CSE 2014 Interview

David Sir board: Whatever i have recollected tried to put it. Total time duration 30mnts

Chairperson: Ur name is suneel
Me: yes sir

C: We are going through ur bio data thats been filled by u
Me: thank u sir.

C: What r u doing?
Me: joined IRS(IT)

c: when did u join?
Me: 2012 batch

c: why IAS
Me: direct interface with the public, diversified areas of working and better promotional opportunites. More over sir, I am willing to work at the cutting edge level of policy implementation.

c: How civil services has been changing esp before independence and after that
Me: Before independence sir mainly entrusted with revenue collection and maintain the stability
but after independence agent of social change in order to bring development.

M1(Lady): IRS provides you better opporutnities and one of the important service then why are you willing to join IAS? Can you give me convincing answer?
Me: Mam, IRS is one the important central service, it helps providing the bread and butter to the nation however mam I am willing to work at the gross root level.

M1: She said, Your answer is not convincing
Me: mam in IRS i may get interact with the business people most of the time, hardly gets a chance to interact with the common man but I am willing to work at the policy implementation level in diversified areas like health, education, rural devt, etc( looks like she is convinced)

m1: Tell me whats the cultural differences between North East and Hyderabad
Me: I tried to explain vaguely Bihu festival, Jaapi, people are cordial, etc(My self is not convinced with that answer)

m1: Compare the N-E poverty level and Andhra pradesh?
Me: N-E poverty levels are more and AP is relatively developed state. N-E poverty is because of geographical barriers, success goverment neglect, etc but however sir situation has been changing due to new developmental inititaitves like NEC, separate ministry and special category status.

m1: As a DM, what will you do in the N-E?
Me: focus on liveli hood needs like especially Develope power looms, bamboo technologies especially as hospital infrastrcture and efficient kerosne stove, etc focus on frugal innovations

m2: As a DM how do you control mob violence?
me: Proactive measures and curative measures. Proactive manner anticipate, deploy police forces and intelligence gathering with departmental coordination. Even if with all the steps, if something goes wrong then Take the help of local community leaders and trying send message though them to bring the law and order situation back, along with police personnale.

m2: As a IPS officer, how do u control?
Me: though IPS officer heads the police but DM is law and order in charge sir. Here there is a need for better coordination among different agencies.

m2: If your posted as IFS officer in the UAE where our sizable population is working then there is an allegation about an employee, who involved in some crime. then what would you do?
Me: Sir, first allegation has to be proved for that seek cooperation from UAE officials to probe then if allegations are proved then according to the law, has to take charge.

m2: If you are posted a secretary, law is not allowing you to do what you want then what will you do?
me: Sir, I would assume that, laws are made by the eminent civil servants with rationality of mind. then he interrupted me..

m2: if there is any conflict between law and what you want to do?
Me: sir, in this case ethics plays a role and some times ethics is beyond the law. I have a conscience that I need to reconcile my self. if i am unable to do that then need to think about whats my next step. it's a crisis of conscience situation sir.

M3: YOu said crisis of conscience. How do resolve that?
me: Sir, as a law abiding and constituionally abiding officer, first try to reconcile my self, If i am unable to do that then consult my peers, then superiors and still unmable to resolve then escalte further. If im still resolve then will resign .

m3: Is it not emotional decision?
me: Its not an emotional decision sir, because i have tried all the means available with me.

m3: Now your in IRS probationary,
me: yes sir, joined and taken leave to appear one more time.

m3: But still I assume, you have some basics.why tax to GDP ratio is stagnant in India?
me: sir, there are incidents of tax evasion and tax avoidance to exploit the loop holes of tax system. e.g recent vodafone case. But sir we r moving towards DTC, GST.

m3: whats the difference between tax evasion and tax avoidance.
me: replied

m3: How DTC simplifies.
me: replied

m3: Is GST direct and in direct
me: replied

m3: when DTC is introduced in India?
me: replied

m3: how direct taxes are preogressive?
me: replied. --> with super rich tax, etc

m4(lady): As a DM whats are priority areas?
me: equity, how to brdige geographical barriers, bringing the excluded section of the people on par with the main stream by finding out the what r root causes and how to brdige those by using ICT.

Education, health, etc

m4: Tell me concretely, how do you utilize ur back ground knowledge in administration?
me: Education --> biometrics for malady of teachers absentesim
    Health---> MCTS
    Mobile devices--> spread the awareness levels so that people can question authorities what entitlements     they are supposed to get.

m4: have you heard about mobiles and toilets in the news?
me: yes mam, unfortunately in India, number of mobile devices are more compared to toilets because of various reasons. People are not aware of negative implication of sanitation probs. e.g. i had given my village example  inspite of people have access to toilet they wont use.

chairperson: do u read today news paper?
me: yes sir, hindu.

c: I didn't ask the news paper name?
me: sorry sir.

c: whats intersting in the hindu?
me: english is good and means to improve my vocabulory

Finally chairperson said, wish you all the best suneel.

I said thank you sir, thanks for all.

Dehorning, not the only option.

                                                       
           
              Manipulating with a body part of a species will be like destroying the beauty of the masterpiece.Whether dehorning of Rhino is really the only option left now or  is it another political gimmick ? To unravel this,  we have to first understand why poaching is prevalent in Assam. I am here taking Kaziranga National Park as the case study as in 2014, 11 out of 12 killings of Rhinos are recorded here. Similarly in 2013 more than 40 rhinos were killed in Kaziranga only.Poaching is mostly done for the user value of the horn. The average weight of a horn is 1.5kg and the price of 1kg horn in the international market in $ 1 lakh approximately.Thus, they earn nearly about 90 lakh rupess for each horn. Also, the horn is used for producing  traditional medicines in many Asian countries from Malayasia and South Korea to India and China. Even it is used for maunfacturing ornaments, dagger handles, paperweight, hair pin etc.

Now the question arises why Kaziranga is targeted mostly. It is the most easily accessable national park.  Kaziranga is one of very few national parks where the national highway runs in between . There is no clear demarcated area, neither any particular entry and exit point of the park.

 Dan Henk in his book - The Botswana defence force and the war against poachers in Southern Africa divided the poachers into three types : subsistence, trophy, and commercial. Subsistence poachers are those who normally poach game for consumption. The practice is commonly referred to as “killing for the pot.” These poachers do not usually pose a serious threat to the extinction of the wildlife. However, the relationship between subsistence and the other two makes them a formidable force in the anti-poaching campaign. Trophy poachers are not a serious threat in the region. They usually kill animals for sport trophies. It is the commercial poachers who pose a serious challenge in wildlife conservation efforts since they indiscriminately kill animals for illicit business purposes such as illegal rhinoceros horn trade. They are organized and closely interconnected with the subsistence poachers. In case of Assam also the main threat is from the commercial poachers, however, the relation between subsistence poachers or local inhabitants and the commercial poachers makes the scene more serious. And the nexus between armed insurgency groups and the poachers has mad the situation more grim .  Even ex-militants are also involved in this game of making fast money.

Though most of the poachers are outsiders but the logistic support is provided by the local people for a small amount. The main concern arises here  that  why even after so much effort by the Government and wild life activists, local tribals help the poachers? Main reason behind it is that, the local tribal people of Kaziranga are not deriving any benefits from the the National Park, rather their traditional rights on forest minor product, fishing etc. have been taken away.

The other angle of the picture is the loopholes in the security arrangement. The forest guards, which are  the main field operators , are not given salary. They are paid meagre allowances . Moreover, they lack sytematic training and are hopelessly ill-equiped . The forest guards still use the obsolete 303 rifles to confront the high tech and automatic weapon weilding poachers. Another important aspect is that minimum technology has been used by the Kaziranga authority to counter poaching activities, leave aside GPS and other technology, even as basic as CC TV in strategic locations are not installed.

 Another very important aspect is the activity of numerous militant outfits in Kaziranga and adjacent areas and easy availability of illegal arms in North East, the main market of illegal arms in NorthEast is Dimapur, Nagaland which is not far away from Kaziranga. On international level, well-versed observers see the increase in the supply of weapons in the African continent as having an impact on rates and patterns of poaching (Duffy 1999, The role and limitations of state coercion: Anti-poaching policies in Zimbabwe.  ).  Zimbabwe’s Minister of Defense acknowledged in 1990 that poaching was no longer an ordinary expedition, but it was some kind of military operation . Therefore, it could be argued that weapons proliferation in Africa escalated the challenges of anti-poaching campaigns. . The armed militants and ex-militants many times directly or indirectly forces the local youths in the poaching loop. And it is already proved all over the world that, involvement of local population is the greatest stumbling block for any anti-poaching drive. Spencer, C., and J. Slabbert in their book Transfrontier Africa-SAVANNA Project argued that more involvement of local population means more cases of poaching. Thus, the easy availability of arms in the hands of militant groups and the so called surrendered militants in Assam and North East is a very important factor which poses serious challenge to any anti-poaching strategy.


Recently, the Assam Government has floated the idea of dehorning the Rhinos to save them from poachers and the opinion of the public has been sought for. In that context, I believe that dehorning should be the last option to protect the endangered animals. But question is whether the Assam goverment has explored and exhausted all other options or not . We have to remember that, dehorning not only defeat the very purpose of conservation of wild animals in their natural place and self. Moreover, the one horned rhino is not just any other animal under threat, over the years it has evolved as a symbol of natural heritage and cultural identity of the Assamese people. Often example of Zimbabwe is discussed as an example of success story of de-horning, but we should not forget that, the dehorning done in Zimbabwe was in completely different situation at the back drop of total break down of law and order situation.

Instead of de-horning the Forest Ministry should explore other acceptable and permanent options. And one of the most important options is total revamping of security arrangement of the Kaziranga National Park. Presently the anti-poaching drive and security of the Park is entrusted with the poorly equipped and untrained forest guards. Instead three layers of security cordon can be provided to counter anti-poaching and other illegal activities. The outer layer may be managed by the Para-Military forces which will surely check the free movement of the militants and illegal arms weilding poachers. The middle layer can be managed by Assam industrial security force which are successfully providing securities to  tea gardens. They can be brought in to check the nexus between locals and the poachers, if any.  And in the inner core area , there should be the entrusted with the forest guards as they are generally more versed with the area, with occasional support from Para-Military forces. This can be an immediate measure , while in the meanwhile, the Government should come up with a better policy to modernise the forest guards so that they can take up the challenges of the changing scenario.

If you give stick, you should propose for carrot too. A symbiotic relationship should be devised between the National Park and the local inhabitants. The locals should get economic benefits from the tourism related industry in the National Park which will slowly convert each of them a conservationist. All  the tourism related industries developed in Kaziranga should give semi skilled or unskilled jobs to the local people. Also, preference should be given to the local people in the skilled jobs. Government should give soft loans to the local people to start small business related to tourism industry, like interest free loan to buy safari jeeps, shops, restaurants etc ,house renovation loan for bed and breakfast schemes etc. Moreover, minor forest product rights, fishing rights in certain areas can be advocated.

More proactive role of the Central Government is also required. Specially, there are allegations that these rhino killings are 'Political Killings'. This is a very serious allegation which requires a high level inquiry by the Central Government.

 As a matter of fact, tightening security arrangements and vigilence ,mindfulness of the Assam Government can go a long way in conserving the life and ecology of the animal. We should not leave any stone untouched before proceeding towards the proposal of dehorning of the Rhinos, which will, no doubt, destroy our cultural identity and pride.

Cyberspace Governance by JOSEPH S. NYE

Brazil recently hosted NETmundial, the first global conference on Internet governance, attended by 800 representatives of governments, corporations, civil-society organizations, and technologists. Based on the notion of “multi-stakeholderism,” the meeting produced a 12-page “outcomes” document.

Nonetheless, at the end of the conference, there was still no consensus on global cyber governance. Many governments continued to advocate traditional United Nations voting procedures for making global decisions, and defend their right to control domestic cyber activities.

In a sense, this is not surprising. After all, though the Internet is a complex, fast-evolving, and all-encompassing global resource, it has not been around for very long. While the World Wide Web was conceived in 1989, it was only in the last 15 years that the number of Web sites burgeoned, and Internet technology began to transform global supply chains.

 Since 1992, the number of Internet users has exploded from one million to nearly three billion. Just like that, the Internet became a substrate of economic, social, and political life.

In its early days, the Internet was often characterized as the ultimate egalitarian conduit of free-flowing information – a harbinger of the end of government controls. But the reality is that governments and geographical jurisdictions have always played a central role in regulating the Internet – or at least have tried. Ultimately, however, the Internet poses a major governance challenge, exemplified in ongoing efforts to understand the implications of ubiquitous mobility and the collection and storage of “big data.”

The governance challenge stems from the fact that cyberspace is a combination of virtual properties, which defy geographical boundaries, and physical infrastructure, which fall under sovereign jurisdictions. Control of the physical layer can have both territorial and extraterritorial effects on the virtual layers. At the same time, attacks can be launched from the low-cost virtual realm against the physical domain, where resources are scarce and expensive.

The Internet began as a small village of known users, where an authentication layer of code was unnecessary and the development of norms was simple. But then it grew, and everything changed. Though cyberspace offered the advantages of access to information and easy communication to a growing number of people, it became a breeding ground for crime, hacker attacks, and threats to governments.

Efforts to limit the risks incurred in this volatile environment have focused on creating private networks and “walled gardens” (closed platforms) – cyber equivalents to the seventeenth-century enclosures that were used to solve that era’s “tragedy of the commons.” But this raises the risk of fragmentation, which, if allowed to go far enough, could curtail the Internet’s economic benefits.

Given that security is a traditional function of the state, some observers believe that growing insecurity will lead to a greater role for governments in cyberspace. Indeed, accounts of cyber war may be exaggerated, but cyber espionage is rampant, and more than 30 governments are reputed to have developed offensive capabilities and doctrines for the use of cyber weapons. Ever since the Stuxnet virus was used to disrupt Iran’s nuclear program in 2009-2010, governments have taken the threat posed by cyber weapons very seriously.

Governments also want to protect their societies from what comes through the Internet. For example, China’s government has not only created a “Great Firewall” of software filters; it also requires that companies take responsibility for censoring their public content. And, if China is attacked, it has the capacity to reduce its Internet connections.
But China’s government – and others that practice Internet censorship – still want to reap the economic benefits of connectivity. That tension leads to imperfect compromises.

A similar tension exists in the effort to create international Internet-governance norms. While authoritarian countries like China and Russia seek “information security,” including the kind of overt censorship that would be prohibited in countries like the United States, Western democracies pursue “cyber security.”

This divergence was starkly apparent in 2012, at a conference convened in Dubai by the UN’s International Telecommunications Union (ITU). Though the meeting was ostensibly about updating telephony regulations, the underlying issue was the ITU’s role in Internet governance.

Authoritarian regimes and many developing countries believe that their approach to sovereignty, security, and development would benefit from the multilateral processes that the ITU employs. But democratic governments fear that these processes are too cumbersome, and would undercut the flexibility of the “multi-stakeholder” approach, which stresses the involvement of the private and non-profit sectors, as well as governments. The vote in Dubai was 89 to 55 against the “democratic” governments.

This outcome raised concerns about a crisis in Internet governance – concerns that the recent conference in Brazil alleviated, but only slightly. Stayed tuned. There are many more conferences scheduled on cyber governance – and a lot more work to be done.

India’s Bourgeois Revolution by Mr. Shashi Tharoor

 In 2009, when I competed in India’s last parliamentary election, I was something of a rarity. I was not a professional politician. By contrast, all of the other candidates in my constituency – indeed, most of the contenders across the country – had devoted their entire lives to politics, many since their student days.

I was not born into a political family; I had no seat or political fiefdom to inherit; and I had entered the race without a political “godfather.” I had not even lived in India for decades, having spent my adult life working abroad for the United Nations. Nonetheless, I managed to wrest a seat from the opposition Communist Party of India, which had won the two previous elections in my constituency, with a substantial margin of 100,000 votes.

This victory represented a slight crack in the well-guarded fortress of Indian politics, which had long been reserved for a small and largely hereditary circle. The only exceptions had been movie stars, whose popular appeal was based on fame, not political pedigree. Professionals who had built careers and reputations in other fields simply could not get their foot in the door.

But this may finally be changing. In the current general election, there are more non-politician candidacies than in any previous poll. For example, Nandan Nilekani, co-founder of the technology giant Infosys, is running on behalf of the Congress Party in Bangalore, India’s information-technology capital, against a five-term incumbent from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

In Mumbai, the newly established Aam Aadmi (Common Man’s) Party has nominated Meera Sanyal, a former head of the Royal Bank of Scotland’s operations in India. And, in Chennai, the Congress has put forward the electronics engineer S.V. Ramani.

This amounts to a fundamental shift from previous generations, when politicians tended to come from either the top or the bottom of Indian society – unless, of course, they were the nationalist leaders who won India’s independence and comprised its original political class (and whose heirs have continued their legacy). They could be maharajahs or zamindars (landlords), with a feudal hold on their districts’ voters and the time and money to devote to politics. They could also be semi-literate members of the underclass, who viewed politics as their only means of advancement and could appeal to others like them. For everyone else, the route to success was to study hard, pass their exams, and build careers based on merit.

Such an approach might be understandable in a highly competitive society where the salaried middle class could not take the kind of risks implied by a political career; but it undermined the quality of Indian politics. Indeed, it excluded the educated professionals who tend to be a mainstay of democratic governments elsewhere, bringing middle-class values and convictions to politics.

In Europe, for example, middle-class professionals comprise the bulk of the activists, voters, and candidates for political office. In India, by contrast, their counterparts are too busy working to make ends meet to have time for activism. They lack the money found at the top of India’s stratified society, and they have little access to the votes that lie at the bottom. As a result, middle-class professionals have largely abstained from the political process.

That pattern has allowed Indian politics to become increasingly populist, with candidates appealing to the lowest common denominator to win votes. Given this, growing disenchantment with Indian democracy among the middle class is not surprising. Some have even spoken of the “secession of the elites” from Indian politics.

That is why the participation of middle-class candidates in the current election is so significant. If the old pattern is being reversed, the change is almost certainly a result of India’s economic transformation, which has enabled millions of people to join the middle class, bringing with them a new energy and dynamism. Hard-working professionals are no longer willing to sit on the sidelines while the political class makes critical policy decisions. Equally important, India’s educated middle class will, in the not-too-distant future, become large enough to matter in elections.

To be sure, India’s parliament already includes several educated young professionals who previously would not have participated in politics – people with good degrees, a clear vision for the country, international experience, bright ideas, and the capacity to articulate them. But they are all children of politicians. Though the dynastic trend in Indian politics may be bending, it is far from being broken: This year, the BJP has nominated technocrat Jayant Sinha for the seat being vacated by his father, former Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha.

And yet, despite their hereditary advantage, this new generation of educated, articulate, and forward-thinking politicians is raising the standard of Indian politics – a shift that the growing involvement of well-educated professionals will advance further. If the current trend continues, India’s middle-class voters will have more representatives with whom they can identify, rather than having to pay allegiance to politicians for whom they constantly need to make excuses. That will be Indian democracy’s salvation.

Community Water Management in Tamil Nadu

http://blogs.worldbank.org/endpovertyinsouthasia/working-together-save-water-tamil-nadu

Rebuilding Uttarakhand

http://blogs.worldbank.org/endpovertyinsouthasia/our-house-now-rebuilding-uttharakand

Why Asia's Great Powers are at Tense

Why are such tensions among Asia’s great powers becoming more serious, and why now?

Asia’s powers have recently elected or are poised to elect leaders who are more nationalistic than their predecessors. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, Chinese President Xi Jinping, South Korean President Park Geun-hye, and Narendra Modi, who is likely to be India’s next prime minister, all fall into this category.

Second, all of these leaders now face massive challenges stemming from the need for structural reforms to sustain satisfactory growth rates in the face of global economic forces that are disrupting old models. Different types of structural reforms are crucially important in China, Japan, India, Korea, and Indonesia. If leaders in one or more of these countries were to fail on the economic front, they could feel politically constrained to shift the blame onto foreign “enemies.”

Third, many US allies in Asia (and elsewhere) are wondering whether America’s recent strategic “pivot” to Asia is credible. Given the feeble US response to the crises in Syria, Ukraine, and other geopolitical hot spots, the American security blanket in Asia looks increasingly tattered. China is now testing the credibility of US guarantees, raising the prospect that America’s friends and allies – starting with Japan – may have to take more of their security needs into their own hands.

Europe’s great powers finally tired of slaughtering one another. Facing a shared threat from the Soviet bloc and US prodding, European countries created institutions to promote peace and cooperation, leading to economic and monetary union, now a banking union, and possibly in the future a fiscal and political union.

But no such institutions exist in Asia, where long-standing historical grievances among China, Japan, Korea, India, and other countries remain open wounds. Even two of America’s most important allies – Japan and South Korea – find themselves in a bitter dispute about the Korean “comfort women” forced to work in Japanese military brothels before and during World War II, despite an official apology from Japan 20 years ago.

Finally, unlike Europe, where Germany accepted the blame for the horrors of WWII and helped to lead a decades-long effort to construct today’s European Union, no such historical agreement exists among Asian countries. As a result, chauvinist sentiments have been instilled in generations that are far removed from the horrors of past wars, while institutions capable of fostering economic and political cooperation remain in their infancy.

This is a lethal combination of factors that risks eventually leading to military conflict in a key region of the global economy. How can the US credibly pivot to Asia in a way that does not fuel Chinese perceptions of attempted containment or US allies’ perceptions of appeasement of China? How can China build a legitimate defensive military capability that a great power needs and deserves without worrying its neighbors and the US that it aims to seize disputed territory and aspires to strategic hegemony in Asia? And how can Asia’s other powers trust that the US will support their legitimate security concerns, rather than abandon them to effective Finlandization under Chinese domination?

It will take enormous wisdom on the part of leaders in the region – and in the US – to find diplomatic solutions to Asia’s multitude of geopolitical and geo-economic tensions. In the absence of supporting regional institutions, there is little else to ensure that the desire for peace and prosperity prevails over conditions and incentives that tend toward conflict and war.