The First ever Association for the scholars and students in International Relations in India has been launched to commemorate the 6Oth Year of Independence of India. The formal name of the organization is THE JADAVPUR ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS (JAIR). More than a professional association, JAIR is foremost a learned society. The direct advancement of knowledge is at the core of JAIR activities. We endeavor to bring together the whole gamut of social scientists from all fields of inquiry, regions, and occupational endeavors within and outside academe, and to expand awareness and understanding of International developments.
The Beginning………………………….
The Inaugural ceremony was initiated by Dr. Partha Pratim Basu, Reader, Dept. of International Relations, Jadavpur University and President (Working Committee), JAIR. Prof. Basu began by saying that the first Dept of IR in India began in kolkata (at the Jadavpur University) and therefore it became axiomatic for the first association of international relations to begin from the same city. Highlighting the objectives of the association he first and foremost mentioned that JAIR is a professional association and aim to be a learning society, offering seminars, discussions, conferences on topic of relevance. JAIR would endeavor to conduct projects in collaboration with other institutions and organizations. Next, Prof. Basu, envisioned JAIR going beyond the realms of pure academics. JAIR would like to indulge in policy making and contribution to international understanding of tolerance, humanity and peace. Prof. Basu further highlighted that IR is a discipline which shares concern with other disciplines and therefore visualized JAIR to be a meeting ground for various subjects offering space from students and researchers, ignite fresh minds what naturally favor is a fact that IR is concerned not just with students and researchers of the discipline but also professionals from fields like defense, diplomacy, media, business (chamber of commerce), therefore JAIR would like to work with such multifaceted professionals and fields. Prof. Basu also emphasized that JAIR having a humble start, envisions itself to be an All India association and towards that direction he seeks co-operation and participation of all present.
Address by Professor P.N Ghosh, Vice-Chancellor, Jadavpur University and Member, Advisory Committee, JAIR
Prof. Ghosh began by drawing the attention of the evidence to the complexity and multi-disciplinary nature of IR. Further he painted the history of changes taking place in the international scenario, drawing concentration towards the changes taking place post second world war, epitomizing the reference of technology engulfing international affairs. He pointed towards the fact that in the post-war years Japan’s economic growth could be traced to its technological advancement, while India though having talented scientists would not cope with world economic advancement became of its technological handicap. Though India political leadership in Non-aligned movement was immense but remained economically backward for its technological response.Prof. Ghosh talked about other relevant issues concerning international relations in present times. He first spoke here of the globalization as a dominant process in the present times. Next he spoke of the relevance of environment, the growing realization among both developing and developed nations towards the same. He also talked about the dangers of terrorism and its impact all over the world.
Address by Sri Prasad Ranjan Roy, IAS, Principal Secretary, Higher Education Department , Govt. of West Bengal and Member, Advisory Committee, JAIR
Sri Roy began by saying that kolkata has tradition of giving birth to many associations and organizations. Therefore fitting for kolkata to lay the seeds of JAIR as an association. Roy addressed the importance of systematic interaction between institutions and government. India has till now lacked this and he hoped JAIR moved thereby fill that vacuum. He hoped JAIR would serve as a grooming ground for those students who move outside. He said “our students are our best diplomats”. He hoped JAIR would help students, representing the country well.
Address by Professor Purushottam Bhattacharya, Professor, Dept of international relations, Jadavpur University and Member, Advisory Committee, JAIR:
Prof. Bhattacharya aspires that JAIR would not only assures an All India character but also an international character too. Having a humble start, the objective of JAIR would need to reach out more people and various areas. Prof Bhattacharya remarked, inter-disciplinary character of IR is a strength rather than weakness. He ended by saying JAIR is undertaking a “challenging task” and hopes it last long.
Keynote address by Sri Amit Dasgupta, Joint Secretary, Public Diplomacy Division, Ministry of External Affairs, Govt. of India and Member, Advisory Committee, JAIR
Sri Amit Dasgupta
Sri Amit Dasgupta began his speech by mentioning that his deliverance will be from a practitioner’s point of view. He began by distinguishing between public diplomacy from traditional diplomacy and his enlighten nature was concerned with the former. While traditional diplomacy remains confined within the realm of talks between governments of several nations or within the government, on the other hand public diplomacy means “out of government”. Public diplomacy came into being in the 1960’s. Government of India also started its distinct public diplomacy. Previous to that India has an External Publicity Division which was first managed by Information and Broadcasting Ministry (Govt. Of India), later taken up by Ministry of External Affairs. The rational behind having a public diplomacy channel is the fact that before independence and at the juncture of independence, the image of India was peddled solely by British. After independence, India suddenly found itself amongst community of nations. Hence it became important to India to project in its various facets in front of the world. Therefore, the external public diplomacy division was given the mandate of imaging India in all its facets; give a sense, “what is India?” It was through such initiatives that people came to have a better understanding of India that it was not just a land of snake chambers and maharajas, that one could also do business with it. The realization was about a need to shift dialogue partners.
Emphasizing the need for public diplomacy, Mr. Dasgupta spoke about dealings in the WTO. While after the WTO negotiations stalled, the delegates came back to Delhi (India), the media reports came rushing in stating India has blocked “development” in the poor countries by blocking WTO negotiations. Therefore apparently India seemed to be at fault. The point is therefore the global civil society never got to know the Indian position. Public diplomacy division was to create a division outside also-an alternative route
Sri Dasgupta pointed out three examples in which public diplomacy showed its own charisma and even failed to do anything. In USA, a lot of effort was taken up by Washington D.C to prove the world that why they have decided to wage the war against Iraq and why Iraq needed a regime change. USA involved its own alliances all over the world and the US military force in their war against Saddam Hussein regime but the crux of the public diplomacy is completely denied by USA. USA completely forgot to convince its citizen residing within USA and overlooked their sentiment. However this example clearly showed USA’s negligence in fostering public diplomacy
In the second case, Israel attacked Lebanon. Israeli soldiers were kidnapped by Hamas and Hijbulla; a fact which has been well documented. Israel therefore asked either to release their soldier otherwise; they will be freed to attack. Hammas and hijbulla refused. This fact has also been documented well. But when Israel attacked, opinion held Israel to be the aggressor. This again was a case of complete collapse of public diplomacy by Israel. It never went to articulate its position while. It is a case of kidnapping of soldiers and the refusal to release are well documented fact.
The third example Sri.Dasgupta pointed out that Germany after the Second World War was a complete savage. People all over the world use to talk about German companies like the Mercedes Benz which is a class apart, a true revolution in itself. But the German growth rate fell and unemployment grew largely all over Germany. The European commission on the other hand pulled up German as it failed to fulfill the deficit four times in a row. A stark detoriation of German self-esteem could be visualized. The foreign ministers in Berlin decided to change German situation by winning friends all over the world. German’s biggest public diplomacy after the Second World War was to project its economic growth and started building it whole heartedly. As a result of which people started to believe in Germany as German, a land of ideas and innovation. The football world cup played the real ground for true German spirit, to prove them in front of millions of crowd gathered their. Black, the captain of German football team said that when he looked around and all he could see are German people. Although Italy won the final but Germany stole the heart. Trade and commerce, industries, tourism grew 4-5 times after that. Germany opted its civil society to play the major role in time of crisis and with public diplomacy only they have their own position in the world map.
But Sri Dasgupta cautioned that the problem with public diplomacy. He also emphasized that with public diplomacy misgivings can be removed. The agenda is to pursue one’s national interest. But there are times when public diplomacy gives a way the wrong stories. For instance, during the middle years of cold war, more than fifty thousand Soviet Union’s people want to study to the USA. One name was Alexander Yahoo who was a significant contributor to the policy Glassnost. The general perception was that his experiences in US contributed to this conceive Glasnost but the reality was that he actually shaped his US wherein he thought everyone abuses his country. Mr. Dasgupta said public diplomacy is the means to create receptivity in an otherwise hostile situation. For instance, Mr. Dasgupta was of the opinion that Cuba showed an interest in creating a favorable atmosphere to relax tension with USA.India’ foreign policy was never open; policy articulation remained within the closed talks of south block. Today, it is different. Point is understood now that foreign policy is also extremely crucial for the domestic as well. For instance, the Indo-Bangladesh relation has immense impact on west Bengal, Assam and north eastern states of India.
The Vote of Thanks was delivered by Dr. Imankalyan Lahiri, General Secretary, JAIR
A fundamental mission of JAIR is to support the professional workplace and career opportunities of young scholars working in the field of International Relations and Contemporary history. There is a role in the association for scholars and students from all venues and locations with a critical and comprehensive interest in the study of International Relations and the enrichment of public life.
Prepared by Smt. Sreya Ghosh and Smt. Sohini Chowdhury for The Jadavpur Association of International Relations.(c) JAIR, 2008
The Beginning………………………….
The Inaugural ceremony was initiated by Dr. Partha Pratim Basu, Reader, Dept. of International Relations, Jadavpur University and President (Working Committee), JAIR. Prof. Basu began by saying that the first Dept of IR in India began in kolkata (at the Jadavpur University) and therefore it became axiomatic for the first association of international relations to begin from the same city. Highlighting the objectives of the association he first and foremost mentioned that JAIR is a professional association and aim to be a learning society, offering seminars, discussions, conferences on topic of relevance. JAIR would endeavor to conduct projects in collaboration with other institutions and organizations. Next, Prof. Basu, envisioned JAIR going beyond the realms of pure academics. JAIR would like to indulge in policy making and contribution to international understanding of tolerance, humanity and peace. Prof. Basu further highlighted that IR is a discipline which shares concern with other disciplines and therefore visualized JAIR to be a meeting ground for various subjects offering space from students and researchers, ignite fresh minds what naturally favor is a fact that IR is concerned not just with students and researchers of the discipline but also professionals from fields like defense, diplomacy, media, business (chamber of commerce), therefore JAIR would like to work with such multifaceted professionals and fields. Prof. Basu also emphasized that JAIR having a humble start, envisions itself to be an All India association and towards that direction he seeks co-operation and participation of all present.
Address by Professor P.N Ghosh, Vice-Chancellor, Jadavpur University and Member, Advisory Committee, JAIR
Prof. Ghosh began by drawing the attention of the evidence to the complexity and multi-disciplinary nature of IR. Further he painted the history of changes taking place in the international scenario, drawing concentration towards the changes taking place post second world war, epitomizing the reference of technology engulfing international affairs. He pointed towards the fact that in the post-war years Japan’s economic growth could be traced to its technological advancement, while India though having talented scientists would not cope with world economic advancement became of its technological handicap. Though India political leadership in Non-aligned movement was immense but remained economically backward for its technological response.Prof. Ghosh talked about other relevant issues concerning international relations in present times. He first spoke here of the globalization as a dominant process in the present times. Next he spoke of the relevance of environment, the growing realization among both developing and developed nations towards the same. He also talked about the dangers of terrorism and its impact all over the world.
Address by Sri Prasad Ranjan Roy, IAS, Principal Secretary, Higher Education Department , Govt. of West Bengal and Member, Advisory Committee, JAIR
Sri Roy began by saying that kolkata has tradition of giving birth to many associations and organizations. Therefore fitting for kolkata to lay the seeds of JAIR as an association. Roy addressed the importance of systematic interaction between institutions and government. India has till now lacked this and he hoped JAIR moved thereby fill that vacuum. He hoped JAIR would serve as a grooming ground for those students who move outside. He said “our students are our best diplomats”. He hoped JAIR would help students, representing the country well.
Address by Professor Purushottam Bhattacharya, Professor, Dept of international relations, Jadavpur University and Member, Advisory Committee, JAIR:
Prof. Bhattacharya aspires that JAIR would not only assures an All India character but also an international character too. Having a humble start, the objective of JAIR would need to reach out more people and various areas. Prof Bhattacharya remarked, inter-disciplinary character of IR is a strength rather than weakness. He ended by saying JAIR is undertaking a “challenging task” and hopes it last long.
Keynote address by Sri Amit Dasgupta, Joint Secretary, Public Diplomacy Division, Ministry of External Affairs, Govt. of India and Member, Advisory Committee, JAIR
Sri Amit Dasgupta
Sri Amit Dasgupta began his speech by mentioning that his deliverance will be from a practitioner’s point of view. He began by distinguishing between public diplomacy from traditional diplomacy and his enlighten nature was concerned with the former. While traditional diplomacy remains confined within the realm of talks between governments of several nations or within the government, on the other hand public diplomacy means “out of government”. Public diplomacy came into being in the 1960’s. Government of India also started its distinct public diplomacy. Previous to that India has an External Publicity Division which was first managed by Information and Broadcasting Ministry (Govt. Of India), later taken up by Ministry of External Affairs. The rational behind having a public diplomacy channel is the fact that before independence and at the juncture of independence, the image of India was peddled solely by British. After independence, India suddenly found itself amongst community of nations. Hence it became important to India to project in its various facets in front of the world. Therefore, the external public diplomacy division was given the mandate of imaging India in all its facets; give a sense, “what is India?” It was through such initiatives that people came to have a better understanding of India that it was not just a land of snake chambers and maharajas, that one could also do business with it. The realization was about a need to shift dialogue partners.
Emphasizing the need for public diplomacy, Mr. Dasgupta spoke about dealings in the WTO. While after the WTO negotiations stalled, the delegates came back to Delhi (India), the media reports came rushing in stating India has blocked “development” in the poor countries by blocking WTO negotiations. Therefore apparently India seemed to be at fault. The point is therefore the global civil society never got to know the Indian position. Public diplomacy division was to create a division outside also-an alternative route
Sri Dasgupta pointed out three examples in which public diplomacy showed its own charisma and even failed to do anything. In USA, a lot of effort was taken up by Washington D.C to prove the world that why they have decided to wage the war against Iraq and why Iraq needed a regime change. USA involved its own alliances all over the world and the US military force in their war against Saddam Hussein regime but the crux of the public diplomacy is completely denied by USA. USA completely forgot to convince its citizen residing within USA and overlooked their sentiment. However this example clearly showed USA’s negligence in fostering public diplomacy
In the second case, Israel attacked Lebanon. Israeli soldiers were kidnapped by Hamas and Hijbulla; a fact which has been well documented. Israel therefore asked either to release their soldier otherwise; they will be freed to attack. Hammas and hijbulla refused. This fact has also been documented well. But when Israel attacked, opinion held Israel to be the aggressor. This again was a case of complete collapse of public diplomacy by Israel. It never went to articulate its position while. It is a case of kidnapping of soldiers and the refusal to release are well documented fact.
The third example Sri.Dasgupta pointed out that Germany after the Second World War was a complete savage. People all over the world use to talk about German companies like the Mercedes Benz which is a class apart, a true revolution in itself. But the German growth rate fell and unemployment grew largely all over Germany. The European commission on the other hand pulled up German as it failed to fulfill the deficit four times in a row. A stark detoriation of German self-esteem could be visualized. The foreign ministers in Berlin decided to change German situation by winning friends all over the world. German’s biggest public diplomacy after the Second World War was to project its economic growth and started building it whole heartedly. As a result of which people started to believe in Germany as German, a land of ideas and innovation. The football world cup played the real ground for true German spirit, to prove them in front of millions of crowd gathered their. Black, the captain of German football team said that when he looked around and all he could see are German people. Although Italy won the final but Germany stole the heart. Trade and commerce, industries, tourism grew 4-5 times after that. Germany opted its civil society to play the major role in time of crisis and with public diplomacy only they have their own position in the world map.
But Sri Dasgupta cautioned that the problem with public diplomacy. He also emphasized that with public diplomacy misgivings can be removed. The agenda is to pursue one’s national interest. But there are times when public diplomacy gives a way the wrong stories. For instance, during the middle years of cold war, more than fifty thousand Soviet Union’s people want to study to the USA. One name was Alexander Yahoo who was a significant contributor to the policy Glassnost. The general perception was that his experiences in US contributed to this conceive Glasnost but the reality was that he actually shaped his US wherein he thought everyone abuses his country. Mr. Dasgupta said public diplomacy is the means to create receptivity in an otherwise hostile situation. For instance, Mr. Dasgupta was of the opinion that Cuba showed an interest in creating a favorable atmosphere to relax tension with USA.India’ foreign policy was never open; policy articulation remained within the closed talks of south block. Today, it is different. Point is understood now that foreign policy is also extremely crucial for the domestic as well. For instance, the Indo-Bangladesh relation has immense impact on west Bengal, Assam and north eastern states of India.
The Vote of Thanks was delivered by Dr. Imankalyan Lahiri, General Secretary, JAIR
A fundamental mission of JAIR is to support the professional workplace and career opportunities of young scholars working in the field of International Relations and Contemporary history. There is a role in the association for scholars and students from all venues and locations with a critical and comprehensive interest in the study of International Relations and the enrichment of public life.
Prepared by Smt. Sreya Ghosh and Smt. Sohini Chowdhury for The Jadavpur Association of International Relations.(c) JAIR, 2008
No comments:
Post a Comment