Our Political System was a revelation in 1776, before
Hidden Microphones & Cameras,
Big Business,
Indoor Plumbing and Toilet Paper,
before Ethics was understood,
and
before the National Security Agency (NSA).
The actions of our political Representatives like George Washington were shaped by the ethics of honor instilled by the educational system and social awareness of that time. Ethics plays no large part in our present educational systems. Ethics should be a formal part of every class from pre-school to doctoral presentation. Instilled formally, the people would better understand how to predict consequences from any proposed action. The corrupt would die out with time and attrition.
Since the Declaration of Independence (and the first fights against taxation without representation), technology has allowed Special Interest groups (to include Terrorist Groups, souless Corporations, and corrupt politicians) to use the innate weaknesses of our political structure to undermine the basis for our Constitution; a modern form of racketeering and organized crime, jeopardizing national security.
The Citizens of the United States
require implementation of
State representation, including ALL states,
by a large and diverse Ethical Oversight Committee
to ensure the security of peoples Freedoms,
to manage National Security Agency (NSA) operations,
and
to determine how the information collected and derived by
the NSA shall best be used
as it relates to our Freedoms and Security,
and to “absolutely” restrict this information
from any other purpose.
Who are the ghosts behind the faces of our government, who continues to manipulate the world into a continuous chain of wars. A chain that has killed many millions of people, and that deters development? This is only one relationship the NSA should be informing the public about.
The NSA is soley controlled by the office of the President of the United States and only needs a single judge to obtain a warrant to covertly monitor any person or corporation (wire tapping, covertly breaking in to copy documents, copy by any means computer information, record in detail the habits and personal relationships of anyone, …).
Recently, President Bush took control away from that judge and even though the judge was ineffectual, the President now has absolute control over the NSA.
The President is a puppet of the same organization that controls the Federal Reserve. Therefore they control the United States, not the President, not the People, and certainly not ethics. The Fed encourages war to promote special interest prosperity. Loans with interest to both sides of every war. Interest paid on every dollar produced for the United States. Who benefits from the interest paid?
Current NSA warrants are meaningless and effectively allows the NSA to collect information without public scrutiny, while Presidential directives prevent the NSA from monitoring special interest group corrupt practices and disclosing those actions to the public
Under our current system a single judge would have to oversee thousands of covert transactions nationwide to adequately monitor national security issues, and to follow up to ensure those requests were legitimate. Further, since information collected by the NSA can be arbitrarily “classified”, the NSA can arbitrarily prevent the judge from monitoring the kinds of data collected.
The current system is not practical and therefore unethical, there is no reasonable way the judge would know what the NSA does with the information collected; and since the judge is controlled by the President, this is highly susceptible to corrupt practices. The current system allows for shielding corruption while promoting unscrupulous special interest activities.
The “Protect America Act” is unconstitutional. But a “simple change” to provide “REPRESENTATION by all States” in the covert collection and processing of data would make the Act Constitutionally sound.
The NSA must be managed by doctors of science (one parallel position for each State elected political representative; but with no affiliation) to evaluate all data collected and eliminate the useless requirement of warrant by a judge (presently coerced into signing off on any NSA warrant presented before them); and to require the NSA to monitor for corrupt political practices (terrorist activities, criminal activities, political practices that endanger National Security, …), with the mandate to notify the offending parties quietly to correct their unethical behavior, only then after they have failed to correct their actions adequately, their actions are publish on a NSA publicly available website.
We the people would then boycott corrupt representatives and their supporting corporations. The associated District Attorney would be notified, and be given the details to substantiate investigation. The District Attorney would then fully investigate and prosecute in accordance with the law. The NSA would at no time directly intervene, thereby limiting their power to nudging our political system away from corrupt activities.
The following details how to update our 200 year old political structure to provide representative governance that promotes the economy, desires of the masses, and ethical government practices; allowing the Government and the people to think as ONE. This same system can be seeded into other governments like Iraq to create an ethical environment for all peoples.
_______________________________________________________
To find & email your specific Congressmen and Senators:
Your State’s Congressmen
Your States’ Senators
To email Congressman all across the United States:
http://www.conservativeusa.org/mega-cong.htm
To talk directly with the staff of your representatives:
(202) 225-3121 for the House
(202) 224-3121 for the Senate
—————————————————————————————————
COPY & PASTE THE FOLLOWING to your Representatives
Subject: Create an “Oversight of NSA Ethics committee” (ONE) to manage NSA Data Collection, Assessment, and Directives in the United States
As your constituent, I request that you forward the following to all political delegates in every State of the United States, and that a Highly Ethical group of diverse people representing every State and its population be instated to provide ethical oversight and management of all National Security Agency (NSA) data collection, assessments, and directives.
Because this large representative body of individuals will act as a covert, but highly trained publicly elected governing body, this will allow the NSA to continue data collection without warrant. The Senate and Congress will provide “oversight and not direct control” of this new branch in our political structure, thereby providing the needed checks and balances.
The problem with our current political system is that Special Interests (Oil Companies, Defense Contractors, Big Business Corporations, Foreign Interests, …) actively and covertly influence our political representatives. Private research (to include Terrorist involvement with genetic engineering in all its forms, nuclear physics research, economic initiatives, social reform efforts, …) are potentially high risk threats to National Security, yet are largely unmonitored. Corrupt and Neglective influences are not ONLY the fault of our Representatives, they are the fault of our unupdated 200 year old political structure.
To correct this weakness in our Government, in addition to the Senate and Congress, create a new branch of State elected political representatives whose only purpose is to manage the National Security Agency (NSA), which did not exist at the birth of our political structure.
Candidates for these new positions must be doctors of science with proven understanding of ethical evaluation. Doctors of science are necessary because they need to understand and interact with the inner workings of computer software to continuously analyze the large amounts of diverse real world data collected.
Our present political structure does not have an ethical political component to effectively neutralize the criminal aspect of political pandering, coercive control over our Representatives, or Terrorist influences in our Society and in our Government, but we do have the resources to do so.
The National Security Agency (NSA) monitors ALL organizations: CIA, NIS, Air Force, Army, PLO, Al-Qaeda, Defense Contractors, Oil Companies, Greenpeace, ALL of our Politicians, and basically all organizations whether domestic or abroad. Anyone with this information controls the focus of our Nation, along with our Freedoms and Security.
An important point here is that collecting information is necessary and of little negative consequence in an ethical environment, what specifically is done with that information is extraordinarily important, especially in unethical and abusive hands. Currently, Special Interests unethically manipulate our country’s assets, despite “We the Peoples” desires. How many people and soldiers have died supporting a business interest rather than a national interest?
Greater than $12 Billion “lost” in Iraq, destruction of New Orleans, War in Iraq, manipulation of the media, greater than $12 Billion illegally allocated to Halliburton where they subsequently moved outside of our legal system to Dubai (Saudi Arabia), …
As a consequence of Special Interest actions, they erode human rights, leave our country unnecessarily exposed to security threats, and hinder commerce that would flourish were it not for unethical business practices of Special Interests and Large Corporations.
Each “Oversight of NSA Ethics committee” (ONE) delegate represents elected representation by certified highly ethical doctors and non-partisan control over our country’s human rights, freedoms, and security.
Together with Congress and the Senate, ONE delegates provide a tertiary and complementary system of representation, with each representative political faction having unique assets and control mechanisms. The combination of focused representation for business, the people, and ethics makes the system innately representative, well informed, ethical, and stable. Businesses will continue to sponsor individual Senators and Congressmen, however, all money contributed to ONE candidates shall go into a common fund to promote all potential ONE candidates equally within each State.
Because this large representative body of individuals will act as a covert, but highly trained publicly elected governing body, this will allow the NSA to continue data collection without warrant.
No longer will we need to have less Freedom to have more Security, or vice versa.
These highly trained elected personnel provide for independent maximizing of Freedoms and maximizing of Security for all citizens !!! While the Congress and Senate provide oversight and continues to control the military as part of the checks and balances to make this political structure stable.
Presently, special interests make Security and Freedom mutually incompatible. Many countries have the same political structure as we do and yet live in a police state where the individual has no recognized rights; we must prevent a similar situation from happening here in the United States. The current actions of the President’s Office are a prelude of worse things to come.
To take into account all perspectives and actual events to maximize both Freedom and Security for our entire country requires much more raw information than 10,000 people can amass, and assessment that would take these people many lifetimes to be just. But events happen concurrently every day that threaten our Freedoms and Security.
NSA computers process diverse data at great speeds to provide minute by minute evaluation of threats to our national security, and currently as directed by special interests. To stop the unethical use of NSA resources, a large group of persons extensively trained in ethical reasoning needs to create the “computer-based automated keys” (Directives) for unlocking relationships related to promoting BOTH Freedoms and Security.
Directives are computer software analysis functions that sift through real world information. Something like Antivirus programs for protecting your computer. When key relationships are found, a task is generated to cleanup that corrupt system. Ethical care must be taken to ensure good relationships are not disturbed, while corrupt activities are corrected. The concept being: “To do the least necessary to allow unhindered natural social development; while ensuring that repeated corrupt practices of the same types identified do not recur.
As Directives are developed that can be generalized for a particular class of social system, they can be shared amongst similarally structured nations. Thereby helping to reduce the development costs for all countries; and provide international peer review of all Directives developed. At no time will raw data be shared by various National Security Agencies of the different nations.
Computer systems have been used for similar purposes for many years with great success in economics to limit risks and promote investment diversity. By developing automated directives, this helps to provide integrity and consistent behavior of the NSA. The derived results can then be evaluated by this large team of elected Representatives using state of the art ethical evaluation tools; thus ensuring the information collected is used solely to independently promote the Freedoms and Security of ALL citizens.
Please instate a comprehensive “Oversight of NSA Ethics committee” (ONE) to manage the National Security Agency (NSA) as outlined below, a system allowing the Government and the people to think as one.
To maintain equitable representation of all peoples, each State shall publicly elect an Oversight of NSA Ethics (ONE) delegate paralleling each elected Congressman and Senator position; but having no affiliation.
The Constitution for each State shall act as the basis for the ethical perspective of each delegate.
The requirements for election as a ONE delegate are:
shall be a certified doctor from a nationally accredited school
shall have authored and published a paper related to ethics in a nationally distributed professional journal
shall be a permanent resident of that State
shall pass uniform but unique tests related to Ethics, Critical Reasoning, probability, and statistics
shall be free of a felony record
shall not be strongly biased regarding any special interests
shall forever be disallowed from ever discussing any information formulated or witnessed while in office; and shall teach ethical evaluation for two years after their term in office
shall submit themselves for lie detection and questioning periodically to prevent outside influence by any special interest
The delegates shall be relocated to the surroundings near the NSA and will be furnished Government owned housing while in office. Physical security for the delegates shall consist of NSA surveillance with an armed NSA controlled security force to control any attempt to access or disproportionately influence the delegate or their family.
Each delegate shall have a two person staff at the NSA and a two person staff in their home State to monitor, collect, and research information.
Each State shall have one highly trained field agent for each delegate for that State whom shall collectively implement directives from the NSA using legal resources.
All work surrounding NSA data collection shall be done in a secure facility protected from military threat.
Absolutely no raw data or interest specific data or interest specific directives shall ever leave the facility under penalty of treason related to all intentionally involved.
No interest specific data or interest specific directive shall be propagated outside of the confines of the NSA by delegate staff or agents under penalty of racketeering.
The ONE delegates shall poll their respective communities related to values and perspectives, but polls shall not contain any Special Interest specific information.
The NSA shall devise and maintain a relational database to allow delegates to productively relate all measure and kind of ethical issue to the vast amounts of information collected by the NSA.
The delegates shall formulate “Automated Directives” for automatically: flagging potentially destructive relationships, developing priorities, developing issued directives to field agents, monitor metrics to verify results, track long term effects and related relationships, provide for a continuously updated scores related to the qualities related to our freedoms and security at that moment in time, and provide simulations for anticipating the effects of issuing a proposed directive and how it would affect the freedoms and security scores, …
The creation of directives shall solely be governed by the ONE Committee. The President, Congress, the House, the Military, nor any other special interest group shall ever have any influence over the creation of directives, other than approved ethical channels of communication. Any attempt to do so outside of approved channels shall be considered treason within the confines of the NSA, and racketeering otherwise, and all involved shall share the same fate, regardless of political standing or financial backing.
Because the positions of the delegates are elected positions. Data would be provided by the NSA which tracks the number of hours each delegate actively performed research, the influence each delegate had on the overall freedom and security qualities, and the core generalized formulas for creating the Automated Directives would be publicly disclosed but would not relate delegate involvement nor the data or type of data that they relate. This is necessary to help ensure high-tech corporations do not fillfully subvert NSA monitored data. Each delegate would be allowed to create public announcements that do not violate that which is outlined above.
The ONE delegates shall govern themselves regarding inappropriate actions generated by a delegate, with periodic oversight by the Senate and Congress. A delegate that fails to use ethical reasoning in promoting a Directive and which benefits a special interest may be penalized and a State elected alternate may take their place.
The term of service for each Delegate shall be four years; followed by a two year mandatory position at an accredited University teaching related ethics topics involving analysis and software. The Delegate may then accept nomination for the following election cycle.
Classes in ethics for learning to create automated Directives shall use independently developed computer models and simulation systems. At no time shall any Directive from the NSA be directly analyzed. The simulated environment would cause errors inconsistent with NSA real world processing. However, relationships discovered can be submitted to the NSA for review through approved ethical channels.
Collectively, the ONE committee shall determine the information necessary to guide the President, Congress, Senate, and the Military. The President, Congress, Senate, and the Military will have continuous one-way input into the NSA as part of NSA data collection, without warrant, the feedback will be immediate, so there is no need for any political party or military component to have dialog with ONE delegates or the NSA data collection and assessment systems.
The Congress and Senate shall provide a team trained in ethical evaluation to periodically monitor (not control) the NSA and report back to the Senate and Congress.
The military remains under the control of the Senate and the Congress; and the NSA shall only be allowed restricted control over a military asset with minute by minute support of the majorities of both the Senate and Congress where time critical relationships exist.
Every political representative in the United States will be able to send their viewpoints to the NSA by sending an email to a NSA server, with only an automated response. But their views will be collected and processed automatically by the data collection system. The same applies for all citizens. All citizens shall have representation and voice.
The administrators necessary to manage the NSA regarding operations personnel, supplies, existing field agents, the budget, and all other aspects of the NSA shall answer to the ONE committee and shall provide a continuous and accurate assessment of resource managment to Congress.
As technology provides greater capabilities in diverse areas such as spy technologies, computer modeling of world economics, …, the NSA shall continue to evolve systems to better represent and anticipate the needs and desires of all citizens.
Under this system, the NSA shall collect and assess all information as practically possible worldwide, without the need for warrant in the United States.
Instate a comprehensive “Oversight of NSA Ethics committee” (ONE) to govern NSA data collection systems as outlined above; a system allowing the Government and the people to think as one.
By: James Dunn
About the Author:
Read more on Method to Ethically Eliminate All Political Corruption…
Filed under Politics by on Jan 23rd, 2010. 
Why did the parliament vote for this early election date? There are more than one answer to this. The front runners for president see a threat in a new rising candidate which will gain by more time, and they want to cut him short of this so he does not win to much votes. Another explanation is that the Ukrainian politicians up till now have not shown much strategic leadership and lack of crisis management, and this is not only limited to the top leaders in Ukraine, but the whole parliament.
Ukraine is in a need for a change in political leadership as the present leadership consisting of the president and prime minister does not provide the leadership Ukraine needs at this moment.
Ukraine present political crisis is a struggle between two heads of power and Ukraine’s future as a European Parliamentary Democracy. In addition there is an ambitious opposition with the party of regions leader, who will do his best to get into power, mostly because of personal ambitions. An opposition leader which has a scandal filled background in Ukrainian politics.
Razumkov Center performed a poll in the period from February 2th until March 5th 2009 revealed six potential presidential alternatives amongst the population, these were;
Viktor Yanukovych,
Yulia Tymoshenko,
Arseniy Yatseniuk,
Volodymyr Lytvyn,
Petro Symonenko, and
Viktor Yuschenko
Amongst these candidates there is only one real choice for a visionary leadership which will contribute to form the independent strong Ukraine which gives the population hopes for the future.
This candidate is the 34 year old economist and lawyer Arseniy Yatseniuk.
He is the candidate which has risen fastest in popularity in the last few months and gains terrain towards his opponents for every day towards the presidential election in January 2010. The other candidates have not demonstrated the ability to unite Ukraine either in power position, nor as opposition politicians. More of the same medicine will not work any longer for Ukraine. Like the international crisis, there is a need for new tools that will prevent Ukraine having the same problems over and over again.
ARSENIY YATSENIUK STANDS FOR BUILDING A NEW UNITED UKRAINE
Arseniy Yatseniuk can build a new sense of national unity that will bring relatively scandal free politics forward and he represent the next generation of a new post-partisan Ukrainian leadership.
He represents the transformational figure which emerges in the Ukrainian political landscape that captures the imagination and majority of Ukrainian voters towards the January 2010 national elections.
Arseniy Yatsenyuk is the one leader who is uniquely positioned to save Ukraine from itself. His meteoric rise is altering the political terrain of the upcoming elections in Ukraine.
Since Yatsenyuk has entered the race, he will have a challenging race towards presidency. But he can also campaign and spur optimism in Ukraine and bring hope back to the distressed population.
Ukraine is required to present balanced governmental budgets. The president must ensure that all politicians, regardless of fraction work together towards a common goal – saving Ukraine. In order to achieve this the new leader must be ready to take actions within the energy politics, especially Naftogas and its inability to present positive capital results as well as be able to open up its operations to be able to control its use of capital. Another issue the president needs to take care of is to handle the level of corruption in Ukraine.
Yushenko and Tymochenko have demonstrated lack of coherent leadership and ability to present a common political platform. They have therefore as I see it, disqualified themselves as candidates to be the needed future visionary political presidential leader of Ukraine.
The apparent lack of proper political craftsmanship in the formation of the Orange Coalition between Yushenko and Tymoshenko has lead to disagreement on virtually everything since they took the power in 2004.
The inability of the opposition leaders to present a real alternative to the present day leadership also disqualifies them from taking part in the new leadership of Ukraine. Today the major opposition party, party of regions is more occupied with criticize the existing government and president for not making a crisis plan and anti-crisis solutions, instead of cooperate with the leadership to create one.
BUILDING A UNITED UKRAINE WITH A VISIONARY MODERN LEADER
The new President to be elected in October 25th needs the trust by vast numbers of Ukrainians and not seen as part of the problem and not fatigued by a constant fighting within the political leader collegium’s of the President, Prime Minister and the chairman of Verkhovna Rada. The new Ukrainian leader must muster enough parliamentary seats and nationwide support to forge an effective coalition government and lead a genuine reform movement.
Yanukovych is facing a backlash in his party and polls for fumbling the last attempt to depose Timoshenko from the prime ministers office.
Arseniy Yatsenyuk can break out as a uniting force to save Ukraine.
The political fighting between Yushenko, Yanukovych and Tymoshenko demonstrate their inabilities in proper visionary political leadership on the cost of retaining personal powers.
Ukraine is sinking and Yatsenyuk’s poll numbers and popularity are rising.
As a former banker, Ukraine’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and Speaker of the parliament, the 34 year-old Yatsenyuk is experienced and respected in Ukraine’s political arena. He is young, relatively scandal free and has the best chance to represent the next generation of a new post-partisan Ukrainian leadership.
Yatsenyuk represent the sober visionary leader who can impart a new sense of realism that implores Ukraine to clean up its own financial house.
He has charisma enough to inspire Ukrainians to take their destiny in their own hands and not look to Europe or Russia for salvation or blame them when things go wrong.
He must challenge the reign in Ukraine’s oligarchs who have ravaged the country in the same way that Russia’s oligarchs did during the transition from state ownership to free enterprise.
Yatsenyuk has the ability to craft a sensible forward-leaning Ukrainian energy policy that modernizes its infrastructure, energy policy reforms and restores its credibility in Europe.
Yatsenyuk articulate a vision that bridges the cultural and religious divide between Ukraine and Russian nationals.
He has demonstrated the capability to lead a parliament to get things done, and should therefore be able to govern a parliament with a significant numbers of members from the Tymoshenko Bloc and the Regions Party on his side.
The Ukrainian people are in a desperate search for new leadership as his political rival’s incessant infighting makes him a more attractive alternative.
POLITICAL STRATEGY – CHANGE UKRAINE THROUGH ITS CITIZENS
Yatsenyuk gives a clear and compelling vision of a new Ukraine, and a new theory of nation-building that departs with the failed attempts of the past.
Yatsenyuk has the ability to find alliances that will assist him in rise funding for his campaign for his newly formed party called Change Front Citizens Initiative.
Yatsenyuk will form a program for Ukraine’s resurrection.
His political strategy will be innovative, and be the consensus in the Ukrainian population as well as within the political circles. His party will present solutions that not only split the political difference between the major parties, but being radical pragmatists proposing solutions that benefit all Ukrainians struggling under severe economic conditions. He will not allow his party to become a soft centrist alternative which tries to be all things to all Ukrainians.
Yatsenyuk is seen as a political threat to established politicians like Yanukovych, and Tymoshenko, who have started attacking Yatsenyuk instead of ignoring him. This will provide an excellent development that provides him greater opportunities to highlight policy differences and new reforms, rather than engaging in personal smears.
Yatsenyuk can and will have to be tough in taking on his detractors; he cannot be equally as dirty.
Yatsenyuk stated recently: "I have ambitions as a politician – I want to change entire country and I do not want to change the National Bank".
Yatsenyuk’s new organization the Change Front Citizens Initiative will build its own independent base of disaffected citizens and Ukraine’s youth that are anchored to his core vision. He will break off sections of Ukraine’s other major and minor parties on principle and policy to forge a winning coalition as the January 17 elections draw near.
Yatsenyuk’s path to victory will be the end of the political rancor between the Region’s Party and the Tymoshenko Bloc, and build a new sense of national unity.
Arseniy Yatsenyuk represents the change that will build the modern democratic Ukraine with the initiative of the Ukrainians themselves.
By: Stig Kristoffersen
About the Author:
Filed under Politics by on Jan 23rd, 2010.
Why did the parliament vote for this early election date? There are more than one answer to this. The front runners for president see a threat in a new rising candidate which will gain by more time, and they want to cut him short of this so he does not win to much votes. Another explanation is that the Ukrainian politicians up till now have not shown much strategic leadership and lack of crisis management, and this is not only limited to the top leaders in Ukraine, but the whole parliament.
Ukraine is in a need for a change in political leadership as the present leadership consisting of the president and prime minister does not provide the leadership Ukraine needs at this moment.
Ukraine present political crisis is a struggle between two heads of power and Ukraine’s future as a European Parliamentary Democracy. In addition there is an ambitious opposition with the party of regions leader, who will do his best to get into power, mostly because of personal ambitions. An opposition leader which has a scandal filled background in Ukrainian politics.
Razumkov Center performed a poll in the period from February 2th until March 5th 2009 revealed six potential presidential alternatives amongst the population, these were;
Viktor Yanukovych,
Yulia Tymoshenko,
Arseniy Yatseniuk,
Volodymyr Lytvyn,
Petro Symonenko, and
Viktor Yuschenko
Amongst these candidates there is only one real choice for a visionary leadership which will contribute to form the independent strong Ukraine which gives the population hopes for the future.
This candidate is the 34 year old economist and lawyer Arseniy Yatseniuk.
He is the candidate which has risen fastest in popularity in the last few months and gains terrain towards his opponents for every day towards the presidential election in January 2010. The other candidates have not demonstrated the ability to unite Ukraine either in power position, nor as opposition politicians. More of the same medicine will not work any longer for Ukraine. Like the international crisis, there is a need for new tools that will prevent Ukraine having the same problems over and over again.
ARSENIY YATSENIUK STANDS FOR BUILDING A NEW UNITED UKRAINE
Arseniy Yatseniuk can build a new sense of national unity that will bring relatively scandal free politics forward and he represent the next generation of a new post-partisan Ukrainian leadership.
He represents the transformational figure which emerges in the Ukrainian political landscape that captures the imagination and majority of Ukrainian voters towards the January 2010 national elections.
Arseniy Yatsenyuk is the one leader who is uniquely positioned to save Ukraine from itself. His meteoric rise is altering the political terrain of the upcoming elections in Ukraine.
Since Yatsenyuk has entered the race, he will have a challenging race towards presidency. But he can also campaign and spur optimism in Ukraine and bring hope back to the distressed population.
Ukraine is required to present balanced governmental budgets. The president must ensure that all politicians, regardless of fraction work together towards a common goal – saving Ukraine. In order to achieve this the new leader must be ready to take actions within the energy politics, especially Naftogas and its inability to present positive capital results as well as be able to open up its operations to be able to control its use of capital. Another issue the president needs to take care of is to handle the level of corruption in Ukraine.
Yushenko and Tymochenko have demonstrated lack of coherent leadership and ability to present a common political platform. They have therefore as I see it, disqualified themselves as candidates to be the needed future visionary political presidential leader of Ukraine.
The apparent lack of proper political craftsmanship in the formation of the Orange Coalition between Yushenko and Tymoshenko has lead to disagreement on virtually everything since they took the power in 2004.
The inability of the opposition leaders to present a real alternative to the present day leadership also disqualifies them from taking part in the new leadership of Ukraine. Today the major opposition party, party of regions is more occupied with criticize the existing government and president for not making a crisis plan and anti-crisis solutions, instead of cooperate with the leadership to create one.
BUILDING A UNITED UKRAINE WITH A VISIONARY MODERN LEADER
The new President to be elected in October 25th needs the trust by vast numbers of Ukrainians and not seen as part of the problem and not fatigued by a constant fighting within the political leader collegium’s of the President, Prime Minister and the chairman of Verkhovna Rada. The new Ukrainian leader must muster enough parliamentary seats and nationwide support to forge an effective coalition government and lead a genuine reform movement.
Yanukovych is facing a backlash in his party and polls for fumbling the last attempt to depose Timoshenko from the prime ministers office.
Arseniy Yatsenyuk can break out as a uniting force to save Ukraine.
The political fighting between Yushenko, Yanukovych and Tymoshenko demonstrate their inabilities in proper visionary political leadership on the cost of retaining personal powers.
Ukraine is sinking and Yatsenyuk’s poll numbers and popularity are rising.
As a former banker, Ukraine’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and Speaker of the parliament, the 34 year-old Yatsenyuk is experienced and respected in Ukraine’s political arena. He is young, relatively scandal free and has the best chance to represent the next generation of a new post-partisan Ukrainian leadership.
Yatsenyuk represent the sober visionary leader who can impart a new sense of realism that implores Ukraine to clean up its own financial house.
He has charisma enough to inspire Ukrainians to take their destiny in their own hands and not look to Europe or Russia for salvation or blame them when things go wrong.
He must challenge the reign in Ukraine’s oligarchs who have ravaged the country in the same way that Russia’s oligarchs did during the transition from state ownership to free enterprise.
Yatsenyuk has the ability to craft a sensible forward-leaning Ukrainian energy policy that modernizes its infrastructure, energy policy reforms and restores its credibility in Europe.
Yatsenyuk articulate a vision that bridges the cultural and religious divide between Ukraine and Russian nationals.
He has demonstrated the capability to lead a parliament to get things done, and should therefore be able to govern a parliament with a significant numbers of members from the Tymoshenko Bloc and the Regions Party on his side.
The Ukrainian people are in a desperate search for new leadership as his political rival’s incessant infighting makes him a more attractive alternative.
POLITICAL STRATEGY – CHANGE UKRAINE THROUGH ITS CITIZENS
Yatsenyuk gives a clear and compelling vision of a new Ukraine, and a new theory of nation-building that departs with the failed attempts of the past.
Yatsenyuk has the ability to find alliances that will assist him in rise funding for his campaign for his newly formed party called Change Front Citizens Initiative.
Yatsenyuk will form a program for Ukraine’s resurrection.
His political strategy will be innovative, and be the consensus in the Ukrainian population as well as within the political circles. His party will present solutions that not only split the political difference between the major parties, but being radical pragmatists proposing solutions that benefit all Ukrainians struggling under severe economic conditions. He will not allow his party to become a soft centrist alternative which tries to be all things to all Ukrainians.
Yatsenyuk is seen as a political threat to established politicians like Yanukovych, and Tymoshenko, who have started attacking Yatsenyuk instead of ignoring him. This will provide an excellent development that provides him greater opportunities to highlight policy differences and new reforms, rather than engaging in personal smears.
Yatsenyuk can and will have to be tough in taking on his detractors; he cannot be equally as dirty.
Yatsenyuk stated recently: “I have ambitions as a politician – I want to change entire country and I do not want to change the National Bank”.
Yatsenyuk’s new organization the Change Front Citizens Initiative will build its own independent base of disaffected citizens and Ukraine’s youth that are anchored to his core vision. He will break off sections of Ukraine’s other major and minor parties on principle and policy to forge a winning coalition as the January 17 elections draw near.
Yatsenyuk’s path to victory will be the end of the political rancor between the Region’s Party and the Tymoshenko Bloc, and build a new sense of national unity.
Arseniy Yatsenyuk represents the change that will build the modern democratic Ukraine with the initiative of the Ukrainians themselves.
By: Stig Kristoffersen
About the Author:
Filed under Politics by on Jan 23rd, 2010.
By: briek24
About the Author:
Read more on Is politics in the classroom considered a civil right?…
Filed under Politics by on Jan 23rd, 2010. 2 Comments.
By: Sharon F
About the Author:
Read more on How do you feel about discussing politics to an unregistered voter?…
Filed under Politics by on Oct 19th, 2009. 12 Comments.
It is important then that you understand what politics really is. Politics, at its core, is defined by Wikipedia as the process by which groups of people make decisions. At its core, politics sounds quite simple. What makes it complicated are the individuals involved in making the decisions. Because human beings are not perfect, the political system is never going to be perfect. This is something that most people don’t understand about politics. You can put all of the pomp and circumstance into politics that you want, in the end; it is more about human beings getting their way than about the process itself.
It has been said quite often that politics is a dirty business. In the United States Congress, for example, politics has taken on an air of hatred and manipulation. Many citizens of the United States feel that they are left out of the process of politics and that their elected representatives are more interested in scoring personal points than in working toward the betterment of their states and districts. In the last few decades special interest groups have taken on an entirely new role and lobbyists have become particularly vilified.
This disillusion toward politics is nothing new. Plato—the famous Greek philosopher—believed that all political systems were corrupt at their cores and that societies leaders should be chosen from an elite group of individuals who were began leadership training at birth. Aristotle argued that man is inherently political and that personal and political ethics are often the same thing.
One of the most famous political philosophers, Machiavelli advised that leaders of politics be brutal and manipulative and do whatever they could to retain their power. Machiavelli is studied today and his work is considered to be one of the leading authorities on how to behave in politics. Is it any wonder then, that the political systems of so many nations look corrupt?
The heart of politics is good: it is how laws are made and how individuals are judged by the societies that surround them. Without politics, nobody would know what was allowed and what was not allowed when they left the house. Unfortunately, many people view politics as a way to get ahead or to gain some sort of power over the people they live and work with. It is because of these “bad eggs” that politics has become regarded as an evil and ugly business.
For more information on politics, visit http://www.politicsmicroblog.com and http://www.englandmicroblog.com.
By: John Parks
About the Author:
Filed under Politics by on Aug 19th, 2009.
By: Wolfy Wolfenstein
About the Author:
Filed under Politics by on Jun 7th, 2009. 4 Comments.
Every country stands for its own development. For this purpose the state introduces and implements new policies and programmes such as Special Economic Zones Act. After 60 years of its independence India with its 110 core population has evolved a new paradigm of its political economy which is confusing. The policies and programmes initiated by Indian government to create a ‘global village’ based on free market economy and free trade among nations cutting across all barriers, abolition of national boundaries and dismantling the nation –state system giving priority to ‘market’ over the ‘state’ . After the enactment of Special Economic Zone Act 2005, it created tremendous effects on political economy of the country.
The term ‘political economy’ came from the two Greek words ‘Politiko’ and ‘Oikonomia, where ‘Politiko’ stands for the state and society and ‘Oikonomia’means managing the house hold economy. Political economy thus means a study of the state, society and house hold economy. The concept of political economy arose historically as the economic doctrine of a new class – the capitalist class. It has been evolved since the days of Aristotle who gave a model of public good through guaranteeing each person private possession of what he was rationally and morally entitled. Private property was elaborated later by Locke, Adam Smith, Ricardo and the physiocrates, who came to be known as the Laissez Fairists in Economics, or, the liberal democrats in politics. Adam Smith referred to political economy as a branch of the system of civil government. It was concerned with public policy.
In Marxian view, political economy can be regarded as a subject which studies the social relations evolves between different classes of people in course of production, distribution, exchange and consumption. Political economy belongs to the broad land of economics, which opens on to political science. After a prolonged period of hibernation, the subject has again been resurrected.
Marxist political economy makes a study of how the productive forces are used under the given relations of production taking account of the lines and trends in technical progress; political economy studies the influence of production relations on such progress and its socio economic consequences. Marxist political economy starts from the assumption that human vital activity is objectively based on social material production which includes man’s interactions with the nature and whole range of relations which arise in the process. It has been realized that every political action has its obvious economic repercussion, and every economic action has had its political implications.
The liberal school of political economy offers economic implications of political facts and factors. The liberal school has economized politics. The liberal system focuses on the atomistic individual as the relevant unit, on the description of economic behavior in terms of subject choices among alternatives, on the notion of social welfare as the maximizations of individual utility sums. The socialist system views the entire economic system as the basic unit, views economic progress in terms of the growth of the forces of production and focuses on ‘relations of production’ ‘surplus value’ and the rapid increase of social product.
By contrast the Gandhian system eschews both the notions of the atomistic autonomous individual maximizing his utility in a self regulating economy and the notion of processes of production autonomously effecting changes in the organization of production ,class relationship and the magnitude and distribution of social product instead of the Gandhian model suggest that the fundamental attribute of human economic behaviour lies in the relationship of individual to socioeconomic micro groups and the relationship of micro groups to society .The basic economic act is neither the choice between economic alternatives nor the social division of natural products, but the adjustment between individual and the micro groups to which they belong, and of those micro groups to society .It is this collaboration which is the basic theme of the Gandhian system of political economy.
The Gandhian system is viewed in micro groups that are fundamental constituents of the economic system and given full scope to develop their potential in the context of no coercive forms of political control. Social welfare is defined in terms of the functioning of the collaborative micro groups vis –a-vis its members. Gandhi believed that the introduction of technology and patterns of development must be consistent with the full employment objective.
Today economist speaks of sustainable development and ecological values. Gandhi was not against industry but as he predicted it could not give people more employment. His constructive programmes were to give employment to all people whether it be kadhi, gobar gas or tree plantations, where all can be engaged in constructive work. Gandhian economics is an alternative to overcome the exploitation of both capitalism and communism for the exponents of human social order.He was against the large scale use of machinery which kept millions without work. Swadeshi is one of the core elements in the socio-economic organisation of Gandhian system.
Gandhi observes
“Life here will not be a pyramid with the apex sustained by the bottom, but it will be an oceanic circle whose centre will be the individual, always ready to perish for the village, the latter ready to perish for the circle of the villages, till at last the whole becomes one life composed of individual, never aggressive in their arrogance, but ever humble sharing the majesty of the oceanic circle of which they are integral units’. The idea of the circle stands for integrating, fullness and self-sufficiency. He wrote that independence must begin at the bottom. Thus every village will be a republic or Panchayat having full powers. It follows therefore, that every village has to be self sustained and capable of managing its affairs even to the extent of defending itself against the whole world.”
Politics and economy are considered as two basic factors in determining the nature of the state and society. They are interrelated to such an extent that the changes in one affect the other, and hence both are ‘dynamic’ and ‘flexible’ ingredients of the national and the international systems. Politics and economy taken together as political economy refers to ‘managing the economy of the state’. Conceptually political economy connotes the relationship between the state, society and the economy, the cause–effect relationship between technological change and the process of development, the economic relations among the different nations of the world.
DEFINITION OF SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE
A special economic zones is a geographical region that has economic; laws more liberal than a countries typical economic laws. According to the SEZ Act 2005, A SEZ is a ‘specially delineated duty free enclave and shall be deemed to be foreign territory for the purpose of trade operations and duties and tariffs. A SEZ also been viewed as “a geographical region with different economic laws than a countries typical economic laws with the main goal of attracting foreign investment’. “A SEZ or a Free Trade Zone (FTZ) is typically an enclave of units operating in a well –defined area within the geographical boundary of a country where certain economic activities are promoted by a set of policy measures that are generally not applicable to the rest of the country”.
The concept of special economic zones is not new. In an International Labour Organization (ILO) report traces the roots of the concept to 13th centaury Spain and in more recent times to Ireland and Puerto Rico, which established Export Processing Zones (EPZ). Export Processing Zones is the former name of the Special Economic Zones. The countries like China, United Arab Emirates, Malaysia, India, Jordan, Philippines and Russia have utilized the concept of SEZ. In 1986, there were 176 zones across 47 countries. Now the number has increased to over 5000 across 147 countries.
The zones are known by different names in different parts of the world. Most often these are Free Trade Zones (FTZ),Industrial Free Zones (IFS) Export Processing Zones (EPZ) Bonded Free Zones and Special Economic Zones (SEZ).
Export Processing Zone is the ancestor of SEZ. An Export Processing Zone is relatively small geographically spread area within a country. The purpose of which is to attract export oriented industries, by offering them especially favorable investment and trade conditions as compared with the reminder of the host country. The EPZ is just an industrial enclave but SEZ is an integrated township with fully developed infrastructure. The UN Industrial Development Organization (UNID) identifies five basic attributes of EPZ s are:
? EPZs are dominated by market mechanisms.
? EPZ are restricted to a limited region.
? EPZs specialize in the production of exports goods and offer special incentives for such production.
? Their major aims are to attract foreign investments, earn foreign exchange and to generate employment
? Secondary aims are technology transfer, development linkages and regional development .
Policies taken by the governments for the development of the nation obviously affect the people. SEZ policies are for the development of the country. These Developmental projects have economic, political and social impact. In Gandhian political economy, village level development is needed. Land needed for the establishment of the SEZs projects also affected the political economy of the country. Tax incentives, Foreign Direct Investment, New type of employment generation also affect the political economy of the country. The macro economic changes driven by SEZs will push the countries down the path of increasing socio-political crisis.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF INDIA’S SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONES
India became independent in 1947 and chose self- sufficiency along with economic autonomy. The Industrial Policy Resolution of 1948 marked the beginning of the evolution of the Indian Industrial policy. The Resolution not only defined the broad contours of the policy. But it delineated the role authority of the state in industrial development both as an entrepreneur and as an authority
The industrial policy Resolution of 1956 gave the public sector a strategic role in the economy. It categorized industries, which would be the exclusive responsibility of the state or would progressively come under state control and others. Earmarking the pre-eminent position of the public sector, it envisaged private sector coexisting with the state and thus attempted to give the policy framework flexibility. India opted for a planned economy with emphasis on state sponsored industrialization. The argument was that capital being scare in India, it was essential to regulate the flow of the available capital in to socially desirable channels. This was achieved by an elaborate system of industrial licensing and state monopoly and control over key industries.
More than 80% of the Indian population is still living in agricultural field. Agri-centered model of development was prevalent during the 1950sand the 60s. Agriculture contributes approximately one-fifth of total gross domestic product (GDP). It provides the means of livelihood to about two-thirds of the country’s population. The Sector provides employment to 59 percent of the countries workforce and is the single largest private sector occupation. Agriculture accounts for about 10 percent of the total export earnings and provides raw material to a large number of industries.
During the Jawaharlal Nehru’s period, foreign collaborations were promoted in certain sectors and foreign investment was encouraged. First Export Processing Zone (EPZ) was set up in 1965 at Kandla, in Gujarat. This was a predecessor of the Special Economic Zone in India. The Santa Cruz EPZ in Mumbai became operational in 1973.
After the death of Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi became the prime Minister of India in 1966. She also did a lot for the economic development of the country. The Foreign Investment Board was set up in 1968. In 1973, Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) was enacted.. India set up the Santa Cruz Electronics Export Processing Zone (SEEPZ) between1973-74. It was the first EPZ which was dedicated to the electronic industry.
Doors of the Indian economy were opened during the 1980s, by Indira Gandhi and later by Rajiv Gandhi. From 1984 to 1989, the policy was to enable the middle class to consume more so as to raise the internal demand. This resulted in the raise of imports and the growth of Foreign Direct Investment. The government tried to raise the level of exports in order to balance this phenomenon. In 1984, the Free Zone policy received a fresh start. By 1991, the Indian economy was opened up for linking up the Indian market with the world leading to free flow of trade and commerce .The multilateral Financial Institutions like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund while assisting the developing countries like India also insisted upon restructuring the polity and the administrative machinery. Following a change in the policy regime in this period and the formation of the World Trade Organization (WTO) with India becoming its founder member, it opted for a liberalized capitalist strategy. There had been introducing policies since July 1991 particularly in the industrial sector.
De-reservation of industries for the public sector was one of the major step taken by the government as part of the policy changes in the industrial sector. It was against the earlier 17 industries were reserved, there are now industries like defense production, atomic energy, coal and lignite, railways and mineral oils reserved for the public sector. Core industries like iron and steel, electricity, air transport, shipbuilding, and heavy machinery industries such as heavy electrical plants telecommunication cables and instruments are now open to private sector participation. Besides, equities held by the government in selected public sector enterprises like ONGC etc are now available to mutual funds, financial institutions, the general public and workers through a policy of divestment
In1998, the first private SEZ started its operations in Surat .This was under the jurisdiction of the Mumbai (SEEPZ)Development Commissioner, who was a nominee of the central Government.
From the beginning of the 21st century, most of the developing countries in the world have recognized the importance of facilitating international trade for the sustained growth of the economy and increased contribution to the GDP of the nation. As part of its continuing commitment to liberalisation, the Government of India has also adopted a multi-pronged approach to promote foreign investment in India. The Government of India has pushed ahead with second-generation reforms and has made several policy changes to achieve this objective. The annual growth rate ranged between six and nine percent.
Bharathiya Janatha Party (BJP) government decided to re-launch the Free Trade Zone Policy in 2000. It changed the name of Export Processing Zone (EPZ) to Special Economic Zone (SEZ). The policy intended to make SEZs an engine for economic growth supported by quality infrastructure complemented by an attractive fiscal package both at the Centre and the State level with the minimum possible regulations.
The salient features of the SEZ scheme are:
v No licenses required for import
v Manufacturing or service activities allowed.
v SEZ units to be positive net foreign exchange earner within three years.
v Domestic sales subject to full customs duty and import policy in force.
v Full freedom for sub contracting.
v No routine examination by customs authorities of export/import cargo.
The United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government Currently in power enacted Special Economic Zone Act, 2005 which was passed in June 2005 and came into force on 10th February 2006 with the notification of the SEZ Rule in 2006. The Act provides for drastic simplification of rules and single window clearance on matters relating to the union and state governments .The state governments have also been enacted their own SEZ laws to cover State subjects.
The Act provides for single window clearance mechanisms for developers and operators for ensuring orderly development of SEZs, the responsibility is assigned to the Board of Approval, constituted by the union Government. The Union Government may set up a SEZ on its own or on the basis of proposals of the state government or private developers after the Board of Approval has duly screened them .At the regional level, the Development Commissioner and his /her office will exercise administrative control of SEZs. The Labor Commissioner’s power is also delegated to the Development Commissioner. There is an approval committee to approve /reject /modify proposals for setting up units in SEZs. All suits of civil nature and notified offences in SEZs will be tried and settled by specially notified courts and affected parties may appeal to high courts against the orders of the designated courts. The corporate units operating under SEZs will enjoy special privileges and protection granted by law.
The Act offers a special fiscal package to the units set up in the SEZs. This package includes, exemption from customs duties, central excise duties, service tax, central sales taxes, and securities transaction tax to both the developer and the units set-up, tax holiday for 15 years like 100 percent tax exemption for five years ,50 percent for next five years, and 50 percent for the ploughed back export profits for the next five years.100percent income tax exemption for 10 years in a block of 15 years for SEZ developers.
There is a three-tier administrative structure. On the top, a Board of Approval at the level of the Union Government has been set up for the functioning of the SEZs. Next an authority has been created by the state governments for creation and promotion of the infrastructure within each state. Finally, in SEZ mechanism /authority is provided for single window approval. According to the 2005 Act, these zones can be set up by the developers, who could be private real persons, companies, both Indian and foreign, as also the State governments or the central government by themselves or jointly with private parties. It is also being envisaged that some of the existing Export Processing Zones would be converted into Special Economic Zones. The SEZ Act, 2005 supported by SEZ Rules, has come in to effect on 10th February 2006.
THREE CATEGORIES OF SEZ
In India SEZs are divided in to three categories, Multi-product SEZs Sector specific SEZs, Free Trade and Ware housing Zone (FTWZ). The first category signifies a SEZ where units may be set up for manufacture/rendering of services of two or more goods in a sector or good/services falling in two or more sectors. For multi-product service SEZ, a contiguous area of 100 hectares or more is required.
The second category defined as a zone meant exclusively for one or more product/services. The minimum area requirement is 100 hectors of contiguous and vacant land. Within sector specific SEZs, Bio-technology, Gems and Jewellery, Non conventional energy, electronics, hardware and software SEZ-including IT can be set up with minimum area has been relaxed to 50 hectares for Assam, Meghalaya, Nagaland and, Arunachalpradesh, Uttaranchal, Sikkim, J&K, Goa and the Union Territories.
Free trade and warehousing zone (FTWZ) is the third category which minimum area requirement is 40 hectares of contiguous and vacant land. Built up area should not be less than 10 hectares.
There are 19 functional SEZs in the country which were set up prior to SEZ Act, and 154 SEZs that were notified under SEZ Act 2005. The maximum numbers of SEZs are coming up in the IT sectorThe total land requirement for the formal approvals granted till date is approximately 44,268 hectares. Out of this, about 87 approvals are for State Industrial Development Corporations (SIDCs) State Government ventures which account for over 21,169hectares
ISSUES RELATING SEZs IN INDIA
One of the main issue is related with SEZ is locating land for SEZs. Many state governments are in the process of establishing SEZs. The issue of displacement, that of compensation or land price, rehabilitation, residential property development and land speculation, the threat of possible relocation of units from other parts of the state to SEZs and the consequent loss of revenue have been flagged . Farmers are protesting against the forced acquisition of their lands. The development of SEZs would lead to the destruction of employment of peasants whose land will be acquired and will create very little employment for high tech or high skilled persons and total net employment generated may well be negative. Handing over thousands of hectares of land cheaply to promoters of industry and relaxing the laws of the land, including those that relate to the welfare of the industrial workers, protection of the environment, taxation, etc, would automatically promote industrialization and solve the nagging unemployment problem of the country overnight. The farmers/peasants in various states such as West Bengal, Orissa, Maharastra, and Punjab have opposed acquisition of their land for SEZs. The highest level of opposition has been observed in West Bengal when land was acquired by the state government for the Tata group at Singur and Salim group of Indonesia at Nandigram. Besides the loss of agriculture land, concerns have also been raised about the project affected People.
Using water for SEZs is one of the major problems rising from different parts of the country. Mundra SEZ as per official website of the SEZ, it expects to get at least 6 million liters per day from the Sardar sarovar project, as promised by Gujarat water infrastructure Ltd.
The another main issue is rising from different parts of the country, the labour laws applicable to the rest of the country have been relaxed for the SEZs. The existing laws are well intentioned and they promote worker welfare. Relaxing such laws exclusively for the SEZs shows the government’s lack of conviction in its own commitment to social justice.
In some SEZs, the state governments are joint venture partners. In the case of some, special incentives by way of concessional electricity and water tariffs have been offered .In almost all the cases, valuable lands have been given away at concessional prices.
Considering the SEZ Act, it violates the letter and spirit of the Indian Constitution; it infringes the Fundamental Rights of the citizen guaranteed in part 3rd of the Constitution. Relaxation /inapplicability of many labour Laws (including under the Industrial Dispute Act, Contract Labour Act, Factories Act, Minimum wages Act, Trade Union Act), Environment (Protection) Act is inapplicable to SEZs ,No environmental clearance needed. Violates Panchayat Raj Act (1996) for local self government, violating laws granting rights and control to adivasi communities over their land, violating many international conventions on human rights.
To sum up, SEZs and other emerging developmental issues can be seen in a broad perspective and theoretical underpinnings of neo-liberalism. As far as Indian polity is considered the implications emerging from SEZs may cause increasing socio-political crisis because the society is far more complex than we assumed and that will result in organized or unorganized resistance and that may even cause anti-neo liberal political forces. So, in order to avoid the polarization of the society, civil society should engage to create a consensus on developmental issues. More over, in order to understand the continuities and changes that are taking place in the developmental scenario it needs further study.
Endnotes
Bijoiny Mohanthy and S.C Hazary(Ed), Political Economy of India Retrospect and Prospects (New Delhi: APH Publ).
S.C Hazary, Political Economy of India Retrospect and Prospects, ( New Delhi: APH Publi,1997.)
Sukhendu Mazumder, Politico-Economic Ideas of Mahatma Gandhi (New Delhi: Concept Publishing House, 2004.).
B.Mohanan,(Ed), Gandhis Legacy and New Human Civilisation, Gyam publishing house, New Delhi,1999.
Vineetha Sharma, ‘Implications Of A Special Economic Zone on Project Affected People a case study of Reliance Haryana SEZ”, Man & Development, Vol.39,Dec,2007.
Jermy Grasset and Frederic Landy, ‘Special Economic Zones in India Between International integration and Real Estate Speculation’, Man &Development, Vol. 39,No.4, Dec, 2007.
India 2008, A Reference Annual, Publication Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting , Govt:of India, New Delhi,2008.
Partha Mukhopadhyay, “The promised land of SEZs” Seminar, Jan, 2008
.
Sheetal Sharma and Kishan Pratap, “ The Prosperous Few and the Pauperized Many: A Perspective on Special Economic Zones”, Mainstream, February,23-March,1,2007.
By: jipson v.paul
About the Author:
Read more on Political Economy of India’s Special Economic Zones: a Conceptual Frame Work…
Filed under Politics by on Apr 24th, 2009.