| |
China upsets neighbours
How India can counter Beijing’s territorial ambitions
by G Parthasarathy
WHEN the foreign ministers of 10 member-countries of ASEAN commenced their meeting in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, on July 9, no one expected to see the differences among the member-states on how to deal with China’s blatantly aggressive behaviour on its territorial claims in the South China Sea, leading to the first-ever breakdown in such a conference in the past 45 years. There was the usual consensus on such issues as economic integration, political and security cooperation, tensions over the North Korean nuclear programme and the ASEAN Declaration of Southeast Asia as a nuclear weapons-free zone. Moreover, when Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen spoke at the conference, he urged the need for ASEAN unity in dealing with the most pressing security issue, evoking serious concern in the region — the growing stridency and assertiveness of China on its territorial claims in the South China Sea.Reports from Phnom Penh indicate that after Prime Minister Hun Sen’s speech, the Chinese approached Cambodian Foreign Minister Hor Nam Hong and made it clear that China objected to the inclusion of any reference to differences on the South China Sea in the conference’s joint declaration. As recipients of massive Chinese economic assistance, the Cambodians have generally toed the Chinese line on regional issues and in the past even listened to Chinese advice that efforts should be made to block Indian participation in the East Asia Summit. When the tensions in the South China Sea were under discussion, Cambodia’s Foreign Minister Hor Nam Hong refused to include any reference to the issue in the joint communique of the conference. With Chinese maritime vessels positioned astride the Scarborough Shoal located barely 100 kilometres from its soil and 1800 kilometres away from mainland China, and China threatening to send its vessels with naval escorts to areas it claimed, the Philippines vehemently objected to the stand of the hosts, Cambodia. Other countries like Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei, facing similar Chinese claims, were taken aback. When the Cambodians refused to budge, the Philippines Foreign Minister packed his bags and headed home. It took some skilful diplomacy by Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa to salvage the situation. He worked with his colleagues to get Cambodia to agree to a six-point declaration which called for “full respect for the universally recognised principles of international law, including the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)”. Within hours of issue of this Declaration of Principles by ASEAN, China reasserted its sovereignty over the entire South China Sea and all the islands in the region. China, of course, has a unique and self-serving interpretation of the UNCLOS. It holds that the UNCLOS is “not an international treaty that settles disputes between sovereign states, nor can it be used as a reference for settling such disputes”. States having differences on maritime boundaries across the world, however, abide by the principles enunciated in the UNCLOS, for determining maritime boundaries, where there are differences. China’s aggressive diplomacy in Phnom Penh has been accompanied by assertive military posturing in recent weeks, all across its maritime boundaries, in both the South China and East China Seas. On June 28, China began combat patrols in waters around the disputed groups of islands in the South China Sea. The move was described by its Defence Ministry as undertaken to protect “national sovereignty” in its territorial waters. It was said to manifest its “determination” to “defend our territorial waters” and to “protect our maritime rights”. Around the same time, the China National Offshore Oil Company (CNOOC) announced that nine new offshore blocks in the South China Sea, all in disputed waters with Vietnam, were open for oil exploration. This, after having warned India not to explore in the blocks allocated to it by Vietnam in an area it had been involved in exploration activity since 1988. The disputed blocks cover an area of 160,000 square kilometres, with some blocks located barely 80 miles from Vietnam’s coast and well within Vietnam’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Interestingly, in recent days, Vietnamese academics have drawn attention to Chinese maps and documents between the 18th and early 20th centuries that clearly demonstrate that China’s historical claims to sovereignty have never extended beyond its Hainan Island and did not even include the Paracel and Spratly Islands, leave alone the entire South China Sea. China’s assertiveness is growing not only in the South China Sea, where it has set up a new Prefecture in Sansha in its Southern Hainan Island. Sansha has been designated as the centre for enforcing Chinese claims across the South China Sea and empowered to administer some 200 offshore islets. Similar growing assertiveness has characterised Chinese behaviour in the East China Sea also on issues like its territorial claims on the Senkaku Islands. China appears confident that with its growing military strength and economic influence, it can create splits in ASEAN and prevent the emergence of a unified ASEAN approach to deal with its territorial ambitions. China is today ASEAN’s largest trading partner with the two-way trade touching $300 billion in 2011 (against an expected $ 80 billion in bilateral trade between India and ASEAN in 2012). In recent years, China has overtaken Japan as the largest contributor of economic assistance to ASEAN. Chinese FDI has also grown substantially in Indonesia, Singapore, Vietnam, Myanmar and Cambodia. The Chinese are evidently calculating that with Myanmar, which like Cambodia is heavily dependent on Chinese assistance and investment, soon set to assume the chairmanship of ASEAN, they can ensure that ASEAN cannot mount a serious diplomatic challenge to their territorial ambitions in the near future. Chinese domination of the sea-lanes of the Indian and Pacific Ocean would be a matter of concern to India as around 50 per cent of its foreign trade moves across the South China Sea. Moreover, with base facilities available in Seychelles and Gwadar, China is poised to expand its influence in the Indian Ocean. If China achieves its territorial ambitions in the South and East China Seas through coercive diplomacy, it could well be tempted to adopting a similar route on its growing territorial claims on India. It is, therefore, imperative for India to work with other partners in the East Asia Summit like the US, Russia and Japan to facilitate the emergence of a cohesive ASEAN strategy to counter Chinese territorial ambitions. Under no circumstances should India back off from its commitments made to Vietnam on offshore oil and gas exploration. Moreover, a much greater focus is required on accelerating the growth of defence, economic and investment ties with ASEAN countries, with particular focus on Indonesia, Singapore, Vietnam and the
Philippines.
 |
| |
To FB or not to FB
by Peeyush Agnihotri
What good can come out of peeping into someone’s personal life or bragging about “been-here, done-that” would be my usual refrain whenever friends and family members would coax me to join Facebook (FB). “World population is seven billion while Facebook has 900 million users. I still count among the majority,” I would jokingly state and play ostrich while this social networking site changed the world around me. My resistance went on for a couple of years till personal emails were reduced to a trickle in the inbox. The landline was taken over by telemarketeers and cellphones merely became an electronic leash. “What! Don’t say a media guy is not on FB?” acquaintances and colleagues (both present and former) would sarcastically lament. Suddenly, I got felt left out, not being in sync with whatever was happening around in the social circle. Relatives would discuss events that made no sense to me as I was not on the “news feed”. My son already knew about Osama’s killing, a match outcome and, more recently, a celebrity’s death while I flipped the channels. A former colleague from Toronto, with whom I had not been in much contact, was aware about my recent visit to India because he saw the reunion pictures on FB. This guy excitedly phoned to enquire about everyone’s well-being. The editor of the online magazine for which I occasionally write politely requested to send write-ups through the Facebook account to boost the magazine’s readership and the university professor wanted a course module’s peer review discussion through Facebook. The Subway guy, a block away, didn’t hand me over a discount coupon, redeemable only through FB, since I was not “socially networked”. Didn’t make sense, but it was food for thought, nevertheless! “Please open an account,” was their piece of advice given in different settings and for a different cause. To FB or not to FB? While I mused at the gym, I overheard a hockey mom shouting out to another, “I just sent you a mail…” Here’s someone, who, like me, believes emails are better than FB, a flash of thought crossed my mind before the lady completed the sentence, “…to be a friend on the Facebook.” Enough! I chided myself. Change to make the world change for you or else you become a dinosaur — once omnipresent, now extinct. I rushed, logged on to the laptop and created an account. A month down the road, though I am still trying to get a hang of FB, life indeed has changed. It has become juicier. Classmates, buddies, former and present colleagues, relatives, including seen-on-wedding ones, family members, acquaintances, all adorn the ‘friends’ corner, pumping something remarkable in the “News Feed” every day. And some of them have been pure revelations. Thanks to FB, I now know about the singing abilities of my designer friend (he posts karaoke audios), a former colleague’s camera skills, a geologist friend’s penchant for poetry and a grumpy manager’s dancing abilities. Social gyan is a double-edged weapon. Now, I see and know more than what I would have never known. Or would never have liked to know. Say, who sleeps too late at night or who got caught in a mudslide, to put it mildly. Then there are others who don’t face the problem. They just Facebook it. Be in the loop or be left out. You have no choice. Some people still equate FB to alcohol for its addictive and squabble-inciting abilities. For them, my advice is: “Please link responsibly and enjoy”.
|
| |
Rejected by the feminists in the 1970s, corsets have returned in the shape of faja that tucks in layers of fat to lend a slender look. With a 47 per cent increase in global demand for fajas, the debate over fashion vs comfort rages on
sizing up curves
Jasvinder Kaur
|
Hidden pain: With girdles and straps fajas are designed to squeeze certain areas and leave others to jiggle.
|
In the world of fashion the more things change, the more they remain the same. Until recently, faja was imported from Columbia, mostly as post -operative wear, a kind of tight wrap used by recovering liposuction patients to check swelling and tightening of the skin. Today, Columbian manufacturers and exporters claim, the demand for fajas has increased by 47 percent, thanks to its body shaping application. Embraced initially by young Latino girls, who used faja to get a short cut to a curvaceous body, it gained popularity among women who wanted to hide unwanted flab across cultures. Forgetting well- known feminist Gloria Steinem’s stand against corsets, more and more women are wriggling into fajas to reduce their girth, if only visibly. Wearing faja ensues a battle between flab and fabric, folds of flesh have to be squeezed into several girdles woven with the fabric that accentuate curves by tightening unwanted flab. Jean Pierre Velez, one of the exporter from Columbia claimed, he sent 60,000 fajas to be sold on the streets of Queens, New York. Available in a variety of shapes and sizes, from full- body jumpsuits to tight belly bands, that cost between $ 20 to $ 70, the effects depend on the fabric heft of the fajas; that includes lycra, cotton, nylon and latex. Wearing faja also kills appetite.  Comfort versus style
Fashion has always been about looking noticeable. Comfort was never its primary concern. Early Europeans who came to India realized the comfort of the local dress. At times they discarded their heavy European styles and took to clothes more suitable to the Indian climate. But the British discouraged this trend. In early 19th century, wearing of Indian clothes became increasingly unacceptable to them. In 1830, legislation was introduced banning employees of the East India Company from wearing Indian attire. While the British were trying to keep their British identity, the Indian elite were beginning to adopt articles of European dress. Slowly but surely Indians adopted European style of clothing even though these were not suited to our climate. In India today the western suit has become part of the formal and business dress code and the tie is an integral part of it. Even in summers while the suit is increasingly being discarded as evening wear, number of clubs insist on a tie while permitting entry onto their premises. As we go through the history of western costume we find that dresses were less complicated till about the16th century. At that time undergarments became important as they gave shape to the costume. The display of the body through the tightening of clothes caused a great scandal in the eyes of the church. The idea of artificially changing the shape of the body was equally distasteful to the moralists. The skirt was pinned to an underskirt called 'wheel farthingale'. The length of the skirt and disposition of pleats was determined each time the dress was worn. This made dressing up cumbersome and time consuming. This type of costume is best illustrated in portraits of Queen Elizabeth I.
|
Obvious discomfort: Barbara Gamage, Countess of Leicester, with her six children in farthingale supported by crinoline, popular from the 15th to early 19th century
|
Exaggerated features The strange artificiality associated with the Rococo ( late Baroque) period is due to the powdered wigs which became the norm in the 18th century. The lady of fashion powdered her head with wheat meal. The messy operation was carried out in a special room near the entrance called the Powder Room. Hairdressers were called ‘mackerels’ as they looked like floured fish ready for the pan. It was said that enough flour rested on the heads of Versailles to feed the poor of Paris. It was during the early reign of Mary Antoinette that enormous constructions on the head were in fashion and could be as high as two feet. Women combed their natural powdered hair along with the false hair so as to cover the horsehair pad worn under the hair. These 18th century hairstyles came with their problems. Women were forced to travel in kneeling positions in carriages with heads hanging out of the window. Even the wealthy could only afford the lengthy attention of the hairdresser once a week while others had to wait for months at times. In the 19th century, the crinoline (a woman's undergarment worn to give support to the back) outdid the earlier dresses by its sheer volume. The skirt similar to Scarlett O’Hara's dress from 'Gone with the Wind' had layers of inner garments to give it support. The lower underwear consisted of a stiff wool and horsehair petticoat about four yards around with another petticoat boned to the knee and padded from the knee down, a starched white petticoat with flounces, a muslin underskirt and finally the gown which was lowered onto the superstructure by servants armed with pole like apparatus. The gown in the following years came with collapsible hinges and lightweight hoops. It was difficult for the lady to dress up on her own and required the assistance of several maids. All this acrobatics was done to accentuate feminine curves. Some rationale Early attempts at dress reform came by mid 19th century. A group of American feminists wanted to reform women’s attire, which they thought was impractical. “Women are in bondage,” said Lucy Stone, one of the leaders of the movement. A group of women along with Amelia Bloomer adopted a style of wearing short skirt over Turkish trousers. Even though Mrs Bloomer did not invent the style, it was named after her as she had endorsed it. She wrote favourably about it in1851, in a journal that she edited. The Bloomer costume consisted of full trousers gathered at the ankle with a knee length skirt. Few women outside the feminist movement took up bloomers. In the early 20th century when women wore corsets, a movement began to stop the practice. Corsets were supported by a steel structure radiating from the waist. Designers like Paul Poiret liberated the women of the corset but put them into a controversial hobble or tube skirt. The silhouette was straight but was worn with a hobble garter which was a strip of material that was tied to the ankles together allowing them to take not more than three or four inch steps at a time. Formal skirts were only 12 inch wide below the knee, so that 'hopping' became the only means of crossing the room. Liberation with industrialisation It was the First World War that thrust the ideas of simplicity in clothing, which were introduced by Chanel's, a fashion designer in 1917. Many more designers introduced comfort and ideas of functionality in clothing. The wartime silhouette was far easier to move in than the ankle-binding, long narrow skirts of the previous period. Clothing styles became more practical. Industrialisation forced women to step out of their cumbersome styles and adopt clothes that facilitated outdoor work. In the Indian context, fashion trends were generally set by film stars. Though, we have not seen the exaggerated costume styles of the west, but some of our styles were difficult to follow. In the sixties Sadhana wore the skin tight sleeveless kameez and equally tight churidar and has been given credit by writers like Mehar Castelino in popularising this style. It was difficult for girls to hop onto buses or play games in this dress. However, it did not go very kindly with school authorities and many of them banned the wearing of tight clothes. India has had some exaggerated hair styles though, like high bouffant and ringlets which were popularised by film stars Sharmila Tagore, Mumtaz and many others. This style was highly impractical for a warm country like ours. It could take women up to two hours to get ready and some would keep the same style for a couple of days. Hygiene was also an issue as generally these were made with false hair. Today more and more people are moving towards comfortable clothing. Perhaps that is the reason why salwar kameez has become popular throughout India. But, the desire to look curvaceous thrusts women of the 21 century undergo all sorts of tortures, wearing faja is just one of them. The writer is a textile researcher who has worked at the National Museum, New Delhi, and Musee d’art et d’histoire, Geneva
The dress circle
 There is a theory that farthingale was invented to conceal the misdemeanours of a Spanish princess, but it is certainly true that the device was known as cache-infant. The two London disasters — The Great Plague(1665) and The Great Fire (1666) led to moralising and soul searching. Charles II was called upon to bring in reforms in dress to curtail expenses of the court. The new dress that was adopted consisted of a shirt, knee-length waistcoat and a coat of the same length worn over it. This three-piece outfit is considered to be the forerunner of the modern three- piece suit. British did not want Indians to adopt European styles but wanted them to wear British manufactured textiles. Indian women's reluctance to adopt European styles was indicated in a debate that arose in the 1930s concerning what Indian women should wear for tennis. It was recognised that the sari was cumbersome. Jeans were originally marketed for gold miners in California by Levi Strauss in 1850. As a practical working garment, jeans remained unchanged for a century. They were adopted for casual wear after Word War II
|
