NEW DELHI: In an overnight U-turn, India has decided to go ahead with sending a military delegation to China next week but curtailed it to 15 members, instead of the original 30, after Beijing refused to issue a visa to an IAF officer, who hails from Arunachal Pradesh.
The 15-member tri-Service delegation will leave for China on Sunday, as was scheduled earlier, to hold talks with their People's Liberation Army (PLA) counterparts as well as visit military establishments in Beijing, Nanjing and Shanghai from January 10 to 13, said officials on Saturday.
Group Captain M Panging, the chief operations officer at the Sukhoi-30MKI fighter airbase at Tezpur, will, however, not be part of the truncated delegation. The visa denial to Group Captain Panging had led to the delegation's visit being put on hold on Friday, with the defence and external affairs ministries speaking in different voices, as reported by TOI.
Given its over-cautious attitude about not doing anything to ruffle a prickly Beijing, India in the past has avoided sending officials hailing from Arunachal Pradesh for defence and other exchanges with China. The defence establishment seems to have inadvertently included Group Captain Panging in the 30-member delegation, which included eight officers each from Army, Navy and IAF as well as six from the integrated defence staff, much to the external affairs ministry's consternation.
Consequently, a 15-member delegation, led by an air vice marshal, will now be heading for China as "a reciprocal visit" to the one made by a 29-member PLA delegation here in the last week of December. This was one of the ``net outcomes" of the 4th India-China annual defence dialogue, held in New Delhi on December 9, which had decided to enhance "the range and scope of bilateral exchanges at various levels'' as a confidence-building measure between the world's two largest armies.
If the delegation's visit next week had been called off, it would have been the second time in less than two years that India would have taken such a step. Earlier, in July 2010, India had frozen all military exchanges with China after Beijing had denied a proper stamped visa to the then Northern Army commander Lt-General B S Jaswal on the grounds that he was commanding forces in the ``disputed and sensitive'' region of Jammu and Kashmir. The ice was broken only after an Indian delegation, led by Major-General Gurmeet Singh, commanding a Rashtriya Rifles division in J&K, visited Beijing in last June.
The 15-member tri-Service delegation will leave for China on Sunday, as was scheduled earlier, to hold talks with their People's Liberation Army (PLA) counterparts as well as visit military establishments in Beijing, Nanjing and Shanghai from January 10 to 13, said officials on Saturday.
Group Captain M Panging, the chief operations officer at the Sukhoi-30MKI fighter airbase at Tezpur, will, however, not be part of the truncated delegation. The visa denial to Group Captain Panging had led to the delegation's visit being put on hold on Friday, with the defence and external affairs ministries speaking in different voices, as reported by TOI.
Given its over-cautious attitude about not doing anything to ruffle a prickly Beijing, India in the past has avoided sending officials hailing from Arunachal Pradesh for defence and other exchanges with China. The defence establishment seems to have inadvertently included Group Captain Panging in the 30-member delegation, which included eight officers each from Army, Navy and IAF as well as six from the integrated defence staff, much to the external affairs ministry's consternation.
Consequently, a 15-member delegation, led by an air vice marshal, will now be heading for China as "a reciprocal visit" to the one made by a 29-member PLA delegation here in the last week of December. This was one of the ``net outcomes" of the 4th India-China annual defence dialogue, held in New Delhi on December 9, which had decided to enhance "the range and scope of bilateral exchanges at various levels'' as a confidence-building measure between the world's two largest armies.
If the delegation's visit next week had been called off, it would have been the second time in less than two years that India would have taken such a step. Earlier, in July 2010, India had frozen all military exchanges with China after Beijing had denied a proper stamped visa to the then Northern Army commander Lt-General B S Jaswal on the grounds that he was commanding forces in the ``disputed and sensitive'' region of Jammu and Kashmir. The ice was broken only after an Indian delegation, led by Major-General Gurmeet Singh, commanding a Rashtriya Rifles division in J&K, visited Beijing in last June.
Japanese car maker Toyota today launched a new version of its hybrid sedan Prius in India that is priced between Rs 27.39 lakh and Rs 29.41 lakh (ex-showroom, Delhi).
The company, which is present in India through a joint venture with the Kirloskar Group, had first introduced the world's best selling hybrid car in 2010.
'The introduction of the new Prius is our sincere effort to bring in advanced hybrid technology to India to develop such market here,' Toyota Kirlosakar Motor (TKM) Deputy Managing Director (Commercial) Shekar Viswanathan told reporters at the 11th Auto Expo here.
The new Prius will have solar ventilation system in addition to the exiting battery technology, he added.
The company, which is present in India through a joint venture with the Kirloskar Group, had first introduced the world's best selling hybrid car in 2010.
'The introduction of the new Prius is our sincere effort to bring in advanced hybrid technology to India to develop such market here,' Toyota Kirlosakar Motor (TKM) Deputy Managing Director (Commercial) Shekar Viswanathan told reporters at the 11th Auto Expo here.
The new Prius will have solar ventilation system in addition to the exiting battery technology, he added.
British Prime Minister David Cameron on Friday criticised the making of a film showing his predecessor Margaret Thatcher as a vulnerable elderly woman.
"The Iron Lady", featuring American Meryl Streep in the main Thatcher role, opens in British cinemas on Friday. Cameron praised Streep but suggested the film should not have been made while Thatcher was still alive and suffering from dementia.
"It's a fantastic piece of acting by Meryl Streep. You can't help wondering, why do we have to have this film right now. It is a film much more about ageing and elements of dementia rather about than an amazing prime minister," he told BBC Radio 4.
"My sort of sense was a great piece of acting, a really staggering piece of acting, but a film I wish they could have made another day," he added.
The film shows Thatcher, now 86, as a confused and lonely old woman looking back on moments from her momentous but highly divisive political career.
Thatcher, Britain's first woman prime minister, ruled from 1979-1990, leading Britain into war with Argentina over the Falkand Islands and taming powerful trade unions at home.
Cameron's reservations are shared by other members of his Conservative Party, which Thatcher once led and which currently heads Britain's coalition government.
"Meryl Streep should probably get an Oscar for an amazing portrayal (but) there was too much of a concentration on Lady Thatcher's dementia and not enough on her life story, her achievements," Conservative lawmaker Louise Mensch told Reuters.
Former Conservative politician Michael Portillo told the BBC he "felt uncomfortable" about scenes highlighting her illness.
One-time Thatcher rival Michael Heseltine, who once challenged her for the Conservative leadership, took a similar view.
"I think Mrs Thatcher was a formidable prime minister and to produce a film in her later stages of life depicting the problems of advanced old age, I find extremely distasteful," he told Britain's Daily Telegraph newspaper.
WASHINGTON: Popular US first lady Michelle Obama has had testy relationships with some top White House advisers, and at times pushed the president to pursue politically difficult causes like healthcare and immigration reform, according to a new book.
"The Obamas" by New York Times reporter Jodi Kantor, paints Mrs. Obama as "an expert motivator and charmer" and "an increasingly canny political player" ahead of the 2012 presidential election, expected to be a tough fight for her husband, President Barack Obama.
Mrs. Obama fought against political tactics espoused by Rahm Emanuel, her husband's former chief of staff, and Robert Gibbs, the former White House press secretary, the book said, pushing her husband to replace advisers who she felt were "too insular, not strategic enough," according to excerpts from the book on the newspaper's website.
"'She feels as if our rudder isn't set right,'" the book quotes Barack Obama as telling aides.
The Obamas did not speak to Kantor for the book, which was based on interviews with more than 30 current and former staff members. It will be released on Tuesday.
The White House on Friday called the book "an overdramatization of old news" and said Kantor had not spoken to the Obamas since 2009.
"The emotions, thoughts and private moments described in the book, though often seemingly ascribed to the President and First Lady, reflect little more than the author's own thoughts," said Eric Schultz, a White House spokesman.
The book says Mrs. Obama, known for her campaign to promote healthy eating and exercise, initially sought a low-key role in the White House, and even considered postponing her move to Washington from Chicago after the 2008 election.
She was worried about being the first African-American first lady, and felt "everyone was waiting for a black woman to make a mistake," said a former aide quoted in the book.
Tensions arose between Mrs. Obama and Gibbs, who worried about public missteps. Valerie Jarrett, senior adviser to the president and a friend of the couple, tried to moderate, the book said.
Mrs. Obama supported her husband's "instincts for ambitious but unpopular initiatives like the overhaul of health care and immigration laws, casting herself as a foil to aides more intent on preserving congressional seats and poll numbers," the excerpts say.
"She does think there are worse things than losing an election," said Susan Sher, her former chief of staff, in the book. "Being true to yourself, for her, is definitely more important."
WASHINGTON: President Barack Obama kicked off an effort to encourage US businesses to keep jobs at home instead of outsourcing them overseas, as he rolled out a new election-year theme on Saturday aimed at courting middle-class voters.
In his weekly radio and video address, Obama previewed an event he will hold next week with business executives to highlight the advantages of investing in the United States.
"We'll hear from business leaders who are bringing jobs back home and see how we can help other businesses follow their lead," Obama said.
The White House forum on " Insourcing American Jobs" will be held on Wednesday. Executives from more than a dozen companies will attend, including padlock maker Master Lock, furniture company Lincolnton Furniture, software application developer GalaxE Solutions, and chemicals company DuPont.
The emphasis on keeping U.S. jobs at home is in line with a populist economic message championed by Obama that could play well with union workers, whose support the Democratic president will need to win re-election in November.
The White House sees an increasing trend of companies deciding to "insource" jobs and invest in U.S.-based plants and factories, according to a White House official. It wants to encourage more businesses to follow that trend, the official said.
The practice of U.S. companies moving jobs to foreign countries such as India and China, where labor is cheaper, is a source of concern to many U.S. workers.
The issue resonates strongly in Midwest industrial states such as Ohio and Michigan that have been hard hit, not only by the 2007-2009 economic crisis, but also by years of shrinkage in the manufacturing jobs sector. Many of those states are battlegrounds that are vital to Obama's re-election hopes.
Republicans vying to challenge Obama in November, including front-runner Mitt Romney, have hammered him over his economic stewardship. They contend that his regulatory policies, including new rules for Wall Street and the overhaul of the healthcare system, have discouraged investment. They also say his fiscal stimulus measures have not succeeded in bringing down high unemployment.
But the White House was encouraged by the December jobs report, released on Friday, which showed a drop in the jobless rate to 8.5 percent, its lowest level in nearly three years.
"We're heading in the right direction. And we're not going to let up," Obama said.
In his weekly radio and video address, Obama previewed an event he will hold next week with business executives to highlight the advantages of investing in the United States.
"We'll hear from business leaders who are bringing jobs back home and see how we can help other businesses follow their lead," Obama said.
The White House forum on " Insourcing American Jobs" will be held on Wednesday. Executives from more than a dozen companies will attend, including padlock maker Master Lock, furniture company Lincolnton Furniture, software application developer GalaxE Solutions, and chemicals company DuPont.
The emphasis on keeping U.S. jobs at home is in line with a populist economic message championed by Obama that could play well with union workers, whose support the Democratic president will need to win re-election in November.
The White House sees an increasing trend of companies deciding to "insource" jobs and invest in U.S.-based plants and factories, according to a White House official. It wants to encourage more businesses to follow that trend, the official said.
The practice of U.S. companies moving jobs to foreign countries such as India and China, where labor is cheaper, is a source of concern to many U.S. workers.
The issue resonates strongly in Midwest industrial states such as Ohio and Michigan that have been hard hit, not only by the 2007-2009 economic crisis, but also by years of shrinkage in the manufacturing jobs sector. Many of those states are battlegrounds that are vital to Obama's re-election hopes.
Republicans vying to challenge Obama in November, including front-runner Mitt Romney, have hammered him over his economic stewardship. They contend that his regulatory policies, including new rules for Wall Street and the overhaul of the healthcare system, have discouraged investment. They also say his fiscal stimulus measures have not succeeded in bringing down high unemployment.
But the White House was encouraged by the December jobs report, released on Friday, which showed a drop in the jobless rate to 8.5 percent, its lowest level in nearly three years.
"We're heading in the right direction. And we're not going to let up," Obama said.
Musharraf, who resigned in 2008 in disgrace, has said he plans to return to Pakistan this month, despite possible arrest, in order to participate in a parliamentary election due by 2013.
On Sunday, he is scheduled to address a rally via video in Pakistan's biggest city and commercial hub, Karachi, sources in his recently formed All Pakistan Muslim League said.
Speaking in favour of relations with Israel could make Musharraf more unpopular, especially among militants who made several attempts on his life with bombings because of his support for the U.S. "war on terror" following the 9/11 attacks.
Those same groups want the destruction of Israel.
For Pakistan blog: click blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/
"There is nothing to lose by trying to get on Israel's good side," Musharraf, a former army chief, told the liberal Israeli newspaper Haaretz in an interview carried on its website.
"Pakistan also needs to keep readjusting its diplomatic stand toward Israel based on the mere fact that it exists and is not going away."
That kind of talk could comfort Israel, which is increasingly nervous because Islamist groups opposed to the Jewish state have been making political gains in Arab states following revolts that brought down autocrats in the region.
Israeli officials were not immediately available for comment on Musharraf's remarks.
CONSPIRACY THEORIES ABOUND
Pakistan has been a staunch supporter of demands for a Palestinian state. Pakistan and Israel, however, have maintained covert contacts for decades, officials have said.
According to an October 2009 U.S. diplomatic cable published by WikiLeaks, the head of Pakistan's main spy agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence, said he had contacted Israel officials to head off potential attacks on Israeli targets in India.
A senior ISI official said the agency has never established any contacts not authorised by the government and which were not in the interests of Pakistan.
Many Pakistanis think Israel and the United States are constantly plotting against Pakistan -- a belief that inspires abundant conspiracy theories. Pakistani media routinely rail against Jews and Israeli plots.
Musharraf, who came to power in a 1999 coup, said Israel's influence in the United States and its relations with Pakistan's main rival, India, can help Pakistan gain influence abroad.
The first public talks between Israel and Pakistan were held in 2005.
They were described as a "huge breakthrough" by then Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom, but sparked fury in Pakistan, a nuclear-armed South Asian nation that is home to some of the world's most feared militant groups.
"I felt I needed to test the waters in Pakistan when it comes to Israel," Musharraf said.
"We have been anti-Israel in Pakistan because of Palestine ... But I believe in realism and in assessing ground realities."
Musharraf left office, and Pakistan, after his allies lost a 2008 general election and he faced an impeachment motion by the new coalition government for invoking emergency rule and suspending the constitution.
A Pakistani court issued an arrest warrant for Musharraf in February 2011 over accusations that he failed to provide adequate security to former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, who was assassinated in December 2007.
Musharraf was declared a fugitive of law after he failed to respond to a court summons.
He has denied suggestions that he, his security agencies, or the military were involved in Bhutto's murder.
Washington For the second time in less than two months, US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has said that the country is facing challenges from rising powers in Asia — China in particular and also includes India — in 21st century.
“We have got the challenges of dealing with rising powers in Asia. We have got the challenge of, you know, dealing with countries like Russia, rising countries that – like India and others.
“All of that represents the kind of challenges that we are going to have to deal with in this world of the 21st century,” Panetta told PBS News Hour in an interview.
A transcript of the interview, taken yesterday, was provided by PBS News Hour.
Panetta’s remarks came within hours of the Pentagon releasing its defense strategic review which said that the US is investing in long-term strategic partnership with India.
The strategy document unveiled by the US President Barack Obama identified China as one of the major security threat to the US in the long term and puts Asia on a bigger priority.
“The United States is investing in a long-term strategic partnership with India to support its ability to serve as a regional economic anchor and provider of security in the broader Indian Ocean region,” said the strategy document.
Earlier in the day at a Pentagon news conference, Panetta had said that the US faces challenges from rising powers in Asia, but had not named any country.
“We’re facing challenges from rising powers in Asia. And we’re facing a situation in the Middle East that continues to be in turmoil.
“So, what we’ve got to do is to be able to have a flexible, adaptable, agile force that can deal with a myriad of challenges in today’s world.
“That’s what we’ve got to be able to develop,” he told the PBS in his interview.
This is for the second time in recent months that Panetta has identified India as a challenge among rising powers in Asia.
“We face the threats from rising powers — China, India, others — that we have to always be aware of and try to make sure that we always have sufficient force protection out there in the Pacific to make sure they know we’re never going anywhere,” Panetta had said on 17 November.
However, Panetta’s spokesman George Little had said that the Defense Secretary strongly values a close relationship with India and sees it as a nation of increasing prominence and power.
“The Secretary strongly values a close military relationship with India, which he sees as a nation of
increasing prominence and power. He doesn’t view India as a threat,” Little had said.
“The United States and India work together on a regular basis to find ways of cooperating around common security interests. We’re committed to pursuing even stronger cooperation in the future,” he had pointed out.
In his PBS interview, Panetta said that the US wants to build relationship with China.
“Well, the United States is a Pacific power. And we have always had a presence in the Pacific. China is a Pacific power as well. And we recognise that.
“And, frankly, my view is that we need to continue to work with China, continue to build a relationship with China, because they are a power, because our economy — our economies are related, because there are other relationships that we have in that area,” Panetta had said.
He said US has a common interest with China in dealing with the threats that exist in the Pacific, “stability of Korea, one example, the whole issue of being able to have commerce move freely through the oceans in that area, the whole issue of nuclear proliferation, the whole issue of dealing with humanitarian crises and disasters.”
He added, “All of these issues in the Pacific and the possibility that any one of those could develop the kind of challenge that would demand US power being invoked, that’s the reason we have got to focus an emphasis on the Pacific region.”
Earlier in the day, the State Department spokesperson, Victoria Nuland, told reporters that the US President Barack Obama, and the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton “desire for a strong, growing, robust partnership with India”.
“We have got the challenges of dealing with rising powers in Asia. We have got the challenge of, you know, dealing with countries like Russia, rising countries that – like India and others.
“All of that represents the kind of challenges that we are going to have to deal with in this world of the 21st century,” Panetta told PBS News Hour in an interview.
A transcript of the interview, taken yesterday, was provided by PBS News Hour.
Panetta’s remarks came within hours of the Pentagon releasing its defense strategic review which said that the US is investing in long-term strategic partnership with India.
The strategy document unveiled by the US President Barack Obama identified China as one of the major security threat to the US in the long term and puts Asia on a bigger priority.
“The United States is investing in a long-term strategic partnership with India to support its ability to serve as a regional economic anchor and provider of security in the broader Indian Ocean region,” said the strategy document.
Earlier in the day at a Pentagon news conference, Panetta had said that the US faces challenges from rising powers in Asia, but had not named any country.
“We’re facing challenges from rising powers in Asia. And we’re facing a situation in the Middle East that continues to be in turmoil.
“So, what we’ve got to do is to be able to have a flexible, adaptable, agile force that can deal with a myriad of challenges in today’s world.
“That’s what we’ve got to be able to develop,” he told the PBS in his interview.
This is for the second time in recent months that Panetta has identified India as a challenge among rising powers in Asia.
“We face the threats from rising powers — China, India, others — that we have to always be aware of and try to make sure that we always have sufficient force protection out there in the Pacific to make sure they know we’re never going anywhere,” Panetta had said on 17 November.
However, Panetta’s spokesman George Little had said that the Defense Secretary strongly values a close relationship with India and sees it as a nation of increasing prominence and power.
“The Secretary strongly values a close military relationship with India, which he sees as a nation of
increasing prominence and power. He doesn’t view India as a threat,” Little had said.
“The United States and India work together on a regular basis to find ways of cooperating around common security interests. We’re committed to pursuing even stronger cooperation in the future,” he had pointed out.
In his PBS interview, Panetta said that the US wants to build relationship with China.
“Well, the United States is a Pacific power. And we have always had a presence in the Pacific. China is a Pacific power as well. And we recognise that.
“And, frankly, my view is that we need to continue to work with China, continue to build a relationship with China, because they are a power, because our economy — our economies are related, because there are other relationships that we have in that area,” Panetta had said.
He said US has a common interest with China in dealing with the threats that exist in the Pacific, “stability of Korea, one example, the whole issue of being able to have commerce move freely through the oceans in that area, the whole issue of nuclear proliferation, the whole issue of dealing with humanitarian crises and disasters.”
He added, “All of these issues in the Pacific and the possibility that any one of those could develop the kind of challenge that would demand US power being invoked, that’s the reason we have got to focus an emphasis on the Pacific region.”
Earlier in the day, the State Department spokesperson, Victoria Nuland, told reporters that the US President Barack Obama, and the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton “desire for a strong, growing, robust partnership with India”.
SYDNEY: The historic 100th international ton continued to elude Sachin Tendulkar as India slumped to an embarrassing innings and 68-run defeat in the second Test against Australia, who have now taken an unassailable 2-0 lead in the four-match series.
India lost the first Test at the MCG by 122 runs and now for the second successive time they have lost with more than a day to spare. They have now suffered the ignominy of losing half as many as six consecutive Test matches on foreign soil.
Resuming at 114/2, India were all out for 400 with 25-odd overs of the fourth day's play still remaining.
There were as many as four half centuries in the Indian innings ------ Gautam Gambhir (83), Sachin Tendulkar (80), VVS Laxman (66) and Ravichandran Ashwin (62) -- yet none produced a gritty effort which could take the match into the fifth day.
Tendulkar again came close to the historic milestone of 100 international centuries but was dismissed by part-timer Michael Clarke to break a few million Indian hearts.
Even though the visitors chalked up 400 runs in their second innings, 114 runs came for the last three wickets by when the match was as good as over.
Ben Hilfenhaus ripped the heart out of India's batting, claiming Virender Sehwag, Rahul Dravid, Laxman and Mahendra Singh Dhoni as his victims for figures of 5/106.
Peter Siddle took 2/88 while James Pattinson, Michael Clarke and Nathan Lyon shared the other three wickets.
The two teams will now travel to Perth for the third Test beginning January 13.
The morning session had promised some rearguard action by the Indians as 129 runs accrued for the loss of a solitary wicket of Gautam Gambhir.
Gambhir, overnight 68, was out on 83 when his attempted push towards mid-on only resulted in a slice to point where David Warner accepted the simple chance with glee. The southpaw batted for 217 minutes and faced 142 balls slamming 11 fours.
The opener from Delhi once glided James Pattinson through slips and then hammered a four off the backfoot against him before ending his innings in a disappointing manner.
Tendulkar, batting on overnight score of 8, had once spent 51 balls without scoring last evening but was in an aggressive mood to start with.
He reeled off a series of fours off Ben Hilfenhaus, five in all and all in the point region, as he quickly moved towards his half-century.
VVS Laxman, who came to the crease with scores of 2, 1, 2 from three innings, was dropped on nought by wicketkeeper Brad Haddin down the leg side off a Siddle delivery.
The right-hander then got into his stride and what helped him was the introduction of off-spinner Nathan Lyon into the attack.
Laxman began with a flicked four off Lyon and then cover drove Siddle through the covers from the other end. He then cover drove the off-spinner to get his innings underway.
Due to the enterprise of the batsmen this morning, Indians added 79 runs from 13 overs in the first hour's play.
Tendulkar, from the other end, reached his half-century with flick for two to fine leg. In took the master batsman 89 balls and 138 minutes to reach his half-century with seven fours.
Tendulkar took only 48 balls to add 42 runs to his overnight score this morning.
Laxman and Tendulkar looked in good touch, the former cutting Hilfenhaus smartly and Tendulkar repeating the dose against Pattinson. The senior-most player also played his trademark uppercut off Pattinson.
It was a satisfactory pre-lunch session for the visitors who put on 129 runs off 27 overs. Tendulkar, unbeaten on 70, was looking good for his hundred.
But the floodgates were opened once Tendulkar nicked a delivery from part-time left-arm spin of Michael Clarke to Michael Hussey at first slip via the gloves of wicketkeeper Brad Haddin.
Tendulkar had added 10 more runs to his lunch time score through ones and twos when he came forward almost in a pre-meditated manner to Clarke and could do no better than edge a chance.
Australians had resorted to bowling Clarke and Michael Hussey from the two ends in a bid to claim the second new ball as quickly as possible. Tendulkar's scalp, just an over before the second new ball was claimed, was an unexpected gift to the hosts.
Tendulkar made his 80 runs from 140 balls in 215 minutes hitting nine boundaries.
The second new ball was now claimed and three wickets were now to fall off 22 deliveries. Hilfenhaus, that tormentor of the Indian batting in the series, made one leave Laxman's defensive blade and just brushed his off-stump to take out the bails.
Laxman (66) batted for 132 minutes and 119 balls and struck seven fours. Skipper Dhoni (2) offered a return catch to Hilfenhaus which needed television replays to affirm that the catch wasn't a bumped offer.
Virat Kohli (9), continuing his miserable form in Test cricket, tried to flick a delivery from Pattinson but it kept low and found him plumb in-front of the stumps.
Ashwin and Zaheer Khan then hit out lustily, more so the left-arm paceman who once clobbered a six and four off successive deliveries from Pattinson.
The 50-run stand for the eighth wicket duly arrived when Zaheer Khan stroked tweaker Nathan Lyon through the covers for three. It took them 44 balls and a mere 32 minutes for the landmark. Zaheer's pyrotechnics finally ended when he lobbed a catch to Shaun Marsh at point, having made his 35 runs from 26 balls and hit five fours and a six.
At the tea break, Indians were 351/8, still 117 runs adrift. India's tail wagged a little in the final session, Ashwin doing his batting average no harm with a well-compiled half century.
After 42 runs were put for the ninth wicket, Ishant Sharma was ruled leg before out to off-spinner Lyon. Ashwin was the last man out for 62 made off 76 balls with nine fours and a si
India lost the first Test at the MCG by 122 runs and now for the second successive time they have lost with more than a day to spare. They have now suffered the ignominy of losing half as many as six consecutive Test matches on foreign soil.
Resuming at 114/2, India were all out for 400 with 25-odd overs of the fourth day's play still remaining.
There were as many as four half centuries in the Indian innings ------ Gautam Gambhir (83), Sachin Tendulkar (80), VVS Laxman (66) and Ravichandran Ashwin (62) -- yet none produced a gritty effort which could take the match into the fifth day.
Tendulkar again came close to the historic milestone of 100 international centuries but was dismissed by part-timer Michael Clarke to break a few million Indian hearts.
Even though the visitors chalked up 400 runs in their second innings, 114 runs came for the last three wickets by when the match was as good as over.
Ben Hilfenhaus ripped the heart out of India's batting, claiming Virender Sehwag, Rahul Dravid, Laxman and Mahendra Singh Dhoni as his victims for figures of 5/106.
Peter Siddle took 2/88 while James Pattinson, Michael Clarke and Nathan Lyon shared the other three wickets.
The two teams will now travel to Perth for the third Test beginning January 13.
The morning session had promised some rearguard action by the Indians as 129 runs accrued for the loss of a solitary wicket of Gautam Gambhir.
Gambhir, overnight 68, was out on 83 when his attempted push towards mid-on only resulted in a slice to point where David Warner accepted the simple chance with glee. The southpaw batted for 217 minutes and faced 142 balls slamming 11 fours.
The opener from Delhi once glided James Pattinson through slips and then hammered a four off the backfoot against him before ending his innings in a disappointing manner.
Tendulkar, batting on overnight score of 8, had once spent 51 balls without scoring last evening but was in an aggressive mood to start with.
He reeled off a series of fours off Ben Hilfenhaus, five in all and all in the point region, as he quickly moved towards his half-century.
VVS Laxman, who came to the crease with scores of 2, 1, 2 from three innings, was dropped on nought by wicketkeeper Brad Haddin down the leg side off a Siddle delivery.
The right-hander then got into his stride and what helped him was the introduction of off-spinner Nathan Lyon into the attack.
Laxman began with a flicked four off Lyon and then cover drove Siddle through the covers from the other end. He then cover drove the off-spinner to get his innings underway.
Due to the enterprise of the batsmen this morning, Indians added 79 runs from 13 overs in the first hour's play.
Tendulkar, from the other end, reached his half-century with flick for two to fine leg. In took the master batsman 89 balls and 138 minutes to reach his half-century with seven fours.
Tendulkar took only 48 balls to add 42 runs to his overnight score this morning.
Laxman and Tendulkar looked in good touch, the former cutting Hilfenhaus smartly and Tendulkar repeating the dose against Pattinson. The senior-most player also played his trademark uppercut off Pattinson.
It was a satisfactory pre-lunch session for the visitors who put on 129 runs off 27 overs. Tendulkar, unbeaten on 70, was looking good for his hundred.
But the floodgates were opened once Tendulkar nicked a delivery from part-time left-arm spin of Michael Clarke to Michael Hussey at first slip via the gloves of wicketkeeper Brad Haddin.
Tendulkar had added 10 more runs to his lunch time score through ones and twos when he came forward almost in a pre-meditated manner to Clarke and could do no better than edge a chance.
Australians had resorted to bowling Clarke and Michael Hussey from the two ends in a bid to claim the second new ball as quickly as possible. Tendulkar's scalp, just an over before the second new ball was claimed, was an unexpected gift to the hosts.
Tendulkar made his 80 runs from 140 balls in 215 minutes hitting nine boundaries.
The second new ball was now claimed and three wickets were now to fall off 22 deliveries. Hilfenhaus, that tormentor of the Indian batting in the series, made one leave Laxman's defensive blade and just brushed his off-stump to take out the bails.
Laxman (66) batted for 132 minutes and 119 balls and struck seven fours. Skipper Dhoni (2) offered a return catch to Hilfenhaus which needed television replays to affirm that the catch wasn't a bumped offer.
Virat Kohli (9), continuing his miserable form in Test cricket, tried to flick a delivery from Pattinson but it kept low and found him plumb in-front of the stumps.
Ashwin and Zaheer Khan then hit out lustily, more so the left-arm paceman who once clobbered a six and four off successive deliveries from Pattinson.
The 50-run stand for the eighth wicket duly arrived when Zaheer Khan stroked tweaker Nathan Lyon through the covers for three. It took them 44 balls and a mere 32 minutes for the landmark. Zaheer's pyrotechnics finally ended when he lobbed a catch to Shaun Marsh at point, having made his 35 runs from 26 balls and hit five fours and a six.
At the tea break, Indians were 351/8, still 117 runs adrift. India's tail wagged a little in the final session, Ashwin doing his batting average no harm with a well-compiled half century.
After 42 runs were put for the ninth wicket, Ishant Sharma was ruled leg before out to off-spinner Lyon. Ashwin was the last man out for 62 made off 76 balls with nine fours and a si
The prosecutor in the trial of Egypt's Hosni Mubarak is seeking a death sentence for the former president and his security chief for killing protesters, the Associated Press reports.
"Retribution is the solution. Any fair judge must issue a death sentence for these defendants," said Mustafa Khater, one of a five-member prosecution team on the third and final day of the prosecution's opening statement. "We feel the spirits of the martyrs flying over this hall of sacred justice, and those who lost their sight by the bullets of the defendants are stumbling around it to reach the judge and demand fair retribution from those who attacked them," he said.
"The nation and the people are awaiting a word of justice and righteousness."
Mubarak's two sons, one-time heir apparent Gamal and Alaa, face corruption charges in the same trial along with their father and a close family friend who is a fugitive.
Mubarak, 83, stepped down on Feb. 11 after a nearly 30-year rule following an 18-day uprising.
Earlier in today's hearing, chief prosecutor Mustafa Suleiman said Mubarak was "politically and legally" responsible for the killing of the protesters and charged that the former president did nothing to stop the killings that he was aware of from meetings with aides, regional TV channels and reports by his security agencies.
He said Mubarak's security chief and co-defendant, former interior minister Habib el-Adly, authorized the use of live ammunition on orders from Mubarak,the AP reports.
"He (Mubarak) can never, as the top official, claim that he did not know what was going on," Suleiman told the court. "He is responsible for what happened and must bear the legal and political responsibility for what happened. It is irrational and illogical to assume that he did not know that protesters were being targeted."
"Retribution is the solution. Any fair judge must issue a death sentence for these defendants," said Mustafa Khater, one of a five-member prosecution team on the third and final day of the prosecution's opening statement. "We feel the spirits of the martyrs flying over this hall of sacred justice, and those who lost their sight by the bullets of the defendants are stumbling around it to reach the judge and demand fair retribution from those who attacked them," he said.
"The nation and the people are awaiting a word of justice and righteousness."
Mubarak's two sons, one-time heir apparent Gamal and Alaa, face corruption charges in the same trial along with their father and a close family friend who is a fugitive.
Mubarak, 83, stepped down on Feb. 11 after a nearly 30-year rule following an 18-day uprising.
Earlier in today's hearing, chief prosecutor Mustafa Suleiman said Mubarak was "politically and legally" responsible for the killing of the protesters and charged that the former president did nothing to stop the killings that he was aware of from meetings with aides, regional TV channels and reports by his security agencies.
He said Mubarak's security chief and co-defendant, former interior minister Habib el-Adly, authorized the use of live ammunition on orders from Mubarak,the AP reports.
"He (Mubarak) can never, as the top official, claim that he did not know what was going on," Suleiman told the court. "He is responsible for what happened and must bear the legal and political responsibility for what happened. It is irrational and illogical to assume that he did not know that protesters were being targeted."
(Reuters) - No one inflames British passions quite like Margaret Thatcher, the former prime minister whose biopic "The Iron Lady" has rekindled debate on her legacy ahead of the film's release on Friday.
Legions of admirers cast her as a pioneering politician whose bold policies rescued Britain from economic collapse, but equally numerous detractors see her as a heartless champion of free market orthodoxy at the expense of the poor.
Memories of her 1979-1990 rule have come into sharper focus for many Britons because the country is again grappling with high unemployment, spending cuts, tensions with Europe, union discontent and riots -- all features of the Thatcher years.
"Her legacy is enormous," said Conservative lawmaker John Whittingdale, who was once Thatcher's political secretary.
"She carried through policies that transformed Britain and indeed Britain's relationship with the world, which will never be reversed and nor would anyone contemplate reversing them."
He cited Thatcher's role in ending the Cold War through her alliance with then U.S. President Ronald Reagan, which along with her successful prosecution of the 1982 Falklands war with Argentina, bolstered British authority on the world stage.
Thatcher's admirers also credit her with turning around, through privatisations and deregulation, what they saw as a quasi-socialist British economy in steep decline and at the mercy of powerful unions when she first took office.
Her detractors point to the bitter and violent strikes when she took on the coalminers' union in 1984, riots in 1990 over her wildly unpopular Poll Tax, and swathes of industrial Britain abandoned to long-term unemployment and decline.
Her tenure became synonymous with the rise of the "yuppie" and a greedy, individualistic capitalist culture that many blame today for Britain's economic woes and lack of social cohesion.
"The legacy of Margaret Thatcher was one of division and conflict and the political encouragement of the 'greed is good' culture at the root of the banking crisis we are all paying a heavy price for today," said Bob Crow of the RMT rail union.
In a sign of her continuing ability to stoke controversy, more than 24,000 people have signed a tongue-in-cheek petition pushing for any state funeral for Thatcher to be privatised.
"This unique opportunity is an ideal way to cut government expense and further prove the merits of liberalised economics Baroness Thatcher spearheaded," the petition reads.
Thatcher is now 86, frail and suffering from dementia.
"FEMINISM IS POISON"
Thatcher's power to polarise makes it difficult for those trying to give a balanced account of her time in office.
"The thing that I noticed when I was making the film, is how fiery hot on both sides the feelings were. People wanted to hold her as this indelible icon or they wanted to regard her as a monster," Meryl Streep, who plays Thatcher in The Iron Lady, told Reuters.
Streep said she did not agree with many of Thatcher's policies but admired many of her personal qualities, a stance shared by many British people.
Thatcher broke entrenched gender and class barriers in her rise from humble beginnings as a grocer's daughter to leader of the centre-right Conservative Party and then prime minister.
"Big personalities will always make their mark," Conservative lawmaker Louise Mensch told Reuters.
"Thatcher was a woman succeeding in a man's world when it was unbelievably unusual ... Whoever the first woman president of the United States is, she will have a great debt to Margaret Thatcher," she added, speaking after seeing The Iron Lady in New York.
A bronze statue of Thatcher, pointing emphatically in her trademark power suit and power-set hairdo, is conspicuous among the otherwise exclusively male statues of former prime ministers in the ornate lobby adjoining parliament's debating chamber.
However, even Thatcher's potential as a role model for ambitious women is disputed, given that she surrounded herself with men throughout her career and did little to help any other woman break the glass ceiling.
"The feminists hate me, don't they? And I don't blame them. For I hate feminism. It is poison," Thatcher said, according to Paul Johnson, one her closest advisers, writing in Britain's centre-right Spectator magazine last year.
"WE REVERE HER"
Part of Thatcher's continuing ability to stoke passions is the enduring influence of her ideology on Conservative politicians and voters today, even among those too young to remember living under her rule.
The Conservatives are in power now, although Prime Minister David Cameron has been careful to differentiate himself from Thatcher with his "Big Society" mantra, which encourages grassroots community action as opposed to state intervention.
The slogan stands in sharp contrast to Thatcher's famous statement that "there is no such thing as society" -- although ironically, that quote was part of an interview in which she too was encouraging individuals not to rely too much on the state.
In a poll of Conservative Party members by the conservativehome website late last month, respondents put Thatcher at the top of a list of politicians that most closely represented their views, seven places ahead of Cameron.
In a wider survey in November, a YouGov/Sunday Times poll of 1,700 adults found Thatcher to be the greatest British leader since 1945, ahead even of wartime leader Winston Churchill.
Her ideology permeates current Conservative thinking, even among the younger members of parliament first elected in 2010, many of whom were children when she was in power.
"I certainly know that all my younger generation of colleagues ... believe she is one of the greatest political figures of the modern age and we revere her," Mensch said.
Like Thatcher taking harsh measures to rescue a faltering economy, Cameron's coalition government has made the deepest public spending cuts in a generation to tackle a big budget deficit, laying off thousands of public sector workers.
Also like Thatcher, Cameron has taken on the unions over pension reform and adopted a tough stance on Europe, garnering praise from his party's powerful Thatcherite wing by vetoing an EU treaty to rescue the euro.
Thatcher once said the currency was "bound to fail, economically, politically and indeed socially".
The debate over Thatcher's legacy is likely to rumble on among Britain's next generation of politicians, who like their predecessors, appear to either love or loathe the former leader.
"(She is) one of the most significant politicians of the 20th Century, an inspiration to my political belief in giving people aspirations and helping them to achieve them," Ben Howlett, who heads the Conservatives' youth wing, told Reuters.
Predictably, the head of Labour Students, the opposition Labour party's student body, takes a different view.
"There are alarming parallels between what Cameron is doing today and what Thatcher did in the 80s," said Olivia Bailey.
"Thatcher to me serves as both a warning and a motivation. A warning of the damage that can be done by Conservative ideology and a motivation to fight for the values held by the Labour Party - to fight to unite our society, not divide it."
Legions of admirers cast her as a pioneering politician whose bold policies rescued Britain from economic collapse, but equally numerous detractors see her as a heartless champion of free market orthodoxy at the expense of the poor.
Memories of her 1979-1990 rule have come into sharper focus for many Britons because the country is again grappling with high unemployment, spending cuts, tensions with Europe, union discontent and riots -- all features of the Thatcher years.
"Her legacy is enormous," said Conservative lawmaker John Whittingdale, who was once Thatcher's political secretary.
"She carried through policies that transformed Britain and indeed Britain's relationship with the world, which will never be reversed and nor would anyone contemplate reversing them."
He cited Thatcher's role in ending the Cold War through her alliance with then U.S. President Ronald Reagan, which along with her successful prosecution of the 1982 Falklands war with Argentina, bolstered British authority on the world stage.
Thatcher's admirers also credit her with turning around, through privatisations and deregulation, what they saw as a quasi-socialist British economy in steep decline and at the mercy of powerful unions when she first took office.
Her detractors point to the bitter and violent strikes when she took on the coalminers' union in 1984, riots in 1990 over her wildly unpopular Poll Tax, and swathes of industrial Britain abandoned to long-term unemployment and decline.
Her tenure became synonymous with the rise of the "yuppie" and a greedy, individualistic capitalist culture that many blame today for Britain's economic woes and lack of social cohesion.
"The legacy of Margaret Thatcher was one of division and conflict and the political encouragement of the 'greed is good' culture at the root of the banking crisis we are all paying a heavy price for today," said Bob Crow of the RMT rail union.
In a sign of her continuing ability to stoke controversy, more than 24,000 people have signed a tongue-in-cheek petition pushing for any state funeral for Thatcher to be privatised.
"This unique opportunity is an ideal way to cut government expense and further prove the merits of liberalised economics Baroness Thatcher spearheaded," the petition reads.
Thatcher is now 86, frail and suffering from dementia.
"FEMINISM IS POISON"
Thatcher's power to polarise makes it difficult for those trying to give a balanced account of her time in office.
"The thing that I noticed when I was making the film, is how fiery hot on both sides the feelings were. People wanted to hold her as this indelible icon or they wanted to regard her as a monster," Meryl Streep, who plays Thatcher in The Iron Lady, told Reuters.
Streep said she did not agree with many of Thatcher's policies but admired many of her personal qualities, a stance shared by many British people.
Thatcher broke entrenched gender and class barriers in her rise from humble beginnings as a grocer's daughter to leader of the centre-right Conservative Party and then prime minister.
"Big personalities will always make their mark," Conservative lawmaker Louise Mensch told Reuters.
"Thatcher was a woman succeeding in a man's world when it was unbelievably unusual ... Whoever the first woman president of the United States is, she will have a great debt to Margaret Thatcher," she added, speaking after seeing The Iron Lady in New York.
A bronze statue of Thatcher, pointing emphatically in her trademark power suit and power-set hairdo, is conspicuous among the otherwise exclusively male statues of former prime ministers in the ornate lobby adjoining parliament's debating chamber.
However, even Thatcher's potential as a role model for ambitious women is disputed, given that she surrounded herself with men throughout her career and did little to help any other woman break the glass ceiling.
"The feminists hate me, don't they? And I don't blame them. For I hate feminism. It is poison," Thatcher said, according to Paul Johnson, one her closest advisers, writing in Britain's centre-right Spectator magazine last year.
"WE REVERE HER"
Part of Thatcher's continuing ability to stoke passions is the enduring influence of her ideology on Conservative politicians and voters today, even among those too young to remember living under her rule.
The Conservatives are in power now, although Prime Minister David Cameron has been careful to differentiate himself from Thatcher with his "Big Society" mantra, which encourages grassroots community action as opposed to state intervention.
The slogan stands in sharp contrast to Thatcher's famous statement that "there is no such thing as society" -- although ironically, that quote was part of an interview in which she too was encouraging individuals not to rely too much on the state.
In a poll of Conservative Party members by the conservativehome website late last month, respondents put Thatcher at the top of a list of politicians that most closely represented their views, seven places ahead of Cameron.
In a wider survey in November, a YouGov/Sunday Times poll of 1,700 adults found Thatcher to be the greatest British leader since 1945, ahead even of wartime leader Winston Churchill.
Her ideology permeates current Conservative thinking, even among the younger members of parliament first elected in 2010, many of whom were children when she was in power.
"I certainly know that all my younger generation of colleagues ... believe she is one of the greatest political figures of the modern age and we revere her," Mensch said.
Like Thatcher taking harsh measures to rescue a faltering economy, Cameron's coalition government has made the deepest public spending cuts in a generation to tackle a big budget deficit, laying off thousands of public sector workers.
Also like Thatcher, Cameron has taken on the unions over pension reform and adopted a tough stance on Europe, garnering praise from his party's powerful Thatcherite wing by vetoing an EU treaty to rescue the euro.
Thatcher once said the currency was "bound to fail, economically, politically and indeed socially".
The debate over Thatcher's legacy is likely to rumble on among Britain's next generation of politicians, who like their predecessors, appear to either love or loathe the former leader.
"(She is) one of the most significant politicians of the 20th Century, an inspiration to my political belief in giving people aspirations and helping them to achieve them," Ben Howlett, who heads the Conservatives' youth wing, told Reuters.
Predictably, the head of Labour Students, the opposition Labour party's student body, takes a different view.
"There are alarming parallels between what Cameron is doing today and what Thatcher did in the 80s," said Olivia Bailey.
"Thatcher to me serves as both a warning and a motivation. A warning of the damage that can be done by Conservative ideology and a motivation to fight for the values held by the Labour Party - to fight to unite our society, not divide it."
NEW DELHI: IPL side Mumbai Indians have bought Tamil Nadu wicketkeeper Dinesh Karthik from Kings XI Punjab in the first player transfer ahead of the fifth edition of the Twenty20 league, it has been reported.
Karthik was bagged by Mumbai Indians for an undisclosed sum and in exchange all-rounder R Sathish will go to Kings XI.
According to a BCCI insider it was the highest sum paid to buy a player from another team in the history of the IPL.
"It was a substantial sum and easily the highest in terms of strictly trading terms. Mumbai wanted a keeper. Punjab did not mind as they were getting a good amount of money," an unnamed BCCI official was quoted as saying.
It is understood that Mumbai have paid somewhere between $2-2.5 million (Rs 10.59-13.2 crores) for Karthik, the report further said.
The franchises have a limited money to spend during the auctions but there is no cap on spending during trading.
According to IPL rules, 20% of the profit made in a trade goes to the player with the rest going to the franchise selling him.
Karthik had spent the first three IPL seasons at the Delhi Daredevils.
The first window for trading between IPL franchises closes on January 20. There will be another short window for trading after the February 4 auction in which the players of now terminated franchise Kochi Tuskers Kerala will be sold.
Karthik was bagged by Mumbai Indians for an undisclosed sum and in exchange all-rounder R Sathish will go to Kings XI.
According to a BCCI insider it was the highest sum paid to buy a player from another team in the history of the IPL.
"It was a substantial sum and easily the highest in terms of strictly trading terms. Mumbai wanted a keeper. Punjab did not mind as they were getting a good amount of money," an unnamed BCCI official was quoted as saying.
It is understood that Mumbai have paid somewhere between $2-2.5 million (Rs 10.59-13.2 crores) for Karthik, the report further said.
The franchises have a limited money to spend during the auctions but there is no cap on spending during trading.
According to IPL rules, 20% of the profit made in a trade goes to the player with the rest going to the franchise selling him.
Karthik had spent the first three IPL seasons at the Delhi Daredevils.
The first window for trading between IPL franchises closes on January 20. There will be another short window for trading after the February 4 auction in which the players of now terminated franchise Kochi Tuskers Kerala will be sold.
(Reuters) - Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said the Pentagon's leaner military strategy will keep up funding in surveillance and intelligence technologies, including unmanned vehicles and cyber warfare, even as the overall defense budget declines.
"We will protect, and in some cases increase our investments in special operations forces, in new technologies like (intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance), and unmanned systems, in space and particularly in cyberspace capabilities, and also capacity to quickly mobilize," Panetta told reporters at the Pentagon.
President Barack Obama unveiled a new defense strategy on Thursday that will shrink the U.S. armed forces at a time of tight budgets at home, but he pledged to maintain the United States as the world's dominant military power.
The new military strategy unveiled on said the Pentagon would "make every effort to maintain an adequate industrial base and our investment in science and technology."
It said the Pentagon would be "prudent with its 'seed corn,'" balancing reductions required by mounting pressure on budgets with the need to continue investing in innovative developments that could provide significant long-term payoffs.
Panetta and General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, declined to spell out which programs would be targeted for cuts and where investments could go up.
But there were hints in the strategy document, including a focus on sustaining undersea capabilities, developing a new stealth bomber, improving missile defenses and continuing efforts to enhance the resilience and effectiveness of U.S. satellites.
"We will protect, and in some cases increase our investments in special operations forces, in new technologies like (intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance), and unmanned systems, in space and particularly in cyberspace capabilities, and also capacity to quickly mobilize," Panetta told reporters at the Pentagon.
President Barack Obama unveiled a new defense strategy on Thursday that will shrink the U.S. armed forces at a time of tight budgets at home, but he pledged to maintain the United States as the world's dominant military power.
The new military strategy unveiled on said the Pentagon would "make every effort to maintain an adequate industrial base and our investment in science and technology."
It said the Pentagon would be "prudent with its 'seed corn,'" balancing reductions required by mounting pressure on budgets with the need to continue investing in innovative developments that could provide significant long-term payoffs.
Panetta and General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, declined to spell out which programs would be targeted for cuts and where investments could go up.
But there were hints in the strategy document, including a focus on sustaining undersea capabilities, developing a new stealth bomber, improving missile defenses and continuing efforts to enhance the resilience and effectiveness of U.S. satellites.
(Reuters) - The Nano is not a flop, its creator Ratan Tata said on Thursday, but he acknowledged that his Tata Motors (TAMO.NS) failed to capitalise on the early excitement surrounding the launch of the world's cheapest car.
In a wide-ranging briefing with journalists, Tata, who will retire in December as head of the Tata Group, India's biggest business house, also said the steel-to-software conglomerate had paid a price for not participating in corruption.
Four years ago Tata Motors unveiled the Nano in what was seen at the time to be a crowning achievement for the silver-haired Tata, but sales have trailed far behind early expectations following a series of setbacks.
"We never really got our act together when the 100,000 were depleted," he said, referring to the first batch of Nanos sold through a lottery system when initial demand exceeded supply.
"I don't think we were adequately ready with an advertising campaign, a dealer network," he said during a two-hour breakfast meeting with journalists on the first day of the India Auto Expo -- the same event where a euphoric Tata and his Nano stole the show four years ago.
A rising price -- the entry level Nano now costs 140,000 rupees (US$2,657), above the 100,000 rupees initially envisioned -- as well as production delays, quality concerns following two voluntary recalls, and a stigma over the car's "cheap" image have all dented demand.
"We've never pushed it as a poor man's car. We pushed it as an affordable all-weather family car. Period," said Tata, 74, who over two decades has built the Tata Group into an $83 billion conglomerate that generates two-thirds of its revenue outside of India.
While the Nano has failed to live up to expectations, Tata Motors' $2.3 billion purchase of luxury car-marker Jaguar Land Rover in 2008 has exceeded them. CLSA recently upgraded Tata Motors to outperform on the outlook for the two British brands.
"In sum, I don't consider it to be a flop. I consider that we have wasted an early opportunity," said Tata.
Tata launched a Nano that runs on compressed natural gas at the car show, but a company official said it is at least a year away from launching a diesel version, which many critics say is key to success for the Nano in a country where petrol costs 56 percent more than subsidised diesel.
The company recently rolled out a 2012 model that is more powerful, gets better mileage, and has improved suspension and steering. It has also stepped up marketing efforts and financing options, and extended dealerships to smaller towns.
"I believe that we will see a resurrection of this product as we move forward," Tata said.
Tata was speaking in his first extensive media appearance since the relatively unknown Cyrus Mistry, a family member by marriage and the son of the single largest shareholder in Tata Sons, was named in late November as the next group chairman.
Tata said the company still wants to develop a low-cost car for the European and U.S. markets, but such a car will need to be upgraded to meet safety and emissions standards and include the sorts of extras that western consumers demand.
SEASON OF SCANDALS
India has been racked for more than a year by a series of corruption scandals, including over the award of 2G telecoms licences. Tata was among the corporate titans summoned to answer questions before a parliamentary panel, although neither he nor his group has been accused of wrongdoing.
"I think the issues have shown that we were one of the victims of what took place and not the offenders," Tata said.
The Tata group, he said, "will deal with corruption the same way as they have, that is by not participating, sometimes to a great cost to the corporation," he said.
"The fact is that one hopes for an India ... where no one is above the law, and there's no preferential permits or approvals or such that are available that all aren't considered on a similar basis," he said.
Fallout from a series of scandals has battered India's ruling Congress party, stalled decision-making on project approvals, and scared off investors.
Unlike most of India's big business houses, the Tata group is not family owned and Ratan Tata is not on the Forbes list of billionaires.
Tata Sons holds the bulk of shares in key companies, and philanthropic trusts endowed by the Tata family own 66 percent of Tata Sons, and the group enjoys a reputation for integrity.
"We've never been asked to give a bribe because most of the agencies know that would not be possible for us to do," Tata said.
WASHINGTON: Despite all the hissing and spitting from both sides in course of a deteriorating bilateral relationship, the Obama administration has clarified that the United States is continuing to supply new F-16s to Pakistan and upgrading the existing fleet.
"Some media have reported a stoppage in the US-Pakistan F-16 program. These reports are not accurate. Neither Pakistan nor the United States has cancelled the F-16 program," a US official said on Thursday, contesting some of the virulent anti-US grievances published in the Pakistani press.
The official maintained that planned delivery of the last "new-buy" F-16 purchased by Pakistan is scheduled to arrive in Pakistan from the United States in late January, 2012. Several other F-16s purchased by Pakistan from the United States are undergoing mid-life upgrades and will arrive in Pakistan beginning in late January, he said, adding that deliveries will continue throughout this year and next.
The American assurance, mainly at the political level, came despite growing antipathy in the US military towards Pakistan for its alleged perfidy in the war on terrorism. The situation has been aggravated by the U.S hunting down and killing Osama bin Laden outside a Pakistani military cantonment in Abbottabad (which Pakistan perceived as a hostile act) and the recent border incident in which Nato troops killed 24 Pakistani soldiers, following which the Pakistani military has threatened to shoot down any US intrusion -- mainly with US supplied hardware.
This possibility -- of American military aid being used against US troops -- moved a decorated U.S marine to file a lawsuit, but the Obama administration appears unfazed by the prospect. As it is, there is a strong anti-American narrative in Pakistan where it concerns F16s (which Pakistanis see as a symbol of their military virility) because of the past history of Washington withholding supplies as part of nuclear-related sanctions. Evidently, Washington does not want to aggravate the mood just now.
This narrative of false grievance persists, with official Pakistani encouragement, despite experts pointing out that Islamabad knew full well it would be sanctioned if it crossed the nuclear threshold. The Clinton administration later reimbursed Pakistan for the stalled f-16, before its successor Bush regime agreed to resume supplies and also compensated with billions of dollars in military aid after 9/11. Arguments by US analysts and protests by New Delhi that the F-16 was not useful in the fight against terrorism and was mainly a weapon against India (besides the potential of biting the US itself) has not impressed Washington mandarins constantly striving to appease Pakistan.
"Some media have reported a stoppage in the US-Pakistan F-16 program. These reports are not accurate. Neither Pakistan nor the United States has cancelled the F-16 program," a US official said on Thursday, contesting some of the virulent anti-US grievances published in the Pakistani press.
The official maintained that planned delivery of the last "new-buy" F-16 purchased by Pakistan is scheduled to arrive in Pakistan from the United States in late January, 2012. Several other F-16s purchased by Pakistan from the United States are undergoing mid-life upgrades and will arrive in Pakistan beginning in late January, he said, adding that deliveries will continue throughout this year and next.
The American assurance, mainly at the political level, came despite growing antipathy in the US military towards Pakistan for its alleged perfidy in the war on terrorism. The situation has been aggravated by the U.S hunting down and killing Osama bin Laden outside a Pakistani military cantonment in Abbottabad (which Pakistan perceived as a hostile act) and the recent border incident in which Nato troops killed 24 Pakistani soldiers, following which the Pakistani military has threatened to shoot down any US intrusion -- mainly with US supplied hardware.
This possibility -- of American military aid being used against US troops -- moved a decorated U.S marine to file a lawsuit, but the Obama administration appears unfazed by the prospect. As it is, there is a strong anti-American narrative in Pakistan where it concerns F16s (which Pakistanis see as a symbol of their military virility) because of the past history of Washington withholding supplies as part of nuclear-related sanctions. Evidently, Washington does not want to aggravate the mood just now.
This narrative of false grievance persists, with official Pakistani encouragement, despite experts pointing out that Islamabad knew full well it would be sanctioned if it crossed the nuclear threshold. The Clinton administration later reimbursed Pakistan for the stalled f-16, before its successor Bush regime agreed to resume supplies and also compensated with billions of dollars in military aid after 9/11. Arguments by US analysts and protests by New Delhi that the F-16 was not useful in the fight against terrorism and was mainly a weapon against India (besides the potential of biting the US itself) has not impressed Washington mandarins constantly striving to appease Pakistan.
Jan. 5 (Bloomberg) -- As president of EBay Inc.’s PayPal unit, Scott Thompson used an eye for detail and a push into mobile payments to more than double revenue and boost the user base to more than 100 million. He’ll face a bigger challenge at the helm of Yahoo! Inc.
Thompson, 54, must lure users and advertisers back to a company besieged by declining sales and shrinking market share. His appointment yesterday as chief executive officer makes it less likely that Yahoo, the biggest U.S. Web portal, will continue to pursue strategic options such as selling the entire company, said Clayton Moran, an analyst at Benchmark Co.
“This makes it clear that they want to remain independent and try to drive a turnaround, which as we’ve seen over the years has been very difficult to achieve,” Moran said.
Thompson, whose past jobs include overseeing global technology for Visa Inc., is an accountant and engineer who helped turn PayPal’s online payments into EBay’s fastest-growing business. Still, he may lack the advertising chops he’ll need to reverse fortunes at Yahoo, once the largest Internet-search provider, now an also-ran in search behind Google Inc. and a laggard in social media to Facebook Inc.
“He’s not a proven media executive,” Moran said. “Yahoo is an advertising-driven business. So I’m a bit surprised that they again went outside the industry to tap a new leader.”
Yahoo said yesterday Thompson will join the company Jan. 9, after leading PayPal since January 2008. Thompson steps in after a failed turnaround effort by former Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz, who was fired in September after less than three years at the helm.
Leveraging Talent
In an interview yesterday, Thompson said he enjoys working through complex problems and breaking down the challenges to be tackled. Yahoo already has plenty of folks with experience in fields such as advertising, he said.
“My job is to leverage all of that talent, experience that exists in the organization already,” he said. “I know there are some things we need to change and fix, and I love it. I think that’s part of what attracted me to come here -- that it’s going to be fast-paced, fun, hard, complex with a great team of people.”
That focus should help Yahoo execute Thompson’s plan to turn around its core assets, said Herman Leung, an analyst at Susquehanna Financial Group, who has a “neutral” rating on the stock and doesn’t own it.
‘Execution-Focused’
“Scott is actually different from the predecessor CEOs, because the other CEOs were actually more big-picture focused and less hands-on,” he said. “I think Scott is probably the most hands-on and execution-focused type CEO that Yahoo can get.”
On a conference call yesterday, Thompson said his priorities are boosting revenue and putting the company at the forefront of innovation. Yahoo will turn its attention increasingly to mobile devices, such as tablet computers and smartphones, Thompson said. Rivals such as Facebook and Google likewise aim to take advantage of the shift to mobile computing.
“I just won’t rest until we’ve positioned this business and start to succeed,” Thompson said in the interview.
When it ousted Bartz, Yahoo undertook a review of its strategic options. One decision that is still on the “front burner” is a possible divestment of the company’s Asian assets, including its stakes in China and Japan, Moran said.
The company has been under investor pressure to realize value from its international assets, including a stake of about 40 percent in Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. and co-ownership of Yahoo Japan with Softbank Corp. In October, Yahoo estimated the Alibaba stake was worth about $14 billion on a pretax basis.
Jack Ma ‘Interested’
After Sunnyvale, California-based Yahoo announced the strategic review, its advisers received inquiries from “multiple parties” interested in various unspecified options, according to a September memo to employees from co-founder Jerry Yang. Later, Alibaba Chairman Jack Ma said he was “very interested” in buying Yahoo.
Yahoo also has considered offers for a minority stake from bidders including TPG Capital and a group led by Silver Lake, people familiar with the matter said in November.
Under Bartz, who joined Yahoo in 2009, the company lost market share in the display-advertising businesses, an area that it has traditionally led. The company’s piece of the $12.3 billion U.S. market fell to 13.1 percent in 2011, from 14.4 percent the previous year, according to EMarketer Inc. The New York-based researcher said Yahoo lost its No. 1 position to Facebook last year.
Revenue Challenge
While Yahoo has been cutting costs, revenue growth has eluded the company as users drift to other sites where marketers are spending money. Yahoo’s third-quarter sales, excluding revenue passed on to partner sites, declined 4.6 percent to $1.07 billion. U.S. Internet surfers spent 9.3 percent of their online time on Yahoo sites in November, down from 11 percent two years earlier, according to ComScore Inc.
Yahoo shares fell 3.1 percent to $15.78 at the close in New York yesterday. The stock has gained 22 percent since Bartz’s departure on Sept. 6.
PayPal, owned by San Jose, California-based EBay, has services that help retailers and individuals exchange funds for purchases or payments, even without a credit card. As president, Thompson contributed to an increase of the payment service’s users from 50 million to more than 100 million, helping it close in on a goal of revenue as high as $7 billion by 2013, compared with about $3.3 billion in 2010.
Thompson also engineered the company’s expansion to online daily deals and mobile payments. His Web-industry experience may give him a better chance for success than Bartz, whose previous firm specialized in software for engineers and architects, said Sameet Sinha, an analyst at B. Riley & Co. in San Francisco.
“He’s from the Internet industry,” Sinha said. “He is always around those sort of people who are in advertising. He can easily learn. Will it take longer to learn? Sure.”
SYDNEY: A hapless India faced the prospect of another humiliating defeat as Australia rode on skipper Michael Clarke's maiden triple hundred and Michael Hussey's 150 to score a mammoth first innings total of 659/4 declared and take complete command of the second Test on Thursday.
At stumps on the third day, India were trailing by 354 runs after losing a couple of wickets at the Sydney Cricket Ground. India face the daunting task of batting out two full days, which raises the possibility of an innings defeat in the match.
Opener Virender Sehwag (4) and an uncertain Rahul Dravid (29) were cooling their heels in the pavilion, leaving Gautam Gambhir (68) and Sachin Tendulkar (8) to fight. The visitors were 114/2 in their second dig in the 41 overs and nearly half the day of batting they got.
Gambhir has so far batted for three hours and struck nine fours off 124 balls. Tendulkar's grim 8 was made in over an hour's batting and he faced 42 balls.
Earlier, Australia continued their firm grip on the match by stretching their overnight score of 482/4 to 659 an hour after lunch without losing a single wicket.
Michael Hussey, overnight 55, remained unbeaten on 150 but the glory of the day belonged to Clarke who was left unconquered on 329, the highest score ever made at the SCG, which is hosting its 100th Test.
Hussey reached his century before lunch but Clarke had to wait till resumption to get to his triple century. The Australian captain, overnight 251, was slow to get off the blocks and had added only 42 runs by lunch as only 13 runs came off his bat in the first hour.
Still, Australia were past 500 runs in the first hour, a feat they had done nearly 22 months and 17 Tests ago -- against New Zealand at Seddon Park in Hamilton in March 2010.
All along, landmarks kept falling like nine pins against Clarke's name. When he had added seven runs to his overnight total, he overtook Ricky Ponting as the highest scorer ever against India. Ponting had made 257 in the 1999-2000 Test at Melbourne.
Clarke swept off-spinner Ashwin to square leg fence through a packed onside field to move to 280 which took him past 277 that West Indian legend Brian Lara made at this venue in a 1992-93 series.
Clarke stroked Ishant Sharma through the covers to become the highest scorer at the SCG, going past the 287 which R E Foster of England made in a 1903-04 series just a few minutes before the lunch interval.
Clarke cut another four in the same over, dangerously close to VVS Laxman at slips, to move to within seven runs of his triple century.
Hussey had reached his own hundred, his 16th in his 68th Test, and was unbeaten on 111 at lunch.
The pair raised the 200 for the stand when Hussey back cut Umesh Yadav crisply past the point boundary. It took 206 minutes and 307 balls for the 200-run stand.
By lunch, the two had put on 258 runs for the fifth wicket and the score read 583/4.
On resumption, Clarke reached the all-important landmark when he clipped Ishant Sharma to midwicket fence.
The two were still going strong when the declaration arrived as soon as Hussey reached his 150. Clarke was unbeaten on 329 at the other end and Australia had stretched their lead to 468 runs.
Clarke's score is the fourth highest score by an Australian in Test cricket, behind Matthew Hayden (380), Sir Donald Bradman (334) and Mark Taylor (334).
This was the 25th instance of a triple century in Test cricket. Only Bradman, Brian Lara, Virender Sehwag and Chris Gayle are the four batsmen who have hit triple century twice in Tests.
That makes Clarke only the 21st batsman in game's annals to crack the code of a triple century.
For records, this is after 95 Tests that an Australian has thrashed a triple century. Matthew Hayden was the last one to do so -- a total of 380 against Zimbabwe at WACA, Perth in 2003.
In all, Clarke batted for 617 minutes and hit 39 fours and a six from 468 balls. Hussey batted for 312 minutes and 253 balls and smashed 16 fours and a six.
India began on a familiar dismal note when Sehwag cut an ordinary delivery from Ben Hilfenhaus to point where David Warner took a wonderful acrobatic catch.
But Gambhir was looking in fine nick as he hit a few glorious strokes in his 39 before tea. In the very first over itself, bowled by James Pattinson, he thrashed two cuts through point for boundaries.
He then twice drove Peter Siddle in succession to cover boundary. It was followed by a straight drive off Siddle which he executed with utmost aplomb.
Off-spinner Nathan Lyon, in his second over, the final one before tea, was hit for two fours by Gambhir -- both slammed through the cover region as India took tea at 53/1.
Gambhir duly reached his half-century in the final session, having taken only 54 balls and hitting eight fours.
Dravid, at the other end, hit a few fine strokes on either side of the wicket but he did appear a man with more than one worry in his head.
The veteran batsman once dangerously inside edged a delivery past his stumps for four and then fell prey in now all too characteristic fashion in this series.
Dravid came forward to an off-cutter from Hilfenhaus and left a little gap between his bat and pad. It was enough for the ball to sneak through and hit the top of the middle stump.
Dravid batted for 102 minutes and 73 balls for his 29 runs and hit six fours. He put on 72 runs for the second wicket with Gambhir.
Gambhir and Tendulkar dropped anchor and were just intent to see through the day. Overs after overs passed without a run being added to the total.
Gambhir took a run after being run-less for 34 balls and Tendulkar went past his three runs through a streaky four only after defending 51 deliveries.
In the dying minutes of the game, Gambhir received a chance when he edged an easy catch towards the wicketkeeper but Brad Haddin just couldn't lay his hands to the edge. James Pattinson was the aggrieved bowler for Australia.