Contents
Preface…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 1 Day 1
Inaugural Ceremony ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 3 Keynote Address ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 6
The Challenges for India in the Emerging
International Order………………………………………………………………………………………………… 8
The Importance of Immediate Neighbors and the Importance of Economic and Military Diplomacy …………………………………………………………………… 11
ComiConflict………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 13 Quizotopia …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 15 Dialectics……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 17 Day 2
Policy Lab…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 20 PenSeive …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 23 Media and International Relations………………………………………………………………………… 25 Aspects of International Relations ………………………………………………………………………… 27 China in the Contemporary World Order………………………………………………………………. 29 PolitCon ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 31 Valedictory Session…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 33 Prize Distribution Ceremony…………………………………………………………………………………… 36 Closing Ceremony ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 38
ii | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Good Thoughts about IRSC 18’ ………………………………………………………………………………… 39 Guest Interviews
Jawhar Sircar …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 41 Manoj Joshi………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 43 Sauraveshwar Sen…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 45 Paranjoy Guha Thakurta…………………………………………………………………………………………. 47 Major General (retd.) Arun Roye……………………………………………………………………………. 50 Shri Suresh K. Goel …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 52 Dr. Srikanth Kondapalli…………………………………………………………………………………………… 54 Student Interviews ……………………………………………………………………………………. 57 The team
Faculty Advisory Committee…………………………………………………………………. 68 Student Committees……………………………………………………………………………….. 69
iii | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Preface
The 7th edition of the International Relations Scholastic Conclave, which is a student led departmental event, was held on the 10th and 11th of April 2018. It was a two day academic extravaganza which sought to explore the multifarious dimensions of the field of International Relations through panel discussions and student events like Quiz, Debate, and Paper presentation among others. The theme of IRSC 2018 was “Rethinking IR: UN and its role in the Emerging world Order.”
We are very thankful to the Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University for their continuous support, help, and financial assistance as it was integral to the success of IRSC 2018.
Partners who helped make IRSC a success are as follows:
1) Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University.
2) Public Diplomacy Division, Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India. 3) Netaji Institute for Asian Studies (NIAS)
4) Jadavpur Association of International Relations (JAIR)
5) Radio JU
6) Rakshak Foundation
7) Catalyst Education Services
8) London Lounge
9) The Sinful Indulgence
10) The Pastry Room
11) The Café Store
Our Events were covered by:
1) Doordarshan Bangla, Kendra Prasar Bharati, Kolkata
2) The Telegraph
3) Campus Varta
The assessed footfall for the events is as follows:
1) Comiconflict (Students‟ Cartoon-Making competition) : 8 selected participants 2) Quizotopia (Students‟ Quiz) : 44 selected participants
3) Dialectics (Students‟ Debate) : 6 teams of 2 members in the finals selected out of numerous applications.
4) Penseive (Students‟ Creative writing competition): 10 selected participants.
5) Politcon (Students‟ Paper presentation): 8 contestants selected in the finals out of numerous applications.
The estimated footfall of the entire event, spanning over two days, was over a 1000 people. ─The Press and Rappoteuring Team
1 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
2 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Inaugural Ceremony
The Inaugural ceremony was graced by Prof. Subhasis Biswas (Dean, Faculty of Arts), Dr. Kakoli Sengupta (Head of the Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University), Professor Partha Pratim Basu (Professor of the Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University and President of Jadavpur Association of International Relations), Professor Shibashis Chatterjee (Professor of Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University), Jawhar Sircar (IAS, retd. and former CEO of Prasar Bharati), Ambassador Suresh K. Goel (Former Director-General, Indian Council of Cultural Relations) Dr. Imankalyan Lahiri (Associate Professor of Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University) and Shri Subhajit Naskar (Assistant Professor of Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University, and Faculty Convener of IRSC 2018.)
IRSC 2018 officially began by the lighting of the lamp and the felicitation of the Guests. The inaugural ceremony was anchored by 3rd year undergraduate students, Sreetama Basu and Anoushka Roy, from the department of International Relations.
Ranit Mukherjee, our very own final year post-graduate student from the Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University gave a brief welcome note. He briefly touched upon the history of the Department of International Relations at Jadavpur University. He explained the significance of the theme; International Relations as we are approaching its centennial year. He then thanked the sponsors on behalf of the organizers, who are as follows: Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University, NIAS, Radio JU, JAIR, Catalyst Education Services, Public Diplomacy Division, Ministry of External Affairs, and Rakshak Foundation. He said that, this year‟s IRSC had achieved much by being able to gather „such a series of stars in one place‟- a euphemism for the guests. The speech ended with another set of thanks to guests, departments, professors, and students.
Shri Subhajit Naskar, the Faculty Convener of IRSC
18‟ welcomed „all the guests and faculty members
“IRSC is a very unique event throughout in India or throughout in South Asia as it is an event by the students ‘for the students’ and of the students’ .The students have really worked hard to make this a success. I am sure the two day event is going to be a great learning experience.”
-Shri Subhajit Naskar, Faculty Convenor of IRSC 2018
of the department and began his speech by elucidating upon the theme, Rethinking IR: UN and its role in the Emerging World Order. He expounded upon how the regional
organizations and the UN are playing a central role in global affairs. He quoted Professor Amitava Acharya and Barry Buzan on how the developing countries are coming to the forefront of world politics. He said that the ASEAN Tigers are coming out of the Westphalian system and bringing the fight to the global north and pointed out the many criticisms made by the orientalists on the multilateral order. He emphasized upon how the professor of a developing country, Mr. Amitava Acharya, went on to become the International
Studies Association President. He concluded his speech by thanking the university authorities and the sponsors for all their help and support.
3 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Dr. Kakoli Sengupta, Head of the department of International Relations, began her speech by thanking all the guests and faculty members for being present. She said she would speak from the heart without giving a prepared speech as this was a students‟ event. She began by recounting the magical experience of students coming to her a month ago with the proposal for the event. She reminded the students about how she had told them that even if there were two people in the IRSC audience she would stand by them. She congratulated the students as the hall was at full capacity with audience members. She reminded the students of the magic mantra- “If you believe in yourself you can make anything happen.” She concluded her speech by telling the students how proud she was of them. She wished the event every success.
Professor Subhasis Biswas, Dean of the faculty of arts began his address by thanking everyone on the dais and expressed his pleasure in being a part of the event. He recounted his student days in Jadavpur University. He explained the history of the department of International Relations- how it came up a year after the foundation of Jadavpur University and how pertinent International Relations continues to remain even after 100 years. He then quoted from Professor Amiya Kumar Baghchi‟s book- „Perilous Passage: Mankind and the Global Ascendancy of Capital‟ on how 80% of the total world resources are located in the northern hemisphere where only 20% of the world population lives, whereas 20% of the total world resources are located in the southern hemisphere where 80% of the world population lives. He hoped that all the evolving contradictions would be discussed in great detail and lead to the coming up of credible solutions.
Professor Partha Pratim Basu from the department of International Relations and the president of Jadavpur Association of International Relations (JAIR) began his address by speaking about JAIR, which is a Non-Profit Non-Governmental Organization that publishes a plethora of journals and organizes numerous seminars. He said that it was the initiative and widespread interest taken by the students that made these events so successful. He expressed JAIR‟s pleasure in being associated with the student led and student organized flagship event of the department of International Relations, Jadavpur University. He recounted the story of how IRSC began 8 years ago and how glad he was to see it continue to grow bigger and better. He concluded by congratulating the Faculty Convenor of IRSC 18‟, Shri Subhajit Naskar, and wished the event grand success.
Dr. Imankalyan Lahiri expressed his gratitude to the Ministry of External Affairs, Public Diplomacy division for collaborating with us. He thanked Ambassador Suresh K. Goel, Jawhar Sircar and all faculty members which include Dr. Kakoli Sengupta, Prof. Partha Pratim Basu, Prof. Shibashis Chatterjee, Prof. Omprakash Mishra, Shri Subhajit Naskar, and Prof. Kanak Sarkar, for taking out the time from their busy schedules to be there. He commended the students for their hard work. He concluded by wishing everyone a great success for the exciting, enriching and epoch making scholastic conclave in the following two days.
4 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Row 1 (From Left to Right) – Lighting of the lamps, Prof. Subhashis Biswas
Row 2 (From Left to Right) – Prof. Partha Pratim Basu, Dr. Kakoli Sengupta
Row 3 (From Left to Right) – Dr. Imankalyan Lahiri, Shri. Subhajit Naskar
5 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Keynote Address
The first event of this two-day conclave was the Keynote address which was
delivered by Mr. Jawhar Sircar, a retired civil servant with over 42 years of experience in administration. He has served as Secretary of the Ministry of Culture, CEO of Prasar Bharati, has been a member of the Governing Councils of Indian Council of World Affairs (ICWA), Consortium for Educational Communication, Film & Television Institute of India, and also Trustee/GB Member of IIM, Kolkata, Victoria Memorial Museum, Indian Museum, National Museum, National Library, National School of Drama, IGNCA, and the Three National Academies. He has been unanimously elected as Chairman of the prestigious Centre for Studies in Social Science. He has carried out research on cultural, historical and anthropological subjects, and has published several articles and research papers on subjects like history, culture, media and society.
Speaker: Jawhar Sircar.
Former CEO of Prasar Bharati
Chair: Prof. Omprakash Mishra.
Department of
International Relations, Jadavpur University.
He gave a discourse on the theme of IRSC 18‟, „Rethinking IR: UN and its Role in the emerging World Order.‟ The session was chaired by Professor Omprakash Mishra of the Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University.
Sreetama Basu, a student of department of International Relations, introduced the speaker and the chair to the audience.
Professor Omprakash Mishra set the tone for the enriching session by touching upon the theme. He explained to the students about how sovereign states are units of International Relations and if rethinking was possible (which was taking place) it would help to achieve a lot. Positive changes would only be made with effective cooperation. Then he opened the floor to Mr. Jawhar Sircar who shared with us his scholarly bureaucratic insights and his international worldview on the theme.
Mr. Jawhar Sircar thanked the eminent personalities present, and began his address on a humorous note on why IFS officers continue to be called Ambassadors
even after retirement, and how he ranked 14th in the Civil
We will even forgive you if you are unable to control superpowers but never forgive you if you are unavailable to control super conglomerates.
-Jawhar Sircar
Services exams.
In emerging world order, he pointed out how the world cannot be run according to the whims and fancies of a blonde man. A unilateral world order is a cause of alarm for anyone. A national policy can have international ramifications where he cited a national policy of killing their own „children.‟ He felt that excessive nationalism will break the nations apart if effective cooperation is not internationalized. He cautioned against the
internationalism of various epidemic diseases. Rohingya was used as an example for globally alarming massacres and the common knowledge of it being a genocide. All the three major players, i.e.; India, China and USA, maintained an academic attitude towards genocide.
6 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
In the Middle East, there is subsidized terror that was aided, funded and created by one of the world superpowers, after which it turned into a Frankenstein. He said that this is the same story for all major terror organs like the ISIS, Taliban and Al-Qaeda. He reminded us that concerns about these groups were only raised when the concerned Superpowers raised the alarm.
UN is multi critical forum that knows how to tolerate President Putin. He felt
that the international cooperative body in spite of all its drawbacks and fallacies
liked the UN for discussing subjects like „Climate Change and for creating a new
world order.‟ He pointed out the need for UN to put forward a charter of
important goals to achieve through the Millennium Development
Goals(MDGs.) He emphasized the need for bodies like WHO (World Health
Organization) as diseases do not respect boundaries and have very little respect
for customs officials. He commended the FAO (Food and Agriculture
Organization) on doing a job well done. The basic problem with all or
Jawhar Sircar
Organizations was that they are headed by people over 60 who try to cater to
try to the interests of people between the ages of 30-35.
He mocked the United Nations General Assembly for its numerous resolutions which are a numbered patchwork of compromises. He then described his experience of serving in the UNESCO. The General Assembly can call Israel a „naughty boy‟, Syria can have observers coming and leaving, Kosovo can have UN making low decibel noises and Iraq can see UN getting sidelined without much effect. He laid down how UN Security Council takes all the decisions for the General Assembly due to the financial structure of the UN where the superpowers pay most of the bills. He pointed out how super conglomerates like Amazon, Facebook and Google surpass the earnings of several nations and how the quest for world domination can‟t be universally surpassed .The transnational nature of the emerging world order has to be recognized and only the UN can bind these major companies with strings of restrictions.
In this transnational world order we can‟t go through orthodox terms like „Boots on the ground‟, deterrence, etc. Rather the key term is net space which is going to be determined by two factors- AI (Artificial Intelligence) and Industry 4.0, which affects us on a daily basis. The function of AI is to create jobless growth, a world where algorithms can do much better. UN can do this work as they can regulate strings of drama by overseeing Net neutrality, AI and Industry 4.0.
One of the lusty dreams of India was to occupy a UNSC seat. The victors of the 2nd World war wanted friendly nations, so China became a member by default. He described how he was sent to North Korea on an assignment and how many things were taking place behind our backs. He explained „trick jumping‟ where, falling into the wrong spot would take you to heaven faster. The next major reforms will be for the solution line-Crafter Treaty. Environment, SDGs and MDGs are of great significance to us and UN has to stop inflicting all organizations with bureaucracy. He concluded by forecasting that the next biggest conflict was going to take place on the net and it required an honest policeman of the very same nation to ensure an area of governance which can ensure justice for all.
Professor Omprakash Mishra agreed with Mr. Jawhar Sircar. He said
that international cooperation is always taking place. What is not
changing is national interests, which make nations move towards
discretional international cooperation for effective work. Sovereignty is
taking a backseat everywhere. He illumined that what is important is
that we think about International Cooperation and International
efficient work as pointed aspirations. He believes that „Rethinking‟ will
happen in time as it is always necessary. India as a nation will promote
a the importance of „Rethinking‟ around the world. Jawhar Sircar and Prof.
Omprakash Mishra
7 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
The Challenges for India in the Emerging World Order
This year IRSC 18‟ was supported by the Ministry of External Affairs, Public Diplomacy Division.
Dr. Imankalyan Lahiri, Associate Professor of the Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University formally introduced the students and guests to Ambassador (Retd.) Suresh K. Goel, who has served in diplomatic missions in a variety of countries which include South Africa, Egypt, Singapore, Malaysia, and South Africa. He was the Ambassador of Lao PDR before becoming the Director-General of Indian Council of Cultural Relations. This was a lecture organized under the Distinguished Lectures Series. The Distinguished Lecture Series is an initiative of the Public Diplomacy Division of the Ministry of External Affairs to start a lecture series on substantive foreign policy issues. This session was chaired by Dr. Kakoli Sengupta, Head of the Department of International relations, Jadavpur University.
Ambassador Goel began his session by thanking all the guests and the chair for inviting him, and expressed his happiness in being at JU. He began by saying that the future belongs to those who go beyond national borders and cultural civilizations and think at the global level. He said that countries clamoring for
Speaker: Ambassador (retd.) Suresh Kumar Goel.
Former Director
General, Indian
Council of Cultural Relations
Chair: Dr. Kakoli
Sengupta
Head of the
Department,
Department of
International Relations, Jadavpur University.
globalization are often countries that have global aspirations, like UK before the 2nd world War, USA and USSR after the 2nd World War, and China and USA after the cold war with China trying to catch up.
He described the Westphalian system as a system where
competing powers could work together without coming into
direct conflict, as Westphalia territories were defined by
power before. International Relations is about National
power promoting National Interest. Rapid globalization of
national powers could be the nail in the coffin for
Westphalia. The world is facing increasing uncertainty due to
a variety of reasons. Every nation is compelled to secure its
own economic security. One of the most important shifts is
from globalization to more nationalistic policies by major
b powers. USA, even before Trump, had begun to turn inwards
Ambassador Suresh K. Goel and
aaaaaaa because of challenges it faced in domestic economic growth,
Prof. Kakoli Sengupta
aaaaaa rise of nationalist rightist trends in western world, the challenges faced from instability and terrorism in Afghanistan, the sectarian conflicts in the Middle East, the Syrian war and tendency from its traditional partners like Turkey to develop new linkages with Russia, Iran and China, which would have been considered unlikely just a few years ago.
8 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
China‟s rapidly growing power and technological prowess, where USA is declining, and its declining interest to take responsibility of countries in East Asia, South-East Asia and Europe throws new opportunities for it. China can upset predictions and begin challenging USA militarily and technologically after 5 years as of date. China is now an acknowledged power in cyber technology and artificial intelligence. This poses unique challenges for countries like India, as China is planning to execute its OBOR, which is more than a connectivity project. China is also increasing its influence in South Asia, Africa, west Asia, and the Indian-Ocean region, thus increasing India‟s problems due to an asymmetry of power
Ambassador (retd.) Suresh Goel.
between both the nations. China‟s connectivity projects can double up for military needs in moments of crisis and easily cut-off India‟s supply lanes.
India‟s Look East Policy, which has now transformed into
the Act East Policy, India‟s Neighborhood First policy that
Election of Trump as
President of the USA on the slogan of ‘America first’ solidified these new fault lines. His statements, often of a transactional nature, have slowly eroded the
international stature of the US. Trump’s statement calling for Japan and Korea to take greater responsibility for security in East Asia,
compelling Europe to
dedicate greater resources to security structures including NATO, and almost a hands off approach to South East Asia has resulted in a kind of vacuum which presents an open invitation to emerging powers to displace USA’s role internationally.
-Suresh K. Goel
concentrates on South Asia, India‟s power and influence in Indian Ocean region extending up to Eastern Africa and East Asia, and India‟s relations with major powers, which it uses as a propulsion to achieve these objectives, is increasingly being challenged by China. China is using proxies like Pakistan and Maldives to defy critical Indian security interests in various regions.
Goel pointed out that countries that have traditionally used India‟s assurances to safeguard their security may not be able to resist China‟s aggression. He referenced the Doklam standoff to prove this point. He threw light on the fact that even ASEAN countries, which look to India as a counter
balance to China, are afraid to challenge the Chinese aspirations due to the asymmetry in political, economic and military influence. India needs to adopt a careful and calculative approach that accommodates the Chinese objectives and promotes long term Indian interests. He concluded by saying that recent initiatives of India, like the QUAD, Asia-Africa growth corridor, links with African, South-East Asian countries and the USA needs to be made to rebalance the asymmetry.
Dr. Kakoli Sengupta, the Chair, summarized in a nutshell the Speaker‟s key points before throwing the floor open to the audience. She analyzed Ambassador Goel‟s wonderful examination of the Westphalian system.
As of now, Sovereignty isn‟t decided by territories but by the extent of power that nations have. All nations continue
to compete for economic spaces. Let us not believe in mirages but believe in the real world, and how the 21st century is a very peculiar century. She expounded upon how systemically the Speaker pointed out
9 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
China‟s ambitions and the various international debates over the South China Sea, West-Asia, Afghanistan, and Syria. She explored the chemical attacks on Syria, Brexit and the America 1st Policy. Trump has to address issues like unemployment and Nuclear North Korea. China‟s technological prowess in Artificial Intelligence, military technology, and the risk of cyber-attacks from China are giving western nations goose bumps. She pointed out China‟s paving the way for being President for life and her promotion of OBOR in all its diplomatic missions abroad.
She concluded her address and threw the floor open to the audience for questions, after thanking him for his fascinating lecture.
There were a variety of fascinating questions. Ayush Banerjee, a 2nd year Student of the Department of International Relations, JU asked about how the youth can contribute in the realm of Foreign affairs. Ambassador(Retd.) Goel said that the youth can contribute through Model United Nations, Conferences and through internships which offered by the Ministry for External Affairs (MEA) to students.
A copy of the entire speech is available on the Ministry of External Affairs‟ website – http://mea.gov.in/distinguished-lectures-detail.htm?745
MEA website screenshot
10 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
The Importance of Immediate Neighbors and the Importance of Economic and Military Diplomacy
This panel was powered by think tank- CENERS-K (Research Centre for East and North East Regional Studies, Kolkata) It was established in July 2007 and consists of an independent thinking body of researchers interested in the study of turbulence, development, peace and Security in the Eastern Hemisphere, which includes Asia, in general, South and South East Asia, littoral countries of the Indian Ocean and Bay of Bengal, and India in particular.
The speaker of this session, Major-General (Retd.) Arun Roye, is a graduate from the National Defense Academy and was commissioned into the 2nd Battalion, Rajput Regiment, in 1967. He has trained the Bhutanese Army, did the Command and General Staff Course in erstwhile USSR and held the diplomatic assignment of Military and Defense Advisor in the USA. He was designated as the senior member of the Joint Working Group with China on Anti- Terrorism by the MHA, and attended two meetings, one each in India and China. He retired in 2006 as the General Officer Commanding, Bengal. He is currently serving as the Executive Director and Secretary of The Research Centre for East and North East Regional Studies, Kolkata (CENERS-K).
Major General (Retd.) Arun Roye, began by thanking all the guests, the chair and the students. He started his session by explaining what national interests
Speaker: Major
General (Retd.) Arun Roye
Executive Director & Secretary, Research Centre for Eastern and North-Eastern
Regional Studies,
Kolkata (CENERS-K)
Chair: Professor
Partha Pratim Basu,
Department of
International Relations, Jadavpur University
are and how national interest is related to International Relations. He mentioned how politicians are not highly educated in India and need guidance from the army, academicians and the Ministry of External Affairs to understand the national interests. He spoke about how the foreign policy of the British has been inherited by the Indians. With time, geography remains constant but the politics of geography continuously keeps changing. Afghanistan is a field where India needs to win or lose. UK ruled over the seas and it helped her control large swathes of economic lanes. This is the second pillar of national interest, the first being Geography. The third pillar is a large population and the fourth pillar is a strong military and economy to protect the third pillar. The fifth pillar is technology.
USA, like Britain and China, is following the same path of
colonization. India is a dynamic country with a lot of
neighbors and each one of them has a different perception of
India. India is looked at as a liberator to a bully in
Bangladesh. Nepal does not trust us and feels that we have a
big brotherly attitude. Afghanistan is a tribal multi-ethnic
nation state rifled with in-fighting. Afghanistan has become
USA‟s pet, and India remains its only reliable economic
partner. He humorously mentioned how USA is very
Major General (Retd.) Arun Roye
11 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Wars are obsolete today due to the lethality of weapons we have economic wars and trade wars but no military wars.
-Major-General (Retd.) Arun Roye
confused about Afghanistan and even if Ashraf Ghani has multi-ethnic support he does not bring it to Taliban.
He enumerated the importance of Bangladesh to us. The Bangladesh government is somewhat friendly towards India, but he also pointed out the problems relating to the distribution of the Teesta Waters. He described Bhutan as India‟s consistent peaceful friend. He lamented upon the fact that the Indian media does not give them much credit even though they played a positive role during the Doklam issues.
He described Maldives as a beautiful country in the
Indian Ocean region. However it seems that their present government has forgotten everything India did for them in 1988. Seychelles was a setback for India, as India had set four ships in the region. Diplomacy always has limited options. Myanmar meanwhile has close Chinese access but it is offset by Indian army‟s good relations with Myanmar. India also built a multilateral project as part of its „Act East Policy.‟
He depicted Nepal as a Hindu Kingdom which offered to join India in
1947 but was declined by Nehru. Today though, because of China‟s
increasing closeness with Nepal, India worries how she‟ll win her
back. Senior leaders of the left alliance will not come together to
support India. Sri Lanka faces its own set of problems.
Geography is destiny since we cannot chose our neighbors and have to
live with them. This was the case with Pakistan. He recapitulated
USA‟s former support to Pakistan, and Pakistan‟s obsession with
Kashmir. He pointed out that Pakistan can never replace India in the market. He played with the words „Meddle‟ and „Muddle‟ to exhibit
Prof. Partha Pratim Basu
the foreign policies of Lord Curzon (Meddle) and Jawaharlal Nehru (Muddle). We have been both „meddling‟ and „muddling‟ although there has been more of „meddling.‟
We need to create a sphere of influence. There is a deepening of Indian linkages in South-east Asia. The cultural links India shares with these countries is changing. But the Act East policy has to mature and the Chinese problem has to be countered. He concluded by saying that China is making bases in Djibouti which may create problems for Indian policy makers.
12 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Comiconflict (Cartoon-Making) Theme: US the menace & Putin, the adventurer
International Relations Scholastic Conclave has always emphasized upon the importance that politics holds in the present globalized world. The event has always aimed at creating awareness of the different affairs happening within
as well as outside the country through different programs such as quizzes, debates, seminars, etc. This year we went further and introduced the Cartoon Making competition named „ComiConflict.‟
This competition‟s aim was to engage and involve more people, including those from cross-disciplinary fields, such as engineering and science, as fine arts does not have any boundaries and anyone with an acumen in arts can happily participate and showcase their talents.
The social existence of human beings is rooted in our ability to process information that is filtered through our senses. Humans are perhaps most
Judges: Professor Indrashis Banerjee
Head of the Department of Political Science, Ramakrishna Mission Vidyamandir
Venue: Department of International Relations Classroom
heavily dependent upon their sense of vision. This is because when we see, our brain processes the information passed by our optic nerves, identifies consistent patterns emanating from that phenomenon and learns to form conceptions about it.
Hence, when we see something we are able to put together a more holistic version of its properties and better understand how it is related to the intricacies of our lives. In this context, visual messages are also the most thought provoking ones, and cartoons serve as potent means of sending socially or politically relevant messages. Political cartoons take the viewers into a vortex of deeper meaning, and if a person is receptive enough, brings about a total transformation in that person’s social and political attitude.
In this respect, political satires are instrumental in proliferation of relevant messages. We all reminiscence about the political cartoons of Dr Seuss. It has tremendous subversive potential. Political cartoons can be very funny, especially if you understand the issue that they‟re commenting on. Their main purpose, though, is not to amuse you but to persuade you. A good political cartoon makes you think about current events, but it also tries to sway your opinion toward the cartoonist‟s point of view. The best political cartoonist can change your mind on an issue without you even realizing how he or she did it .This was the idea behind our competition‟s theme, “US, The menace and Putin, The Adventurer.”
The theme challenged the young minds to produce a satire which would sufficiently represent the reckless and shortsighted nature of Trump’s policies, the resurgent spy turned president Putin and how their actions are affecting the world order.
The response for this event was truly inspiring. Fourteen participants from eminent institutions took part in the event. Upasana Das (Jadavpur University) bagged the first position, followed by Sayantan Ghosh (Ashutosh College) and Bijetri Pathak (Jadavpur University) bagged the third position.
The event was a major success, and we hope to organize it every year.
13 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Participants deeply engrossed in drawing
cartoons
14 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Quizotopia (Student Quiz) Theme: Global Polity & Society
The essence of a good quiz is the quality of the questions placed forward, the efficacy of the rules and last but not least the camaraderie inherent among the quiz masters. Knowledge is power, and to harness this power it is essential to refine it through tribulations. Knowledge is the key to enhancing the understanding of the world and its problems. The organization of the third edition of this famous quiz was a challenging endeavor, which would not have been pulled off without the exemplary commitment of Sayantan Bandyopadhyay, Sauptick Chakraborty, Subhranil Ghosh and Sourajyoti Roy Chowdhury All of them were 3rd year students of the Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University and the In-House quizmasters of this year‟s „Quizotopia.‟ The fulcrum of this quiz was to establish the universality of knowledge and to elaborate upon the transcendental nature of knowledge. In keeping with our theme, “Global Polity and Society,” the questions were prepared in such a way that they encompassed a wide range of subjects and were interdisciplinary in nature.
Dr. Kanak Sarkar , professor of Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University, was in-charge of this event
Registrations began at 3pm with 44 students who had registered for the quiz. We were enlivened at such a strong turnout. The event displayed a strong intercity flavour as participants hailed from Presidency University, St. Xavier‟s College, Gokhale Memorial Girls College and of course, Jadavpur University. Keeping in mind the pedigree of the participants, the onus was on the
In-Charge: Professor Kanak Sarkar,
Department of
International Relations, Jadavpur University.
Quizmasters: Sayantan Bandyopadhyay,
Subhranil Ghosh,
Souryajyoti Roy
Chowdhury, and
Soumyadeep Bidyanta
Scorekeeper: Sauptick Chakrabarty
Venue:-Departmental Seminar Hall of IR Department
organizers to frame challenging yet relatable questions, coupled with occasional sprinkles of humor.
As soon as the event started, one could sense the early signs of rivalry brewing among the teams. Naturally, it soon became more and more competitive and engaging.
It is important to mention the assistance we received from Rudrasavarna Dutta, Kathamrita Mukherjee, Soumyadeep Bidyanta and Swapnadya Ghosh (2nd year students of the Department of International Relations, JU) as well as from Salini Chatterjee and Devapriya Bhattacharya (3rd year students of the Department of International Relations, JU.) Sauptick Chakrabarty was the official scorekeeper with Rudrasavan Dutta helping in score calculation.
The quiz began at 4pm and concluded at 5:30pm. There were two rounds- prelims and finals, and the general procedures were clearly laid down keeping in mind the difficulty of organizing a quiz that covers virtually every topic under the sun. Souryajyoti Roy Chowdhury and Soumyaeep Bidyanta were the prelims quizmasters and Sayantan Bandyopadhyay and Subhranil Ghosh were the quizmasters of the finals.
There were 20 questions in the prelims, with 8 teams qualifying for the finals, facing a total of 32 questions in the final round. There were 8 pounces for each team and an infinite number of bounces.
15 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
The winners of the Quiz were Sourjo Sengupta from Techno India College, Salt Lake and Ritwick Ghosh from Presidency University, bagging the gold with a whopping 130 marks. Both of them were brilliant in their knowledge and quizzing aptitude.
Top row (Left to right) – Sauptick Chakrabarty
as scorekeeper, Subhranil Ghosh as
quizmaster.
Middle Row (Left to right) – The Quiz in
Progress, Sourajyoti Roy Chowdhury as
quizmaster.
Bottom Row – Sayantan Bandyopadhyay as
quizmaster.
16 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Dialectics (Students Debate)
“This house believes that the rise of regional organizations have made the United Nations organization redundant”
Conflict of ideas is never complete without the war of words. The participants were given three topics to prepare for and were informed that the final topic would be chosen by the judges an hour before the commencement of the event. The final motion for the debate was, “This house believes that the rise of regional organizations have made the United Nations Organization redundant.” This event was judged by Professor Anindya Jyoti Majumder and Dr. Bhagawan Behra of the Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University. Both judges were from our own faculty and are very well known in their respective fields. The debate was moderated by Shreya Mukherjee and Anoushka Roy, both 3rd year students of the Department of International Relations, JU. There were 6 teams in the finals, which included 6 speakers for the motion and 6 speakers against the motion. The participation list was composed of both, stalwart debaters and amateur debaters budding with enthusiasm. The teams were from Jadavpur University, Presidency University, Loreto College, St Xavier‟s college, etc. The maximum participants were from Jadavpur University and the event was organized in K.P Basu Auditorium, Jadavpur University. The Auditorium was full of beaming audience members who were excited to hear the clash of words.
The Winners of the Debate (Dialectics) were Sukanya Bhattacharya and Shromona Jana, a team from Presidency University. Both were 1st year students of Presidency University. They emerged as the best team, and best
Judges: Professor Anindya Jyoti
Majumder
Department of
International Relations, Jadavpur University.
Dr. Bhagaban Behra
Assistant Professor, Department of
International Relations, Jadavpur University
Moderators: Shreya Mukherjee and
Anoushka Roy.
Venue: K.P Basu
Auditorium.
speaker (for) and best speaker(against) the motion. Sukanya wonderfully argued for the motion and spoke about how the UN can no longer maintain its position as the primary international organization because it fails to recognize the unique diversity of each and every country, properly respect them and pay attention to them. She explained how regional organizations on the other hand tackle each and every country‟s special needs and celebrate them, making them far more important in the globalized 21st century.
The Best Speaker (against) the motion said that the United Nations is still the best organization in spite of all its shortcomings, as it binds the world together and forms a community where every country can interact with each other instead of being confined to their own geographical boundaries. She pointed out that in contemporary times, where pressing global issues are haunting us and threatening our very existence, the UN is more important than ever in protecting human civilization by facilitating dialogue between various countries.
17 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
What separates IRSC debates from other conventional debates is the fact that this debate is judged by the very stalwarts in the field of International Relations, who possess great experience and knowledge in this field. The debates were very extensive and intricately detailed, proving yet again that the quality of debates of IRSC have always been above average. There were a large number of eminent speakers from various colleges. The debate was a huge success and the audience and the judges were left spellbound after observing the quality and exclusiveness of the debates. We hope it will continue to be a great success story in the upcoming years too.
Clockwise from the left – Dr. Bhagaban Behra (Judge), Dr. Aninda Jyoti
Majumdar (Judge), Anoushka Roy (Debate moderator), Sukanya Bhattacharya
(Participant)
18 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
19 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Policy Lab
Theme: Sustainable Development Goals of the UN
The second day of IRSC 18‟ commenced with the keynote address given by Dr. Sujata Dutta Hazarika, Deputy Director of the Guwahati Regional Centre at the Indira Gandhi National Open University and an honorable guest judge for the event. She is the co-founder of Global Initiative for Sustainable Development and Planning, which seeks to redefine the role of economy and business in public policy through social innovations founded on creative and critical thinking. She began her career as a sociologist in the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences at the Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati. In 2009, she initiated the North East Centre for Research and Development. She has conducted projects nationally and internationally, and published papers exploring issues of governance, internal displacement, and sustainability.
She began her address by thanking all the organizers of IRSC and said that the present era is called „sustainable development era‟ as we are making a journey towards a new world. She believes that there is no point in creating and nurturing the bad elements in the society, rather we should keep the best elements which can help in moving the society forward. Mrs. Hazarika believes that there are three paradigms which are significant. They are as follows:
- Being aware of the fact of the uniqueness of the historical stage. She believes that we all are in a changed era where there are very limited resources which we humans have not „goofed up‟ in our race for development. She believes that we, the citizens of developing nations are luckier than the citizens of superiorly developed nations as we still have more amount of resources in our hands in comparison to them, as they have destroyed it in their pursuit of development and empire building.
- The youth finds themselves in a precarious position. They are a part of a knowledge system which is not their legacy. They have to take up the baton of activism. The youth should be historically informed as no stage in history is independent. We need to reflect historically and should be in synchrony with the current situation.
Judged by: Dr. Sujata Dutta Hazarika,
Deputy Director of the Guwahati Regional Centre at the Indira Gandhi National Open University
Mr. Sauraveshwar Sen,
Chief Mentor &
Founder of Catalyst Education Services.
Dr. Bijoy Kumar Das
Assistant Professor, Department of
International Relations, Jadavpur University
Moderators: Sanjana Priyaranjan and Ayush Banerjee
Venue: K.P Basu
Memorial Hall.
- When we talk of SDGs we cannot lose our vision of sustainability. A software company called SAP when publishing their journal „Human Way‟ said that qualities like creative thinking, empathy, etc. are our soft skills which only some of us are skilled to use.
Mrs. Hazarika believes that we cannot sell our human souls to technology since it would make us lose our humanity. If we stay unaware of the encroachment in our lives by artificial intelligence we end up losing our humanity.
20 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
The end of her mind blowing presentation signaled the beginning of the second day of „IRSC 2018‟ with an awesome and interesting students event called „Policy Lab‟, where teams of student participants were determined to present several sets of ideas, enshrined in several SDGs under the auspices of United Nations. The theme for this event was „The SDGs of UN.‟ During the Keynote address she highlighted the SDGs under the auspices of the United Nations and the students emphasized their various viewpoints during their various presentations.
This event was bound under a certain set of rules where each participating team could not have more than 4 members, each team would get 8 minutes of regulation time along with an extension of 2 minutes. Each team had to select one of the SDGs and formulate a new policy based on it or criticize the existing one and come up with an alternative set of models in the field of the particular SDG. The teams may choose to present it in the form of a PPT or promote it publicly beforehand and show us evidence in the form of video footage and/or brochures on the main day as per the rules. They had to convince the judges in the estimated time about the viability of their policy and their presentation would be followed up by a question-answer session. Marking would be based on the novelty, creativity, originality and presentation of ideas.
This event was judged by Mrs. Hazarika herself, Mr. Saureveshwar Sen,(Chief Mentor & Founder of Catalyst who has a decade of experience in training students for competitive entrances), and Dr. Bijoy Kumar Das, (Assistant professor of department of international Relations) of Jadavpur University. The event was moderated by Ayush Banerjee and Sanjana Priyaranjan, both 2nd year students from the Department of International Relations, JU. This event took place at K.P.Basu Memorial Hall in Jadavpur University. Students fromseveral renowned institutions around Kolkata like, St. Xavier‟s College (Autonomous), Bhawanipore Education Society College, Scottish Church college, Presidency University and Jadavpur University itself participated in the event. There were 4 teams. Though all the other teams performed their best, students from Jadavpur University, Shounak Baidya and Ujan Natik, both being IR students bagged a clear victory showing their predominance of performance via their memorable presentation and viewpoints.
There were several remarkable policy presentations on several SDGs by the teams, among which one of the four teams presented “Alternative policies and models for rethinking and restructuring of judicial structures and institutions along with their procedures in different stratas of Indian society.” Standing on the present context of India‟s socio–political arena this type of discussions truly carries value. Apart from this, there were two other very relevant presentations– “Alternative measures to accelerate the Ganga action plan along with its pollution control initiatives” and “Burning issue of problem of conservation of power and resources and its proper uses.”
In the contest, attention was drawn to the students from JU IR , Shounak Baidya and Ujan Natik due to their data oriented concise presentation of SDG 5, where they clearly stated their goal to achieve gender equality and women empowerment in accordance to the SDG.
Under SDG 5, their presentation targeted 5.6 for ensuring universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights as agreed in accordance with the programme of action of the ICPD and the Beijing platform for action, and the outcome documents of their review conferences. They helped the judges and the audience understand the needs and prerequisites for this programme, by presenting select data from the UN‟s action and awareness conferences based on this SDG. They reflected upon the need for women‟s rights for the successful implementation of this SDG.
By showing the challenges and framework of this policy they proposed an alternative programme for enhancing the implementation of their policy, along with a new decentralized funding process for several initiatives.
21 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
This performance was truly worth remembering and was greatly appreciated by the judges. „Policy Lab‟ is a type of event which gives students the opportunity to express their opinions and come up systematically with alternative strategies on any policy in an innovative manner. We look forward to conducting this event on a grander scale in the coming years.
Top Row – Dr. Sujata Dutta Hazarika
Middle Row (left to right) – Ayush Banerjee and Sanjana Priyaranjan
(Moderators), Policy Lab Judges.
Bottom Row (Left to right) – Ujan Natik and Shounak Baidya (Best team)
22 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
PenSeive (Creative Writing Competition)
Theme: Power or Morality & the UN’s Role in Outer Space Conflicts
Any scholastic effort, measure or conclave is incomplete without the expression of creativity. Varied ideas, thoughts and views supported by rational arguments give students a scholarly mindset. Going beyond verbal discussions by writing down ideas and opinions can help greatly in expressing one‟s views better.
International Relations Scholastic Conclave, 2018, was not just about verbal discussions and the conflict of ideas. In the seventh edition of IRSC, the department of International Relations, Jadavpur University gave the students the opportunity to write down their ideas and views on scintillating and burning issues of the world arena.
This event was judged by Dr. Shibasish Chatterjee (Professor of department of International Relations, Jadavpur University), Dr. Herkan Neaden Toppo, (Assistant Professor, Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University) and Arup Bhattacharya (Assistant Professor, Department of International Relations, Jadavpur
University).
The competition took place in the
departmental classroom of IR, JU.
Many colleges and universities
participated. 10 students from
several institutions participated in
the event, with major
participation from Jadavpur
University, St. Xavier‟s‟ College
(Autonomous), Presidency
Judges: Professor Shibashis Chatterjee
Department of
International Relations, Jadavpur University.
Dr. Herkan Neaden Toppo
Assistant Professor, Department of
International Relations, Jadavpur University.
Arup Bhattacharya
Assistant Professor, Department of
International Relations, Jadavpur University
Venue: Departmental classroom of
International Relations Department.
University, Gokhale‟s Memorial Girls College, Rabindra Bharati
University, Ashutosh College, Scottish church college and many
more.
The topics for this contest were –
- “UN‟s role in outer space conflict.” and
- “Power or Morality.”
23 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Any one of these topics could be attempted. These topics were also relevant, contemporary and in line with the IRSC theme, “Rethinking IR: A Quest for UN and New World Order.”
This event was a great success and it was difficult for the judges to come up with a winner. Sahajahan Mollah from Jadavpur University secured the first position in this contest. Mihika Sharma and Arunima Aditya from Jadavpur University hold the spot of joint 1st runner up. Archita Mitra from Jadavpur University secured the spot of second runner up.
Creative Writing is necessary for clarifying ideas and for the search of identity. So this event named „PenSeive‟ is expected to achieve greater and greater success with every successive IRSC.
24 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Media and International Relations
We have all heard about Paranjoy Guha Thakurta‟s prowess as a speaker.
He has done extensive work in various fields, notably – political economy, Indian media and world media, on which he has authored and co-authored books, and directed and produced various documentary films. He started his career as a journalist, and has been employed by various media organizations, including Business India, Business World, The Telegraph, India Today and many more. He anchored a daily discussion programme called India Talks for almost six years and has anchored two one hour long weekly programmes for Lok Sabha television from 2007 to 2013. He was nominated by the University Grants Commission to be a member of the Press Council of India. He coauthored a 36,000 worded book titled, “Paid News: For Corruption in the Indian Media.” He served for two years – from 2011 to 2013 as President of the Foundation of Media Professionals and has also served as the editor of the Economic and Political Weekly.
He is the lead
Speaker: Paranjoy Guha Thakurta
Former Editor,
Economic and Political Weekly
Chair: Professor
Nilanjana Gupta
Department of English, Jadavpur University
author of “Gas wars, Crony Capitalism and the
Ambanis” along with Subir Ghosh and
Jyotirmoy Chowdhury. He has directed
documentary films like “Hot as Hell: a profile of
Dhanbad” and “Blood and Iron: a story of
convergence of Crime, Business and Politics in
Southern India.”
Professor Nilanjana Gupta, the Chair of this
session has specialized in popular literature
and culture. Professor Gupta has been teaching
in the Department of English, Jadavpur
University since 1991 and served as Director,
School of Media Communication & Culture till
Paranjoy Guha Thakurta
2010, after which she was elected Dean of the Faculty of Arts, a position she held till 2012. Dr. Gupta set the tone for the enriching session by discussing a bit on the theme. She mentioned that the media does play a very significant role in maintaining the vitality of society and that at the same time the media is also in perennial danger of being co-opted by corporate entities and political elites. She also reminisced about the nature of the media and the influence social media had during her college years. She admitted that social media in today’s day and age enjoyed far greater access and digital penetration.
Paranjoy Guha Thakurta began his speech after thanking the eminent personalities. He humorously declared that he would speak in his mother tongue, Bengali. Humor was the most prominent characteristic
25 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
of this session as he challenged the audience to find the Bengali words for Facebook and portable telecom device. He said that he was going to talk about Information Technology and International Relations and bring in the United Nations into it. He also came up with the Bengali word for mobile telephone instrument and smart mobile telephone instrument. He gave us the astonishing statistic that there are more Subscriber Identity Modules than human beings in most parts of India. He spoke about how the World Wide Web has changed human society in an incredibly short span of time. He talked about the origins of the Internet in Switzerland and how it changed the way we read, watch and listen.
Internet has given us access to a plethora of
information. Wikipedia has replaced Encyclopedia
Britannica. Billions of messages are exchanged on
”A medium of mass
communication is also a medium of personalized communication.”
-Paranjoy Guha Thakurata
WhatsApp. This means that the New World Order envisages that the biggest corporates dominating the economy of the planet are Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Alibaba, Alphabet, and Netflix who enjoy huge influence over the Internet space and indirectly or directly control telecommunication. Telecommunication and broadcasts have no difference today. He then brought in comic relief by introducing a friendly jibe at Arnab Goswami.
He spoke about how the root servers controlling the flow of information had enough storage space to record the digital thumbprint of every human being on the planet for a period of two hundred years. The future of human relations and international relations is beset by individuals like Julian Assange and Edward Snowden. He warned about the dangers of fake news to public order and social harmony. There were also dangers in open server space and that confidential information sensitive to relations between states were stored. Paranjoy Thakurta also gave us interesting facts about Gaddafi’s bodyguards and other trivial gossip.
The speaker then presented the audience with some thought-provoking questions – Can the internet be governed? Should the internet be governed? If so, by whom? Would the International Telecommunications Union or the UNESCO govern it? Would the UNCTAD or WTO govern it? The whole issue is on how to monetize the content put up on the internet?
What are the ramifications of it in India? In this diverse country with over a 100,000 registered newspapers, news and current affairs is still a monopoly of the Government of India. Akashvani and Doordarshan under Prasar Bharati are premier government channels. It is under debilitating government control. On the other extreme is corporate media which uses financial muscle to control what the public gets to read and know about. There are 300 news and current affairs channels on which trivial and unnecessary information is put up. There are a staggering number of TV sets in the country, amounting to above a million. Relaince Jio and Idea sim blatantly undertake corporatization of media. Politicians control means of distribution of news. There is proliferation of inauthentic news. We have to distinguish between what is credible news and what is not, and between factual information and opinion.
The internet is a platform where everybody can voice their opinion. Everybody can become a journalist, but unfortunately not everybody can become an objective journalist. He concluded by pointing out that miniaturization of technology has changed the way we think, communicate, act and live. We must embrace these changes but with forethought.
26 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Aspects of International Relations
Dr. Manoj Joshi is an Indian journalist and author. As of 2013, he is a distinguished fellow at ORF, a New Delhi based think tank. He has worked with The Times of India, Mail Today, India Today and the Hindu. He was also a member of India‟s National Security Advisory Board from 2004 to 2006.
Dr. Manoj Joshi opened his address by thanking Jadavpur University and all the esteemed guests. It was his first visit to this historic institution. He felt the topic of his address should have been if whether the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) should ever be reformed, because unless it is reformed it will get outdated. The US focuses more on a weighted system as 17 countries pay 80% of the budget of the UN. He described the structure of the International organizations in 1990s which were mostly Eurocentric, which included G-7, NATO and the UNSC. Currently, G-20 is less Eurocentric.
United Nations is a global institution unparalleled in legitimacy and power as it was created after World War II as an organization to protect and promote International Peace and security. It had seven organs. The UN has struggled very hard to ensure wars don‟t take place but it has failed miserably in Syria. He exposed how the United Nations has been accused of power politics and Euro-centrism as three permanent members of the UNSC are from Europe.
There are new trends
which are emerging
due to emergence of
countries like India,
Speakers: Dr. Manoj Joshi
Distinguished fellow, Observer Research Foundation (ORF.)
Professor .Srikanth Kondapalli
Professor in Chinese Studies, Centre for East Asian Studies, School of International Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru
University
Chair : Professor
Samita Sen,
Director of School of Women’s Studies, Jadavpur University, Kolkata
which are rising powers and for giants, like Google
which are providing information at your fingertips
leading to diffusion of power. No one has a clear idea
of UNSC reform. As per Article 108, the proposed
amendment must be ratified by all countries which
include the P5 (permanent members of the UNSC.)
He felt that the biggest block to UNSC expansion is
the United States of America‟s senate as it takes an
Dr. Manoj Joshi
27 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Ideological position. The Charter was amended in, 2004, and by the end of the 20th several developments took place – like in 2004, two new groups came up which included the G4 countries (India, Japan, Brazil, and Germany) and Uniting for Consensus (Mexico, Italy, Pakistan, Argentina, etc.) The G4 was collectively bidding for and supporting each other‟s membership, but the coffee club (UFC) was full of regional rivals who were the G4‟s comfiture to the hot seat of the Security Council.
He narrated the story of head of states‟ meeting among
the member states to decide UNSC expansion. Kofi
“P5 don’t want UNSC
expansion as they don’t want to lose their authority and status.”
-Dr. Manoj Joshi
Annan proposed the expansion of non-permanent seats from 10 to 20. The Uniting for Consensus (UFC) wanted all expansion to be based on a consensus but the G4 wanted expansion to be based on widest possible agreement. He explained how the P5 were not interested to lose their status of authority by allowing expansion. Even in the P5 there was a problem as USA under Bush wanted expansion to be criteria-based. China opposed India and Japan‟s bid at that time. There was considerable development in 2015 as the
UNGA adopted a Negotiating Text based (NTB) method for adding semi-permanent members, but China and Pakistan opposed this mode of negotiations. After Donald Trump came to power Nikki Haley was appointed the US ambassador to the UN and her statement was quoted by the Speaker where she said that India could get a seat in the UNSC without Veto power. He concluded by summarizing the chief challenges to reform the United Nations Security Council:-
1) Each UN member has its own national interests and policy priorities.
2) Competing priorities are also there.
3) External influences will create problems.
International politics is about power and no one is going to shed it willingly.
28 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
China in the Contemporary World Order
Dr. Srikanth Kondapalli is a professor in Chinese Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University. He received the K. Subramanyam Award in 2010 for Excellence in Research in Strategic and Security Studies. He has published two books, two monographs, co-edited two volumes and several articles in edited books in national and international journals and newspapers. He is a guest faculty member at Foreign Service Institute, National Defense College, Defense Services Staff College, Army War College, College of Naval Warfare, College of Air War, Indo-Tibetan Border Police Academy and Border Service Force Academy.
Dr. Srikanth Kondapalli began at around 2:10 pm and no one remembered how time flew by after he started. He began by thanking the organizers, guests and the Chair. He spoke on China‟s role in world affairs from ancient times to modern times. He began by describing the Treaty of Westphalia and the role of the UN in the world order in Chinese terms.
In the Middle Kingdom (Chinese empire), the emperor used to provide protection and security. Sri Lanka in 1530 resorted to their security protection. In the Middle Kingdom there were 3 notions of world dominance and the 3 notions of governance internally. Firstly, the ruler should provide for a
harmonious rule.
Secondly, there should
be a legalistic way of
defining things – Ta
Tao. Rule of law was
established as proposed
Speakers: Professor. Srikanth Kondapalli
Professor in Chinese Studies, Centre for East Asian Studies, School of International Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru
University
Dr. Manoj Joshi
Distinguished fellow, Observer Research Foundation (ORF).
Chair : Professor
Samita Sen,
Director of School of Women’s Studies, Jadavpur University, Kolkata
by the decision-maker. Thirdly, as Confucius suggested
– a great relation between the ruler and the ruled, son
and father, wife and husband, and friend and enemy.
Chinese Philosopher Hen Feizi suggested global
ordinance and the Chinese need to revise their ideas.
Dr. Srikanth Kondapalli
The world is dominated by capitalists who need to be opposed as pointed out by classical Marxists. The world order cannot serve the interests of people of other nations. He depicted how the Chinese followed Mao-Tse-Tung‟s ideas to oppose the capitalistic 1st world and the hegemonistic 2nd world. Today the world is composed of sovereign nation states –role of non-state actors, climate change, NGOs, outcome between
29 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
states and non-state actors – holistic systems based on asymmetric power relations. The Politburo has the ability to impose 60% of the directives, but the Politburo may not be seriously followed at the lower levels.
He explained that Chinese international pattern involves
changes which are related to checks and balances.
Chinese classical alliance concepts are of balancing
alliances as Chinese academics try to reform their ideas
“In this international order whether China is a status quoist power or revisionist power is debatable.” -Dr. Srikanth Kondapalli
of how alliances change. They suggest relative stability of system and international strategic forces of neo realism. Balance of power is creeping into the Chinese discourse. China also has an alternative order known as the Beijing Consensus. In terms of Consensus we have the Mumbai consensus, imposing democracy and emphasizing productive forces. The Chinese order is made up of the Beijing Consensus which has new elements. The 19th party congress suggested a common destiny for the entire community. A committee of shared
interests is band wagoning between the two. Sri Lanka invited China for 1.5 billion dollars for a 99 year lease. Hong Kong was given on a 99 years lease after the 2nd opium war. Today China follows these ideas of conservative understanding.
ASEAN countries strive for an ASEAN community with a visa free zone like for countries based on transported visa regime. China wants to propose this model without sacrificing its core interests which are flexible. The Chinese discourse was reflected by its role during the Bangladesh Liberation war and its exercise of the Veto power during the disarmament related program, space recognition programs, etc. The core interests of China extend from Tibet to Taiwan, to the South China Sea and calling Arunachal Pradesh as South Tibet. China is a major player in North Korea, Iraq and climate change. The July 2016 tribunal ruling was not followed by China on the South China Sea.
He concluded by referring to initiatives like OBOR and other neorealist terms which are used more and more frequently by China which are reviving a Middle Kingdom and comprehensive national power.
30 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
PolitCon (Paper Presentation) Theme: Ethnic Conflicts around the World
The Paper Presentation for the International Relations Scholastic Conclave has always been the most distinguished event, where participants from esteemed Institutions like Presidency University, St. Xavier‟s College and other centres of excellence present papers on a topic that boasts certain relevance pertaining to the field of International Relations and has the potential to alter the global geostrategic landscape.
Since the inception of the landmark event, the Paper Presentation has always been an integral part of the IRSC. This event was the brainchild of the organisers and professors of the Department of International Relations who realized the need for an event which would hone the writing skills of the students and their ability to logically argue their case. It is imperative that these talents are fully developed for budding academics in the future. The event has always been very successful.
The Paper Presentation took place in the departmental seminar hall on the ground floor of the PG Arts building. As mentioned earlier, the Paper Presentation is to aid in the development of skills for doing proper research. Imaginative perception is an indispensable mental asset for students. This event is devised as a forum which inducts students into the preliminary preparation programme for paper writing.
The topic for this year‟s Paper Presentation was “Ethnic Conflicts around the world.” As students of International Relations know, ethnic conflict is a growing menace. Keeping in mind the Syrian Refugee Crisis, ethnic strife may result from civil war and other un-conventional and sub
Judges: Dr. Sanjukta Bhattacharya,
Former Professor, Department of
International Relations, Jadavpur University.
Vivek Mishra,
Assistant Professor, Netaji Institute of Asian Studies
Moderators: Shreya Mukherjee and
Anoushka Roy.
Venue:-Departmental Seminar Hall of
International Relations Department
conventional conflicts which have the potential to snowball into conventional conflicts, thus posing a serious threat to both regional and international peace and security. These problems may also arise from in group out-group hostilities which precipitate into majority-minority conflicts, which were seen in Yugoslavia and Rwanda.
Regardless of the cause it is quite clear that ethnic conflicts are extremely detrimental to the vitality of a state and society. In IRSC 2018, the target areas of research were Venezuela, Russia, China and Iraq. There were in total eight contestants with three collaborations and two individual papers. The three teams were from Jadavpur University itself -Anwesha Ghosh, third year undergraduate from the Department of History and her partner Anupam Banerjee, a post graduate student of the same department; Subhranil Ghosh and Sreemoyee Majumder from the Department of International Relations; and Abhipsa Basu Roy and Manoswini Sarkar, second year and third year undergraduate students respectively from the Department of IR along with others. There was also a thought provoking paper on ethnicity in Maduro‟s Venezuela.
The judges for the event were Dr. Sanjukta Bhattacharya (Former professor, Department of International Relations, JU) and Dr. Vivek Mishra, (Assistant Professor of International Relations at the Netaji Institute
31 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
of Asian Studies and Guest Lecturer of International Relations at Presidency University, Kolkata.) Their knowledge and charisma transformed the entire event into a magnificent platform for intuitive questions and meaningful answers.
Sreemoyee Majumdar and Subhranil Ghosh bagged the first prize and displayed immaculate team coordination. Abhipsa Basu Roy and Manoswini Sarkar won the second prize. It was a truly engaging event.
Clockwise (From left to right) – Abhipsha Basu Roy & Manoswini Sarkar (Participants), Subhranil Ghost & Sreemoyee Majaumdar (Participants), Dr. Sanjukta Bhattacharya & Dr. Vivek Mishra (Judges), Anwesha Ghosh & Anupam Banerjee (Participants)
32 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Valedictory Session Craig L. Hall took up his assignment as U.S. Consul General in Kolkata on
August 19, 2016. Immediately before coming to Kolkata, he served as the Deputy Political Counselor in the U.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Indonesia. Craig has also served in Seoul, Korea; Mosul, Iraq; Canberra, Australia; and Surabaya, Indonesia. Dr. Kakoli Sengupta, Head of the department of International Relations, Jadavpur University introduced Craig Hall, as the representative of the most powerful nation in the world.
Mr. Hall started his speech by advising the participants and organizing members of the event to relax as it was the end of the programme. He showed his gratitude by acknowledging the honorable chairperson of the department along with his political specialist, and Sri Deepankar Dasgupta, the press specialist from the US consulate for making an opportunity for him to be in the event as a guest. He started his lecture by highlighting the theme of the conclave, “Rethinking IR from the perspective of UN and new world order.” Before starting his lecture on this particular aspect, he focused on a few relevant questions in international relations, which were:
- What is the role of India in the UN?
- What is the role of the US?
- What can India and the US do together in the United Nations?
Speaker: Craig L.Hall U.S Consul General in Kolkata
Chair: Dr. Kakoli
Sengupta,
Head of the
Department,
Department of
International Relations, Jadavpur University.
Going on to discuss the UN‟s role in the emerging world he asked the question „What is the emerging world?‟ While discussing about the UN-India partnership work he focused on the shared interests and problems in their relations, like; terrorism, global pollution, trade, refugee problems, international boundary, etc. He highlighted the role of news which may be sometimes different from the realityHe referred to the global life expectancy rate, which was just 31 years in 1900 and has now increased to 71 years. This shows the betterment of humanity. Now there is no country in the world, where life expectancy is less than 40 years of age. With regards to poverty, it has decreased since 1965 globally. In India the level of extreme poverty has decreased greatly since 1997. He appreciated the efforts of the governments in increasing and enhancing the global. In his knowledge the recent rise in global GDP to 73 trillion US dollars from that of 33 trillion US dollars clearly reflects the betterment of human life. He said that the global per-capita GDP was 6,600 USD and today it is 10,000 USD. He said that some of the poorest people today are happier than even the kings were 200 years ago. So in his view the world is a better place to live now than before, as it is showing betterment of humanity in a vast sense.
He marked the end of the Second World War in 1945 as a major turning point in international relations as it paved the way for the emerging new world order, interstate trade relations, political interactions and cooperative measures in.
He claims that post 1945, only 11.2% of the population lived in a democracy, whereas 55% of the population currently lives in a democracy, as well as the fact that only23% of the population today lives in autocratic/totalitarian societies. He notes that out of the total population living in autocratic/totalitarian societies, 4 out of 5 people live in China, which is the largest autocratic/totalitarian society today in terms of population.
33 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
He asserts that another example of the success of the
current rules based world order is globalized trade.
He justifies his claim by giving the example of China
which witnessed an increase in GDP from 2.3 trillion
dollars to 12.3 trillion dollars after joining the WTO
in 2001 and of India which after joining the WTO in
1995 witnessed a growth in GDP from 33 billion
dollars to 2.4 trillion dollars.
He then analyzed the role of the UN in the emerging
world order. He claimed that the US after proper
assessment sees the peace and stability of the post
1945 era under serious threat. He also believes that a
proper assessment is required because global peace
and stability is not the normal order of things and it
Craig L. Hall
has to be worked on.
The threats to the world order that the US has perceived are:-
- Revisionist powers like China and Russia who use technology, propaganda and coercion to force the world order to submit to their values and do not respect human rights and liberty.
- Regional dictators like Kim Jong Un of North Korea who can use weapons of mass destruction to bring the world order down.
- Jihadi terrorist groups aiming for the destruction of the world to fulfill their wicked ideology. The US has formulated the following response:-
To build and strengthen strategic partnerships with likeminded countries in the Indo-Pacific like the countries of ASEAN, Japan, India and South Korea.
- Recognition of US interests in the Indo-Pacific.
- Promote an open, prosperous and secure Indo-Pacific.
He has asserted that the Trump administration considers the Indo-Pacific region as vital to the future of the US.
One of the most important reasons for this is geography. When compared to their Pacific coastline of 7600 miles, the US only has a 2600 mile Atlantic coastline. Therefore nowhere else are US strategic interests more clear and compelling than in the Indo-Pacific region. 5 out of 7 major US alliances, which are alliances with Japan, Philippines, Thailand South Korea, etc , are in the Indo-Pacific region. He asserts that in the Indo-Pacific region, India is a vital partner of the US. The US government has said that India and the US are book-ins of the global order to ensure greater security and stability for their citizens. Former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has identified the Indo-US relationship as their most important bilateral relationship.
The Consul General asserted that the US partnership is with all nations respecting national sovereignty, free and fair trade, and the rule of law. He emphasized the US vision which is that even the smallest country can live in liberty and security without fear from a larger country.
34 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
The ways according to the US to secure this vision are:
- Ensuring freedom in air and sea which is under increasing threat from Chinese bases in the South China Sea and Chinese activity in the Indian Ocean which is a growing cause for concern. To promote market based economies to ensure peace and prosperity because if markets are not free, economies will not grow.
- Promotion of good governance to defeat autocracy.
- Protection of sovereign nations from external coercion.
Dr. Kakoli Sengupta & Craig L. Hall.
He asserts that in order to secure this vision, the US-India partnership is vital.
The Consul General believes that no other multinational organization global in scope can match the UN which is based on cooperation. He began his conclusion by stating that the UN‟s future will be determined by its member states. He emphasized that both inside and outside the UN, the US-India relationship is based on shared interests in a rules based international order of democratic values.
He believes that both the countries can be a force for good if they can work together. He concluded his address by stating that the US believes that the US-India partnership can be a formidable force for good but the question is how much we can live up to the potential?
The Session came to an end after an interesting question answer session where interesting questions were asked by Ayush Banerjee (2nd year undergraduate student of the Department of International Relations, JU) on H1B1 visas & Sayantan Bandyopadhyay, (3rd year undergraduate student of the Department of International Relations, JU) on why the US can‟t make Pakistan change its Afghanistan Policy? There were some thought provoking questions asked by faculty members like Vivek Mishra, Dr. Imankalyan Lahiri and Prof (Retd.) Sanjukta Bhattacharya.
Sayantan Banerjee, Ayush Banerjee
35 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Prize Distribution Ceremony
The session ended with the prize giving ceremony, where Mr. Hall along with other honorable guests distributed the awards to the respective event winners. The Prize winners were as follows: –
The winners of Comiconflict (Students Cartoon-Making competition) were as follows: Upasana Das from JU who bagged the first position, followed by Sayantan Ghosh from Ashutosh College and Bijetri Pathak from JU who bagged the third position.
The winners of Quizotopia (Students Quiz) were as follows: Sourjo Sengupta from Techno India College, Salt Lake and Ritwick Ghosh from Presidency University who bagged the Gold. Indrayudh Ghosh, Prateen Dhara and Krithika Saptarishi from JU placed 1st Runners-up. Anik Dasgupta and Ishan Palit were placed at 3rd place.
The winners of Dialectics (Students Debate) were as follows: A team from Presidency University with Sukanya Bhattacharya (Best Speaker-For) and Shromona Jana (Best Speaker-Against.) Both were 1st year students of Presidency University.
The winners of Policy Lab were as follows: Shounak Baidya and Ujan Natik from Jadavpur University emerged victorious and bagged the prize for the Best Team.
The winners of PenSeive (Students Creative writing) were as follows: Sahajahan Mollah from JU secured the first position in this contest. Mihika Sharma and Arunima Aditya from Jadavpur University hold the spot of joint 1st runners up, whereas Archita Mitra from JU secured the spot of second runner up.
The winners of PolitCon (Students paper presentation) were as follows: Sreemoyee Majumder and Subhranil Ghosh bagged the first prize. Abhipsa Basu Roy and Manoswini Sarkar won the second prize.
36 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Prize Distribution Ceremony
37 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Closing Ceremony
Ranit Mukherjee, our 2nd year post-graduate student gave the closing speech. The speech was moving and acknowledged all the effort put in by everyone to make the IRSC a success.
Ranit Mukherjee began his speech by thanking the Teacher Coordinator, Faculty members, members of the Board of Studies and all those without whose support and cooperation this event would never have been a success. He thanked the honorable Vice-Chancellor, Pro Vice-Chancellor, Registrar and all other administrative officials. He thanked all the guests for taking the time off of their busy schedules to be present here. He thanked Shri. Subhajit Naskar, Dr. Kakoli Sengupta, Professor Partha Pratim Basu and all the members of the organizing committee. He thanked all the sponsors of the event.
He began by describing how he used to look at a „vote of thanks‟ as a mere formality, but time being the best teacher has taught him its importance as an organizer. This vote of thanks was not just an opportunity to thank the organizers, but was also an opportunity to put a smile on their faces. He described how the organizers had spent their mornings, tireless evenings and sleepless nights behind this event. They worked very hard for a successful IRSC. The pillars of this successful IRSC are the students, without whom this dream could have never come true. He then narrated the story of how his juniors had come up to him with the idea of organizing the IRSC within a month, which had stunned him at the time. The success of this event was the result of successful implementation of theory and practice of IR. In IR is full of possibilities as anything which is impossible today can be possible tomorrow and anything possible today can be impossible tomorrow. The event organized in such a short time frame was nothing short of an impossible achievement as it takes at least 4 to 6 months of preparation to organize an event of this magnitude. This achievement proved the indomitable spirit of the students. He quoted Kazi Nazrul Islam‟s phrase, “Amra Sakti, Amra Bol, Amra Chatra Dal.” A new chapter was added to the history of IRSC. He congratulated the Organizing batch (3rd year undergraduate batch of 2018.) He concluded with the hope that we would continue to see bigger and better IRSCs in the coming years.
From left to right – Closing Ceremony , Ranit Mukherjee giving the Vote of Thanks
38 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Good Thoughts about IRSC 18’
I was very pleased to see so much active interest of students because most of the time students try to take their annual festival to some other level or some ephemeral thing. They enjoy and that is the end of the story. I am not against the enjoyment but all I am saying is that there should be a forum outside your curriculum to debate discuss and engage with the people. In this aspect it has been an excellent event. I saw a wide mixture of speakers from a variety of fields to enrich the students. I wish you all the success for your future editions of IRSC.
-Jawhar Sircar, Former CEO of Prasar Bharati
If young students’ from Jadavpur University are actively engaged in looking at alternative ways in which Indian society and the world can become more ecologically sustainable then I find that’s a wonderful thing. I wish all of you very best .
-Paranjoy Guha Thakurta
I believe this is a dash good idea to hoist this event. I will
tell you why, as people like me who are born in the 40s and 50s we have fixed ideas and you guys are much more progressive and well-read, can think out of the box. I will be speaking in my lecture about why we have not been able to reach the mark as our foreign ministries speak in an all British culture. As all you know our politicians are not well educated very frankly speaking. If they are not educated someone has to tell them the different paths to take so that’s what we are doing. Such events will go a long way to educate the students and enrich them.
-Major General (retd.) Arun Roye
This is a fantastic event as the students are in charge. You guys discuss whatever the issues are and you bring out some solutions through discussions. This is the bottom-up approach. You guys have done it in a wonderful manner in a festive mood. I hope I will be present next year too
-Dr. Srikanth Kondapalli
39 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
40 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Jawhar Sircar
Jawhar Sircar is an outstanding bureaucrat with over 42 years of experience in public administration, and is equally well known as an author, researcher, publisher of articles and a public speaker. He retired from the Indian Administrative Service as Union culture secretary in 2012. He was CEO of Prasar Bharati from February 22, 2012 to November 3, 2016. He has a tremendous amount of experience in the field of education, media and culture. He now lives in Kolkata where he settled down to take over his pending research and publication work. We at IRSC 2018 got the opportunity to hear him and later he agreed to give the press team a short interview.
Q1: Sir, You were elected as the Vice-President of the Asia-Pacific broadcasting Union(ABU) for a term of four years. ABU recently celebrated its 50th Anniversary in 2014 so can you please share with us your experience and tell us more about ABU?
JS: Asia Pacific broadcasting union is the biggest broadcasting union in the world and there is no such body as ABU because the growing area of the world is in Asia. It includes full-members from Asia-Pacific region and associate members from Africa, Europe, Latin America and America. It was started in this region and is known as Asia-pacific broadcasting Union. ABU was established in 1967 and is about 53-54 years old. It is headquartered in Kuala Lampur. It is a non-profit, non-government, professional association to assist the development of broadcasting in the region. The ABU promotes the collective interests of television and radio broadcasters and encourages regional and international co-operation between broadcasters.
When I was the Vice-President, it had 72-74 members and now it has around 272 member broadcasters from 69 countries. It is a unique organization and the only one of its kind. So many member states broadcasters are not represented in any international body and so it does a phenomenal job. I was even offered the position of the President but I refused to take it due to a variety of reasons.
Q2: Sir, Can you share with us your insight how our education system can be reshaped to provide better dividends to all individuals ensuring both quality education at an affordable cost bringing it at par with the developed countries?
JS: This debate is going on for a very long time. In America, if someone goes to college it is because they want to go to college. Most of them can find good jobs with vocational training so they don‟t want to go to college. But in India vocational training is looked down upon so you find most people in colleges. In America if people reach high school like class 10, class 11, that‟s more than enough. They earn as much money as a professor, in fact more money. So degrees are only needed to convert into economic values and education is according to economic requirement. In India, as per the British craze for degrees everyone moves for higher and higher education which even includes people who are not interested in studies. They try to get a degree to convert it into economic value. Such a system is itself self-defeating as you can‟t have quality. In spite of all this, some universities try to maintain higher standard. Higher Education is considered elitist and on the other side vocational education and technical education is looked down upon. We are in a transitional stage where we need to decide what to do with higher education. I am not saying the numbers need to change, all I am saying is that the turnover of students need to be different. The
41 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
students who are unable to afford universal education should come and enrich themselves. This will provide valuable input into the system.
Secondly, the curriculum has to be relevant for the students. The challenge of higher education is teaching the wisdom of yesterday to students of today which they will use to face life tomorrow. This is the main challenge of education. There is a chronological paradox in the whole system. The basic fact is you do not know what type of changes the students require but the platform for the students must be good enough to accommodate changes as and when they come. The basics must be very good as the basics will ensure them to mold their knowledge to face the challenges. So that‟s a key aspect of where the problem begins.
Thirdly, Curriculum change is so difficult in a particular setting and it is a subject of so much debate as curriculum change means teachers who are specialized in a particular set of knowledge become redundant. So teachers don‟t want the change to happen as their world is centered on the curriculum and they feel the worldview is centered on that view of life. That is where change is required.
Q3: Sir, Do you really feel Prasar Bharati is autonomous with full control as approved By Sam Pitroda‟s committee?
JS: Prasar Bharati has always been autonomous and whenever a question is asked in Parliament the concerned minister always says it is an autonomous institution. This is one of the biggest white lies I have seen. You can be autonomous but the way this new minister (at that time Smriti Irani) is interfering is dangerous. In my time, the ministers tried to interfere but I could put some resistance to some extent. I had to pay the cost for it as it was ensured whatever things or decisions I wanted they ensured it was delayed or it never came to me, as I was being disobedient. So there is a system of bureaucracy and a system of autonomy which are antagonistic. You cannot have strong bureaucracy and strong autonomy either one has to be compromised.
Q4: Sir, you have worked in various departments in both Central and State Governments and have spearheaded several initiatives in fields of MSMEs, education, media and culture. Can you share with us what has been the driving force for you in these 42 years of service?
JS: I have always wanted to serve the country and very early in life you have to make the choice between serving public interest and private capital. There is no third choice in it. Academics are also in the public domain. But there are both private universities and public universities and youngsters or rather everyone has to make the choice. Private jobs have their own list of tantrums.
When I started my life I began serving the private capital and earned a lot of money by those standards, but I soon decided I am not going spend my entire life here and soon I decided to make the shift.
Q5: Sir, Can you please share your thoughts on IRSC and how was your experience? How do you think these types of events are beneficial for students?
JS: I was very pleased to see so much active interest of students because most of the time students try to take their annual festival to some other level or some ephemeral thing. They enjoy and that is the end of the story. I am not against the enjoyment but all I am saying is that there should be a forum outside your curriculum to debate, discuss and engage with the people. In this aspect it has been an excellent event. I saw a wide mixture of speakers from a variety of fields to enrich the students. I wish you all the success for your future editions of IRSC.
42 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Manoj Joshi
Manoj Joshi is a distinguished fellow at the ORF. He has been a journalist specializing on national and international politics and is a commentator and columnist. As a reporter, he has written extensively on issues relating to Siachen, Pakistan, China, Sri Lanka and terrorism in Kashmir and Punjab. He was most recently a member of the Task Force on National Security chaired by Mr Naresh Chandra to propose reforms in the security apparatus of the country. He has been the political editor of The Times of India, Editor (Views) Hindustan Times, Defence Editor of India Today, National Affairs Editor of Mail Today, The Washington Correspondent of The Financial Express and a special Correspondent of The Hindu in his three decade long career as a journalist. Before that he was an Academic Fellow of the American Studies Research Centre, Hyderabad. We at IRSC 18‟ met him for a short interview after lunch and we were delighted to hear from him.
Q1: Sir, you have said about the modernization of Indian Army and you also said it‟s very difficult for us to wage a two and a half-pronged war without depending on god. So can we infer from this that our present day‟s security issue is under great threat?
Manoj Joshi: See, India is a nuclear weapon power and its immediate two adversaries are also nuclear weapon powers. You may have border provisions but the prospect of an all-out war is very dangerous. If there are chances of facing catastrophic defeats you don‟t go to war and so it also applies for Pakistan. Actually you know what, there may be some understandings in political and administrative level in between the ministers and leaders of these countries. If you go by the figures released by Comptroller and Auditor General of India and figures of the Parliament there is no way to wage an all-out war. We don‟t have the ammunitions for 10 days and the socio-economic situations to fight an all-out war. The point is we are setting up the question we can‟t have all-out wars.
When you are going to wage an all-out war, a nuclear war you cannot even be able to imagine about its loss if you are defeated in some sense. When we talk about all-out war we talk of something like Syria where we see total devastation. But that‟s simply not possible. I am saying the whole thing is structured in a very peculiar way. Our problem is we have a huge manpower and we have a pension bill which is more than the money we are willing to serve for capital modernization.
Q2: Sir, you have said that pension scheme for army personnel has been increasing day by day. Can you elucidate what are the anomalies in our pension policy along with other national armies?
MJ: The pension bill (One-Rank one pension) just shows when you have manpower you have to pay for your manpower. The pension bill is ever increasing. The other people are cutting their army for example The PLA (People‟s Liberation Army.)When you have excess money you can use them for mechanization and for enhancing the capabilities of the army. But the problem in Indian Army is you are increasing their numbers and you also want them to be modern. When you look at the numbers for something like the Air force; the Air force is already down to 32 squadrons whereas they should be having 42 squadrons. In the next 5 years they are going to lose another 5 squadrons so by 2020 they will be down to 27 squadrons. In
43 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
the meantime they only will be adding some Rafales and some other aircrafts. 27 squadrons will be much below 32 squadrons which you got now. If your present plans for acquiring more squadrons don‟t work out you will land up to 15 squadrons in 2020. With whom will you fight with this? As you have a large mass in the army you will need drastic reforms and you need to reduce the size. The armour holding of the army designed in the 1980s was different as you had the plan to cut Pakistan into two if there is a war. You know this plan won‟t work today as you have nuclear weapon in the picture. But you still have the same armour holding and it is very expensive to maintain this holding so you can reduce the armour. If you look at USA at the time of 1st Gulf War in 1993, they have 40,000 soldiers and by the time of 2nd Gulf war in 2003 they had 7,000 soldiers. You should have a flexible plan. But we are only adding soldiers and holding the same armour. The army Vice-Chief said 68% of the Army is obsolete and only 22% is of cutting-edge. So what‟s point of keeping the 68% of the forces? So there should be a balanced and rational thinking of armor holding power of a country.
Q3: Sir, how do you like our Departmental event IRSC 18‟?
MJ: It is really a worth remembering programme, that I have ever seen, solely dependent upon great efforts of students. Mostly it should be said that you guys are truly proud enough for being part of renowned department of IR of reputed university like Jadavpur University and by getting opportunity to arrange programme like this with wonderful events and valuable sessions. You should keep continuing it.
44 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Sauraweshwar Sen
Sauraveshwar Sen, chief mentor and founder of Catalyst has a decade of experience in training students for competitive entrances. Sauraveswar established Catalyst in 2011. Sauraveshwar switched gears from working as a Design Engineer with Mettler Toledo Inc. to what he was most passionate about – teaching. At 23, he was the youngest trainer delivering sessions at nationally reputed training institutes for GRE, GMAT, IELTS, CLAT and CAT. In IRSC 18‟, we were terribly lucky to have him as a judge for our flagship event known as Policy Lab. He has truly been instrumental in being with us in this entire journey and helping us to grow. We also got an opportunity to get an exclusive interview with him.
Q1: Sir, This year we launched our flagship Student Event, Policy Lab with your help and motivation. You have also been the judge of this event. Can you please share with us your experience in judging this event?
Sauraveshwar Sen: What we really enjoyed was the research element of each presentation of the Policy lab. We really wanted this to happen. We really wanted to understand the practical implementation of the plan. That‟s something on which the participants need to work on. This is very important and is very crucial for all of us and I consider it to be a responsibility for all of us to ensure Policy Lab will happen year after year. There should always be a sustained level of awareness around the year, and now we can create this awareness as we can easily reach out through social media to all the people. Maybe we can in between create this policy dialogues and addas where we can talk and debate. We can even organize simple field trips to see and discuss the policy issues. In IRSC 18‟, the team 1 presented on Life Under Water and if there can be a visit where one is taken to Fishery department or a pisciculture and they try to understand the woes of the fisherman. For Example, in West Bengal we keep receiving, importing and buying fishes from other states and half of the fishes we consume in Bengal does not come from the state itself. This should not be the case as we have the river Ganga flowing through the state and we have the coastal regions like Digha and Mandarmani and even Sunderbans. In spite of that we have to import fishes from Andhra Pradesh and other states from the South. So I guess I love the fact students have started innovating on policy and some of the recommendations made with their level of maturity is very commendable. I wish IRSC all the best and may it evolve to a platform where more action can be taken and implementation can be done. It does not matter you know whether you change something or not but at the end of it you should implement it. It was something which we really enjoyed.
Q2: Sir, You have been a patron and supporter of IRSC every year so can you please share with us your vision which makes you come back to IRSC year after year?
SS: I think again what really attracts not only me but everyone who is investing their time and energy in supporting this event is its quality and maturity. For example, In Policy Lab we became a part of the flagship event this year and prior to this there was never policy Lab before so the times are changing. The adaptive nature of IRSC which attracts not only the sponsors, supporters and collaborators but also it attracts a lot of quality minds. I think this can keep getting better and better and I personally feel the students, committees should always keep the understanding lingering all around the year as a natural
45 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
buildup. As you all will be graduating and soon leaving the college and eventually maybe leaving the state, it would be very difficult for you to stay in touch with this event. This knowledge has to disseminated for training the younger generation. Since this is the 7th edition I can rest assure all of you it is one of the very important chapters across all the student events and I would love to see IRSC chapter of Jadavpur University being hoisted now all across the country. We can see more collaborations and that can be done periodically across the year as different cases have different timetables. I think this is one aspect which always keep us coming back to this adaptive format, the contemporariness of IRSC and definitely the quality of the participation.
Q3: Sir, Do you wish to see any improvements in future editions of IRSC?
SS: In case of improvement in IRSC, it should really be setting more aspirational aspects in future editions. It needs to create better outreach. Earlier outreach was difficult due to operational aspects but now it is much more easier and less expensive. I would suggest that once IRSC gets over, the organizing committee should immediately start on the guideline of the next event because that is very important. After every edition there is lot of pending issues which we can overcome and always something where we can achieve more. I guess that will always continue to happen even if we take it to magnificent scale. We will always continue to improve our event and collaborations. This year‟s event will soon be over and you would go beyond with ideation and contemplation. Students nowadays are very receptive where they get to do things. I would suggest field trips under IRSC where they go to the field and address real life poverty issues, problems of employment and talk to people to solve issues. These things can be planned as everyone loves to get involved and do things on their own. The more people we have at hand we get together it‟s much easier to scale up different issues of development.
46 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Paranjoy Guha Thakurta
Paranjoy Guha Thakurta is a writer, speaker, anchor, interviewer and teacher
and his main interests are the workings of the political economy and the
media in India and the world, on which he has authored/co-authored books
and directed documentary films. He served as the editor in chief for Economic
and Political weekly. He served two years as President of the Foundation for
Media Professionals (FMP.) He is definitely someone who never attempts to
be politically correct but always factually correct. We met him after his speech
at IRSC 18‟ on „Media and International Relations‟ at the guest house for an
exclusive interview.
Q1: Sir, there is a wonderful quote by Barrack Hussein Obama, “ think it‟s important to recognize that you can‟t have 100 per cent security and also then have 100 per cent privacy and zero inconvenience.” In today‟s world we see security organizations and government agencies around the world believe that‟s the only way to prevent terrorist attacks from taking place. Even UIDAI chairman Ajay Bhushan said in the Supreme Court, „The governmental agencies would require authorization at the level of Cabinet Secretary to get access to information from the Aadhar data only for national security threat.‟ So Can you please share with us your insight on this neo-debate of privacy vs. security?
Paranjoy Guha Thakurta: You need to understand what the Government of the day or the people who are in positions of power and authority what they consider National Security are often being challenged and disputed. Let‟s assume a simple kind of a situation where there is a consensus among people on National Security. Then yes the state and the government should have the power and authority to look at the private communications of individuals. I will tell you the difference that is happening today and part of this difference is due to technology and part of it is also due to the character of the government. What technology has enabled is mass surveillance and not just targeted surveillance. In targeted surveillance you suspect a particular group of people A,B,C could be working with those who are opposed or those who are going to jeopardize the security of the country, so you tap their phones and follow their movement and so on and so forth. Today technology has given the government and private firms the power to indulge in mass surveillance. This is one important change which has occurred.
Secondly, this whole issue about individual privacy and the interests of the country are heavily loaded phrases often disputed and often controversial. One man‟s freedom fighter is another person‟s terrorist and this is the way life is, and in the whole world across Julius Assange and Edward Snowden were looked down as technology terrorists and some other people called them freedom fighters – those who are fighting for Right to free expression. There were always some checks, balances and safeguards. For instance, if you tap someone‟s telephone lines you could be the Minister of Home Affairs (MHA), The Intelligence Bureau, Research and Analysis Wing, Income Tax department, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence or the Central Bureau of Investigation but you are supposed to take permission from the Secretary of Ministry of Home Affairs before tapping anyone‟s phone. But what happens today in a day where technology has enabled mass surveillance, these checks, balances and safeguards remain largely on paper. Therefore what is happening across the world and also in India is frightening. The Cambridge Analytica and the Facebook episode shows what is considered private and what is not. These divisions are blurring. Even Mark Zuckerberg can just come and say “I am sorry.” The fact is Cambridge Analytica has mined huge volumes of data which was
47 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
presumed to be private but it is not. Then there is also the laws of nation states. Snowden has claimed that the NSA (National Security Agency) of the US government like the PRISM and other programs, are violating the rights of American citizens. The fundamental right of American citizens are being violated according to Snowden. I am not even getting into details of whether he is right or wrong. But the problem is what about my rights? If the NSA can read every email I have written, I am not a US citizen. What happens to me? So this is the problem the same organization can literally conduct surveillance operations or literally spy on people from across the world. So they may be violating their own country‟s laws but what about people who are not their citizens. This is the entire issue that remains.
Q2: Sir, we have heard about paid news and we have seen how pervasive the phenomenon of paid news has been in these years. Sir, you were a part of the sub-committee of the Press Council of India which came out with a report “Paid News: How corruption in the Indian media undermines democracy.” Can you share your insight into this scourge of paid news in the light of the various revelations coming forth down the ages?
PGT : Media is the fourth pillar of democracy and the repository of public trust. It has the obligation and the responsibility to present truthful correct objective information when they are being presented as news. Such news content is distinct from opinions that are conveyed through articles and editorials in which writers express their views. News is meant to be objective, fair and neutral – this is what sets apart such information and opinion from advertisements that are paid for by corporate entities, governments, organizations or individuals. What happens when the distinction between news and advertisements start blurring, when advertisements double up as news that have been paid for, or when “news” is published in favor of a particular politician by selling editorial spaces? In such situations, the reader or the viewer can hardly distinguish between news reports and advertisements/advertorials. This report tracks the blurring boundaries between news and advertisements/advertorials and highlights the efforts made by individuals and representatives of organizations who have painstakingly chronicled the selling of editorial space for money during elections. Indian Media the way it works, it subverts the democratic norms, purity of the right to vote and the freedom of expression.
I and my colleague K. Sreenevas Reddy were part of a sub-committee which came out with a 71 pages report with the title, “How corruption in the Indian media undermines democracy.” We interviewed around 50 individuals and we found out that what is being passed down as news is actually not something which is independently produced, factually correct and based on independent and autonomous sources. So as a reader or a listener you don‟t know what you are listening is something that you have paid for. So, essentially an advertisement is disguised and masqueraded as news. So, we have named and tried to shame a large number of people based on sound evidence. When we were in Press Council, some people were opposed to its publications and they kept the report under wraps, though it had been leaked in the media much before. Subsequently, due to the Right to Information Act the petition to the CIC (Central Information Commissioner) and due to the order of CIC, the Press Council had to make the Report public.
Q3: Sir, there was a huge controversy regarding two specific articles on the Adanis which were published when you were the Editor-in-chief of EPW (Economic and Political Weekly.) Can you exactly tell us about the two articles which were removed from EPW‟s websites and subsequently you had to lay down your papers. Can you summarize for us for what happened in the meeting in which you had to resign?
PGT: The two articles were „did the Adani Group Evade Rs 1,000 Crore in Taxes?‟ And „Modi Government‟s Rs 500-Crore Bonanza to the Adani Group.‟ I have given a detailed interview to M.K Venu from Wire and all of these are in public domain, so I will be very brief .
The articles was based on 500 crore duty refund scam. The Adanis claimed duty refund without paying the duty and our articles exposed how this was done. It was Tuesday, the 18th of July 2017, and I came into that
48 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
meeting at noon. I was told the two trustees were already meeting and they had a discussion and the entire meeting lasted for a little over 45 minutes. I remember the time as the resignation letter was timed at 12:45pm. I will tell you who the Trustees were ; The chairman of the Sameeksha Trust which runs the EPW was Professor Deepak Nayar, the managing trustees were Professor D.N Ghosh. Among the trustees who were present in that meeting were Professor Romila Thapar, Professor D.N Gupta, Professor Rajiv Bhargava and Professor Shyam Menon. The two trustees who were not present in the meeting were Professor Deepak Parekh and Professor Andre Beteille. I was of the opinion the agenda of the meeting would be a documentary film which is being made to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Economic and Political Weekly. All the trustees felt that by seeking the services of a lawyer to reply to a letter sent by a lawyer representing Adani Power Limited to the article which I and three others have put together constituted a „breach of trust‟ and a „grave Impropriety.‟ Both the notices, the one sent by Adani Power and the other replied by our lawyer representing everyone were uploaded in the website. All the Trustees felt that by using the services of a lawyer without taking their express permission and consent constituted to use their words a „grave impropriety‟ and „breach of trust‟ until both the notices were put on the website. I thought this to be a procedural lapse for which I immediately apologized. They said they were seeking to codify rules and guidelines to specify what should be the nature of engagement between the editor and the trust. Then they said they were looking into the possibilities of hiring a co-editor. Then they said to pull down both the articles with immediate effect and they told me to not leave this room until they have ascertained the articles have been pulled down. They also said I cannot write any article under my name or my byline, a signed article presumably, without the prior permission of the trust. At that point of time I asked for a piece of time and handed down my resignation.
Q4: Sir, Can you tell us why the private TV networks like Republic TV and Times Now network are more loyal to the government than the Prasar Bharati?
PGT: This is the question I was waiting for so long. This is somewhat related to their business interests as you already know. One of the major financiers of Republic TV is a BJP MP. So at one level it is not surprising. There is nowadays the “double whammy” of the recession and the growth of the worldwide web has upset the revenue models of most large media groups, many of which have downsized. Everyone these days in the internet wants everything for free. All of this had an impact on the media groups which subsequently lead to the growth of the “Paid News.” In India, these media groups have become relatively more dependent on government bodies and the ruling dispensation for their earnings. Consequently, they are displaying a willingness to bend over backwards not only to earn money but also to accommodate the ideological interests of those wielding political power. This can be the reason why these media organizations are becoming more subservient.
Q5: Sir this is the 7th edition of IRSC where we are trying to create a platform to provide students the opportunity to debate, discuss and deliberate with various stalwarts and even among themselves through various students events? We have also launched this year our flagship event „The Policy Lab‟ where we are providing young students the opportunity to create new or alternative policy frameworks for ensuring India reaches the Sustainable Development Goals(SDGs.) Can you please share with us your ideas on IRSC 18‟ and The Policy Lab ?
PGT: Honestly, I don‟t know much. But if young students from Jadavpur University are actively engaged in looking at alternative ways in which Indian society and the world can become more ecologically sustainable then I find that‟s a wonderful thing. I wish all of you very best.
49 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Major General (Retd.) Arun Roye
Major Gen. Arun Roye, a graduate of National Defence Academy, was
commissioned into the 2nd Battalion the Rajput Regiment in 1967. He saw
frontline action in Chhamb in 1971 with the 8th Jammu and Kashmir Light
Infantry. The unit was the recipient of the highest number of gallantry
awards in the Indian Army, and won two battle honors in the same
operation. He is the founding member, Vice-President and Director General
of Research Centre for Eastern and North Eastern Regional Studies, Kolkata
(CENERS-K.) He retired in 2006 as the General Officer Commanding,
Bengal. He is presently the Executive and Secretary of CENERS-K. We met
on 10th April, 2018 when he was waiting patiently for his session to start.
We got the opportunity to quiz him for a very brief interview.
Q1: Sir, you have been actively involved in training the Royal Bhutanese Army. Can you share with us your experience in training them and how they are as an armed force?
Major General Arun Roye: The Royal Bhutan Army is a very fine army with integral Bhutanese population. When I say integral Bhutanese population they comprise mainly from central Bhutan. The southern tracts of Bhutan have got a conglomeration of people whose citizenship is not very clear. They are well-trained and very sincere. They may not have the best of equipments but it is good enough to protect their country.
Q2: Sir, one of the major complains of the army is they don‟t give enough money to pursue Modernization. The financial support which they receive from the Government is only good enough to support their pensions and salaries. Sir can you enlighten us what does modernization essentially comprises of and what will eventually happen if countries don‟t embark upon that journey?
AR: There are two things which we need to understand. If any country wants to become a power, there are two pillars – economic power and the military power. You need military to protect the economy and the economy to sustain the military. What happens when both are dependent to each other? We require modernization as we cannot fight wars with archaic weapons which are 50 years old. You need to have modern weapons to fight wars. Although I must tell you, wars are becoming obsolete yet it is obsolete for obvious reasons. Today even a small country can inflict unacceptable damage due to the lethality of the weapons. If you don‟t modernize the army the lethality of the army doesn‟t come about. Modernizing the army creates a deterrent so that you don‟t fight wars. It dissuades the opponent party. That is why you must modernize. Your opponents must be wary of what unacceptable damage you must inflict upon them.
Q3: Sir, Can your share with us your insight and ideas on IRSC 18‟and how was your experience in the whole process? Do you think these events are beneficial for the students in enriching them?
AR: I believe this is a dash good idea to hoist this event. I will tell you why as people like me who are born in the 40s and 50s, we have fixed ideas and you guys are much more progressive and well-read, can think out of the box. I will be speaking in my lecture on why we have not been able to reach the mark as our
50 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
foreign ministries speak in an all British culture. As all you know our politicians are not well educated very frankly speaking. If they are not educated someone has to tell them the different paths to take so that‟s what we are doing. Such events will go a long way to educate the students and enrich them.
Q4: Sir, this year we have launched our Flagship Student event, „The Policy Lab‟ where we are giving opportunity to the students to present their innovative ideas on how to implement the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs.) It is an innovative exercise where the participants have the freedom to criticize the present policy and suggest an alternative policy to effectively implement the SDGs.
AR: I agree, this is a wonderful initiative launched to go through the critiques taking place. Critiques need to take place and it is needed to take place day in and day out as anything which is stationery is stagnant. Anything which is stagnant won‟t be able to develop. We have to keep moving on, even if we have an argument all we need to do is move on. We cannot cling on to the argument and we need to keep searching for better discourses. Think out of the box and thinking out of the box has become a necessity of this age.
51 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Shri. Suresh K. Goel
Shri Suresh L.Goel has served as an IFS officer for 35 years and has worked
actively on Indian-ASEAN partnership. He also served in the permanent mission
of India in New York from 1991-95. He retired in 2013 as Secretary of Ministry of
External Affairs and Director General of the Indian council of cultural Relations.
We met him after his lecture at the Guest House for an exclusive interview.
Q1: Sir, you have been posted in the ASEAN region for a long time and have tremendous expertise in this field. So Sir, I will love to know a common question which most of the students face- why India frequently gets snubbed by ASEAN countries and fails to get diplomatic dividends like China manages to have in this region.
Ambassador Suresh K.Goel: I really don‟t agree with the viewpoint. We don‟t have same diplomatic relations as China. Our relationship is different from China. China has greater capacity in terms of both economic resources and geographical proximity to influence events in this area as compared to us. There is an asymmetry of power and resources. Precisely that‟s the reason and it has nothing to do with what the ASEAN countries want.
Q2: Sir, you have been the Director-General of ICCR (Indian Council of Cultural Relations) for a long period. You have also been instrumental in talking about soft power and cultural diplomacy. Sir, you have also organized International Dance Festival. So Sir, can you tell us the importance of these terms in the context of organizing International Dance, song and drama festivals.
SKG: I will give you one example. In 2012, When the ASEAN summit took place in India, we were responsible for organizing different cultural activities of different events leading up to the summit. One of the events was a cultural performance after a dinner at Rashtrapati Bhawan. We did that performance, representing each ASEAN country and matched that group with another group of that country. It was a 45 minutes performance at Rashtrapati Bhawan. No one was able to discern where India ended and ASEAN began and vice-versa. It all gelled together and looked as if it represented one common culture. This is what we achieve by doing these things. Culture is beyond boundaries. National power goes beyond borders. We achieve what we want and culture is transboundary. Cultural diplomacy is engagement between two countries societies on the basis of cultures. You have to understand their cultures, the people and engage with them at the cultural level on the basis of their values.
Q3: Sir, Boutros Boutros Ghali came up with the report on UNSC expansion known as the Agenda of Peace. Sir, you were posted in the UN for a long period of time. Sir, can you exactly tell us the politics behind India‟s failure to secure a seat at the global high table and also about the UFC (Uniting for Consensus representing Pakistan, Italy and Mexico etc.) claim opposing India‟s candidature.
SKG: In the process of negotiations and consultations is a lengthy process. In the discussions process there is going to be incompetency and discrepancies. Then there is UFC who are opposing India‟s candidature, which have just come up to oppose their regional rivals from getting a seat in the UNSC. But yes, politically there are many big powers in the world who were not ready to accept India in the UNSC at that time. But
52 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
even today USA, France, UK are ready to work with us and even Russia is agreeable to work us. Russia does not at all consider us as an equal. But China does not want India as a member and these are the real issues which a country needs to deliberate on before taking the final call. The rest is up to what and where we put questions on drafting, deliberating, strategies, tactics and ideas. At this moment the world is not ready for a UNSC expansion.
I wish you all the best for IRSC and wish you all students‟ all the success in life.
53 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Dr. Srikanth Kondapalli
Srikanth Kondapalli is the professor in Chinese Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru
University. He received the K. Subramanyam Award in 2010 for Excellence in
Research in Strategic and Security Studies. He has published two books, two
monographs, co-edited two volumes and several articles in edited books and in
national and international journals and newspapers. He is a guest faculty
member at Foreign Service Institute, National Defense College, Defense Services
Staff College, Army War College, College of Naval Warfare, College of Air War,
Indo-Tibetan Border Police Academy and Border Service Force Academy. He is a
very busy man and came to Kolkata on a very tight schedule. We caught up with
him for a couple of minutes after lunch before he left for his flight.
Q1: Sir you have an enormous volume of work in Chinese studies. In OBOR (One-Belt One Road Initiative) India refused to be a part of it on claims of OBOR violating its sovereignty. India also did not send any delegation to the BRF (Belt and Road Forum) held last year. Sir, what are your views on OBOR and do you think we are on the losing end by not being a part of OBOR?
Dr. Srikanth Kondapalli: Firstly, this Belt and Road Initiative initiated in 2013 expanded through various places. The top 6 areas of BRI are Eurasian connectivity, Russia-China-Mongolia, Iran-West Asia related connectivity, CPEC (China-Pakistan Economic Corridor) and BCIM-EC (Bangladesh, China, India and Myanmar Economic Cooperation) and Indo-China region (Laos and Cambodia connectivity.) India has no objection to most of the areas except for CPEC project. In 1963, Pakistan transferred 5000 sq. kms of territory to China which is called Shaksgam valley. The Chinese foreign ministry made an announcement after the Indian protest that the land which was transferred will be finalized in terms of sovereignty, etc. once Kashmir Govt takes a decision. Kashmir here refers to Kashmir which is independent or a Kashmir which joins India or a Kashmir which joins Pakistan that‟s the option. The Chinese announcement and 2014 CPEC project are contradictory in nature and most importantly it violates the Indian Sovereignty. Now when Dalai Lama came to India we were told we are interfering in Chinese internal affairs so they waged a war on India in 1962 saying we violated their sovereignty and other things. China does not allow to maintain favorable diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In the light of these Chinese comments on sovereignty, the Indian concern on sovereignty is not taken care of. So there is apprehension of not simply Chinese investments in these places but also security of these places. In Gilgit and Baltistan, Pakistan occupied Kashmir there is also a concern of deposed Chinese security troops. The Indian concern are on investments on POK but most importantly the presence of Chinese security guards in areas closer to the hydroelectric project. Chinese state owned enterprises are coming up in Jhelum, Chenab areas. If there is an Indo-Pakistan conflict in future there is going to be a new element due to the presence of Chinese guards. This provides a direct role and a cause to interfere in Indo-Pakistan conflicts. Prime Minister Modi in the Raisina dialogue said sovereignty claims of a country cannot be dismissed in the name of connectivity. This is a very explicit statement from the PM and the External Affairs Minister and others as well. Despite the Indian statement, China has not been able to account it. At a time when China wants India to accommodate Chinese interests in the Taiwan issue and Tibet issue but it is not sure of any accommodation in POK. It neither wants to accommodate Indian concerns on security guard agencies
54 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
issues or on issues of investment. These are some issues which needs to be resolved by the leadership before taking the final call.
Secondly in May 2013, when Premier Li Keqiang visited India there was an agreement on BCIM-EC. Three high level meetings have already taken place. India is not opposing BRI initiative completely but only one portion of OBOR on sovereignty issues. If the Chinese are so sensitive on sovereignty, how can they not expect other countries to be sensitive on sovereignty issues too? So it is a double standard that china imposes on others and hence the Indian interest are important and Indian protests are equally relevant.
Q2: Sir, Can you share with us what type of relations we have with Taiwan as Taiwanese PM was present in the swearing-in ceremony of Narenda Modi in 2014?
SK: India has no diplomatic relations with Taiwan, but we have economic, social and cultural relations since 1995. This means we can trade as part of WTO and we also have cultural contacts with them. We issue them visas as religious ethnic Buddhists can come to India for various festivals. This is not official diplomatic process. They do not have official embassies and diplomatic process. China and Taiwan have a deep animosity but even then Taiwan invested 280Bn Dollars in the Chinese market for mutual benefit. So India is similarly requesting Taiwan to invest in India under the WTO framework and international norms. In international norms if X wants to invest in Y you just need an investment protraction agreement. So this is what India and China are doing right now.
Q3: Sir, South China Sea (SCS) is a huge economic football ground with many players in it. Can you enlighten us in brief what these issues are which keeps complicating this debate beyond solvation by the players?
SK: South China Sea is more than the size of India as it is about 3.4 billion Sq. Kms. It has huge energy and other assets. In 1980s when energy was discovered in SCS everybody went to grab as many territories as possible. There are about 45 islands of which maximum are with the Vietnamese and 9 are captured by Chinese. The most important aspect in this area – China has built up 3500 acres of area specially in terms of military facilities in these nine islands. They have installed 29 sophisticated surface to air missiles and other complex weaponry. China is militarizing these facilities. In July 2016, when China lost a case to Philippines in the Court at Hague tribunal, it set the ball rolling and it was due to four elements in the judgment by the Hague tribunal. The first reason was due to the welfare of the fisherman as China was sending naval warship to harass the fisherman. So the Filipino fisherman had to face problems of losing their livelihood, so the Hague tribunal suggested their rights be restored. Secondly, Hague tribunal suggested because of the militarization and emerging projects; environmental degradation has taken place which will have consequences not just for China, Philippines, Malaysia and Vietnam but the entire humankind. We know that if we treat the environment this way it will lead to tsunamis which will drastically affect human civilization. The Hague tribunal cautioned against environmental degradation causes for any dredging projects. Thirdly, the Hague tribunal criticized you cannot go and occupy a reef, and from this reef you try to occupy 100 nautical miles. If you look at the map of China the SCS is 1200 nautical miles away and China is saying it is ours. It defies logic when you look at the map. The Chinese jurisdiction goes into the land of Philippines. When you look at the map of Philippines, the land contiguous to Philippines belongs to them. Yet China wants to grab the land which is closer to Philippines. If you look at the map of SCS, Chinese claims go deep into the 200 nautical miles of Malaysia, Vietnam, Brunei, Philippines and many other countries. Under international law you cannot claim other‟s territories. The Hague tribunal says you cannot go and occupy an island and from that island you cannot claim other territories 200 nautical miles out. The fourth aspect which Hague tribunal pointed out is the Chinese claims are based on history. For example, if I tell the Jadavpur University‟s Vice-Chancellor, my great grandfather was in this room so this room belongs to me. This is a historical claim. China‟s claims is based on Ming dynasty when some ships passed through this SCS and found some coins. So, if I leave some coins in JU and come back 200 centuries later and claim
55 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
this guest house. This defies international legal principles of continuous physical occupation. Chinese army is physically occupying these areas. Under this context Hague tribunal rejected the Chinese claims.
The Indian position is freedom of navigation because China is insisting that the whole land is a Chinese territory and any ship which is passing through should take the permission of the Chinese government. India, ASEAN, Japan, Australia, USA and every other country is saying freedom of navigation is a universal right. On high seas they should have free commons. If a country occupies this 3.4 Bn Sq. kms then the international commons will collapse. There are 29 sea-links of communications in SCS, this will affect the international trade. India has 50% of trade passing through SCS. So, if India gives SCS on Freedom of navigation, 50% of India‟s trade is gone. Then JU and JNU will not get its funds.
Q4: Sir, this is the 7th edition of IRSC where we are trying to create a platform to provide students the opportunity to debate, discuss and deliberate with various stalwarts and even among themselves through various student events? Can you share with us your insight on IRSC 18‟?
SK: This is a fantastic event as the students are in charge. You guys discuss whatever the issues are and you bring out some solutions through discussions. This is the bottom-up approach. You guys have done it in a wonderful manner in a festive mood. I hope I will be present next year too. I wish you all best wishes for the future editions of IRSC.
56 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
57 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Student Interview – I
Q1: Sir, Could you please introduce yourself?
Ujan Natik: My name is Ujan Natik, I am a student of the Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University. Currently I am in undergraduate second year.
Q2: Was this your 1st IRSC? If not then please tell us about your previous experiences.
UN: Previously, I have attended IRSC only once, in my first year that was in September, 2016. I was literally amazed by the huge number of people, including the participants, guests, lecturers, sponsors, and the organizers that were associated with the event. I have never expected that an event of
Ujan Natik, Policy Lab Winner
this scale could be pulled off by any discipline of social-science. Previously I
heard about large-scale tech fests that are organized in various engineering a colleges. I always had the idea that fests which are centering on technology was generally of large scale than fests of other themes. It is natural considering the amount of interest the youth have on technology. However, after IRSC 2016, my view regarding this totally changed as I saw the
amount of interest that this conclave, which was based on IR and political science, attracted. It totally goes on to show that people are genuinely interested in current affairs and international/national politics. It was really amazing.
Q3: Please tell us about the “The Policy Lab” in which you participated.
UN: In this event, the participant had to present with an alternate policy framework/roadmap (to the already existing one in India) in a particular section or criticize the already existing policy. This has to be done through power point presentation. A minimum of two members is required in every team. The language of presentation is either Bengali or English. The sector that can be selected has to fall under any of the Sustainable Development Goals.
Q4: Congratulations for winning gold in The Policy Lab. How has your experience been in participating in this event? Please share with us the secrets of your success.
UN: Thank you. The experience was pretty enriching. Competition is always prevalent in an event like this where teams from various colleges compete. But, apart from that, it was a very enlightening session as a whole. Came to learn about various existing policies in India, that I did not know previously. Not only that, I also learnt their loopholes, where they can be improved and what alternative model can substitute them. This event was a very serious academic simulation. Hence, the knowledge and views that were shared in the session among the various contestants and the spectators are very „original‟ in nature. These types of
58 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
activities motivate any person to think through a parallel viewpoint and learn to think differently from the already existing popular forms. Thus, it helps in building up constructive criticism regarding any policy.
Q5: Please share with us your presentation which bagged you the 1st Prize and tell us something about your partner‟s presentation too?
UN: My partner, Shounak Baidya (Postgraduate Second Year) is a well-known and arguably one of the most knowledgeable seniors of the Department of International Relations. He suggested me the idea of presenting a policy on the reproductive health of women in India. It falls under the SDG 15. This sector is still pretty much under developed in India. That is why we suggested a budget allocation in our presentation, which is to be implicated by the Ministry of Women and Child Development, Govt. of India. It was again primarily the idea of my partner. We also stated the sources from where this fund can be derived, with the examples of previous instances where countries have successfully gathered fund from these sources for this purpose. Our main essence of the presentation targeted primarily the purpose of the policy and what the possible sources of the fund could be. Once we have clarified this aspect of the policy, it started to appear a much realistic option that can be actually implemented in the country.
Q6: Please tell us something about the PR & marketing, hospitality and food of this year‟s IRSC.
UN: Hospitality is always spotless in IRSC. The volunteers put up a tremendous effort to make sure of that. Every year a lot of effort goes into PR and marketing, that is quite evident considering the size of the IRSCs that have happened in the past, but this year it was evident that the organizers put an inhuman effort into these departments. It is because, the students of the IR dept. got less than a month to organize this event. Without any time, without any source of fund, without any confirmed sponsor and with semester exams approaching fast, they took this challenge to organize the IRSC; and ultimately, they have been very successful in doing that. That goes on to show how much effort these members of the organizing committee put into PR and Marketing, to be able to pull off an event of such size and quality in such a short time. The entire department should be proud of them. The food has always been good in IRSC, nothing really new to tell about that.
QN: Do you want to suggest any improvements for next year IRSC?
UN: I only have the best compliments for IRSC. I want it to grow from strength to strength each year, with each batch taking this challenge of organizing a bigger, a better IRSC. At the end, I would like to suggest everyone to participate in this event as a conclave of this stature in the field of political science or IR cannot be seen anywhere else. IRSC is really one of a kind. There are several events organized by various societies of JU, but unlike these profit generating, commercial events, IRSC is a very humble and pure academic meet in the truest sense of the term. The participants can participate in as many events as they wish, without any participation fee, can attend lecture sessions and panel discussions of eminent personalities from around the country and can learn several things which would not be available elsewhere. IRSC is a very humble and an honest initiative by the students of the dept. of IR, Jadavpur University, whose only target is to spread the knowledge and extend the discourse of political science. That makes it the most unique academic event in Jadavpur University.
59 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Student Interview II
Q1: Sir, Could you please introduce yourself?
Subhranil: Hello, my name is Subhranil Ghosh. I am a third year
undergraduate student of the department of International Relations,
Sreemoyee: Hello, my name is Sreemoyee Majumder. I am a third
year undergraduate student of the department of International
Relations.
Sreemoyee Majumdar & Subhranil
Ghosh, Winners of PolitCon
Q2: Was this your 1st IRSC? If not, then please tell us about your previous experiences.
Subhranil: This was my third IRSC to be precise, and in the last two instalments I worked for the research team and it was a thrilling experience.
Sreemoyee: Yes, this was my first.
Q3: Please tell us about “PolitCon” in which you participated.
Subhranil: PolitCon was a brilliantly organised power point presentation which helped to hone our skills of research and presentation. It also helped to forge teamwork and establishing your argument.
Sreemoyee: Not only is the name unique, even the topics were. Moreover, such paper presentations are very much needed for students like me who want to pursue their career in academics. It allows to sharpen their presentation and analytical skill, which is very important.
Q4: Congratulations for winning the gold in PolitCon. How has your experience been participating in these event? Please share with us the secrets of your success.
Subhranil: It has been a deeply enriching experience and exhilarating experience. The secret to our success has been our teamwork, my teammate Sreemoyee has put in so much effort in spite of her additional responsibilities of managing the hospitality committee. Honestly, I would not have been able to do this, so the credit goes to her ability to multitask.
60 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Sreemoyee: It was very enriching and as I said such events help to sharpen the analytical as well as the presentation skills. Last but not the least it was judged by one of my favourite professors, Sanjukta Bhattyacharya. That was a brownie point! Well, for success you need hardwork. Of course tons and tons of thanks to my partner, Subhranil, without whom it was an impossible task!
Q5: In PolitCon we try to provide a platform for students to showcase their research and analyzing acumen through PowerPoint Presentation. How do you think these events help the students to think and introspect deeply, as students at UG level get very few opportunities to present a paper?
Subhranil: You are absolutely spot-on when you talk about a platform, it is essential that UG students get as much exposure as possible and PolitCon goes a long way to ensure that. My only prayer is that this rich tradition continues and aids students in developing introspective skills.
Sreemoyee: Subhranil has said everything I have nothing to add.
Q6: This year we have introduced a new flagship event „The Policy Lab,” where we tried to create a framework to push people to think out of the box, to put forward alternative strategies and ideas to ensure India achieves its SDG goals. We are giving them the opportunity to create an alternative model to achieve the SDGs. How do you think these events help in enhancing creativity, novelty and indigenous ideas among the students?
Subhranil: All I can say in my humble opinion is that these events are fundamental in developing a student‟s cognitive capabilities. They promote novelty, creativity and skill to negotiate the interconnected nodes of global and domestic politics. Also, originality is perhaps the greatest takeaway from these events and allows students to provide more efficient and implementable solutions.
Sreemoyee: Policy lab was really unique! It makes the aspiring sociologists and political scientists aware of the surrounding socio-political issues and also it gave a unique platform to the young minds to showcase their fresh ideas.
Q7: Please tell us something about the PR & marketing, hospitality and food of this year‟s IRSC?
Subhranil: All the departments have been most efficient and approachable, and it is a miracle on their part that they managed to pull off this event in record time, all the while keeping a level head. The four committees have displayed amazing cooperation and teamwork and they deserve a hearty round of applause.
Sreemoyee: Being a part of the IRSC team, we had to overcome a lot of hurdles to make this event huge, and I must say all the teams did a great job! Brilliant management.
Q8: Do you want to suggest any improvements for next year‟s IRSC?
Subhranil: Nothing, it is perfect the way it is, it is an exemplary manifestation of the hard work put in by students and the students have done a fabulous job, my hope is that it can be sustained in this way for years to come.
61 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Sreemoyee: Well, improvement has no limit but from the core of my heart what I feel is, team work is the fundamental and the most important thing. Always keep that. That’s the route to success! All the best for all the upcoming IRSCs!
I wish you all the best in life. Thank you so much for your time, Ma‟am. We sincerely hope to see you come back for next IRSC.
62 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Student Interview III
Q1: Ma‟am, Could you please introduce yourself?
Sukanya: I am Sukanya Bhattacharya, studying
Political Science hons. in Presidency University,
currently in my 1st year.
Shromona: I am Shromona Jana from Presidency
University and I am pursuing political science,
currently in my 1st year.
Sukanya Bhattacharya & Shromona Jana from
Presidency University
Q2: Was this your first IRSC? If not, then please tell us about your previous experiences? Sukanya: Yes, this was my first IRSC.
Shromona: Yes, this was my first IRSC.
Q3: Congratulations for winning the gold in Dialectics. Tell us how your experience has been after participating in this debate? This debate has been a long tradition of IRSC so was this debate any different from other debates in the Kolkata debating circle?
Sukanya: This debate was not really that different from the conventional Oxford style debates that happen in Kolkata debating circle. My experience in IRSC was quite good, there were a number of helpful volunteers, and we were provided food and refreshments which was a wonderful gesture on the part of the committee.
Shromona: Thank you so much. The win was unexpected, especially when all the participants were all so deserving. Usually conventional Ox-Bridge debates are quite typical in the way the motions are made. A debate is as good as the motions are. What was different about the debate was the kind of motions participants had to deliberate on. The motions were very relevant to the present political climate and atmosphere in the international arena. The actions of the United Nations Peacekeeping Force, the relevance and importance of regional organisations in light of Brexit and the growing concerns of non-traditional security threats regarding global warming, cyber security and economic security are issues of the hour and it was challenging yet exciting to debate on such motions.
63 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Q4: Please tell us about your overall experience.
Sukanya: My overall experience in IRSC was great and I look forward to participating in this event next year!
Q5: Can you share with us your secrets of success?
Sukanya: It‟s really hard to pinpoint that one secret to success when it comes to debating, but I feel that my love for this subject and the research I did on the motions helped me gain a head start.
Shromona: The overall experience was quite enjoyable. The motions, the judges and all the participants made the debate quite an engaging event.
Q6: Please tell us something about the PR & marketing, hospitality and food of this year‟s IRSC. Sukanya: My partner and I were satisfied with all these aspects.
Shromona: There is no secret as such. A debater, in fact anybody engaged in doing anything should be aware, should think out of the box, experiment, work hard and stay determined and focused, no matter the number of losses behind one‟s back. And yes, never to let a win get to your head.
Q7: Do you want to suggest any improvements for next year‟s IRSC?
Sukanya: It would have been great had the winners been announced on the day of the debate itself at night through social media. My partner and I had class during the time of prize distribution, so if we would have known that we won beforehand, we would have made sure to be present. Since we were unsure of the results, we did not attend the prize distribution in the fear of losing our class for nothing. So, I would like it if next time winners are announced beforehand so they can be there for prize distribution ceremony.
Shromona: Maybe to just start the event at the given time. Nothing else.
64 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Student Interview IV
Q1: Ma‟am, Could you please introduce yourself?
Upasana Das: This is Upasana Das, an undergrad student in the Jadavpur
University Department of English.
Q2: Was this your 1st IRSC? If not, then please tell us about your previous
experiences.
UD: Yes. It was my first IRSC.
Q3: Please tell us about the “The Comiconflict” in which you participated?
UD: It was basically a graphic art contest where you had to choose between
two political topics and present your views in the form of art.
Upasana Das, Winner of
ComiConflict
Q4: Congratulations for winning the gold in Comiconflict. How has your experience been participating in these event? Please share with us the secrets of your success.
UD: Art and politics are always intertwined. It was a good event and it was nice to see an inter-university political science conference include art in it. There are no secrets to share. If you are interested and you have an idea, go ahead and draw.
Q6: Can you share with us what was your cartoon and how did you interpret the Theme of the event, „US, The menace and Putin, The Adventurer‟?
UD: We had to choose between the two topics and I chose „US the menace.‟ I basically drew what the US has been doing over the years since the Second World War. It included disarmament, the gulf war, globalization, arms supply to the Middle East, UN control and Trump‟s conflict with Gonzalo Curiel.
Q6: What are the utility of political cartoons and do you really think they have the power to persuade the audience and change their mind on a particular issue?
UD: Yes, cartoons are a smart and simple way to mobilize and educate people who do not know about a particular issue within a short period of time, through images. Most cartoons are humorous which almost always attract people more.
65 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Q7: Please tell us something about the PR & marketing, hospitality and food of this year‟s IRSC?
UD: The PR was good and everyone knew about the event. There were volunteers who mostly knew where the event was occurring in case you didn‟t. The food was fine.
Q8: Do you want to suggest any improvements for next year‟s IRSC?
UD: The time factor and more volunteers.
66 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
67 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Faculty Advisory Committee IRSC 2018
Faculty Convenor: Shri Subhajit Naskar
Prof. Partha Pratim Basu Treasurer: Dr. Herkan Neadan Toppo
Dr. Imankalyan Lahiri Smt. Rochona Das With Special thanks to
Prof. Omprakash Mishra
68 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Student Committees
When a bunch of motivated people come together to chase their dreams, you see magic taking place in front of your eyes. IRSC 18‟ is a story of this magic and this dream taking shape. The entire department has ceaselessly worked for hours and hours to meticulously ensure everything goes according to plan.
Logistics
Paripurna Mazumdar Kathamrita Mukherjee Manoswini Sarkar
Parna Bhattacharya Avipsa Singh
Asif Sardar
Arjun Sarafar
Roddur Mitra
Bijetri Pathak
Mouboni Dutta
Sreya Nath
Juhi Mandal
Sheena Bhattacharya Sagnik Dam
Suman Rajak
Sourajyoti Roy Chowdhury Devapriya Bhattacharya Salini Chatterjee
Thinley Choden Bhutia Da Yankee Sherpa
Upasana Mishra
Avishek Chanda
Joydip Ghosh
Finance Committee
Avishek Chanda
Sreetama Basu
Avipsa Singh
Food Committee
Mihika Sharma
Asif Sardar
Morsalim SK
Joydip Ghosh
Sayan Bose
Riya Das
Puja Bhakat
Supriya Halder
Jagatpati Das
Abu Basar
Toydul Islam
Ritapriya Nandy Chitralekha Saha Arundhoti Das
Akash Chatterjee Ranit Mukherjee Rafik Laskar
Events
Shreya Mukherjee Anoushka Roy
Bijetri pathak
Sanjana Priyaranjan Ayush Banerjee
Awstika Das
69 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
Hospitality
Chitralekha Saha
Tanishtha Bhagawati
Shreya Banerjee
Riddha Chakraborty
T.A.Nagalakshmi
Ritapriya Nandy
Avipsa Singh
Paripurna Mazumder
Ayush Biswas
Sandeepta Sinha
Apurbaa Sengupta
Madhura Chanda
Sreemoyee Majumder
Pratyusha Raychaudhuri
Dwaipayan Sinha
Subhranil Ghosh
Rishma Banerjee
Parna Bhattyacharya
Asif Sardar
Conference Report, Editing, Photography & Rappoteuring
Swapnadya Ghosh
Mrinmoy Routh
Avipsa Singh
Nayan Golder
Debanjan Dey Sarkar
Shreya Sarkar
Devashrita Mukherjee
Rit Mitra
Dhritiman Banerjee
Pranjal Roy
Rudrasavarna Dutta
Pratiti Ghosh
Arup Maity
Pratik Bose
Shrestha Chanda
Sayantan Bandyopadhyay
Vasundhara Mukherjee
Sauptick Chakroborty
Arnab Chaudhuri
Outreach
Akash Sekh
Pratyusha Raychaudhuri Arup Maity
Sagnik Dam
Dwaipayan Sinha
Swapnadya Ghosh
Deepyaman Dey
Ritapriya Nandy
Suman Rajak
Research Committee
Avipsa Singh
Riddha Chakraborti
Paripurna Mazumder Pratiti Ghosh
Kathamrita Mukherjee Ujan Natik
Mouboni Dutta
Ayush Biswas
Apurba Daspoddar
Sheena Bhattacharya Abhirup Bhattacharya Apurbaa Sengupta
Rudrasavarna Dutta Swapnadya Ghosh
Sourajyoti Roy Chowdhury Pranjal Ray
Salini Chatterjee
Tanistha Bhagawati
Sangita Kar
Soumyadeep Bidyanta Bodhisatwa Bhattacharyya
Digital Editing
Parna Bhattacharya
70 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018
PR Committee
Pratyusha Raychaudhuri Apurba Daspoddar Ankita Mandal
Pooja Adhinarayan Ananya mondal
Rushali Saha
Rishma Banerjee
Ahana Roy
Sponsorship Committee
Avipsa Singh
Sreemoyee Majumdar Jahnobi Paul
The Team
71 | IRSC CONFERENCE REPORT ● 10-11 APRIL 2018