Archive | May, 2015

Seven deadly mistakes that destroy employee motivation

Posted on 27 May 2015 by admin


Deadly Mistake # 1: Taking your bad mood out on others

Stressful situations often bring out the worst in leaders who are either feeling squeezed due to economic uncertainty, or the cumulative, demanding pressures of work and life. The most effective leaders recognize that the “boss” title, doesn’t legitimize your mood swings, nor does it give you permission to take your frustrations out on your team. It’s one thing to reveal your humanness; it’s another to let your emotions run wild no matter how much economic uncertainty prevails.

Deadly Mistake # 2: Constantly switching priorities

Leaders are responsible for setting the agenda, articulating the vision and allocating the work. They expect teams to manage projects within an anticipated time frame and meet customer demands; constraints that are understood as a “given.” However, all too often leaders change direction on a whim, causing havoc for employees and clients alike. When they incessantly shift the focus, confusion reigns as teams are forever chasing goals that have become moving targets.

Deadly Mistake #3: Criticizing, rather than critiquing performance

Evidence regarding unsatisfactory performance may be a genuine cause for concern. However, the opportunity to correct the issue diminishes when leaders are incapable of engaging in a conversation that gets to the heart of the problem. Their line of questioning can exacerbate the situation, such as: “Why did you do it this way?” instead of “tell me more about your process.” Defaulting to “why” implies judgment.

Deadly Mistake # 4: It’s my way or the highway

Many leaders use a take-it-or-leave-it philosophy with their employees, leaving no room for compromise. This makes people feel powerless and unappreciated, stifling opportunities or a desire to offer innovative ideas and alternative suggestions to improve existing processes. A lack of flexibility on the leader’s part can destroy team morale and motivation. In addition, an intransigent approach can have an adverse impact on productivity as a team goes through the motions implementing a directive they don’t agree with.

Deadly Mistake #5: Focusing on negatives before the positives

Too many leaders look for examples of what a team member is doing wrong, instead of what they are doing right. It is no surprise that many organizations continue to experience low morale and declining levels of engagement when leaders rarely offer appreciation or praise. When this occurs, especially during a performance review, the employee will shut down and tune out. Phrases that begin with “you should,” “you need to,” “you always,” “you have to,” often illicit a defensive response. Giving feedback is not the same as giving orders. An employee is less likely to develop and thrive under a leader who is constantly telling them what to do, or how to improve.

Deadly Mistake #6: Viewing employees through a myopic lens

Many leaders lack objectivity. This will invariably show up in their communication. A good leader will appreciate having team members with personalities or work styles that are different (but complementary) to them. A poor leader can’t see past the differences, seeing them as an irritant, rather than looking at performance or contribution. When a leader’s biases affect the lens through which they view their workforce, they run the risk of alienating themselves from the entire leadership infrastructure and may damage the reputation of the very organization they have toiled to build. By focusing on the personalities, genders and cultural background of an employee through vague, subjective language that pushes buttons (for example, “I want to talk to you about your attitude”) the mark on a leader’s character may be forever tarnished.

Deadly Mistake # 7: Taking all the credit

Good leaders know how to share credit and praise their employees. They are able to lead by example, set their egos aside for the good of the company and their employees. Give credit to employees when it is due. Acknowledging the accomplishments of your staff will make them feel like valued members of your team. And when your team members shine, you can bask in the afterglow without the need to take accolades that were not yours in the first place.

Teams crave caring communication from their leaders, through any economy. When they don’t receive it, or when it is framed incorrectly, it can often be the catalyst that sparks dissatisfaction and heightens the desire to leave their jobs. It is incumbent on leaders to be mindful about the impact of their words, their influence and delivery, on the career path of an employee.

Comments (0)

When Richa Chadda met her ‘idol’

Posted on 27 May 2015 by admin


Richa Chadda was left speechless when she got an opportunity to meet her cinema idol, French actress Marion Cotillard at the Cannes Film Festival.

The 26-year-old actress took to twitter to share her excitement with her fans.

“Speechless when I met my idol in flesh. #Marion Cotillard. Thank you #MasaanAtCannes and Melita. Unbelievable,” Richa Chadda tweeted.

The actress’ film “Masaan”, which was screened in the Un Certain Regard section of the film fest, has been honoured by the International Federation of Film Critics (FIPRESCI).

The Neeraj Ghaywan directed film was also treated to a five-minute long standing ovation during its screening at the annual movie gala.

Comments (0)

Pooja Hegde finishes 101 days of ‘Mohenjo Daro’ shoot

Posted on 27 May 2015 by admin


Model-turned-actress Pooja Hegde has wrapped up shoot of the Bhuj schedule of Ashutosh Gowariker’s epic adventure-romance film ‘Mohenjo Daro’.

The former beauty queen, who will share screen with Bollywood star Hrithik Roshan in the film, took to twitter to inform her fans that she has completed 101 days of shooting.

“Wrapping up from Bhuj having completed 101 days of shoot! What an amazing team! #MohenjoDaro,” Pooja tweeted.

“Mohenjo Daro” will mark Pooja’s Bollywood debut. She has earlier starred in Tamil film “Mugamoodi” and Telegu movies “Oka Laila Kosam” and “Mukunda”.

Comments (0)

Pooja Chandrashekar earns admission to all eight Ivy League universities

Posted on 21 May 2015 by admin

Pooja Chandrashekar

Even at the Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology, a top-ranked magnet school, senior Pooja Chandrashekar stands out among her brainiac peers.

She’s got a 4.57 grade-point average, scored a 2390 (out of 2400) on the SAT, and aced all 13 of her Advanced Placement exams. She also founded a national non-profit that encourages middle-school girls to participate in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) programs.

She’s also developed a mobile app that analyzes speech patterns and predicts with 96 percent accuracy if a person has Parkinson’s disease.

Oh, and she’s 17.

College admissions offices took notice. She can now add another bullet to her résumé: Pooja earned admission to all eight Ivy League schools. She also was accepted at Stanford, MIT, Duke, the University of Virginia, the University of Michigan and Georgia Tech, going 14 for 14.

Earning an acceptance letter from one Ivy League school is a rare achievement for most high school students. It is extremely rare for a student to gain admission to all eight, though a few each year manage to do so. This year, Long Island student Harold Ekeh announced he, too, had been accepted to all the Ivies.

Pooja’s guidance counselor, Kerry Hamblin, said that the senior is dedicated to pushing herself in the classroom, which helped her to stand out. “She’s taking the hardest courses, the most challenging that we offer, and has exceeded anyone’s expectations in all of them,” Hamblin said.

Hamblin added that it is “very atypical to get into all eight ivies,” though some of the elite magnet school’s students each year try.

“It’s not typically what we advise,” since each school has its own personality, strengths and weaknesses, Hamblin said. “They share a football league in common, and that’s about it.”

Born in Potomac Falls, Pooja is the only child of two engineers who immigrated to the United States from Bangalore, India.

Pooja spent her summers attending programs in robotics. She tinkered in Web design and game programming. In middle school, she built a windmill to explore the prospects of renewable energy.

She attended the private Nysmith School in Herndon before enrolling at TJ, where she has taken classes in computing, artificial intelligence, and DNA science. She hopes one day to pursue a career in medicine and bio-engineering.

“She really stands out as a TJ kid who has taken the mission of the school as far as it can go,” said principal Evan Glazer. “She’s a STEM superwoman who humbly approached her interests in curious ways.”

Comments (0)

Tory should let permanent residents of Toronto vote in municipal elections

Posted on 21 May 2015 by admin

Toronto Mayor John Tory (open John Tory’s policard) doesn’t want people who aren’t Canadian citizens to vote in municipal elections. It’s a reasonable stand, but he should change his mind.

He had said during mayoral campaign that the right to vote is a privilege given to Canadian citizens. Mayor Tory, then candidate Tory, had also said that permanent residents should volunteer in the political process.

Tory expressed similar sentiments this past week at a Ryerson City Building Institute forum organized to explore ways of bridging urban divides. Giving non-citizens the vote was suggested as a way to open up the democratic process and help more visible minority candidates win elected office.

 Mississauga Mayor Bonnie Crombie and Ajax Mayor Steve Parish welcomed the idea. But  Tory expressed reservations, including doubt that this change could actually boost the diversity of municipal councils.

As far as getting more minority people elected, the reform is at least worth a try. Not much else has worked so far. But even beyond that, change is a matter of fairness. On this ground alone, the right to vote in municipal elections should be extended to all permanent residents — citizens and non-citizens alike.

It’s estimated that more than a quarter-million newcomers live, work and play in Toronto. They volunteer in support of local causes, send their children to local schools, pay local taxes, and support local businesses. Yet they’re barred from the ballot box, denying them a say in how this city is run, because they’re not Canadian citizens.

At least 40 other countries allow non-citizens to vote at the municipal level, and it’s time Toronto did too. The province would need to amend the Municipal Elections Act to bring this about and it would be a big help if Toronto’s mayor were a firm advocate of change.

Citizenship would remain a privilege associated with voting in federal and provincial elections. This would still be something special. It makes sense to set a lower requirement for voting at the municipal level, where the issues aren’t national security or foreign policy concerns but more mundane matters such as garbage collection, water bills, transit fares and whether the Gardiner Expressway is torn down.

Non-citizens have become a vital component of Canada’s largest city, helping to make it one of the most diverse places in the world. These people should no longer be written off on Election Day.

Comments (0)

John Tory is taking us backward not forward.

Posted on 21 May 2015 by admin

John Tory

Samuel Getachew


 In the 2014 municipal election, I should have voted for Olivia Chow. I voted for John Tory and that was a mistake.

 I saw in Tory a moderate and inclusive public servant. I was blinded by the widespread support he held from citizens and institutions I respect and admire John Crombie, David Peterson, Bill Davis, Zanana Akande, the Toronto Star editorial among many others. I was not just a supporter of his but I was also his biggest cheerleaders.

Citizens like me and many others made him look smart, progressive and moderate. Sadly, he is not. Essentially, we became the human face of a man whose ideals are wrong for Toronto and Torontonians. We should have known better.

Like a young Jean Chrétien, who in 1958 went to Ottawa as a Lester B. Pearson delegate yet supported Paul Martin Sr. out of pity, I was drawn to Tory for that very same reason at the beginning. I did not study his perspectives well and embraced him rather quickly. The late David Pecaut believed in him and that meant something for me.

 Less than a year after he became our mayor, he has disappointed me a great deal.

 He has endorsed carding, rejected an idea to have new immigrants participate in our local democracy and his idea of engaging our young people by way of Starbucks employment is a farce at best. I should have followed my instinct and voted for Olivia Chow.

 Chow has always been a proven fighter for better ideals in our society and reflects the more perfect Canadian citizenship to us all. She supports the idea of allowing new immigrants to vote, does not support racial profiling and is a noted youth advocate as an elected official and private citizen. Tory is an elitist and he reflects the rejected ideals of the old Reform Party. Chow lost because of people like me. I should have known better.

I would like to publicly apologize to Olivia Chow.

Last night at Ryerson University, Mayor Tory once again broke the trust we placed on him and rejected the idea of allowing landed immigrants and other non-citizens the right to vote in our municipal elections — a practice many Canadian citizens take for granted. “I would not support the extension of the vote to people who are not citizens of Canada,” he said. The mayors of Mississauga and Ajax endorsed it.

 Ryerson University professor, Myer Siemiatycki, sees the lack of opportunity to engage new immigrants to the political process as a “lost city of residents–who pay municipal taxes through their mortgages or rent, and contribute to services and programs through various user fees–but have no say in electing the mayor, city council, and school board trustees.” Mayor Tory reflected how he has long called for keeping the status quo the way it is. For him, “better success with a program that educates students on how to get elected, including fundraising” is a better way to diversify our politics.

 If that was the only ingredient needed to inject diversity in our politics, I, my friend Andray Domise and many others would be councillors today. We are not.

 As for me, I took the most intensive and extensive political training for prospective candidates via Maytree Foundation in Toronto. Domise was overwhelmed with financial support, more than he needed, during his campaign. Yet, we both lost and became fringe voices in the end. We are a failed experiment of what Mayor Tory thinks works in our politics.

 If Mayor Tory really wants to promote diversity in municipal politics, he should advocate for real reform such as term limits and a recall legislation in case electors have a voter remorse. Better yet, he should reflect on allowing our new neighbors the chance to participate in our local democracy.

Former American Vice President, Dick Cheney, was once asked why he oddly supports same-sex marriage for a Republican. He responded that his daughter, Mary Cheney, is a lesbian. Mayor Tory was also asked a similar question on his support for police carding and he reflected how “his kids, if they were stopped in the street, they wouldn’t be treated (the way young people of color are).”

 I voted for Tory but I certainly did not endorse a second-class citizenship for myself. Why is he endorsing public policies that Torontonians, for the most part, do not want? Why are we, our fellow black and brown citizens, allowed to be treated in such a way? Why does he continue to fail to understand our anger? Is it because it does not affect him personally?

 John Tory is taking us backward not forward.

Comments (0)

Labour board case on teacher strikes an ‘attack’ on rights, union says

Posted on 21 May 2015 by admin


Thousands of angry teachers converged on Queen’s Park in protest Thursday as an Ontario Labour Relations Board hearing began — just blocks away — to determine if a strike in three school boards is legal.

The Durham, Peel and Rainbow/Sudbury boards are asking for a ruling that would put an end to their high school teachers’ walkouts and return students to class before the school year is lost.

But Heather Alden, lawyer for the Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation, told labour board chair Bernard Fishbein that the case is a “fundamental attack” that seeks to “limit the charter rights” of teachers.

The boards are arguing the high school teachers’ job action is unlawful under new bargaining legislation because they’re striking locally over issues that are negotiated provincially, such as class size. The boards want teachers back in their classrooms. Some 70,000 students have been affected.

“Being entitled to strike locally does not entitle them (teachers) to strike over central issues,” argued lawyer Michael Hines, representing the school boards. Lawyers for both sides huddled in private for most of Thursday trying to come to agreement on what facts will be included in the case before Fishbein.

While the case has been deemed urgent by the strike-bound school boards, Fishbein chose not to impose a time limit on lawyers’ presentations, and allowed them to meet behind closed doors for more than six hours on procedural matters without even starting to present their arguments. The hearing is to resume Friday.

The first strike was called in Durham, where high schools have now been shut down for four weeks and concerns are growing about how 21,500 students — especially the 7,100 in Grade 12 — will make up the lost time.

Public high school teachers in Peel walked off the job last week affecting 42,000 students, and teachers in Rainbow/Sudbury joined the picket lines two weeks ago.

At the Queen’s Park rally, OSSTF president Paul Elliott told the crowd that the strikes were called over local issues, and the crowd booed when he mentioned the labour board case, the Star’s Richard J. Brennan reported.

Elliott said “teachers have had enough” and called on the provincial government to “put its foot down to get the boards moving.”

Secondary teachers are upset over a provincial proposal to make changes to class size caps, which boards say they need for flexibility.

A few Durham teachers said privately that they hope the labour board forces them back to work, but added they are upset with the government and would not vote Liberal again.

The three boards that launched the labour board case believe the strikes are based on “central” issues and not local ones, and say that’s not allowed under the new bargaining legislation.

Bill 122 details a two-tiered bargaining system, with costly items such as class size and salary hammered out centrally between the province, the school boards’ association and the provincial unions. Local issues such as performance appraisals or grievance procedures are negotiated between individual boards and union districts.

Talks at both levels have been strained; the high school teachers, as well as the province’s elementary teachers, have walked away from provincial bargaining saying they oppose the concessions the government and school boards have put forward.

Education Minister Liz Sandals said the labour relations board hearing “does not affect other boards, other unions or negotiations at the central table.”

“It is up to the OLRB as an independent tribunal, to hear the evidence and issue a ruling about whether the local (high school teacher union) strikes at these three boards are deemed to be illegal based on the School Board Collective Bargaining Act.”

Meanwhile, unions representing the province’s Catholic and French teachers remain at the table.

The Catholic teachers’ union recently sent out a bargaining update listing 12 upcoming dates for talks.

“If we are unable to secure a fair and just agreement, we will move forward and apply for conciliation,” said the update. “This would likely place us in a provincial strike position in September, a more realistic and tactically superior time to commence any type of action than mid-June.”

The province’s public elementary teachers’ union has launched a work-to-rule campaign, refusing to administer standardized tests or provide report card comments.

On Thursday, EQAO standardized testing was cancelled at schools hit by work-to-rule or strikes.


Comments (0)

93 Per Cent of Canadians Get Nothing from Doubling TFSA Limits

Posted on 21 May 2015 by admin

The Hon. Ralph Goodale 



At a time when the Canadian economy is sputtering — with virtually no growth, weak job creation, poor job quality, large trade deficits, record household debt, and low confidence levels — governments need to be careful in their policy choices.

What will best drive jobs and growth, and provide the most help to the largest number of those who really need help the most? Growth and fairness must be prime objectives.

One policy choice made by the Harper government is to increase the annual limit on contributions to “tax fee savings accounts” (TFSAs). Created in 2009, TFSAs currently allow taxpayers to deposit up to $5500 in after-tax money every year in a designated account, which will grow over time on a tax-free basis. Mr. Harper is nearly doubling the annual contribution maximum to make it $10,000.

According to the government’s calculations, this will cost the federal treasury several hundreds of millions of dollars over the next five years, and some tens of billions of dollars over the longer-term. It will also reduce provincial government revenues.

For those who readily have an extra $4500 available every year, after they’ve paid their taxes, this increase would be an attractive future tax break. But is a higher limit fair to taxpayers across the board? The answer to that question depends on how many taxpayers at various wealth levels will be able to benefit from the higher contributions.

At $5500/year, the benefits of TFSAs are generally accessible to a broad cross-section of taxpayers. But on the incremental amount up to $10,000 — not so much.

Following a detailed review of this program last winter, the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) said: “TFSA benefits, currently balanced across wealth groups, will become increasingly skewed toward high-wealth households over time.” After the recent budget, he said: “The contribution limit increases proposed in Budget 2015 would accentuate these distributional disparities.”

“Distributional disparities” is PBO lingo for “unfair”. The most recent statistics on TFSAs, published by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), reinforce the PBO’s warning:

In 2013, over 28-million Canadians were eligible to have a TFSA. About 10.7-million did so. That’s a participation rate of just under 38 per cent.

Of those who participated, only 1.9-million contributed the maximum. That’s less than 18 per cent of those who had a TFSA and, more importantly, a very small 6.7 per cent of those who were eligible to have one.

Significantly, the number of taxpayers who are able to maximize their annual contributions has been dropping steadily since this program’s inception. At 1.9-million in 2013, it is down 39 per cent from five years earlier. To look at it another way, in 2009 more than 64 per cent of TFSA-holders maxed-out. In 2013, fewer than 18 per cent did.

It’s important to note that any “unused” room to make a contribution to a TFSA in any one year can be carried forward to future years. It accumulates. CRA figures show that the average TFSA is carrying more than $13,500 in unused, available room – within existing limits.

All in all, then, it’s difficult to sustain an argument to increase the maximum. More Canadians would be further ahead if the government maintained the existing TFSA limits, while also:

  • Cutting the middle-class income tax rate across the board;
  • Creating a single, progressive, tax-free “child benefit” that provides significantly more support each month to 9 out of 10 families with children;
  • Restoring the Old Age Security/Guaranteed Income Supplement eligibility age to 65; and
  • Strengthening investments in public infrastructure to drive better jobs and growth immediately, while also laying a solid foundation for a more productive, competitive and prosperous economy for years to come.

The Harper government frequently tries to concoct an argument that doubling TFSA limits would be especially helpful to Canadians earning up to $60,000 because these are the people who regularly max-out every year. Or so the Conservatives claim.

But as my Liberal MP colleague (and statistics expert) Ted Hsu recently pointed out, the issue is NOT how many of those who max-out their TFSAs have incomes of $60,000 or less. The crucial question is the other way around — how many people earning $60,000 or less are actually maxing out their TFSAs? The answer is about five per cent. As income levels rise, a larger proportion are able to contribute the maximum. This demonstrates the skew toward higher wealth (as reported by the PBO).

Given only mediocre improvements in median family incomes over the past many years and the explosion in household debt, it’s just not realistic to expect many middle-class families will have an extra $10,000 lying around every year, after taxes, to enable them to fill up a higher TFSA contribution maximum.

There are greater, more beneficial priorities to be tackled more urgently.

The Hon. Ralph Goodale is Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, Member of Parliament for Wascana and former Finance Minister


Comments (0)


Posted on 21 May 2015 by admin


Dr. Hasan Askari


                 The terrorist attack on the passengers of a bus in Karachi on May 13 shocked Pakistanis living within Pakistan and abroad. It shattered the slowly developing optimism after the attack on the Peshawar’s Army Public School that Pakistani civilian and military authorities had brought the menace of terrorism under control.

     In the immediate aftermath of the latest Karachi incident, we witnessed a lot of activity on the part of civilian and military leadership. They ran around under a heavy security cover, civilian and army top brass first held their meetings separately and they joined together to discuss the ways and means to cope with the tragedy.  The Sind Apex Committee meeting, a conglomerate of civilian and military leadership, was held at the Corps headquarters in Karachi the next day.

    The key civilian and military officials as well as the leaders of political and religious parties were vocal in criticizing the attack and the civilian and military leadership.

     We saw similar activity after the attack on the Army Public School, Peshawar, on December 16, 2014.   A twenty-point agenda was announced and the constitution was amended to accommodate military courts for two years under the on-going civilian democratic system.

    Five months down the road from the Peshawar incident, we do not know what happened to the twenty points National Action Plan. The Army and the Rangers made some quick moves.

The civilian provincial and federal governments arrested a few thousand people on the basis of the list of criminal and dubious people available with the police; some books were banned and an action was launched against the use of loudspeakers by the mosques. The federal government also announced steps to regulate the madrassa system.  As the religious leadership adopted a defiant posture, the federal and provincial governments stepped back.  Most of the things have also returned to pre-December stage. All militant and sectarian leaders are free to engage in their activities.

  The Rangers and the Army showed their teeth in Karachi by launching a raid against a political party, arresting a number of its activists. Later, video tapes of Saulat Mirza were released targeting that party. All this happened in the second week of March.  We do not know about the follow up of all this by mid-May. Saulat Mirza has been administered death sentence and his video tapes have become history.

        Pakistan’s inability to fully control religious extremism and terrorism can be attributed to a set of dilemmas faced by the civilian leadership and the military top brass.  The civilian leaders, especially those in power at the federal and provincial levels, have the problem of a lack of focus, absence of unity of mind on terrorism and their tendencies to view all state policy issues, including religious extremism and terrorism, from their narrow partisan perspectives.

   The biggest tragedy is that the civilian power elite and other political and religious leaders lack the unity of mind as to who is responsible for terrorism.  They differ on sectarian killings either due to religious denominational mindset or because of political considerations. Why should they lose votes by openly criticizing sectarian groups?

 Others are bogged down in conspiracy theories and the role of an external hand.  It is true that if a country experiences internal strife and disorder, other countries may exploit the situation to their advantage. The best way for neutralization of external intervention in Pakistan is to eliminate the groups that seek foreign support, especially funding for their violent activities.

   Another important development in the post-Peshawar incident period was the increased role of the army in civilian governance and internal security matters.

The apex committees signify a new civilian-military hybrid that provides an institutional cover to the expanded role of the army in civilian affairs. By now, the provincial apex committees meet periodically at the Corp headquarters which are participated by the chief ministers and other civilian leaders. This has enhanced the role of the Corps Commanders based in provincial capitals. This arrangement serves the interests of civilian and military leaders.

The Army top leadership is more actively involved in policy making at the federal and provincial levels who are convinced, and rightly so, that the civilian leaders cannot alone cope with terrorism and extremism. The loss of power by the civilian leaders is compensated by the removal of the fear of being totally knocked out from top civilian positions.  The semblance of civilian rule enables Nawaz Sharif and his colleagues to stay in power and it saves the Army from being criticized for displacing an elected civilian system.

   However, the chances of strains in the current civilian-military hybrid with a heavy tilt towards the Army, cannot be ruled out.    The Army is over-burdened and over-stretched because of the military operation in North Waziristan and other tribal agencies, internal security in Karachi, policy-making in key foreign policy and external security issues, support to civilian authorities for many civilian tasks, including security tasks on the eve of some by-elections, and its role in apex committees.

     The Karachi incident has increased the responsibility of the Army because the civilian federal and provincial governments have no definite ideas to control terrorism; they lack ideas and capacity.

When the Army’ moves quickly to control terrorism, it will be confronted with the harsh reality of linkages between some political parties and criminal and terrorists elements.  Therefore, the current civil-military hybrid for handling selected civilian affairs, especially controlling terrorism, may not prove to be a stable relationship. If the Army leadership goes incessantly after religious extremists, terrorists and criminal elements, it may be knocking at the door of powerful political bosses and religious institutions.  The challenge of restoring the primacy of the Pakistani state is very complex.

Comments (0)

India and China sign deals worth $22bn as Modi ends visit

Posted on 21 May 2015 by admin


India has signed trade and economic co-operation deals worth $22bn (£14bn) in Shanghai as PM Narendra Modi’s visit to China draws to a close.

The agreements cover a range of industries including renewable energy, the financial sector and ports.

“Let us work together in mutual interests,” said Mr Modi. “Now India is ready for business.”

On Friday, more agreements worth $10bn (£6.3bn) covering education, railways, and scientific research were signed.

Border talks

On Friday, Mr Modi held talks with China’s Premier Li Keqiang and both sides agreed to seek a “fair resolution” to disputes on their common border.

China rejects a 1914 border agreement signed by the British colonial authorities with Tibet, establishing a de-facto boundary.

Both have claims on various parts of each other’s territories, including an Indian-administered area known as Zangnan or South Tibet in China which is considered part of Arunachal Pradesh state in India.

Mr Modi said at a news conference that he and Mr Li had agreed to explore a “fair, reasonable and mutually acceptable resolution” to the issue.

Mr Li said the two countries had “enough political wisdom to manage and control” differences.

On Friday, Mr Modi also met Zhang Dejiang, the chairman of the National People’s Congress standing committee.

A statement by China’s foreign affairs ministry reported Mr Xi as saying to Mr Modi that their two countries “must work together to enhance mutual trust, control our differences and problems to avoid them interfering with bilateral relations”.


Comments (0)

Advertise Here
Advertise Here