Critical transition in Saudi Arabia

          The death of King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, at the age of 90, beckoned a cautiously orchestrated transition of power to his successor Salman in the Al Saud dynasty that holds power in the nation. King Salman has pledged that the succession would be managed smoothly, with continuity in policies and stability in internal as well as foreign relations. Given the rising violence and political instability in the region, and the glut in oil supply and consequent fall in prices, this transition of power is a critical moment. Salman, who has been crown prince since 2012, is now 79 years old and not in the best of health. Clearing any sort of uncertainty, Prince Muqrin, followed by Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, 55, have been declared the crown prince to succeed King Salman. Although the monarchic succession plan seems to be clearly mapped out, the House of Saud is said to be riven by factions and internal feuds. Whether order will prevail within the royal family is hard to speculate, given the secretive nature of its internal affairs.

The transition of power is happening at a time when politics in the region is beset with uncertainty. Sunni-dominated Saudi Arabia and Shia-dominated Iran, with their decades of rivalry, are closely following the turmoil in Yemen since the resignation of President Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi. The Shiite rebel group Houthi, suspected to have affiliations with Iran, has often accused Saudi Arabia of meddling in the country’s internal affairs. Riyadh has been praised for its effective counter-terrorism activities, especially with the Islamic State-dominated Iraq on its northern borders. Saudi Arabia continues to have favourable strategic partnerships with the United States, the United Kingdom and Europe. Even with the global glut in supply, King Salman is likely to continue pumping crude, keeping prices low, with no apparent intention to alter policies anytime soon. India maintains significant economic ties with Saudi Arabia, which is its biggest supplier of oil, accounting for 20.18 per cent of the imports in 2013-14. India accounts for 11 per cent of Saudi Arabia’s exports and 7.2 per cent of its imports. Remittances from Indians in Saudi Arabia amount to a substantial sum. From a socio-economic perspective, India has a lot at stake in the stability of the country. Given the centrality of Saudi Arabia to western economic interests, the West has often treated the country as an exception when it comes to human rights issues. The fact is that Saudi Arabia has an incredibly poor record in the matter of ensuring civil and political rights. Public flogging, beheading, and a general climate of intolerance are hallmarks of its criminal justice system. Women still do not have even the fundamental rights of speech, movement and assembly.

Wrong Responses to Charlie Hebdo

Wrong Responses to Charlie Hebdo

Leaders in Europe are justifiably trying to figure out what they should be doing to prevent terrorist attacks like the recent massacre at the satirical French newspaper Charlie Hebdo. Regrettably, some politicians are proposing the kind of Internet censorship and surveillance that would do little to protect their citizens but do a lot to infringe on civil liberties. But on the other hand what do they think about freedom of the press?

In Paris, a dozen interior ministers from European Union countries including France, Britain and Germany issued a statement earlier this week calling on Internet service providers to identify and take down online content “that aims to incite hatred and terror.” The ministers also want the European Union to start monitoring and storing information about the itineraries of air travelers. And in Britain, Prime Minister David Cameron suggested the country should ban Internet services that did not give the government the ability to monitor all encrypted chats and calls. Even before the Charlie Hebdo attack, European leaders were proposing or enacting harsh measures. Besides, even if Internet companies blocked videos and other propaganda produced by terrorist groups from their networks, that action would not necessarily prevent Europeans from finding that information. Terrorist sympathizers could access the banned content relatively easily by using virtual private networks or proxy servers that allow users in one country to pretend they are in a different country, like the United States, where free speech laws are much stronger. Some Europeans are already using such tools to access American services, like Netflix, that are not yet available in their countries. Mr. Cameron’s proposal raises another set of problems. In a speech earlier this week, he said he wanted companies like WhatsApp and Snapchat to create back doors in their services that would allow intelligence services to monitor conversations between users. If the companies refused to comply, he said, they should not be allowed to operate in Britain. Such an approach might seem reasonable to some — after all, the police can wiretap a landline phone, so why not a messaging service? So my question is everyone is interested in banning all the communication services and so why it is not considered as denying freedom of the press?

But technology and privacy advocates say it is dangerous to require technology companies to build such surveillance mechanisms into communications services because hackers and criminals will inevitably find ways to use those back doors to steal information from individuals, corporations and governments. Mr. Cameron’s proposal would make the Internet less secure without necessarily hampering terrorists. People who are determined to communicate with each other in secret can download encryption software from the Internet and send messages through systems like Tor that obscure their identities and locations.

Of course, governments can and should take steps to identify threats and prevent terrorist attacks through targeted intelligence gathering. But there is good reason to believe that widespread censorship and intrusive surveillance will only undermine personal freedoms, freedom of the press and could even make us less secure. The journalist’s liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.

'PK' a clever film

'PK' a clever film

The new Rajkumar Hirani-directed Bollywood movie PK starring Aamir Khan and Anushka Sharma has divided opinions in India. ‘#BanPK’ trended on Twitter, there were protests all over India and religious groups burnt posters of the movie at processions but the movie is in course to be the highest grossing Indian film of all time.

                                     India’s silent majority is letting its position on the issue known by supporting the movie. There are no mass protests in support of the movie but the positive reviews online and thousands of people taking to social media to praise it shows India is ready to have the ‘religion’ debate.

There was outcry from religious groups, and threats of mob violence but the courts and the government must be admired for not bowing down under the pressure of these mobs. The Supreme Court passed a verdict simply saying, “Don’t watch the film, if you don’t like it.” Although 'PK', is doing well at the box office, has been getting mixed reactions from audiences for its content. While some have slammed it, saying it mocks Hindu traditions, a lot of people have called it the best film of 2014. According to me the amazing thing about the film is that it is so clever. Clearly, it has done so well that anybody who stands up and says, this film offends me, it shows them that the film was right. It is also an Amir Khan show in which logic takes back seat. 

So I feel that something is there in the movie, few of us feels like get offended. I think We live in disturbed times. And in morally empty times, a half-full glass of science and reason is just what we need to keep the faith. Because faith is hope that all is well or will be.

What the Biggest Tech Trends Will Be: CES 2015

What the Biggest Tech Trends Will Be: CES 2015

Get ready to have your mind blown when the 2015 International Consumer Electronics show kicks off in Las Vegas this week, showcasing new gadgets and tech trends. Most of the tech giants were present there with their innovative products except apple.

The official event gets underway in Las Vegas, where approximately companies are expected to show off technology and services that not only impress but promise to make life easier. So what is gonna be the trend of 2015? Let’s see...

Cheaper Televisions were the highlights of the event. It may be time to say goodbye to our old 1080 pixel television. The new trend is with the 4k televisions. While the technology has been around for a few years, but I think this is the year when it’s going to become even more affordable to consumers. This year connected cars are going to take center stage, there were companies who showed off their cars including BMW, Benz, Audi, and ferrari.

                                 This is also gonna be the year of appliances may be more eco-friendly and save you money on your electric bill. There were companies like L.G introduced their new series of smarter home appliances like washing machine and refrigerator.  The Apple Watch, due out early this year, is already dominating the conversation for 2015, but the tech giant won’t be participating at CES. Expect to see hundreds of other companies showing off their wearable, including some accessories that are designed to work with the Apple Watch. We've seen robot security guards at Microsoft and worker robots helping to fill orders at Amazon, but there’s plenty more to come, if the list of exhibitors is any indicator. So this is all about the CES 2015 and we can expect more brighter and smarter products from the companies that will helps the consumers to make their life easier.