February 2017

India’s Concerns with regard to CPEC and the way out?

0

Pakistan and China are on the path of executing a multi billion dollar mammoth infrastructure project called China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). These two countries are describing the project as a “game-changer” and a crucial arm of China’s One Belt One Road (OBOR) Project. The project announced in June 2015 by Chinese President Xi Jinping stipulated an investment of $46bn to develop infrastructure and energy projects in Pakistan. India was not invited by China in its OBOR or New Silk Route Project or CPEC. India raised its objections against the CPEC on strategic concerns and said that it was “unacceptable”. The CPEC is part of China’s “One Belt and One Road” or new Silk Road project  and consists of a series of roads, railways, pipelines, hydro power plants and other development projects, being built from the restive Xinjiang province in China to Gwadar in south-western Pakistan. The CPEC came into operation last November.

The CPSE passes through Gilgit-Baltistan in Pakistan-administered Kashmir. But there is a dispute between India and Pakistan on Kashmir region. The Indian Prime Minister clearly said in January 2017 that CPEC can fulfill its promise of regional connectivity only by respecting the sovereignty of countries involved. On a separate occasion India’s foreign secretary, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar also expressed hope that the developers of CPEC would respect other people’s sovereignty.

China-Pakistan Claims on CPEC

 China claims the main purpose of CPEC is regional connectivity for economic development.  Further, Pakistan dismisses India’s concerns. Nafees Zakaria, a Pakistan foreign ministry spokesman asserted that the economic corridor was a “comprehensive and broad-based economic cooperation project”. The project will contribute to economic development of the entire region and not only for Pakistan and China. Pakistani analysts believe, “It can be a catalyst for economic connectivity and integration in Central Asia, South Asia and West Asia. Pakistani analysts hold the opinion that objection by India or any other country to such an economic project was beyond comprehension.

The 3,200km-long corridor is intended to connect the world’s second largest economy, China, with the Middle East and Central Asia, reducing the alternative sea route distance – via the Malacca Strait – by 10,000 km. China is rising to become a global power and it is already the second largest economy of the world. By 2050, according to a report by Price waterhouse Coopers, China is projected to become the world’s largest economy, with a GDP of $58.5 trillion, up from $5.7 trillion in 2010. The country’s GDP growth rate has declined in recent years, however, from 7.3 percent in 2014 to 6.7 percent in 2016.

Pakistani economy is small and not so diversified. It depended much on the US assistance for its contribution in war against terror. In recent past it requested lloans from the World Bank even for its budgetary expenditures. The CPEC is anticipated to boost Pakistan’s economy, where the GDP is expected to grow by more than five percent by 2020, according to an IMF growth forecast. Price waterhouse Coopers predicts that Pakistan’s GDP will reach $4.2 trillion by 2050 from the current $988 bn.  For Pakistan, the combined value of the CPEC’s infrastructure projects would be equivalent to 17 percent of Pakistan’s GDP in 2015, a report by Deloitte predicted. The report estimated that the economic corridor would create some 700,000 direct jobs between 2015 and 2030, and add up to 2.5 percent to the country’s growth rate.

India’s Concerns

Although the project promises to be an immense economic and strategic windfall for China and Pakistan, for India it is a matter of strategic concern. The problem is multi-pronged pronged. First is the isolationist approach of China and deep alliance with an adversary of India with an aim to contain India. It is easy to understand that if China is spending such a mammoth amount on a project which would take years to be economically feasible and rewarding, there must be strategic reasons behind undertaking such a project (because economic returns are not possible immediately). The idea that this project would lead to economic benefits to the region is doubtful because Pakistan has always obstructed India’s direct trade access to the Central Asia or other regions in the Middle East. India is the biggest trading country in the region after China. Secondly, China may be keeping in mind its own logistic requirements including uninterrupted energy supply and military access through CPEC, despite claiming it purely an economic venture. Thirdly, the CPEC project passes through disputed POK where the presence of a third party is unacceptable as long as dispute is not settled. Fourthly, China is engaging with Pakistan and helping Pakistan through military and development cooperation so as to contain India. Overall, India cannot take the project as purely economic and it needs to be cautious.

India’s counter strategy: Possibilities and realities

There is one possibility that China and Pakistan co-opt India as a partner in the CPEC. But given the above mentioned concerns would India be ready to join the CPEC? Andrew Small, author of The China-Pakistan Axis: Asia’s New Geopolitics, doesn’t believe that the offers to India to join CPEC will elicit a positive response in the near future. But he believes there is a view among a number of officials in China and Pakistan that, in the long-term, that door needs to be kept open.However, according to Small, keeping the door open does not mean that India will become enthusiastic about CPEC but that “it will be neutrally disposed – seeing some potential security benefits if Pakistan’s economy is stabilized.”

According to a report released by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute – a Swedish-based think-tank – India’s opposition to CPEC reflects a concern over the internationalisation of the Kashmir dispute and the growing influence of China in the Indian Ocean. It says that there is considerable concern within India that China, which has been neutral on Kashmir since 1963, can no longer be so now that its economic and security interests in these territories are growing. After the 1962 India-China war, Beijing sought to cultivate good relations with Islamabad, which has emerged as the biggest buyer of Chinese defence equipment in recent years.

The option of co-opting India in the CPEC is, nevertheless, not so easy in the immediate terms because of the intricacies of the geopolitics in the region. Small explains that India doesn’t need to “join CPEC” anyway – in the future, it could maintain its formal objections to the initiative but still deepen trade relations with Pakistan, and in the process implicitly be utilising CPEC infrastructure, energy projects, industrial zones and more. But Mihir Sharma, who is the author of Restart: The last chance for the Indian Economy, says that India’s relations with Pakistan are simply too unstable for the former’s primary land connectivity corridor to Central Asia, Russia and Europe, to run through the latter’s territory. “The risk of the investment and of trade through that corridor, in both geo-strategic and economic terms, might be too high.”

Chabahar Project and route to Central Asia through Afghanistan

Another answer which India has already conceived and started working on as an alternative route is through Chabahar to Central Asia. The Chabahar alternative may be India’s answer to CPEC for the time being, but it has its own problems- poor infrastructure and disturbed western region of Afghanistan may be a major hurdle in implementing the project.

India signed (May 23, 2016) a historic deal to develop the strategic port of Chabahar in Iran and agreed on a three-nation pact to build a transport-and-trade corridor through Afghanistan that could help halve the time and cost of doing business with Central Asia and Europe.The deal was signed in the presence of Afghan president Ashraf Ghani and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani. Developing the Chabahar port was seen as crucial for India because it will not only allow New Delhi to bypass Pakistan and access global markets but also counter China’s expanding influence in the Indian Ocean region. But the project’s land route through Afghanistan remains a security headache. According to the Prime Minister of India, “The agreement (if successful in its mission) …can alter the course of history of the region. Studies show that… the corridor could bring down cost, time of cargo trade to Europe by about 50%.”

India has watched with unease Chinese funding for a strategic port in Gwadar, Pakistan, which New Delhi believes will give Beijing access to the Indian Ocean region. In response, New Delhi began negotiations with Tehran more than a decade ago to develop the Chabahar port to counter the Chinese moves in what is seen as part of India’s sphere of influence. The Chabahar bilateral deal with Tehran will see India spend about $500 million (Rs 3,400 crores) to develop the port in southeastern Iran’s Sistan-Baluchistan province as a regional trade hub. This will allow it to open up an alternative land-sea route for trade with Afghanistan.

As part of a separate trilateral deal, India, Afghanistan and Iran agreed to establish a land transit-and-trade corridor. The three nations have engaged in protracted negotiations since 2003 but the lifting of sanctions on Tehran in January has boosted prospects of the port’s development.

From Chabahar port, the existing Iranian road network can link up to Zaranj in Afghanistan. This road can then connect to the 218-km Zaranj-Delaram road — constructed by India in 2009 at a cost of Rs 680 crore – and finally to Afghanistan’s Garland highway. This will give India road access to four major cities; Afghanistan-Herat, Kandahar, Kabul and Mazar-e-Sharif but Kabul has already warned New Delhi to be ready for possible attacks by Pakistan-backed elements to delay the project. Future plan include an International North-South Transport Corridor through Iran to Russia and Europe. Indian will invest $500 million (Rs 1,000 crore) in phase-1, including $150 million line of credit from Exim Bank to the Iran’s Maritime and Ports Organisation for making jetties and berths at Chabahar.

State-owned construction firm Ircon signed an agreement to lay a rail line from Chabahar port to Zahedan and Nalco signed a deal to look at the possibility of setting up a 0.5 million tone aluminium smelter at Chabahar free-trade zone, provided Iran gives cheap natural gas. India Ports Global, a recently formed port project investment arm of the shipping ministry and a joint venture between the Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust and the Kandla port, will invest $85 million in developing two container berths with a length of 640 metres and three multi-cargo berths.

Most dramatic moment in Oscar History: La La Land named the winner instead of Moonlight

0

The Oscar Award 2017  end with an unusual drama as La La Land is wrongly announced for best picture instead of Moonlight. “There’s a mistake. Moonlight, you won best picture,” Fred Berger, the La La Land producer announced showing the card. Warren Beatty ,who announced the wrong name, said he had been given the wrong envelope to open. La La Land had to hand the best picture award over to Moonlight, but they get six other including Best Actress and Best Director.

Mahershala Ali became first Muslim actor to win an Oscar for role in Moonlight

Mahershala Ali won the Academy Award for best supporting actor for his portrayal of a drug dealer in Moonlight, becoming the first Muslim to be awarded Oscar for acting.

Here is the complete list:

Best film – Moonlight

Best actress – Emma Stone (La La Land)

Best actor – Casey Affleck (Manchester By The Sea)

Best director – Damien Chazelle (La La Land)

Best supporting actress – Viola Davis (Fences)

Best supporting actor – Mahershala Ali (Moonlight)

Best original screenplay – Kenneth Lonergan (Manchester By The Sea)

Best adapted screenplay – Barry Jenkins and Tarell Alvin McCraney (Moonlight)

Best cinematography – Linus Sandgren (La La Land)

Best original score – Justin Hurwitz (La La Land)

Best original song – Justin Hurwitz, Benj Pasek and Justin Paul (La La Land)

Best sound editing – Sylvain Bellemare (Arrival)

Best foreign language film – Asghar Farhadi (The Salesman)

Best film editing – John Gilbert (Hacksaw Ridge)

Best visual effects – Robert Legato, Adam Valdez, Andrew R. Jones and Dan Lemmon (The Jungle Book)

Best production design – David Wasco and Sandy Reynolds Wasco (La La Land)

Best sound mixing – Kevin O’Connell, Andy Wright, Robert Mackenzie and Peter Grace (Hacksaw Ridge)

Best documentary Feature – Ezra Edelman and Caroline Waterlow (O.J.: Made in America)

Best animated film – Byron Howard, Rich Moore and Clark Spencer (Zootopia)

Best animated short film – Alan Barillaro and Marc Sondheimer (Piper)

Best documentary short subject – Orlando von Einsiedel and Joanna Natasegara (The White Helmets)

Best live action short film – Kristof Deak and Anna Udvardy (Sing)

Best make-up – Alessandro Bertolazzi, Giorgio Gregorini and Christopher Nelson (Suicide Squad)

Best costume design – Colleen Atwood (Fantastic Beast and Where To Find Them)

India’s Expenditure Reforms and Expenditure Reforms Commission

0

India is struggling with its expenditure management since the Economic crisis of 1991. The fiscal deficit of India had touched unmanageable level at 8.4 per cent of GDP in 1991 and it was panned to bring it down to 4.5 per cent by 1996. Indian government was able to contain the fiscal deficit to the stipulated level in 1996. But after this, once again there was a divergence between the receipts and expenditure and fiscal deficit continuously increased. The combined fiscal deficit of the Central and state governments increased beyond 10 per cent of GDP (Centre about 6-7 per cent and states about 2-3 percent). India decided to evolve a legally binding commitment on the part of government to contain the fiscal deficit at a tolerable level. In the year 2003 India passed an act called Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management Act (FRBM Act), which was implemented since 2004. In the initial year the FRBM act successfully achieved the fiscal roadmap that stipulate reduction in the fiscal deficit and revenue deficit  by 0.3 per cent of GDP and 0.5 per cent of GDP respectively to realize the goal of fiscal deficit to the tune of  3 per cent of GDP  and revenue deficit to zero by 2008.  But due to the stimulus package that India adopted in 2008 to ward off the adverse effects of the sub- prime crisis on the Indian economy, one again fiscal deficit goals as given in the fiscal roadmap were defied. Later there was an amendment in 2011-12 in the FRBM act to include two new things- a concept of effective revenue deficit was adopted which was to be maintained at zero level while revenue deficit was stipulated to be contained at 2 per cent of GDP level whereas fiscal deficit goal was still kept at 3 per cent of the GDP level to be achieved by 2015-16. Now the target has been extended to 2017-18 in view of the slowing Indian economy in the backdrop of the European Sovereign Debt Crisis and slowing Chinese economy. The amendment also included an escape clause for such exigencies, which made it difficult to achieve the stipulated goals in the fiscal roadmap.

Expenditure Management Commission 

In the 2014-15 budget speech, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley announced the constitution of Expenditure Management Commission (EMC). The Commission had been conceived as a recommendation body with the primary responsibility of suggesting major expenditure reforms that will enable the government to reduce and manage its fiscal deficit at more sustainable levels. The EMC was formed as a five-member body composed of the former Reserve Bank Of India (RBI) Governor Bimal Jalan, who has been appointed to Head the Commission, former Finance Secretary Sumit Bose, former Deputy RBI Governor Subir Gokarn and two other members. The commission was mandated to evaluate proposals for reducing the three major subsidies (i.e. food, fertilizer and oil). The commission was to submit an interim report before the presentation of the Budget for 2015-16. The final report was to be submitted before the 2016-17 budget. But the Commission took a little more time.

The expenditure management commission, headed by former Reserve Bank of India (RBI) governor Bimal Jalan,  submitted its first interim report in January 2017  to Finance Minister Arun Jaitley. The finer details will take time till Finance Minister and a team of policymakers examine it and make it public. However, the broad proposals suggest ways for the government to reduce administrative costs and disburse funds for various schemes more efficiently.
The commission might submit a few more interim reports to the government, before presenting a final report early next year. The panel, which includes former RBI deputy governor Subir Gokarn and former finance secretary Sumit Bose, is studying various government schemes, programmes, acquisitions and projects for which the Centre is spending substantially.

It is anticipated that the commission might have suggested the Centre not to carry forward pending expenditure from a particular year to subsequent years to show better expenditure or fiscal deficit numbers. The panel, however, for the time being may not be looking on to the allocation of expenditure towards particular schemes. Rather, it may is recommend ways in which the sum allocated can be spent in the most cost-effective manner. The three broad areas the commission has examined are the delivery mechanism of programmes, the technology being used to implement these, and the accounting methods used by the government.

The government follows the cash-based accounting system, through which income is counted when cash (or a check) is actually received, and expenses are counted when actually paid. An alternative method is an accrual-based system, wherein transactions are counted as they happen, regardless of when the money is actually received or paid. The Commission studied the pros and cons of both methods. Their recommendations in this regard, however, couldn’t be ascertained.

The terms of reference of the commission, constituted on September 4 last year, include reviewing all matters related to central government spending, including suggesting space for increased developmental spending and reviewing the budgeting process and norms under the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management Act and suggesting ways to meet a reasonable proportion of spending on services through user charges. It is also to recommend ways to achieve a reduction in financial costs through better cash management, greater use of information technology and improved financial reporting systems.

The Commission is anticipated to give following broad proposals in the report

  • Ways for the govt to cut administrative costs
  • Panel has suggested ways to spend budgetary allocation effectively
  • Delivery mechanisms, technology, accounting methods being studied

Major strains on India’s Expenditure Management

The Indian economy is facing demand and supply side shocks due to demonitisation and a sluggish development in exports and Industrial sector which has reduced the growth forecast a little bit for the year 2017 and 2018. Government has implemented and OROP for defence personnel and the seventh pay commission for the government employees, which would have repercussions for the government expenditure. Also government’s announcement of recapitalization of banks in view of mammoth Non- Performing Assets as well proposal of increase in public sector investment in infrastructure, railways as well as rural development would also put pressure on government exchequer apart from various subsidies. The additional proceeds from Public Sector disinvestment is also uncertain.

US slaps new sanctions on Iran over missile test

0

The US Treasury added 13 Iranians and 12 companies on February 4, 2017, some of which are based in Lebanon, the United Arab Emirates and China, to its sanctions list. The United States has announced new sanctions against Iran after its recent missile test. Tehran denounced US sanctions saying that it would impose its own legal restrictions on American individuals and entities. In a statement John Smith, acting director of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control said, “Iran’s continued support for terrorism and development of its ballistic missile programme poses a threat to the region, to our partners worldwide, and to the United States.” Earlier National Security Adviser Michael Flynn insisted the missile test  by Iran was in defiance of UN Security Council Resolution 2231, which calls on Iran not to test missiles capable of delivering a nuclear weapon. However, Bahram Ghasemi, Iran’s foreign ministry spokesman, later on called the claims “baseless, repetitive and provocative”.

Among those sanctioned were companies, individuals, and brokers the US Treasury said support a trade network run by Iranian businessman Abdollah Asgharzadeh. The Treasury said the businessman supported Shahid Hemmat Industrial Group, which, according to the US, is a subsidiary of an Iranian entity that runs Iran’s ballistic missile programme. The Treasury also sanctioned what it said was a Lebanon-based network run by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the elite military body that is also powerful in Iranian politics and the economy. Iran’s foreign ministry condemned the sanctions as illegal and vowed to reciprocate any measures taken against Tehran by the US. “In retaliation for the US sanctions, Iran will impose legal restrictions on some American individuals and entities that were involved in helping and founding regional terrorist groups.” According to Al Jazeera,the “list of individuals and entities will be released by the Iranian foreign ministry after it decides who will make the cut”.

 Iran test-fired  (January 29)a medium-range missile, which the White House contends violated a UN Security Council resolution proscribing missiles that could carry a nuclear device.
Tehran has confirmed it tested a ballistic missile, but denied it was a breach of a 2015 nuclear deal with world powers or UN resolutions. Earlier, US President Donald Trump had said Iran was “playing with fire” after Tehran dismissed his warnings over the missile test as unfounded and provocative. In a post on Twitter, Trump said his administration would not be as “kind” to Iran as the government of his predecessor, Barack Obama. “Iran is playing with fire – they don’t appreciate how ‘kind’ President Obama was to them. Not me!” Trump said. The comment appeared to prompt a quick response from Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iran’s foreign minister. “Iran unmoved by threats as we derive security from our people. Will never initiate war, but we can only rely on our own means of defence,” Zarif wrote also on Twitter. Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian American Council, said “all these new tensions that are emerging, and this war of words between the US and Iran in and of itself is endangering” the nuclear deal. “The Trump administration has decided to really dial up this escalation without first establishing de-escalatory mechanisms – they don’t have a direct dialogue with Iran in order to be able to calm things down once they believe they have achieved their objectives.” “So, if you only have an ability to dial it up, but not dial it now, that is what is most worrisome right now because it could, unfortunately, lead to a military confrontation.”  Iran said on the same day when sanctions were imposed by the US it had barred a US wrestling team from participating in the Freestyle World Cup competition in retaliation for an executive order by Trump banning visas for Iranians, Iran’s state television reported.

America’s president: An insurgent in the White House

0

Washington is in the grip of a revolution. The bleak cadence of last month’s inauguration was still in the air when Donald Trump lobbed the first Molotov cocktail of policies and executive orders against the capital’s brilliant-white porticos. He has not stopped. Quitting the Trans-Pacific Partnership, demanding a renegotiation of NAFTA and a wall with Mexico, overhauling immigration, warming to Brexit-bound Britain and Russia, cooling to the European Union, defending torture, attacking the press: onward he and his people charged, leaving the wreckage of received opinion smouldering in their wake.

To his critics, Mr Trump is reckless and chaotic. Nowhere more so than in last week’s temporary ban on entry for citizens from seven Middle Eastern countries—drafted in secret, enacted in haste and unlikely to fulfil its declared aim of sparing America from terrorism. Even his Republican allies lamented that a fine, popular policy was marred by its execution.

In politics chaos normally leads to failure. With Mr Trump, chaos seems to be part of the plan. Promises that sounded like hyperbole in the campaign now amount to a deadly serious revolt aimed at shaking up Washington and the world.

The Cocktail Party

To understand Mr Trump’s insurgency, start with the uses of outrage. In a divided America, where the other side is not just mistaken but malign, conflict is a political asset. The more Mr Trump used his stump speeches to offend polite opinion, the more his supporters were convinced that he really would evict the treacherous, greedy elite from their Washington salons.

His grenade-chuckers-in-chief, Stephen Bannon and Stephen Miller, have now carried that logic into government. Every time demonstrators and the media rail against Mr Trump, it is proof that he must be doing something right. If the outpourings of the West Wing are chaotic, it only goes to show that Mr Trump is a man of action just as he promised. The secrecy and confusion of the immigration ban are a sign not of failure, but of how his people shun the self-serving experts who habitually subvert the popular will.

The politics of conflict are harnessed to a world view that rejects decades of American foreign policy. Tactically, Mr Trump has little time for the multilateral bodies that govern everything from security to trade to the environment. He believes that lesser countries reap most of the rewards while America foots the bill. It can exploit its bargaining power to get a better deal by picking off countries one by one.

Mr Bannon and others reject American diplomacy strategically, too. They believe multilateralism embodies an obsolete liberal internationalism. Today’s ideological struggle is not over universal human rights, but the defence of “Judeo-Christian” culture from the onslaught of other civilisations, in particular, Islam. Seen through this prism, the UN and the EU are obstacles and Vladimir Putin, for the moment, a potential ally.

Nobody can say how firmly Mr Trump believes all this. Perhaps, amid the trappings of power, he will tire of guerrilla warfare. Perhaps a stockmarket correction will so unsettle the nation’s CEO that he will cast Mr Bannon out. Perhaps a crisis will force him into the arms of his chief of staff and his secretaries of defence and state, none of whom is quite the insurgent type. But don’t count on it happening soon. And don’t underestimate the harm that could be done first.

Talking Trumpish

Americans who reject Mr Trump will, naturally, fear most for what he could do to their own country. They are right to worry, but they gain some protection from their institutions and the law. In the world at large, however, checks on Mr Trump are few. The consequences could be grave.

Without active American support and participation, the machinery of global co-operation could well fail. The World Trade Organisation would not be worthy of the name. The UN would fall into disuse. Countless treaties and conventions would be undermined. Although each one stands alone, together they form a system that binds America to its allies and projects its power across the world. Because habits of co-operation that were decades in the making cannot easily be put back together again, the harm would be lasting. In the spiral of distrust and recrimination, countries that are dissatisfied with the world will be tempted to change it—if necessary by force.

What to do? The first task is to limit the damage. There is little point in cutting Mr Trump off. Moderate Republicans and America’s allies need to tell him why Mr Bannon and his co-ideologues are wrong. Even in the narrowest sense of American self-interest, their appetite for bilateralism is misguided, not least because the economic harm from the complexity and contradictions of a web of bilateral relations would outweigh any gains to be won from tougher negotiations. Mr Trump also needs to be persuaded that alliances are America’s greatest source of power. Its unique network plays as large a role as its economy and its military might in making it the global superpower. Alliances help raise it above its regional rivals—China in East Asia, Russia in eastern Europe, Iran in the Middle East. If Mr Trump truly wants to put America First, his priority should be strengthening ties, not treating allies with contempt.

And if this advice is ignored? America’s allies must strive to preserve multilateral institutions for the day after Mr Trump, by bolstering their finances and limiting the strife within them. And they must plan for a world without American leadership. If anyone is tempted to look to China to take on the mantle, it is not ready, even if that were desirable. Europe will no longer have the luxury of underfunding NATO and undercutting the EU’s foreign service—the closest it has to a State Department. Brazil, the regional power, must be prepared to help lead Latin America. In the Middle East fractious Arab states will together have to find a formula for living at peace with Iran.

A web of bilateralism and a jerry-rigged regionalism are palpably worse for America than the world Mr Trump inherited. It is not too late for him to conclude how much worse, to ditch his bomb-throwers and switch course. The world should hope for that outcome. But it must prepare for trouble.

Courtesy: The Economist, Feb 4th 2017

Labour Reforms: Government reduces 56 labour registers to 5 under various Labour Laws

0

The Government has simplified the maintenance of Labour registers of about 5.85 crore establishments in agriculture and non- agriculture sectors. These registers are related to details of employees, their salaries, loans/recoveries, attendance etc. This exercise will drastically reduce the number of registers being maintained by these establishments from 56 to only 5 by doing away with overlapping/redundant fields. This will help these establishments to save cost and efforts and ensure better compliance of Labour Laws.

Under various Central Labour Acts, there is a requirement of maintenance of registers depending upon the threshold of the number of employees by the establishments in agriculture and non-agriculture sectors. As per the Sixth Economic Census of Central Statistical Office conducted during 2013-2014, India has about 5.85 Crore establishments in agricultural and non-agricultural sectors combined. Out of this, 4.54 Crore establishments are in non-agricultural sector. While reviewing the requirement of filing various returns / registers/forms provided under 9 Central Acts, there were several overlapping/ redundant fields that could be rationalized.

An intention notification was issued on 4th November, 2016 for reducing the number of registers/data fields and the same was widely circulated to concerned Ministries / Departments, State Govts., other stakeholders besides placing the same in public domain. In effect, all previous registers envisaged under various Acts / Rules have been omitted and replaced with only 5 common Registers. Such an exercise has reduced number of data fields in 5 registers to only 144 from the then existing 933 fields in 56 registers.

Ministry of Labour & Employment has also simultaneously undertaken to develop a software for these 5 common Registers. After development of the software, the same will be put on the Shram Suvidha Portal of the Ministry of Labour and Employment for free download with an aim to facilitate maintenance of those registers in a digitized form.

The Labour Laws under which these registers are maintained include:

The Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996

  1. The Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970
  2. The Equal Remuneration Act, 1976
  3. The Inter-State Migrant Workmen (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1979

The Mines Act, 1952

  1. The Minimum Wages Act, 1948
  2. The Payment of Wages Act, 1936
  3. The Sales Promotion Employees (Conditions of Service) Act, 1976
  4. The Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act, 1955

ISRO launches 104 satellites in one go: Establishes its credentials as low cost and efficient commercial launcher

0

The Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) set a new record in space mission achievements after it successfully launched 104 satellites in desired orbits one go from the Satish Dhawan Space Centre in Sriharikota, Andhra Pradesh, on February 2017morning. This was ISRO’s first space mission for the year 2017, and the most complicated mission it has ever carried out. The feat was performed on the old reliable launch vehicle, the PSLV, numbered C-37, which took off from the first launch pad at the Satish Dhawan Space Centre, Sriharikota, at 9.28 a.m. C-37 was a largely commercial flight as all but three passenger satellites, small nanosats, belonged to six other countries. PSLV Project Director B. Jayakumar at the Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC) said “It is confirmed that all 104 satellites have been successfully deployed in the orbit.” ISRO said that after separation, the two solar arrays of Cartosat-2 series satellite were deployed automatically and ISRO Telemetry, Tracking and Command Network (ISTRAC) at Bengaluru took over the control of the satellite. In the coming days, the satellite will be brought to its final operational configuration.

According to ISRO the 29-minute mega-payload launch went off precisely as planned; it took just 11 minutes from the release of the primary Cartosat-2 series spacecraft to the last launch of a client satellite. The PSLV, in the category of launch vehicles that can lift relatively light loads to space, now marks 38 successful missions in a row out of a total of 39 flights. This time, it took to space a total of 1,378 kg, of which the primary satellite was 714 kg.

The latest Cartosat is the fifth in the series of six Cartosat-2 spacecraft, starting from Cartosat 2 in 2007 and followed by what were earlier marked A, B, C, D and E. The last one is due. An official communique said, “After a flight of 16 minutes and 48 seconds, the satellites achieved a polar Sun synchronous orbit of 506 km inclined at an angle of 97.46 degrees to the equator — very close to the intended orbit. In the next 12 minutes, all 104 satellites successfully separated from the PSLV fourth stage in a predetermined sequence, beginning with the Cartosat-2 series, INS-1 and INS-2.” After a flight of 16 minutes and 48 seconds, the satellites achieved a polar Sun synchronous orbit of 506 km inclined at an angle of 97.46 degrees to the equator — very close to the intended orbit. In the next 12 minutes, all 104 satellites successfully separated from the PSLV fourth stage in a predetermined sequence, beginning with the Cartosat-2 series, INS-1 and INS-2.

The PSLV, which created launch history by placing a record 104 spacecraft in their desired orbits, has totally launched 46 Indian spacecraft, most of them Indian Remote Sensing (IRS) satellites. As many as 180 small satellites of foreign customers contracted by ISRO’s commercial company Antrix Corporation have also reached space on this vehicle. This time, it took to space a total of 1,378 kg, of which the primary satellite was 714 kg. The latest Cartosat is the fifth in the series of six Cartosat-2 spacecraft, starting from Cartosat 2 in 2007 and followed by what were earlier marked A, B, C, D and E. The last one is due. The PSLV, 39 flights old since 1993, also launched the Indian Moon mission Chandrayaan-1 in 2008; and is set to launch a private lunar mission for Bengaluru start-up Team Indus in late December this year.

PSLV first launched the 714 kg Cartosat-2 Series satellite for earth observation, followed by the INS-1A and INS-1B, after it reached the polar Sun Synchronous Orbit. It then went on to inject 103 co-passenger satellites, together weighing about 664 kg, in pairs.ISRO scientists used the XL Variant – the most powerful rocket – earlier used in the ambitious Chandrayaan and during the Mars Orbiter Mission (MOM).

Till 2016, Isro had launched 75 foreign satellites, out of a total of 121. Forex revenues of Isro’s commercial arm, Antrix Corporation, rose 204.9% in 2015  on the strength of foreign satellite launches. In 2015-16, commercial launches brought in Rs230 crore, which was 4% of Isro’s average spending over the previous three years. Isro’s low prices are drawing foreign clients. Private space programmes such as Arianespace and SpaceX are yet to equal its cost-effectiveness. Besides, Isro has a 100% success rate in foreign satellite launches. While a satellite launch on Arianespace’s rocket will cost about $100 million after subsidies, SpaceX will charge $60 million. In contrast, Isro charged an average $3 million per satellite between 2013 and 2015.

Trump, media and future of democracy

0

US President is very angry on media. Media is called fourth estate in democracy. In the fast moving information age, media has immense power to affect people’s choices- sometimes based on truth and facts and sometimes by their capacity to propagate a certain ideology, agenda or propaganda. But media is not a neutral entity. It has its own interest because it is owned by corporate houses with a profit motive and some of them have ideological leanings as well. Nevertheless, apart from breaking news and sensationalism, there is section in media which follows professional ethics, offers a platform of debates and discussion and also helps people in forming educated opinions.  Media brings truth, even when it does not intend because competition and ideological leanings push them to find hidden dimensions of an event. But media cannot be relied upon without scrutiny. Free media competes in both truth and propaganda. It does both- bringing out the truth and propagation of propaganda. But at any time there also exists professionally serious and committed media. In a democracy educated people are free to choose what they want to read and see and which ideology or policy they support. Thus free media is better than regulated media. But the US President thinks that all sections of media should support him in all his policy initiative without scrutiny and criticism. It is neither desirable nor is it going to happen for political and other reasons.

In fact US President is not angry on all the sections of media. He is cool on the sections which buy his ideas and favour and publicise his policies.  He says that media is perpetrating untruth and lies. He admonishes the media as the “enemy of the people.” But there is another side. His administration is also happy with select parts of the media – especially those that share and reinforce Trump’s own world view. They are not only trusted friends, but are at times, converging with the voice of the administration itself. This is, however, not good for the role of the media as the fourth estate.

Truth is not only what suits the interest of a political party or a leader.

 If the leaders have a tendency of one-upmanship so much so that anything that is critical or alternative of their view becomes a conspiracy or untrustworthy then the very spirit of democracy dies whatever be the margin of his electoral victory. Media stands for a healthy scrutiny. And if a leader is afraid of scrutiny, surely his conscience is not clear. People’s mandate is not tested only in elections.

There is other dimension also. When statesmen start borrowing ideas from media or basing their visions on media of their choice or popular websites, there is a danger of losing sight of reality. In an increasingly polarised media landscape, many people live in bubbles – only reading and watching things that confirm our world view. This is more about finding confirmation of our beliefs or obsessions rather than “weighing” or “evaluating” something to find the truth or right course. Some analysts opine that in Trump’s case, the bubble is shaping the country’s agenda and the chaotic atmosphere.

Josephine Tovey writes in this regard in the Sunday Morning Herald: Sweden’s leaders were dumbfounded – there had been no terror attack or major incident. But only if you’d watched the conservative pundit Tucker Carlson’s show on Fox the night before, would you have any idea what the commander-in-chief was talking about – an incendiary segment linking immigration to crime in the Scandinavian country. This was not a first. In fact, a huge number of Trump’s outbursts and falsehoods can be linked to something he saw on television or on one of his preferred websites.

In January, Trump lashed out seemingly randomly at Chelsea Manning, the recently-pardoned Wikileaks whistle blower, calling her an “ungrateful traitor” on Twitter. It came shortly after a segment about Manning on Fox accompanied by a chyron (the “headline” at the bottom of the screen) that read “ungrateful traitor”. A day earlier, Trump threatened to “send in the feds” to deal with gun violence in Chicago – shortly after a Fox segment about precisely the possibility of federal government intervention in the city. It’s not only Fox that fires up the President. Several of his most egregious claims in recent months have come from or mirror those on America’s most prominent conspiracy website Infowars – which is perhaps best known for pushing the lie that the Sandy Hook school massacre was a hoax. …. Infowars, which has had Trump on as a guest, ran a series of stories claiming the mainstream media was ignoring terrorist attacks or covering up the Islamist links of perpetrators before Trump made his extraordinary claim this month that the “dishonest press” didn’t want to report such attacks because they had their “reasons” (wink wink, tip the tinfoil hat). The website also pushed the idea that three million “illegals” had voted in the November election before Trump began to push that very notion.”

According to BBC Mr Trump had attacked the media at a press conference on February 16, as pressure mounted on his presidency. His national security adviser Michael Flynn quit earlier in the week. More recently in a rally President Trump said in Melbourne, Florida that reporters “are part of the corrupt system”. When he attacked the media, people in the audience screamed their support. Describing the media as “dishonest”, he repeated his assertion that some outlets “don’t want to report the truth” and were making up their stories about him.

“We will continue to expose them,” he said, pledging to “win, win, win”.

In his speech, the president also:

  • Repeated his campaign pledge to keep America “safe” and said the country would “have strong borders again”
  • Said Americans would have “a great healthcare plan” and Obama reforms would be repealed
  • Stressed that the White House was running “so smoothly”, dismissing claims that his administration was in disarray
  • Promised to “downsize the bloated bureaucracy” and “drain the swamp” in Washington
  • Said a plan would be developed to “totally destroy” so-called Islamic State
  • Promised to create more jobs in the US and rebuild the country’s military

It is unusual for a sitting president to hold a rally in the style of those held during election campaigns.

Then after the controversial press conference, Mr. Trump’s team conducted a survey (February 17), which media experts described as a technically unsound and also politically motivated survey to solicit desired answers. The survey asked participants to weigh in on the media’s bias against Trump, on issues like immigration, religion, the economy, and his presidency as a whole. Fair enough. However, as many critics on social media pointed out, the survey’s wording was often loaded, not to mention confusing. Any other critiques aside, questions like these are not the way to get scientific results. “A lot of these questions are designed in a way to confirm a particular hypothesis,” says Carey Morewedge, an associate professor of marketing at Boston University. “They basically are suggesting there is a correct answer.”The  online questionnaire called the Mainstream Media Accountability Survey or Trump Survey had questions like –  Do you believe that the mainstream media has reported unfairly on our movement?”; Were you aware that a poll was released revealing that a majority of Americans actually supported President Trump’s temporary restriction executive order?”; Do you believe that contrary to what the media says, raising taxes does not create jobs?”; Do you believe that people of faith have been unfairly characterized by the media?”; Do you agree with President Trump’s media strategy to cut through the media’s noise and deliver our message straight to the people?”All these questions according to the analysts were framed in such a manner so as people believe that Donald Trump is savior and the answers lie in his policies only. Carolyn Dicey Jennings, a philosopher at University of California, Merced points out that many of these questions—at least 16 of the 25—are framed in a way that signals to the reader that they are meant to be answered yes. This leads to what psychologists call acquiescence bias. Jennings says a better way of framing the question would be something like, “How has the media reported on the GOP movement?” and have response choices on a scale that runs from “fairly” to “unfairly”. Daniel Oppenheimer, a psychologist at UCLA who’s written a book about the flaws in elections, pointed out that the survey was doing what is called “push polling”—trying to convey some information rather than asking people what they think. “This is not an attempt to get information about the media, but to sway opinions.” One of the questions also takes advantage of what psychologists call ‘the bandwagon effect’—if others believe it, then you should. Jennings points out that this question is suggesting that everyone else already supports Trump’s executive order. Other questions in the survey use the same technique, but instead use an authority figure (the president) to start the bandwagon.

The attack on media is not new.

In the past autocratic leaders and dictators are known to have banned media. Also media is highly regulated in present Russia and China. Democracy needs free media to scrutinize government policies and form public opinion. But if leaders control media and freedom of expression, it is dangerous to the future of democracy. Undoubtedly Trump needs a fair deal from media, but his own overtures and loudmouth is often taken as a reason for his criticism. He has a tendency to describe all his political opponents, especially democrats as corrupt. Even his republican critics are not taken by him as constructive. Although after centuries of mature democracy, the American system would not be amenable to autocracy, yet he wants to utilize his presidential authority without checks and balances to have final writ on each and everything. He does not want to allow any alternate idea. But his efforts are not yielding space to him for one-upmanship or megalomania.   A new poll from Quinnipiac University suggests that while people may be broadly unhappy with the mainstream media, they still think it’s more credible than Trump. The president regularly accuses the press of “fake news,” but people see more “fake news” coming out of his own mouth. The poll asked who registered voters “trust more to tell you the truth about important issues.” A majority — 52 percent — picked the media. Just 37 percent picked Trump.

Studies and surveys on media credibility may have premeditated objectives- whether they support Trump’s way of looking on media or otherwise. But the gold standard is that the variety of opinion in media offers alternative visions to choose from and also allows the policy makers and implementers opportunities for course correction. Throttling or gagging free speech and alternative visions is an undemocratic way and more an un-American way. For policy makers, especially when self righteousness and one-upmanship is the trait of a leader or political party, debate and discussion, is a hurdle in drafting and implementing policies based on their skewed world view. They do not feel it productive to indulge in reaching consensus.  But in such a scenario, the main victims are people and democracy both. Rationality and reason is overpowered by whims and fancies. But such short sighted views may be disruptive, which is considered good in business, we need to care and not bully alternative views in nation making or leading the world.

NASA discovered 7 Earth-like planets

0

Scientists of NASA announced discovery of an entire system of Earth-sized planets. In these seven planets, six innermost are rocky like earth.

Three of the planets lie in the star’s habitable zone. The habitable zone or goldilocks zone is the region surrounding a star in which liquid water could theoretically exist. This means that all three of these planets may have presence of water. This indication dramatically increased the possibility of life. This is the largest number of Earth-sized planets yet found which could support liquid water.

As per Scientists, the star in this system-TRAPPIST-1 is an “ultra cool dwarf”. The energy output from dwarf stars like TRAPPIST-1 is much weaker than that of our Sun. Planets would need to be in far closer orbits than we see in the Solar System if there is to be surface water. Fortunately, it seems that this kind of compact configuration is just what we see around TRAPPIST-1.”

Michael Gillon leads the TRAPPIST collaboration, which hunts for planets using two 60-centimetre telescopes of Chile and Morocco. Gillon said that the team initially reported three planets around the star, known as TRAPPIST-1, last May. Further research revealed that it was not a single planet but four that orbit Trappist-1 roughly every 4, 6, 9 and 12 days. Those four joined the two innermost planets, which whirl around the star once every 1.5 days and 2.4 days. The team also find a seventh, more distant planet.

The six inner planets probably formed farther away from their star and then migrated inward. Now, they are so close to each other that their gravitational fields interact that enabled the team to estimate each planet’s mass, which they range from around 0.4 to 1.4 times the mass of the Earth.

Distance from Our Earth

The system is just 40 light-years away. Although, it would take us millions of years to get there with today’s technology, but these findings are important milestone in search of life beyond Earth.

Future

The Hubble Space Telescope is already being used to search for atmospheres around the planets. Emmanuel Jehin, a scientist who also worked on the research, asserts that “With the upcoming generation of telescopes, such as ESO’s European Extremely Large Telescope and the NASA/ESA/CSA James Webb Space Telescope, we will soon be able to search for water and perhaps even evidence of life on these worlds.”

This revelation is also important for researchers who are working to compare how worlds evolve. The TRAPPIST-1 system probably has a similar variety of worlds. “If one of these planets hosts life and the adjacent one doesn’t, why not?” asks Sarah Ballard, an astronomer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge.

Although at least some fraction of each planet could harbour liquid water, it doesn’t necessarily follow that they are habitable. TRAPPIST-1 emits about the same amount of X-ray and ultraviolet radiation as the Sun does, which would make it much more challenging for life to thrive.

 

11 Most Important Geographical Phenomena

0

1. Solstice

The word solstice is derived from the Latin sol (sun) and sistere (to stand still), because at the solstices, the Sun stands still in declination; that is, the seasonal movement of the Sun’s path (as seen from Earth) comes to a stop before reversing direction. A solstice is an astronomical event that occurs twice each year (in June and December) as the Sun reaches its highest or lowest excursion relative to the celestial equator on the celestial sphere. The seasons of the year are directly connected to both the solstices and the equinoxes. The term solstice can also be used in a broader sense, as the day when this occurs. The day of the solstice is either the longest day of the year (summer solstice) or the shortest day of the year (winter solstice) for any place outside of the tropics. Alternative terms, with no ambiguity as to which hemisphere is the context, are June solstice and December solstice, referring to the months of year in which they take place. At latitudes in the temperate zone, the summer solstice marks the day when the sun appears highest in the sky. However, in the tropics, the sun appears directly overhead (called the sub solar point) some days (or even months) before the solstice and again after the solstice, which means the sub solar point occurs twice each year.

2. Equinox

An equinox is an astronomical event in which the plane of Earth’s equator passes through the center of the Sun, which occurs twice each year, around 20 March and 23 September. On an equinox, day and night are of approximately equal duration all over the planet. They are not exactly equal, however, due to the angular size of the sun and atmospheric refraction. To avoid this ambiguity, the word equilux is sometimes used to mean a day in which the durations of light and darkness are equal.

Day is usually defined as the period when sunlight reaches the ground in the absence of local obstacles. On the day of the equinox, the center of the Sun spends a roughly equal amount of time above and below the horizon at every location on the Earth, so night and day are about the same length. In reality, the day is longer than the night at an equinox. There are two reasons for this:

First, from the Earth, the Sun appears as a disc rather than a point of light, so when the centre of the Sun is below the horizon, its upper edge is visible. Sunrise, which begins daytime, occurs when the top of the Sun’s disk rises above the eastern horizon. At that instant, the disk’s centre is still below the horizon.

Second, Earth’s atmosphere refracts sunlight. As a result, an observer sees daylight before the top of the Sun’s disk rises above the horizon. Even when the upper limb of the Sun is 0.4 degrees below the horizon, its rays curve over the horizon to the ground.

In sunrise/sunset tables, the assumed semi diameter (apparent radius) of the Sun is 16 minutes of arc and the atmospheric refraction is assumed to be 34 minutes of arc. Their combination means that when the upper limb of the Sun is on the visible horizon, its centre is 50 minutes of arc below the geometric horizon, which is the intersection with the celestial sphere of a horizontal plane through the eye of the observer. These effects make the day about 14 minutes longer than the night at the equator and longer still towards the poles. The real equality of day and night only happens in places far enough from the equator to have a seasonal difference in day length of at least 7 minutes, actually occurring a few days towards the winter side of each equinox. The times of sunset and sunrise vary with the observer’s location (longitude and latitude), so the dates when day and night are equal also depend upon the observer’s location. At the equinoxes, the rate of change for the length of daylight and night-time is the greatest. At the poles, the equinox marks the transition from 24 hours of nighttime to 24 hours of daylight (or vice versa).

3. International Date Line

The International Date Line (IDL) is an imaginary line of navigation on the surface of the Earth that runs from the north pole to the south pole and demarcates the change of one calendar day to the next. It passes through the middle of the Pacific Ocean, roughly following the 180° line of longitude but deviating to pass around some territories and island groups. The IDL is roughly based on the meridian of 180° longitude, roughly down the middle of the Pacific Ocean, and halfway around the world from the Greenwich meridian. In many places, the IDL follows the 180° meridian exactly. However, in other places, the IDL deviates east or west away from that meridian. These various deviations generally accommodate the political and/or economic affiliations of the affected areas.

Proceeding from north to south, the first deviation of the IDL from 180° is to pass to the east of Wrangel Island and the Chukchi Peninsula, the easternmost part of Russian Siberia. It then passes through the Bering Strait between the Diomede Islands at a distance of 1.5 kilo meters (0.93 mi) from each island. It then bends considerably west of 180°, passing west of St. Lawrence Island and St. Matthew Island. It crosses between the Aleutian Islands, belonging to the US—Attu Island being the westernmost—and the Commander Islands belonging to Russia. It then bends southeast again to return to 180°. Thus all of Russia is to the west of the IDL and all of the United States is to the east.

The IDL remains on the 180° meridian until passing the equator. Two US-owned uninhabited atolls, Howland Island and Baker Island, just north of the equator in the central Pacific Ocean (and ships at sea between 172.5°W and 180°) have the latest time on Earth of UTC-12 hours. The IDL circumscribes Kiribati by swinging far to the east, almost reaching the 150°W meridian. Kiribati’s easternmost islands, the southern Line Islands south of Hawaii, have the most advanced time on Earth, UTC+14 hours. South of Kiribati, the IDL returns westwards but remains east of 180°, passing between Samoa and American Samoa. In much of this area, the IDL follows the 165°W meridian. Accordingly, Samoa, Tokelau,Wallis and Futuna, Fiji, Tonga, Tuvalu and New Zealand’s Kermadec Islands and Chatham Islands are all west of the IDL and have the same date. American Samoa, the Cook Islands, Niue, and French Polynesia are east of the IDL and one day behind.The IDL then bends southwest to return to 180°. It follows that meridian until reaching Antarctica. Conventionally, the IDL is not drawn into Antarctica on most maps.

4. The Doldrums

The doldrums is a colloquial expression derived from historical maritime usage, which refers to those parts of the Atlantic Ocean and the Pacific Ocean affected by the Inter tropical Convergence Zone, a low-pressure area around the equator where the prevailing winds are calm. The doldrums are also noted for calm periods when the winds disappear altogether, trapping sail-powered boats for periods of days or weeks. The term appears to have arisen in the eighteenth century, when cross-equator sailing voyages became more common. Since this zone is the meeting place of two trade winds, it is also called inter tropical convergence zone. n maritime usage, the low pressure characteristics of the doldrums is caused by the expanding atmosphere due to heating at the equator, which makes the air rise and travel north and south high in the atmosphere, until it subsides again in the horse latitudes. Some of that air returns to the doldrums through the trade winds. This process can lead to light or variable winds and more severe weather, in the form of squalls, thunderstorms, and hurricanes. The doldrums are also noted for calm periods when the winds disappear altogether, trapping sail-powered boats for periods of days or weeks.

5. Horse latitudes 

Horse latitudes or subtropical highs are subtropical latitudes between 30 and 38 degrees both north and south where Earth’s atmosphere is dominated by the subtropical high, an area of high pressure, which suppresses precipitation and cloud formation, and has variable winds mixed with calm winds. The horse latitudes are associated with the subtropical anticyclone and the large-scale descent of air from high-altitude currents moving toward the poles. After reaching the earth’s surface, this air spreads toward the equator as part of the prevailing trade winds or toward the poles as part of the westerlies. The belt in the Northern Hemisphere is sometimes called the “calms of Cancer” and that in the Southern Hemisphere the “calms of Capricorn”. The consistently warm, dry, and sunny conditions of the horse latitudes are the main cause for the existence of the world’s major non-polar deserts, such as the Sahara Desert in Africa, the Arabian and Syrian deserts in the Middle East, the Mojave and Sonoran deserts in the southwestern United States and northern Mexico, all in the Northern Hemisphere; and the Atacama Desert, the Kalahari Desert, and the Australian Desert in the Southern Hemisphere.

6. The Roaring Forties

The Roaring Forties are strong westerly winds found in the Southern Hemisphere, generally between the latitudes of 40 and 50 degrees. The strong west-to-east air currents are caused by the combination of air being displaced from the Equator towards the South Pole and the Earth’s rotation, and there are few landmasses to serve as windbreaks.

The Roaring Forties were a major aid to ships sailing the Brouwer Route from Europe to the East Indies or Australasia during the Age of Sail, and in modern usage are favoured by yachtsmen on round-the-world voyages and competitions. The boundaries of the Roaring Forties are not consistent, and shift north or south depending on the season. Similar but stronger conditions occur in more southerly latitudes and are referred to as the Furious Fifties and Shrieking or Screaming Sixties. Hot air rises at the Equator and is pushed towards the poles by cooler air travelling towards the Equator (an atmospheric circulation feature known as the Hadley Cell). At about 30 degrees from the equator, the outward-travelling air sinks to lower altitudes, and continues toward the poles closer to the ground (the Ferrel Cell), then rises up again from about 60 degrees as the air joins the Polar vortex. This travel in the 30 to 60 degree zone combines with the rotation of the earth to move the air currents from west to east, creating westerly winds.

Unlike the northern hemisphere, the large tracts of open ocean below 40th parallel south (interrupted only by Tasmania, New Zealand, and the southern part of South America) mean that higher wind speeds — the Roaring Forties — can develop. Similar but stronger wind conditions are prevalent closer to the South Pole; these are referred to as the “Furious Fifties” (50 to 60 degrees south), and the “Shrieking” or “Screaming Sixties” (below 60 degrees south). The latitude ranges for the Roaring Forties and similar winds are not consistent, shifting towards the South Pole in the southern summer, and towards the Equator in the southern winter.

During the Age of Sail, ships travelling from Europe to the East Indies or Australasia would sail down the west coast of Africa and round the Cape of Good Hope to use the Roaring Forties to speed their passage across the Indian Ocean, then on the return leg, continue eastwards across the Pacific Ocean and under Cape Horn before sailing up the east coast of the Americas to home. It was first used by Dutch explorer Hendrik Brouwer in his Brouwer Route, discovered in 1611, which effectively halved the duration of the trip from Europe to Java. “To run the easting down” was the phrase used to describe the fast passages achieved in the Roaring Forties.  Round-the-world sailors also take advantage of the Roaring Forties to speed travel times, in particular those involved in record attempts or races.

7. Solar Eclipse

As seen from the Earth, a solar eclipse is a type of eclipse that occurs when the Moon passes between the Sun and Earth, and the Moon fully or partially blocks (“occults”) the Sun. This can happen only at new moon, when the Sun and the Moon are in conjunction as seen from Earth in an alignment referred to as syzygy.

8. Lunar Eclipse

A lunar eclipse occurs when the Moon passes directly behind the Earth into its umbra (shadow). This can occur only when the sun, Earth and moon are aligned (in “syzygy”) exactly, or very closely so, with the Earth in the middle. Hence, a lunar eclipse can occur only the night of a full moon.

9. Aurora Borealis (Northern Lights)

The Aurora Borealis (Northern Lights) and Aurora Australis (Southern Lights) are the result of electrons colliding with the upper reaches of Earth’s atmosphere. (Protons cause faint and diffuse aurora, usually not easily visible to the human eye.) The bright dancing lights of the aurora are actually collisions between electrically charged particles from the sun that enter the earth’s atmosphere. The lights are seen above the magnetic poles of the northern and southern hemispheres.

10. Jet Streams

Jet streams are fast flowing, narrow, meandering air currents found in the upper atmosphere or in troposphere of some planets, including Earth. The main jet streams are located near the altitude of the tropopause. The major jet streams on Earth are westerly winds (flowing west to east). Their paths typically have a meandering shape. Jet streams may start, stop, split into two or more parts, combine into one stream, or flow in various directions including opposite to the direction of the remainder of the jet. The strongest jet streams are the polar jets, at 9–12 km (30,000–39,000 ft) above sea level, and the higher altitude and somewhat weaker subtropical jets at 10–16 km (33,000–52,000 ft). The Northern Hemisphere and the Southern Hemisphere each have a polar jet and a subtropical jet. The northern hemisphere polar jet flows over the middle to northern latitudes of North America, Europe, and Asia and their intervening oceans, while the southern hemisphere polar jet mostly circles Antarctica all year round. Jet streams are the product of two factors: the atmospheric heating by solar radiation that produces the large scale Polar, Ferrel, and Hadley circulation cells, and the action of the Coriolis force acting on those moving masses. The Coriolis force is caused by the planet’s rotation on its axis. On other planets, internal heat drives their jet streams. The Polar jet stream forms near the interface of the Polar and Ferrel circulation cells; while the subtropical jet forms near the boundary of the Ferrel and Hadley circulation cells.

11. El Niño

El Niño is the warm phase of the El Niño Southern Oscillation (commonly called ENSO) and is associated with a band of warm ocean water that develops in the central and east-central equatorial Pacific (between approximately the International Date Line and 120°W), including off the Pacific coast of South America. El Niño Southern Oscillation refers to the cycle of warm and cold temperatures, as measured by sea surface temperature, SST, of the tropical central and eastern Pacific Ocean. El Niño is accompanied by high air pressure in the western Pacific and low air pressure in the eastern Pacific. The cool phase of ENSO is called “La Niña” with SST in the eastern Pacific below average and air pressures high in the eastern and low in western Pacific. The ENSO cycle, both El Niño and La Niña, causes global changes of both temperatures and rainfall. Mechanisms that cause the oscillation remain under study. Developing countries dependent upon agriculture and fishing, particularly those bordering the Pacific Ocean, are the most affected. In American Spanish, the capitalized term “El Niño” refers to “the boy”, so named because the pool of warm water in the Pacific near South America is often at its warmest around Christmas. “La Niña”, chosen as the ‘opposite’ of El Niño, literally translates to “the girl”.

Load More