MY COMMENTS ON THE ARTICLE WRITTEN BY PARAKALA PRABHAKAR ON AP ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS 2024.

Parakala Prabhakar comes from a staunch Congress family. Both his father and mother had been Members of the Legislative Assembly representing the Congress. His father held cabinet positions 3 times in the AP Assembly.

Prabhakar is from Narasapuram and he did his BA from Andhra Loyola College, Vijayawada. Then he did his MA and M Phil from JNU, Delhi. He later took his doctorate from the London School of Economics in 1991. 

Parakala Prabhakar and Nirmala Sitharaman met when they both were studying at JNU and got married in 1986. On political ideology, they are dead opposed to each other. Although Nirmala Sitharaman never makes any public statement against his beliefs, Parakala Prabhakar overdoes that and is highly critical of her party, the BJP. Despite his vehement criticism, the marriage endured for 29 years now and that is a testament to her patience because I have not seen her giving a single public comment about his political views while he excels at it. Each to their political opinion, and no one bothers but when they start airing their opposing political views in public then it can lead to many interpretations.

After education Prabhakar never took up any job despite being a Phd from London School of Economics and chose to remain merely as a political commentator. He was a communications advisor to the YSRCP Government between the years 2014-2018. He is called an Economist but I have not seen any of his works as an economist at all. He is only good at criticism and offers nothing constructive. His prominence was merely because he is the husband of Nirmala Sitharaman. Had that not been so, probably no one would have noticed him.       

Parakala Prabhakar chose to write a note on the Assembly elections of AP held in 2024 titled “Is there Mischief Behind the Miracle of the 2024 Polls”.

Now as for my political belief, I prefer Jagan to Chandrababu as CM, however, truth is truth and it cannot be seen through the political spectrum and get colored accordingly. I strongly feel Parakala Prabhakar had done a grave injustice to truth by this article and want to put the position straight by commenting on it below:

Before we go to examine the issue of the allegations of Parakala Prabhakar, let us take the figures first from his own write up. Because based on those, he wove a web of concocted stories trying to implicate the Election Commission in malpractices. 

I give a link to his article below:

https://thewire.in/government/is-there-mischief-behind-the-miracle-of-the-2024-andhra-pradesh-polls

As per his own figures

But before commencing on the critique I have to admit that the Election Commission, be that of AP or the ECI has committed a monumental blunder in announcing figures without properly taking in the figures reported and consulting each other. I cannot say whether the blunder is from the AP EC or the ECI because they are contradicting themselves because the former said it was 68% by 5 PM, while the latter said it was 68% by 8 PM. So both the figures cannot be correct and one of them has to be compulsorily wrong. This is fact that cannot be denied and such uncoordinated actions by the state and National Commissions is totally improper and it gives chances for such interpretations like that of Parakala Prabhakar. All one needs is one inconsistency like in this case and the issue can be blown up to accuse the EC itself of favouring one party at the expense of the other.   

The figure that initiated all this controversy was the voting figure released by the AP EC as 68.04% up till 5 PM on that day. On this figure he did not give any press statement or apress note or a tweet, but merely stated it to the press.

Now let us have a look at the figures                     

Before we go to examine the issue of the allegations of Parakala Prabhakar, let us take the figures first from his own write up. Because based on those, he wove a web of concocted stories trying to implicate the Election Commission in malpractices. 

But before commencing on the critique I have to admit that the Election Commission, be that of AP or the ECI has committed a monumental blunder in announcing figures without properly taking in the figures reported and consulting each other. I cannot say whether the blunder is from the AP EC or the ECI because they are contradicting themselves because the former said it was 68% by 5 PM, while the latter said it was 68% by 8 PM. So both the figures cannot be correct and one of them has to be compulsorily wrong. This is fact that cannot be denied and such uncoordinated actions by the state and National Commissions is totally improper and it gives chances for such interpretations like that of Parakala Prabhakar. All one needs is one inconsistency like in this case and the issue can be blown up to accuse the EC itself of favouring one party at the expense of the other.   

The figure that initiated all this controversy was the voting figure released by the AP EC as 68.04% up till 5 PM on that day. On this figure he did not give any press statement or apress note or a tweet, but merely stated it to the press.

Parakala Prabhakar, in his haste to prove the EC guilty takes the flawed figure of 68.04% given till 5 PM as the basis of his entire calculation. This figure was never put out as a tweet or as any press release by the AP EC. He merely mentioned it to the press reporters who were eager to grab it and transmit it all over.  

Another important number Prabahkar puts in the AP ECs mouth on which his entire calculation is based is that large voter queues are there only in 3500 booths. What the EC of AP mentioned was that even at 5 PM large queues of voters are there in many booths and he never mentioned that figure of 3500. Parakala Prabhakars entire calculation is based on these 3500 booths which never came out of the EC’s mouth. Only some officials indicated this 3500 figure to the press. Some official telling something to the press is not official news coming from the EC of AP.  

Prabhakar also assumes that polling has concluded at 11.45 PM and bases his Calculation on that. The ECI never said that polling had concluded when it gave a press release on the 11.45 PM figures.

If these factors are taken into consideration, then Prakala Prabhakars theory falls flat on its face. No doubt the EC of AP quoted a polling figure of 68% till 5 PM, while the ECI said it was 68% only by 8 PM. Such mistakes are not at all expected from poll bodies at the state and the centre and they have certainly bungled on that.

The ECI had been very consistent on reporting of poll percentage as 68.12% at 8 PM, 76.5% at 11.45 PM and finally 81.79% at conclusion. There is no such thing as only 3500 booths on which Prabhakar fully bases his calculation on.

Also regarding the small differences in reporting, consider this. Each EVM is a standalone machine and is not attached to any other by way of either a connecting chord or a Wifi. The isolation of the EVM’s has been deliberately done by the EC because they should not present any chance of getting hacked online.

That means each booth has to manually report the figures to the polling station in charge. He/she in turn would have to report the figures to the AP EC and the reporting is not automatic. Obviously the EC of AP would have software to collate all the individual data that is coming in from the polling stations.

But the weak in this chain is the Polling station in charge who has to manually feed the data into the software supplied by the AP EC or get it fed by another person because the EVM’s cannot be linked to any other device. At the time of this entering of data mistakes can take place because there are 46,389 polling stations and that many individuals feeding the data.

Based on that, intermediate duration data would never be accurate because different booths can have different voting patterns with each of them registering voting at different times and also reporting at different times. So the intermediate data is only an approximation and can never be perfect. So the ECI, to make sure that such interpretations as that of Parakala Prabhakar arise due to doubt and also bias, and has to make sure that either they report the data or the concerned state EC’s do it. If both lack the coordination, then it would end up only in such a fiasco.  

Then there is another important factor which Prabhakar has conveniently forgotten or chose to ignore deliberately. Each booth has agents of all major parties and the EVM’s after completion of voting are sealed in their presence.

The sealed EVM’s in turn are moved to highly guarded strong rooms in the district in the presence of party agents and the rooms are sealed in their presence. The strong rooms are again opened in the presence of party agents. So how can any malpractices or tampering can be done in this operation?  Unless, of course the agents of all parties compromise at all the strong rooms in unison and the officials too collude in it. Is such a thing possible without a leak from thousands of people? The chances for this not even 1 out of 1 crore or even more.

So, yes there are inconsistencies in the statement by the state Commissioner for AP and the Election Commission, and that should be condemned for creating a doubt in the minds of the people, but that does not compromise the election in any way at all.   

SINGAPORE THE ASIAN TIGER-HOW IT GOT THERE?

 

Singapore is a great country/city in the world and there is none to equal it in many ways. Singapore consists of 63 islands. It has a population of 61 lacs and is multi religious and multi ethnic with Buddhism being the leading religion with 31% following it. 20% people do not follow any religion, 19% follow Christianity, 16% follow Islam, 9% follow Taoism & 5% follow Hinduism.  On ethnicity, 74% are Christian, 14% Malay & 9% Indian. That means there are 550,000 Indians in Singapore of which 198,000 are Tamils. Tamil is one of the official languages of Singapore. 

If one checks the countries in the world with over 100,000 in population, then the list on nominal per capita is headed by Ireland with USD 129,132, followed by Switzerland with USD 111,047 and the 3^rd place is taken by Singapore with USD 94,481. Of course among the bigger countries the US stands unequalled on nominal per capita with USD 89,599. Singapore is also ranked as one of the most expensive cities in the world for expatriates & foreign workers. Singapore is the world’s 3^rd least corrupt country after Denmark & Finland. Incidentally on this corruption index, of the 180 countries India is ranked 96, Pakistan 135, Bangladesh 151, the 178, 179 & 180 ranks go to Venezuela, Somalia & South Sudan respectively.   

On PPP per capita Singapore is the country with the 3^rd highest in the world with USD 157,000 only after Monaco & Liechtenstein where the latter 2 are very small countries with about 40,000 populations each. Singapore is the only country in Asia with a sovereign credit rating of AAA from all major rating agencies. There are only 10 such countries in the world on AAA rating and 8 of them come from Europe and the rest 2 are Australia and Singapore.

Singapore was supposedly founded by Sang Nila Utama, a prince from Palenbang in Java in 1299 AD. It was a Hindu-Buddhist kingdom. It was originally known as the Kingdom of Singapura. After coronation Nila Utama’s official adopted title was Sri Tri Bhuvana. Singapore in the 14^th century was known as Temasek and was part of the Indosphere.

                            INDOSPHERE IN ORANGE. 

Indosphere is a term used for areas of Indian linguistic influence in the neighbouring Southern Asian, Southeast Asian, and East Asian regions. It is commonly used in linguistics in contrast with the Sinophone languages of the Mainland Southeast Asia linguistic area of the Sinosphere.

In the 14^th century Singapura’s  ruler Parameswara was attacked by the Javanese or Siamese kingdoms and was thrown out. In 1613 AD Portuguese raiders burned down the settlement. For the next 2 centuries Singapore was under the Johor Sultanate and the Dutch conquered it when they conquered Malacca in 1641 AD. The British arrived in the island in 1819 and the then the sultan of Johor gave them rights to establish a trading post in return for USD 5000 per year. In 1824 another treaty with the British made the entire island a part of the British Empire. When the British first arrived in 1819 there were hardly 1000 people living on the island. By 1860 this has boomed to 80,000. Later Singapore grew rapidly.

In the 2^nd World War the British suffered their worst defeat in Singapore when 60,000 British forces surrendered, and 5000- were killed and wounded. The British forces planned to liberate Singapore in 1945/46, but by that time the war ended on account of the Atom bombs. The British, Indian and the Australian forces under Mountbatten accepted the surrender of the Japanese forces.

Much of the infra of Singapore was destroyed during the 2^nd World War, Shortage of food led to malnutrition, disease and rampant crime and violence. A series of strikes crippled the economy. However, by late 1947 the economy began to recover.

The failure of Britain to successfully defend Singapore in the war made the image of the British tarnished in the eyes of Singaporeans. On 1^st April 1946 Singapore became a British crown colony. During the1950’s the Chinese Communists waged a war in the state. In 1959 the British agreed to give full independence to Singapore except in defence and foreign affairs. This happened days before the general election when the PAP (People’s Action Party) party of Lee Kuan Yew won a landslide victory.

Lee was an outstanding scholar and earned a double starred first class honours at Cambridge which showed his consistent academic excellence.  He was also a brilliant lawyer who defended radical students and postal and port workers at the same time not losing the confidence of the establishment.  In 1959, when PAP won 43 seats out of the total 51, Lee himself drove his car to the Government house to be sworn in as PM.

Singapore had strong links with Malaya (now Malaysia) and the PAP leaders believed that their future lay with Malaya. In 1961 Malaya offered a federation named Malaysia of which Singapore would also be a part with high autonomy. Singapore accepted that after a referendum. Indonesia was against this arrangement.

However, in this federation Singapore was discriminated against and there were lots of political and economic differences between Malaya and Singapore. In August 1965 Singapore separated from the Malaysian Federation and became an independent country with Lee Kuan Yew as Prime Minister.

In 1967 Singapore co-founded the ASEAN. Lee’s emphasis on rapid economic growth, racial integration, promotion of business entrepreneurship and curbs of democratic freedoms by governing with extensive legal powers shaped Singapore’s policies for the next half a century.

Steady Economic growth continued throughout the 1980’s at 8% with the unemployment rate falling to 3% and continued till 1999. Lee’s government developed Singapore port into one of the world’s busiest ports and service and tourism industries also expanded significantly during this period.  

The PAP under Lee has remained in power since 1959 and is the political party in power with the most longevity in the world. 

As usual opposition political parties view the PAP as having tight regulation of political and media activities along with its stringent laws as an infringement on political rights.

In 1990 Goh Chok Tang became the 2^nd PM of Singapore after Lee. Goh had to face two crisis’s; the 1997 Asian Financial crisis & the 2002-04 SARS outbreak. In 2004, Lee’s son became the 3^rd PM of Singapore. After mismanagement of the economy by him the PAP had the worst victory in the elections ever in 2011. Of course that was a good 60% vote share though. In 1968 elections the PAP had the best ever tally of 87%. Lee Kuan Yew’s death in 2015 brought back the PAP with a 70% vote share in the elections held that year. In 2024 Laurence Wong of the PAP became PM.

The PAP stormed into power in 1959 and has never looked back since. In 1968 it won with a massive 87% vote share and no party could ever defeat them till now. That is the real magic of Lee Kuan Yew. PAP ruled Singapore for 67 years in succession without a single defeat and the least percentage of vote share they ever got in an election was 60%.

How did that happen? Singapore was described by a British politician as a “Pestilential and immoral Cesspool”. From there it transformed itself into a powering tiger marching forward nonstop.  

This was because of the amazing first leadership of Lee Kuan Yew provided to Singapore, which built a lasting legacy that could not be erased from people’s minds. When he died in 2015 Singapore mourned the loss of a great leader which shaped its destiny. But he must have died a truly happy man for his achievement of making Singapore a great country and gave his countrymen what they wanted. That is a glorious death which is not possible for everyone.

But he was pretty strict in Singapore and also authoritarian. The sole opposition MP J.B. Jayaretnam at one time was ruined by continuous lawsuits. A political activist spent 32 years in detention. Lee believed that good governance did not depend on human rights or liberal democracy. I am completely with him on that. He never accepted the press as a guardian of the nation as he felt the media houses were too corruption ridden.

Tom Abraham was India’s first High Commissioner to Singapore. He was a lifelong friend of Lee. He said of Singapore that he knows about all the beatings and tortures and what happened in Singapore but despite all that the PAP has done a remarkable job. No doubt about that at all because the worst vote share PAP got in their elections was 60%. So, there is not a shred of doubt about their delivery. 

Singapore is one of the 4 countries in the developed world to retain the death penalty. Apart from it, only the USA, japan and Taiwan have retained it. Singapore levies a death penalty for drug trafficking on which Amnesty and Human Rights Watch cry hoarse about. They want human rights for drug traffickers.

This is what AI says about Lee; 

"Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore's founding father, was a notoriously tough, pragmatic leader who transformed a vulnerable, resource-poor island into a global economic powerhouse. He wielded significant, sometimes authoritarian power, acting as a "benevolent dictator" to enforce discipline, root out corruption, and drive rapid modernization, often using an "iron" will to secure the nation's survival." 

I personally think that the policies followed by Lee were perfect for a developing country. While for a developing country, providing living security and governance to its population should become the primary task and freedoms should take a backseat.

For a developing nation the priorities are different with policies hinging on development with selective curb on freedoms. This does not mean that dissenting people should be tortured but certainly they should be dealt with firmly because they act against the larger goal set for the country. 

China succeeded because of following this policy and so did Singapore while great colonial powers like the UK and France which had immense resources at their command could become prosperous only in hundreds of years while both Singapore and China took far less than a hundred.    

Once the country develops then the security issue gets sublimed with that of freedoms and then they become important. Having no freedom for a developed nation is bad and the people would be disillusioned.

Amazingly Lee visited India 17 times during his tenure starting in 1959. In contrast he visited China only in 1976. When the then Chinese premier gave him a copy of “India’s China War” of Neville Maxwell telling Lee that it was the correct version,  Lee politely returned the book stating that it was Chinas version and there was another Indian version.

Lee was a man who recognised India’s potential even before Indians themselves did. It was he who introduced India to the ASEAN. 

Even before the ASEAN he wanted involve India in the region and suggested to Indira Gandhi that India should enforce a Monroe like doctrine to Asia. 

He warned south East Asian students in 1962, with China rising, unless India emerged “Asia would submerge”. He attributed his strategic vision to Nehru and KM Panikkar. He spoke with reverence of Indian civilization and that it played a role in Asia as Greece and Rome have done in Europe. He always alluded to Singapore’s Sanskrit name Singapura. For him Nehru was his failed God who failed because of allowing populist politics to erode his promise.

 

HOW MANY PEOPLE CAN SLEEP SAFELY IN AN AIRTIGHT AIRCONDIONED ROOM FOR 8 HRS.

 

Once I had a discussion with someone as to what happens if the doors of room are kept closed for a long time with a person inside it. How long would he be able to sustain his breathing? When I enquired on that I found the following facts.

A room can be of different sizes and can contain different quantities of Oxygen. Let us take a room of 10*10*10 (length 10 feet, width 10 feet & height 10 feet) with an area of 1000 cubic feet or 28.31 Cubic Mtrs.

The density of air is 1.225 Kg/m ³. So a room of 1000 ft³ would have 28.31*1.225 or 34.68 Kgs of air. Now we think that air is weightless, so this weight surprises us.  

Air contains 21% Oxygen, so a room of 1000 ft³ would have 34.68*21/100 or 7.28 Kgs of Oxygen. 

A person consumes about 700 gms of Oxygen in 24 hours’ time or thereabouts. So if he sleeps in a completely closed room (air conditioned) with an area of 1000 ft³ without opening the doors then the Oxygen in the room would be sufficient for 7280/700 or 10 days. But there are other factors that have to be taken into consideration. 

Humans consume only 5% of Oxygen per breath and of the 21% we breathe in 16% is exhaled out as the human body does not require it. So as long as the concentration of Oxygen in the air does not drop below one fourth there would not be any discomfort for a person in a completely sealed room that is airtight. 

However, there is another important factor to be considered and that is Carbon Dioxide because we give out CO2 while breathing out. Atmosphere contains .043% of CO2. 4% CO2 in the air is dangerous for humans and 10% is fatal. Each inhalation of ours gives out .04 gms of CO2.  An adult inhales 0.5 ltrs of air per breath while at rest. Exhaled air consists of 4% CO2. 

Considering the above factors, It has been estimated that in a closed room of 1000 cubic feet a person can remain safe for 2-3 days. So if 6 people sleep in such a room that is air conditioned which is airtight for a night (8 hrs) they would have no problem. Since the area of the room is so small, no way more than that number can sleep in it. An air conditioner does not make any difference to the equation as it only compresses the refrigerant and transfers the heat in the room outside and merely circulates the air in the room and does not bring in any fresh air. But even if the door of the room is opened once air from outside the room flows in and extends the safe time.

IRAN-ITS HISTORY & POLITICAL EVOLUTION.

 

Iran is quite a large country with about half the area of India but with a population of just 9.25 crores. It has borders with 7 countries; Iraq, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan of which 4; Iraq, Turkey, Pakistan & Afghanistan are major. Its nominal GDP for2025 was 357 Billion USD and the Per Capita was 4074 USD.

Iran is home to one of the world’s oldest continuous major civilizations with settlements dating back to 4000 BC. Iran was a part of the Assyrian state, and when that declined an Iranian state was established by the Medes in 612 BC.

The Achaemenids united all the Iranian tribes between 580 and 559 BC under Cambyses I. Under his son Cyrus II, also known as Cyrus the Great they defeated the Medes and established a unified Iranian state. By about 500 BC the Achaemenid empire stretched right from Turkey to Afghanistan and even into part of Egypt and also included parts of the Arabian peninsula and Central Asia.

This was the Persian Empire which was defeated by Alexander in 330 BC. After Alexander’s death his general Seleucus Nicator took control of Syria, Iraq, Iran and Turkey and established the Seleucid dynasty. The Parthians challenged the Seleucid rule in Iran and wrested its control in 142 BC. Parthian power ended when Ardeshir II established the Sasanian empire in 224 AD. This dynasty ruled Iran and much of Middle east before the Muslims arrived on the scene in the 7^th century AD.

After the fall of the Sasanian Empire in 651, the Arabs of the Ummayed Caliphate (descendants of the first Caliph Omar) adopted many of the Persian customs. Arab provincial governors were mostly Persian.  Persian remained the court language of the Caliphate till about the end of the 7^th century AD when Arabic replaced it. However, entire Iran could not be brought under the Caliphate and the Daylam region and the Tabaristan region was under local kings who could not be subdued and together they defeated an Arab general.

Later anti Umayyad insurrections were supported by non-Arabic Islamic converts who were resentful as they were relegated to lower social standing. In one of these revolutions the Abbasids who were descendants of Mohammed’s uncle Abbas overthrew the Umayyad’s in 750 AD and established the Abbasid caliphate. The power of the Abbasids decreased by the 10^th century AD and there was an establishment of several independent Iranian dynasties.  

Then came the Seljuk Turks in the 11^th century AD and took over the Iranian region. The Seljuk Empire fractured in 1157 AD. The Islamization of Iran was a long process. The Muslim population of Iran was 40% in the mid-9^th century but it went up to 90% by the end of the 11^th century AD. Despite the Persians adopting the religion of their conquerors, they worked to protect and revive the Persian language and culture and Arabs and Turks participated in this process.

In the early 13^th century the Mongol hordes descended on the caliphate which finished off the Abbasid caliphate completely by 1258 AD. Later the Mongol Empire got fractured after the death of the Great Khan and the region including Iran fell to Hulegu Khan. There was a cultural renaissance and his descendant Ghazan Khan converted to Islam in the late 13^th century turning it away from the other Mongol khanates. After him, his nephew Abu Said became the Khan and when he died in 1335 AD, the Kingdom was fractured into several small kingdoms when black death arrived and killed 30% of Iran’s population. 

Timur  founded the Timurid dynasty in 1370 AD. He came from a Turkified tribe of Mongols. He invaded Iran in 1381 AD. He was most brutal and ordered the complete massacre of Isfahan killing 70,000 people. The Timurids ruled Iran till 1452 AD.

The Safavid Empire was founded by Shah Ismail in 1505 AD is considered as the beginning of the modern Iranian history. The dynasty unified Iran as a cohesive entity under Persian rule and as Shia Islam as the official religion. The Safavids ruled from 1501 AD to 1722 AD and had a brief restoration from 1729 to 1736. The Safavids ruled Iran with an iron hand in a despotic fashion.

The rival Asfaharid dynasty was established by Nadir Shah (1736-1747) & Zarid dynasty by Karim Khan( 1751-1777). Nadir Shah is described as the last great Asiatic military conqueror. His Empire at the maximum extent encompassed Afghanistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Georgia, Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Oman, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, North Caucasus & the Persian Gulf. 

Although he sacked Delhi and looted the Peacock throne and the Kohinoor, India was not a part of his Empire because neither he nor his heirs ruled Delhi.  The Qazar dynasty took control of Iran in 1789 AD under Agha Mohammed Shah and unified Iran.  

In the 19^th century following the Russo Persian wars Iran lost significant amount of territory in the Caucasus to the Russian Empire. Britain then got involved in Southern Iran to counter the Russian presence in the North. This power struggle resulted in poor governance and culminated in the Great Persian Famine of 1870-71 which killed a significant portion of Iran’s population numbering millions.

In 1921 in a coup the Qajar dynasty was replaced by the Pahlavi dynasty founded by Reza Shah. He believed in an authoritarian government that valued nationalism, militarism, secularism and anti-communism with strict censorship and state propaganda.

Reza Shah introduced many socio economic reforms reorganising the army, government administration and finance. He ruled for 16 years before he was forced to abdicate by the Anglo Soviet invasion of Iran in 1941 overwhelming the weak Iranian army.

His rein brought in law & order, discipline, central authority and modern amenities like schools, trains, buses, radios, cinemas and telephones. However, his rein was perceived as a corrupt police state with only outward modernization. Reza Shah was deposed by the Soviet  Anglo alliance and they replaced him with his son Mohammed Reza Pahlavi. From that time (1941 AD) onwards till the revolution in 1979, Iran was ruled as an autocracy under the Shah with strong American support.

Shah initiated economic, social, agrarian, and administrative reforms to modernize the country which became known as the White Revolution. Many Islamic leaders criticised those initiatives and the land reforms had mixed results.

By 1978 the Shah had become widely unpopular among the Iranian people. Daily demonstrations destabilised the region and the Shah established martial law to curb the opposition. When hundreds of thousands of protesters demonstrated, the security forces opened fire on the agitators in an incident that is known as Black Friday. In this incident about 100 protestors were killed and 200 injured by the army firing in Jaleh Square in Tehran.

The protests then grew and included 10% of the area of the country and involved 1% of its population. Anger with the Shah was so great that even secular and leftist groups supported Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the revolution despite not sharing any of his ideas. Ultimately the Shah fled Iran and Khomeini who was then in exile was invited to come back. 

Khomeini on return claimed to support free democratic elections. On 31^st March 1979 a referendum was held in Iran seeking the people’s preference for an Islamic regime. The answer as per the official announcement was that a 97% yes. But no impartial observers from outside were allowed to oversee the elections, so despite it being a positive vote, it is very doubtful if it was actually 97% as stated. Anyway it is a yes for the theocratic regime due to the hatred of the people towards the Shah.  

The referendum mandated the creation of an assembly to draft a new theocratic constitution by which Khomeini became the Supreme leader in December 1979.  Industries were nationalised, laws and schools Islamized and Western influence was restricted.

In Sep 1980, the Iraqi army under Saddam Hussein invaded Iran initiating the Iran-Iraq war. The war continued till 1988 when Khomeini accepted a truce mediated by the UN. The war killed 500,000 people and Saddam Hussein freely used chemical weapons against the Iranians.                

On his deathbed in 1989, Khomeini appointed a reform council which proclaimed Ali Khameini as his successor. President Rafsanjani concentrated on a pro business policy of rebuilding the economy. He supported free market favouring a privatization of state industries and took a moderate position internationally.  

In 1997 Rafsanjani was succeeded by the moderate Khatami as President who advocated freedom of expression, good diplomatic relations with Asia and the EU and a policy that supported free market and foreign investment.         

The year 2005, brought the hardliner Ahmadinejad to power as the President. He had hard line views on nuclearization, on relations with Israel and other countries.

In 2013 the centrist Rouhani was elected as President. He agreed to a Joint Comprehensive Plan in Vienna in 2015 between Iran & the P5+1 (UN Security Council + Germany) and the EU. The talks are about ending economic sanctions on Iran in exchange for Iran’s cap on enriching Uranium.

In 2018 Trump withdrew from the deal and new sanctions were proposed on Iran. In 2020 IRGC General Suleimani, the 2^nd most powerful man in Iran was assassinated by the US, and in retaliation Iran rained missiles on the US airbases in Iraq. On Jan 8 2020 the IRGC shot down an Ukrainian International Airlines flight killing 176 civilians.

Hardliner Ibrahim Raisi was elected President in 2021. During his term Iran enriched its Uranium further and joined SCO and BRICS.  In 2024 Raisi was killed in a copter crash and Pezeshkian got elected as the President.

The weakening of Iran’s key allies and proxies since 2023 has left Iran isolated. In 2025 Iran was rapidly advancing its nuclear program. Iran and the US entered into negotiations for a new nuclear agreement but nothing came out of it. 

In June 2025 IAEA found Iran non-compliant with regulations. Totally disregarding that, Iran then announced the launch of another nuclear enrichment facility. 

On 13^th June 2025 Israel launched strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities killing top members of Iran’s military leadership. Thereafter in June 2025 itself, the US struck Iran’s nuclear facilities and Iran attacked the US bases in Qatar. On 24^th June Israel and Iran agreed to a ceasefire on the insistence of the US.   

Since Dec 25 Iran has experienced mass demonstrations across many cities against the Islamic Republic due to frustration with the economic crisis. By Jan 13 some 12000 demonstrators have been killed by the regime after blacking out the internet.   

There was a regime change in 1979 when the regime killed only 100 people and I wonder what the people of Iran would do now when so many people have been killed.

A study of the economy of Iran clearly points out how detrimental to economic development the Islamic regime had been.

Under Shah the per capita income of Iran had been 344 USD in the year 1969, 10 years before the revolution. By 1979, the year of the revolution, this has gone up to 2352 USD. That means it has gone up by 683% in 10 years or 68% a year.

In contrast the Islamic regime started with a fair per capita of USD 2352 in 1979 and by the year 1989, 10 years after the revolution, it has actually come down to 2124 USD which means it declined by 10% in those 10 years decreasing about 1% each year.

On a long term average between 1989 and 2023 the per capita of Iran has gone up from 2352 in 1979 to 4465 USD in 2023. That is a growth of 90% in 34 years or about 2.5% per year. Clearly the Islamic rule has pushed Iran into an abyss and made the economic life of the people miserable. No doubt the sanctions on Iran badly affected its economic situation. However, that alone is not the sole contributing factor for the decline and the Government policies too are negative and affected it. 

Between the years 2014 and 2024, in 10 years Iran’s GDP has fallen from USD 460 billion to USD 437 billion.

When this sort of growth rate is there for a country and then it registers a huge fall in its currency rate coupled with 40% inflation, then it is disaster time for a country and its people. One can only pity all those people whose life had been made hell by the Islamic regime.

It is very convenient to push all the ills to sanctions, but how a country in such a precarious economic condition could fund militant groups outside the country and supply them with arms to fight Israel. So for that regime religion is much more important than people and people do not matter at all except for giving excuses. The regime wants to fool the people with lies and continue on their religious agenda.  

ALEXANDERS ONLY EVER DEFEAT----BATTLE OF THE PERSIAN GATE.

 

Most Indians know about Alexander (Alexander III) because he fought with King Porus of Punjab in 326 BC and defeated him. King Porus put up a gallant fight, and he was respected by Alexander who made him one of his Satraps (Vassal Kings).

Alexander had to take on the Persian Empire before he could battle with Porus. At that time, the Persian Empire was the largest Empire the World has seen and was being ruled by Darius III. It consisted of 55 lac Sq.km of territory and stretched from the Balkans and Egypt in the West to the Indus Valley in the East including Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Palestine, Parts of Eastern Arabia and a large part of Central Asia.

Darius was then known as the King of Kings. Alexander first consolidated his power in Greece and proceeded into Asia to conquer it with 37.000 men (32000 infantry & 5000 cavalry) in 334 BC. He split the army into two and at the battle of the Granicus river, Alexander defeated the Persian forces. It was an impossible task as the Persians chose and waited on the opposite river bank which was on higher ground and the lower bank which Alexander had to climb was slippery with mud and slime.

The Persian army stood guard on the other side waiting for Alexanders army who did not have a footing to stabilise themselves for climbing the banks and give battle to the Persians. The hooves of their horses and the feet of the infantry skid on the slime on the steep banks of the river. To climb against enemy Javelins and arrows while their horses slipped in the wet slime is virtually an impossible task. Things looked hopeless for his soldiers, but then they were led by Alexander himself. 

Alexander spoke to his men and rushed to the frontline itself and led his army. In the front a soldier can easily be cut down by the enemy, knocked over by a Javelin or an arrow. Alexander was recklessly brave and was always ready to die fighting his battle. He rushed and led his soldiers forward on the slimy banks of the river. In the process when he gained purchase on the bank, an enemy commander attacked him and an axe cleft his helmet into two, yet Alexander miraculously survived to claim further reverence and wonder of his men. With him leading the way, the Persian army which had all the advantage was obliterated in one day.   

Then, at the battle of Issus Darius himself faced Alexander with a large army, got defeated and fled East.  Darius then raised another large army and met Alexander at Gaugamela with about 250,000 men (some ancient historians put their number at even 1 million). Alexander by his brilliant General ship has routed that large host in just one afternoon and Darius again fled East to raise still another army to confront Alexander again. Till then Alexander did not lose a single battle he fought and was feared by many Kings who submitted to him without a fight. Wherever he went the vassal Kings of Persia trembled at his name as they believed he was unbeatable and was blessed by god himself.  

Babylon and Susa submitted to Alexander without a fight. At Susa Alexander got hold of a huge quantity of Gold and Silver in its treasury. In fact it was 50,000 talents of it. A talent being equal to about 30 Kgs, that is about 1500 tons of those precious metals.

After Gaugamela, Alexander split his army into 2 portions, and sent the major portion of it through his General Parmenion along with baggage and siege equipment on the Royal road towards Persepolis the imperial capital.  The second portion of 17,000 troops led by him was the best crack troops at Alexander’s disposal. 2000 of the troops were the Companion Cavalry comprising of the Greek aristocracy which was well tested and feared in battle and was absolutely loyal to Alexander. 

These troops he took on a path that is nearer but on a critical snow covered mountain pass through the Zagreb Mountains. That was January and winter was at its peak, and it was foolhardy to risk his best troops in that fashion, but probably, the easy victory at Gaugamela against great odds, and the subsequent lame submission of kingdoms seem to have made Alexander rather reckless. Alexander had his eyes set on taking Persepolis, the capital of the Empire.

To stall the advance of Alexander and give him time to raise another army Darius appointed Prince Ariobarzanes, the Satrap of Persis (his domain also included Persepolis the imperial capital). This guy did not have much army left to defend against Alexander as he too fought Alexander at Gaugamela and most of his army was slain in the battle.

Now Ariobarzanes had very few men under his command, less than 2000 of them of which about 300 were horsemen, yet he is very spirited and committed to the cause of defending his country against Alexander. He stood no chance to confront Alexander directly so when Alexander presented him with an opportunity by going through very difficult mountain passes, Ariobarzanes who knew the terrain very well thought of using it against his famous adversary to block him completely and give time to Darius to raise another army.  He had a valorous sister named Youtab (Utab) who is well trained in warfare and she participated in his campaign against Alexander.

On way through the mountains Kings and Tribes submitted to Alexander because his great reputation preceded him. One hill tribe named Axians who are fierce mountain warriors that defended the key passes dared to defy him. Alexander led a lightning strike through their territory, crushed their defences and forced their complete submission.

It was early January 330 BC when Alexander and his men went deeper into the snow-clad Zagreb Mountains.  The passes were narrow and treacherous covered with ice and snow.

Ariobarzanes knew the power of the Macedonian phalanx having seen it in action at Gaugamela. The entire Persian army of 250,000 men was torn to pieces in a single day, in fact in a single afternoon and that was a lesson he would not and could not forget. He knew that the odds were helplessly staked against him. If Alexander reached Persepolis without being stopped, he knew that the Persian Empire would cease to exist.

His force was no match for the Macedonians but he knew the terrain thoroughly and had a fanatical determination to fight for his homeland unlike his Emperor who always chose to run from the battlefield when defeated. He chose a place in the snow clad mountains where a small force can stop an army and defend it. Its name was Persian Gates which is a narrow mountain pass. It had snow clad cliffs rising on either side touching the sky totally un-scalable with the track being only like a goat track in some places and filled with slippery ice and snow.  

Ariobarzanes made a defensive position at the narrowest point of the pass and got his men to construct a wall blockade to the entire pass after a turn in the pass. His men guarded the cliff heights on either side of the pass and stored a large number stones of various sizes as well as a large number of Javelins and arrows to ambush the army of Alexander from above. Moreover there was ice and snow in the pass which made it very slippery.

Alexander’s troops had a wall right in front of them blocking the pass and the men of Ariobarzanes waited on either side on cliffs. The moment Alexander’s men tried to do something to bring down the wall they were attacked with Javelins, arrows & stones raining down from either side. It was sheer suicide for Alexanders men and despite repeated attempts Alexander only lost more men. Finally the first time ever in his life Alexander had lost a battle and had to retreat some distance. Alexanders men made more attempts on some nights again to breach the wall which proved futile as it was well guarded by the men of Ariobarzanes.  

Alexander lost his best men in the attacks from the force named Companion Cavalry which numbered 2000 men and that was composed of the Greek aristocracy which served as his personal bodyguards. They were the veterans of many a battle and were extremely capable and a big asset in any battle.

In fact this battle was lost by Alexander because of poor intelligence. His advance scouts have failed to warn him of the wall that was constructed and about the men of Ariobarzanes and Alexander fell right into their trap. 

Despite many attempts by Alexanders forces only further numbers of men were lost and the defence could not be broken. He could turn back and the take the circuitous path his General Parmenion has taken to Persepolis, but that would have lost Alexander a lot of time. Moreover, to turn back in defeat would have been utterly insulting for Alexander and would have dealt a fatal blow to his undefeated image. Moreover his men trusted Alexander with all their hearts and believed that he is undefeatable as he is blessed by the Gods. So it would have been impossible for Alexander to turn back.

Luckily for Alexander fortune smiled on him after some days and nights of such futile attempts and losses. Some shepherds met his men and led them on a small mountain path in a dark and extremely chilly night. A step to the side would take them down the cliffs to certain death. Many of his men died that night by falling down the cliffs but without making a sound. Finally that passage made Alexander’s men bypass the men of Ariobarzanes and emerge in their rear. Despite being attacked from the rear and having only less than 2000 men, Ariobarzanes did not try to escape and had a hard fought battle with Alexanders men and they could go ahead only when all his men including Ariobarzanes were slain. 

Ariobarzanes fought and died with valour unlike his Emperor who ran away from battle the moment he lost it. Along with Ariobarzanes died his valorous sister Utab fighting to the last.   

 

HOW DID CHRISTIANITY TAKE ROOT IN THE BEGINING? WHAT DOES IT SAY

 

Today Christianity has the most number of followers in the world numbering about 2.3 billion. The crucifixion of Jesus happened sometime around 30AD, but only about 350 years later Christianity was accepted by the Roman Empire.  So why did it gain so much following and so much prominence? For that we have to check the background of the Roman Empire which controlled all of Europe then. Augustus Caesar was the Emperor of Rome till 14 AD and thereafter the Emperor was Tiberius Caesar. Jesus Christ received no royal patronage as long as he lived.

The Roman Empire was built on blood and battle. War was an accepted part of life then and spared no one including the families. The families of those losing the battle and the other men who survived the war were either employed by the Romans as slaves or were sold as such. There was total oppression of the people. By the time of Christ, the so called Roman senate became redundant and was ignored by the Emperors. A slave’s life had no value and they are treated more like cattle than humans. They were forced to fight each other to death in order to provide entertainment to the people.

It is estimated that in the 1^st century AD at the time of Jesus the Roman Empire had a population between 50-60 million of which roughly about 10 million were enslaved.  

Even among the freemen there was a distinction. If they belonged to newly taken areas despite being freemen their rights are restricted. Only their children had the real rights freemen enjoyed. These were the conditions at the time of Tiberius Caesar. So the slaves faced utter repression and lived without any hope and even the newly added freemen too had restricted rights.  

So for about 25% of the Roman population life was not good at all and for the slaves it was sheer misery. Such a state of affairs does bring forth a reaction and that reaction came in with Christianity. Jesus’s father Joseph was only a limited freeman as he was a Jew.

From the absolute oppression at that time Christianity preached exactly the opposite; There is but one God and Jesus was the son of God, leave all violence and bear with anyone who oppresses you with calm and faith in God. Never raise a finger against those men and if they hit you on one cheek, then show them the other. Always help others and spread the word of God to them.  Love everyone despite whatever they do to you.

So Christianity is an extremely pacifist religion which does not know anything called aggression. It believes that everyone is equal before God and only by doing good deeds, preaching the people about the greatness and the kingdom of God a Christian would be pardoned by god for his sins. All the first `12 disciples of Jesus were Jews and therefore not full free men.

It is a great irony that followers of such a religion which preaches to love others unconditionally could go into the crusades on a killing spree. By doing that they have completely violated all the precepts set down by Jesus.

FOLLWING ARE SOME OF THE MAIN TEACHINGS OF JESUS

There are some important teachings of Jesus that may be difficult to follow for Christians but they form the core of his teachings:

1.       Luke 16:13-You cannot serve both God and money. Jesus makes it clear that it is not possible for us to fully love and serve God and money at the same time. 

2.       Luke 6:27-28, 35-Love and pray for your enemies-Jesus encourages and commands that his followers both love and pray for those who actively oppose what he and his followers stand for, and practice. 

3.       Luke 6:29-Turn the other cheek-When someone hurts you or insulted you, then simply take the beating or hurt and respond with kindness and love. 

4.       Luke 9:23-Deny Self, take up Christ-like suffering-His followers must deny themselves, take up the suffering for Jesus and follow him. Suffering brings life, denying self brings life, losing  life means finding it. 

5.       Luke 9:57-62, 14:26, 21:16-17-Following Jesus is more important than family. Jesus says “ If you want to be my disciple, you must by comparison, hate everyone else—your father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, and yes even your own life, Otherwise you cannot be my disciple”.

6.      Mathew 7:12, Luke 6:31-Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. This is perhaps one of the greatest sayings of Jesus. Just treat others as you yourself would like to be treated. This psalm gives a perfect moral standing on which to base ones actions on others. We would not like any harm to come to us, so never harm anyone, we want to be happy, so make others happy and so on.      

7.       Mathew 7:13, 13:50, 25:46-Hell is real and most people are headed there. Jesus says “Do you pray every day for the unbelievers? Do you talk about God with them often and purposefully? Do you actually share the good news with them? 

8.       Luke 21:17-We cannot be loved & accepted by both Jesus and the World-Jesus said Everyone would hate you because you are my followers which means as per Paul “I am not trying to win the approval of people, but of God. If pleasing people were my goal I would not be Christ’s servant”. 

9.       Mathew 5:14-15-Forgive others, or God would not forgive you. Jesus said “If you forgive others who sin against you your heavenly father would forgive you. But if you refuse to forgive others your father would not forgive your sins. 

10.   Luke 12:8-9, Mathew 10:32-Deny Jesus before men, get denied by him before God-Jesus says “ I tell you the truth , everyone who acknowledges me publicly here on earth, the Son of man will also acknowledge in the presence of Gods Angels.

VENEZUELA.- US MEDDLING.

 

Venezuela rests on the northernmost tip of South America with the Caribbean Sea and North Atlantic Ocean in the north. On the west it is bordered by Colombia and on the east by Guyana and in the south by Brazil.  It has a land area of about 916,000 Sq. Km and had a population of 30 million. A vast majority of its people live in the North in its cities and its capital Caracas. 92.6% of Venezuela is Christian.

Venezuela was colonised by Spain in the year 1522 AD. It became independent from the yoke of Spain in 1811 AD itself and was part of the Columbian republic. It separated as a sovereign country in the year 1830. In the 19^th century Venezuela suffered from political turmoil and autocracy and was ruled by military dictatorships till the mid-20th century. From 1958 onwards, the country had a series of Democratic governments and the period had economic prosperity.

Economic shocks in the 1980’s and 90’s led to major political unrest. The collapse of confidence of the people in political parties was seen in the 1998 Presidential election. In 1999, a new constitution was made by the constituent assembly and was ratified. The government then started populist social welfare policies as the Oil prices were then soaring. The earlier years of the regime did see reduce in economic disparity and inequality. The poverty again started to increase rapidly from 2010 onwards. The 2013 Presidential election led to another crisis as it was disputed and there were widespread protests which continue to this day. First the Chavez and then Maduro administrations shifted from Democracy into an authoritarian state. Nicolos Maduro became the President of Venezuela in the year 2013 where he won 51% of the vote. The opposition contested the vote but it was rechecked and ratified by the SC.

Venezuela has the world’s largest known oil reserves and is fully dependent on exports of oil which was to the tune of 86% of its export share. Its economy was o dependent on oil that after the oil fell steeply from USD 100 to USD 40, Venezuela got into deep trouble and its economy got into recession. In 2015, Venezuela’s inflation had crossed 100%. Between 2014 and 2024 about 7.7 million people left Venezuela comprising of 25% of its population.

In 2016 Maduro declared an emergency and took more powers. The situation in Venezuela worsened further creating shortages even for food. In 2017 Maduro banned opposition parties form contesting elections. In 2017 the Trump government imposed mores sanctions on Venezuela and has frozen the USD 22 billion assets held overseas by Venezuela. These sanctions were responsible for a 59% decline in Venezuelan oil production compounding the crisis further.

Maduro won the 2018 election with a 68% vote share. However, that was challenged by Argentina, Colombia, Chile, Brazil, Canada, Germany, France and the USA. What I fail to understand here is that how can other countries challenge and election in another country. It is like us challenging an election in the US, does not make any sense at all.   

Venezuela has the largest oil reserves in the world estimated at 303 billion barrels. The US companies first developed the oil reserves in Venezuela but they were nationalised by the Venezuelan government in the 1970’s. Venezuela now earns only a fraction of the revenue compared to the revenue it earned earlier due to sanctions by the US. So the idea is to remove Maduro and install a pro US government so that they can grab the oil. Venezuela could export only USD 4 billion worth of oil in the year 2023 which is far far less than that of Saudi Arabia which is 181 billion USD. Place restriction on a country that is already in trouble and choke the exports of its main commodity so that the economy of the country is finished. The US is nothing l3ess on this than China on Taiwan. If the US does this, then why should not China grab Taiwan?

The following is what the Trump aide Stephen Miller tweeted on X.

American sweat, ingenuity and toil created the oil industry in Venezuela. Its tyrannical expropriation was the largest recorded theft of American wealth and property. These pillaged assets were then used to fund terrorism and flood our streets with killers, mercenaries and drugs.

The US gathered the largest military force in the region of the coast of Venezuela and also carried out multiple strikes on boats which the US claims as carrying drugs, of course without providing any proof. They are now out to grab Venezuelan oil in the guise of controlling drug trafficking.

The above tweet clearly means that the US is going to grab all that oil now. Just because the American companies developed the wells, they claim it as their own.

The USA has finished off Venezuela, and I think this is the worst type of robbery if it grabs Venezuelan oil. China should immediately garb Taiwan then. After all both are brothers going hand in hand. The only difference is the US makes noises about democracy, freedom of expression and so on. Ultimately what it does is this. China at least says Taiwan belongs to it and it is peopled by the Chinese. Nothing of the sort is between the US and Venezuela.

When the world becomes Unipolar this is what happens, might becomes right, because there is none to check that.