UPSC Appoints Committee of Experts to Review The Existing Structure Of Civil Services Main Examination

On December 12th, 2011 UPSC appointed a committee of experts to review and suggest changes to the existing pattern of civil services main examination. This year it introduced changes in the preliminary examination.

The committee will be headed by Arun S. Nigavekar, ex-chairman of UGC, and a reputed educationist, whom A P J Abdul Kalam hailed as ‘father of quality education in India’ (wikipedia).

UPSC has given the committee 6 months of time to submit its report. The committee has 8 members among whom are former chairman of CBDT, former defence secretary, IIM Bangalore director and few other reputed personalities.

On December 1st, UPSC chairman, D P Agrawal had said in a speech (UPSC 3ed Foundation Lecture) –

“……Commission has constituted a high power Committee to suggest possible changes in the pattern of Civil Services (Main) Examination.  I would like to make it very clear that the endeavor of the Commission is to ensure that  all the candidates are judged on the basis of in-depth knowledge and understanding rather than information gathered at the last moment.”

Among its terms of reference are : to study various selection methods in practice globally; to identify the desired profile including skill sets required for a civil servant to  deliver good governance and adopt to changing domestic scenario in socio – economic and technological fields; to propose appropriate methods for selection; evaluation etc.

As a relief for candidates appearing for 2012, the report will be accepted either at the end of 2012 or in 2013. The report will be submitted in June 2012 to UPSC. Then it goes to government where it will be tabled before the cabinet for consideration.

It is now confirmed that 2012 will have the old format for main examination.

Change is desirable, but UPSC should be graceful to announce any changes one year before they notify them.

For reference  HERE is the link to the UPSC notification announcing the appointment of committee.

Iraq In a Quagmire

USA has formally declared that war is over in Iraq and it has withdrawn last remaining troops from this country. After 8 years of brutal battles that brought death to more than 100,000  Iraqi civilians, 4500 American soldiers, which displaced more than 1.75 million people and which cost USA $1 trillion (of taxpayers money) – the war is far from over.

During 2005-08 it was common to read everyday in newspapers about a bomb blast in Iraq – the country was pushed into sectarian violence between majority Shia and minority Sunni sects. The chaos also secured safe haven fo Al-Qaeda. After the famous ‘surge’ of troops in 2007 by USA, violence was gradually brought under control.

Under the new administration (Obama’s), USA declared that it would withdraw troops completely by January 2012. The process started two and half years ago itself. But before leaving the country USA made systematic efforts to train, arm and build professional Iraqi army; build institutions necessary for democratic setup. (These measures in no way absolve US of war crimes it has committed and even after troop withdrawal more than 16,000 staff will man its embassy in Iraq – most of them are contractors!! – and it is anybody’s guess who so many of them are needed there)

Shia are the majority community in Iraq and are everywhere in Iraq’s administrative setup. Earlier during Saddam Hussein’s reign, himself a Sunni, his community though was in minority, enjoyed unlimited power. With the advent of Americans equations were changed. Americans put Shia and Kurdish politicians in charge of political and military affairs.

Incumbent Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki is a Shia Muslim, so is the head of Iraqi army Babakir Zebari. President of Iraq, Jalal Talabani is a Kurdish politician, whose community comprises 3-5 % Iraq’s population.

This shift in fortunes has upset Sunni sectarians. Backed by Saudi Arabia they are pushing to establish an autonomous region within Iraq consisting of  Salah ad Din, Al Anbar, and Ninawa provinces.

Meanwhile Iran is playing its geopolitical card by actively helping present government to boost its role as the emerging power in the region (Iran is also a Shia majority nation). And it holds enormous clout in the affairs of the present government, which is resented by Saudi Arabia.

But biggest problem for Iraq will be sustaining democracy itself. It will have  to chose between western liberal secular model or twisted version – authoritative, theocratic namesake democracy being practiced in the neighbourhood.

With a vacuüm being created by the withdrawal of US, Iraq, sandwiched between two ambitious but antagonistic regional powers, will have to bear the consequences of the bloody game that will be played within its borders. Already signs of resurgence of sectarian violence are evident from the recent bombings in Iraq.

Between Iran and Saudi Arabia – ‘who emerges as the winner?’ question, there is a clear answer – that Iraq will be the loser.

For now, Iran has the upper hand. It doesn’t matter, Iraq will still be the loser.

Drone or Trojan Horse?

Last week Iran displayed to the world captured US drone, RQ-170 Sentinel – the drone responsible for spying in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran about secret hideouts of terrorists, movement of suspects and nuclear program in Iran. Iran has said that it would mass produce the drone once it deciphers technology behind the drone.

But it’s unimaginable to believe US would commit such a mistake and risk endangering its own security. USA has asked Iranians to return the downed drone. It is unlikely Iranians would respond in affirmative.

US doesn’t seem worried so much over the issue. Is it because all this was just a ‘drama’ ? I mean they downed their own drone in Iran so that they would have a pretext for a war – a  Trojan Horse in the deserts of Persia!

Conspiracy theory!!

But, WMD didn’t exist, Iraq was devastated. Laden was in Pakistan, Afghanistan is still pushed back into stone age.