exponentially. Many new start-ups don't really make anything. Instead of cutting out middlemen, they've become middlemen themselves, connecting people with specific genres of services or merchants. Successful examples of this globally include transportation providers Uber and travel rental startup Airbnb.

A similar transformation is taking place in the online retail space. Of India's $500-billion retail sector, $6 billion is presently transacted online. This might hit $100 billion by 2019. Thus middlemen will see redundancy growing, physical retailers will see business being taken away and retail real estate will witness low occupancy. Landlords will also need to adapt to the changes to their lessees' requirements. For example, real-estate developers may feel threatened on the retail side, but they will have other big opportunities - building warehouses, for instance.

Governments who treat "layered supply chain" players as their vote banks will be under immense pressure to increase protectionism. However, they need to understand the new world order and proactively frame legislation that creates better value and not hurdles for both producer and consumer.

Technology entrepreneurs generally focus on a unique opportunity and then scale up rapidly, in some cases making it a "winner-take-all market". Legislators cannot view these businesses from the prism of their traditional legislation of competition and monopoly. As long as the customer is not being compromised, monopolistic behaviour may not necessarily be a bad thing.

A couple of instances suggest that government response globally is not very thoughtful. Regulators and politicians in Europe are trying to strongly reduce the influence of US internet companies in general - and to damage Google and Facebook in particular. Both China and Russia have pushed for new international treaties governing cyberspace. China has also been heavily criticised for censoring the internet by blocking news or comment that it deems damaging.

Back home the response of our government is no different. The government expected everything to be hunky-dory once Uber was banned. It should have reacted not by banning taxi companies, but by putting in place the very regulations that they haven't implemented up until now. It singled out Uber, perhaps more because it is a high-profile, politically weak service, than because of any risks riders may face. Not so long ago, the Karnataka government also banned Amazon from selling electronics and several other products from its warehouses in the state. The government wanted Amazon to pay VAT as it wanted the company to take ownership for the products stored in its warehouse well before a customer orders them.

A forward-looking proactive government can be ahead of the curve and facilitate the ushering in of technology for better and more efficient business models. They must work towards helping in nurturing the development of a healthy internet ecosystem, one that boosts infrastructure and access, builds a competitive environment that benefits users, lets innovators and entrepreneurs thrive and nurtures human capital.

This kind of government support might be a key enabler in addressing some of India's own grand challenges - like the Digital India vision and the aspiration to create a number of smart cities. Gone are those days where a government could protect its businesses by playing the big daddy. In a country like ours where 60 per cent of our population is below 60 years of age, of which most are tech-savvy, the government cannot deprive its customers of any opportunity. This very population that has elected the government could be the one to oust it.

In other words, they need to consider the long-term societal impact rather than short-term political gain. Technology is after all just a tool to facilitate change