The ongoing conflicts and crises across the world, be it in Ukraine or in the South China Sea, reflect a serious flaw in the current international order and in the politics of relations amongst nations. The singular focus on the demonisation of leaders, aided by perception management through devious media control, reflects a significant danger to global safety and stability. The current hyper noise in US-China relations is driven by hyperbole about Xi and other leaders. It is time to take a step back and review the information holocaust.
Rebecca E Karl’s perceptive article highlights the vagaries of flawed picture portrayals of China and Xi that can be very far from the truth. This article was published earlier in Dissent Magazine.
– Editorial Team
Mao and Xi’s historical projects couldn’t be more different, and it is high time to move beyond the bad history that conflates them.
Commentary on China these days often presents lazy thinking that leads to some ridiculous historical statements. That President Xi Jinping is a would-be Mao Zedong or that China is facing a “new Cultural Revolution” are examples of this laziness. In a charitable light, such assertions stem from a broad misunderstanding of the logics of contemporary China and its role in the world today. In a less charitable light, they are driven by ideological fealty to some of the most outdated and frankly racist aspects of Cold War Western anti-communism. My premise in the following comments: China today is not Maoist, and Xi is not Mao redux. China today is also not communist in any genuine sense of that term, even though the Communist Party presides over the country with an increasingly iron grip.
The difference between Mao and now could not be starker. Mao’s twentieth-century anti-capitalist and anti-feudal revolution in politics and culture sought to transform China’s domestic social relations by mobilizing masses of people against the systems of domination that constrained their everyday lives. He sought to demonstrate to the non-capitalist world the superiority of socialism as a mode of material and cultural production. Those experiments must be judged a failure on both counts. Xi’s twenty-first-century goal, by contrast, is to release economic forces from the burden of sustaining socialist relations in order to build China’s global wealth and power. To that end, he has pursued domestic stability and has repressed potentially insurgent political, social, and cultural impulses along with challenges from internal peripheries—all while enhancing the power and privileges of the Communist Party itself. To date, his efforts to redefine and defend capitalist logics in China seem to have found success.
China today is not Maoist, and Xi is not Mao redux. China today is also not communist in any genuine sense of that term, even though the Communist Party presides over the country with an increasingly iron grip.
Mao and Xi’s historical projects couldn’t be more different, and it is high time to move beyond the bad history that conflates them. We need to grapple with how the past several decades of social and political realignment, not just in China but around the world, are leading to a global future not yet foretold.
The “new Cold War” rhetoric that permeates public discourse these days is dangerous, to be sure, yet it appeals to a version of the world that is long gone. Socialism has disappeared, and capitalism has prevailed. The fundamental antagonism between these two irreconcilable social and ideological systems—the antagonism that informed a struggle between two different cultural imaginings of the future—has not existed since at least the mid-1990s, when the post-1989 Chinese capitalist order came into full view and took material and ideological root in China and the world. (And, as anyone in Asia or Africa knows, the concept of the “cold” war was always of questionable utility in places that hosted a continuous series of hot wars.)
Indeed, the huge dissension within the “West,” the United States included, about how to even specify these problems—or whether to specify them at all—gives the lie to the fiction of unified nation-states facing off across elemental ideological divides.
We live in a capitalist world, but that doesn’t reduce the stakes of current conflicts. Will we blow each other up in militarized one-upmanship? Will we so pollute our environments that we destroy the natural world’s capacity to sustain life? Will we tear each other and ourselves apart in the attempt to come to human solutions to human-made problems? Will the speed of disease and pathology outstrip our ability to lock down and vaccinate, or will we look the other way as the necropolitical selection of those who live and die proceeds apace? These are apocalyptic stakes, but they do not break down analytically on fundamental lines of systemic antagonism. The definition of and solutions to these problems do not depend on such outmoded analytics as the “West” and the “rest,” or the United States and China. Indeed, the huge dissension within the “West,” the United States included, about how to even specify these problems—or whether to specify them at all—gives the lie to the fiction of unified nation-states facing off across elemental ideological divides.
We need to confront the possibility that our leaders—whoever they may be, whether so-called democrats or so-called authoritarians, so-called liberals, leftists, or rightists—all are leading us into disaster.
What we need to confront today is that our accustomed systems of analysis based in the imaginary unities of nation-states are exhausted. We need to confront the possibility that our leaders—whoever they may be, whether so-called democrats or so-called authoritarians, so-called liberals, leftists, or rightists—all are leading us into disaster. Those of us outside China must oppose attempts by our governments and ventriloquist media to create ever more unequal and violent capitalist relations that ratchet up tensions between peoples and nations. At the same time, we must try to support those within China who are opposing their own government’s and ventriloquist media’s commitments to suppressing the critical voices and anti-capitalist practices in their midst. The stakes are high, and now is the time to rise to the occasion of critical engagement rather than sink into facile historical analogies. What we face today are not conflicts between civilizations but conflicts over what kind of civilization we wish to inhabit moving forward. Neither the Chinese state nor Western ones have the kinds of answers that we need these days, but there are activist elements in all of our societies striving to find solutions. It is to such activists that we must look for hope.
It is also obvious that the way China handles Sri Lanka’s issue will have a significant impact on the future of China’s debt strategy in other developing nations across the world
Sri Lanka and China share an ‘all-weather friends’ relationship. Long-standing diplomatic ties between Sri Lanka and China have developed into an infrastructure-focused economic partnership. Beginning in the early 1970s, China began to offer support for the economic development of some landmark projects in the country. The financial assistance offered by China has increased significantly since 2005. Soon their relationship transformed into a model that made use of interest-bearing loans and foreign direct investments. With Chinese assistance, the Mahinda Rajapaksa administration launched significant transportation, energy, and telecommunications projects. Some of these were the coal-fired Norocholai power station in 2006, the Hambantota port in 2007, the Mattala International Airport in 2010, the Colombo International Container Terminal at the Colombo port in 2011, and the Lotus Tower in 2012. With the launch of China’s BRI (Belt and Road Initiative) strategy in 2013, projects like Colombo Port City were taken up and further investment was made in earlier projects like the Hambantota port deal (Wignaraja et al. 2020).
During the period between 2006 and 2019, the total value of Chinese investment in Sri Lanka was around $12.1 Billion (Wignaraja et al. 2020). According to a data analysis, China’s bilateral assistance and export credit loans have tripled from US $386.1 million in 2007 to US$1.2 billion in 2009 (Nilanthi Samaranayake 2011). The major sector of Chinese investment is the road and expressway, which accounts for over 68% of the country’s total expressway length. The other significant sector which has received Chinese investment and loans is the port projects.
Port City – Colombo
The Port City of Colombo (PCC) is the dream project of Sri Lanka that was unveiled during Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit in 2014. Since Colombo is one of the top 25 busiest ports in the world, the proposed project promoted Colombo as a “world-class city” not only for Sri Lanka but also for South Asia as a whole (Revi 2021), with the government expecting to turn it into a financial centre like Singapore and Dubai. The initiative is supposed to improve Sri Lanka’s economy, which is primarily dependent on the export of tea and tourism, to more prosperity through a wide range of service sectors. It is projected to cost $14 billion, with China investing $1.4 billion to assist PCC in reclaiming 269 hectares of land in the Indian Ocean. In return, China received a 99-year lease over 116 hectares of the surrounding area. The initiative is a private-public partnership project between the Sri Lankan government and CHEC Port City Colombo Pvt. Ltd. It is also the first Special Economic Zone of Sri Lanka. CHEC Port City Colombo Pvt. Ltd is a part of China Communication Construction Enterprise, which is the state-run infrastructure company that oversees the Belt and Road Initiative (Basu 2022). However, even if Port City manages to produce a sixth of Sri Lanka’s present economic production by 2041, as suggested by an independent study, it will still be a costly venture. Even though China is funding its construction, these commercial activities will provide little income for the debt-ridden country (Mukherjee 2022).
The Hambantota Port
The Hambantota port is in southern Sri Lanka. Its construction began in 2008. The port was built under the state-owned enterprises – China Harbour Engineering and Sinohydro Corporation. Around $1.4 billion was financed by EXIM Bank China in the form of three fixed interest rate loans (Wignaraja et al. 2020, 9). The project’s first phase was finished in 2010 at a cost of US $361 million (Samaranayake 2011), and the port started operations in November 2011. The second phase started in 2012 and ended in 2015. The project took more time than was expected to complete, and was not very successful, leading to a substantial capital loss. By 2016, the Sri Lanka Ports Authority, which owned the Hambantota Port, had suffered losses roughly amounting to SLR 46.7 billion. By this time, it was also evident that this extravagant project was not commercially viable, as had been demonstrated in preliminary feasibility studies (Gupta 2022). To counter this financial loss, the government, in 2017, decided to grant the port to the Chinese state-owned enterprise – China Merchant Port Holdings Company Limited – for a 99-year lease. The revenue from the contract was primarily utilised to address the balance of payment problems brought on by the rising cost of debt payments in the country.
The leasing of the port also represents Sri Lanka’s current external sector crisis (Moramudali 2020). Despite restructuring and turning it over to a Chinese entity for 99 years, Sri Lanka is still responsible for paying the debt associated with the failed port. The presence of the established trans-shipment hub, Colombo Port, which is 200 kilometres from Hambantota also makes the port commercially unviable. Because of this proximity issue, even though the port possesses several berths for diverse purposes, just about 400 vessels visit it each year as compared to 4,000 vessels in Colombo Port (Gupta 2022). Moreover, the Mattala Rajapaksa International Airport (MRIA) constructed in the southern Hambantota district with a $200 million loan from China, is referred to as the “emptiest airport in the world” (Shepard 2016).
Investments in the Energy sector
Another key sector that has received Chinese investment is the energy sector. The Norocholai power station was built by the China Machinery Engineering Corporation over a seven-year period in three phases. Three loans from the EXIM Bank of China totalling $1.4 billion and extra funding from the Sri Lankan government contributed to its co-financing. The power plant is now the largest and a vital contributor to the nation’s electricity supply (Wignaraja et al. 2020).
Projects’ Viability and Performance
Inthe Global Competitiveness Report 2019, released by the World Economic Forum, Sri Lanka ranked 84 out of 141 countries, which shows that the country’s infrastructure performance is far worse than that of other middle-income economies like Malaysia (Wignaraja et al. 2020). According to the publicly available figures, the Chinese debt is around 10% of Sri Lanka’s total foreign debt of $55 Billion and the actual figures are much higher than that. Chinese loans to Sri Lankan state-owned firms and other sorts of loans are not included in the current official estimates. According to some experts, this might amount to more than the US $6 billion, or about 20% of Sri Lanka’s external debt with higher interest rates (Gupta 2022).
The protracted effects of Chinese investments must be carefully re-examined by the Sri Lankan government so as to prevent an increase in China’s coercive influence
Hambantota Port which was built in the home district of the Rajapaksa family clearly portrays the family’s interest in their hometown. The 99-year lease of the port reflects the ever-increasing hold of China on the trade in the strategic Indian Ocean region and there are also prevailing accusations that China is likely to use the port for military purposes in future. In the case of Port City Colombo, scholars worry that it might develop into another Hambantota. Given the present situation, where Sri Lanka is unable to pay its obligations, Colombo Port City may also fall into Chinese control. Due to the political upheaval and financial issues the project construction has been interrupted multiple times.
The main causes behind the failures of these projects are that many of these were undertaken for political expediency and electoral considerations rather than for sound economic analysis and commercial viability. The government did not conduct proper feasibility studies to establish the commercial viability of these projects. Unbridled corruption made it worse. For the Hambantota port, more connectivity projects would provide more market and for the Port City Colombo, proper management plans should be given during its ongoing construction period.
The protracted effects of such Chinese investments must be carefully re-examined by the Sri Lankan government so as to prevent an increase in China’s coercive influence. In light of the current economic crisis in Sri Lanka, China as the largest creditor in the country should offer reasonable restructuring on its loans. China’s response to the current crisis, particularly in the aftermath of the large-scale protests and a new government, will impact the relations between the two countries. It is also obvious that the way China handles Sri Lanka’s issue will have a significant impact on the future of China’s debt strategy in other developing nations across the world (Latiff and Wijesinha 2022).
References
Basu, Nayanima. 2022. “Crisis-Hit Sri Lanka Bets Big on $14 Bn China-Backed Port City, Wants Reluctant India to Invest.” ThePrint. March 24, 2022. https://theprint.in/diplomacy/crisis-hit-sri-lanka-bets-big-on-14-bn-china-backed-port-city-wants-reluctant-india-to-invest/883643/.
Gupta, Shishir. 2022. “Was Cash Strapped Sri Lanka Duped by China in Hambantota Port?” Hindustan Times. June 26, 2022. https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/was-cash-strapped-sri-lanka-duped-by-china-in-hambantota-port-101656205405799.html.
Latiff, Aquilah, and Anushka Wijesinha. 2022. “Understanding China’s Role in Sri Lanka’s Debt Restructuring Efforts.” Thediplomat.com. August 2, 2022.
Moramudali, Umesh. 2020. “The Hambantota Port Deal: Myths and Realities.” Thediplomat.com. January 1, 2020. https://thediplomat.com/2020/01/the-hambantota-port-deal-myths-and-realities/.
Mukherjee, Andy. 2022. “Port City Colombo: The Great Chinese White Elephant of Sri Lanka.” Business Standard India, April 14, 2022. https://www.business-standard.com/article/international/port-city-colombo-the-great-chinese-white-elephant-of-sri-lanka-122041400365_1.html.
Revi, Vinitha. 2021. “Colombo Port City Project: Controversial since Its Inception.” ORF. December 28, 2021. https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/colombo-port-city-project/.
Samaranayake, Nilanthi. 2011. “Are Sri Lanka’s Relations with China Deepening? An Analysis of Economic, Military, and Diplomatic Data.” Asian Security 7 (2): 119–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/14799855.2011.581603.
Shepard, Wade. 2016. “For Sale: The World’s Emptiest International Airport.” Forbes. July 18, 2016. https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2016/07/18/for-sale-the-worlds-emptiest-international-airport-mattala-international-hambantota-sri-lanka/?sh=74595f4c1e3b.
Having lost out big time due to short-sighted piecemeal procurements, India’s acquisition process needs an overhaul and improve its track-record. With correct lessons derived and applied diligently, India can truly emerge as a globally competitive defence manufacturer and achieve control over critical technologies
The ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, now in its fifth month, has major lessons for India and the rest of the world, not only in terms of the future of war and military operations but more importantly on the importance of military capability and technological sovereignty. The war will be studied for its various aspects: the role and effectiveness of air dominance and air defence, Ukrainian use of anti-tank missiles and shoulder-fired missiles, anti-shipping missiles, heavy use of artillery, urban warfare, Russia’s use of long-range and hypersonic precision missiles, it’s artillery dominated grinding nature of the land campaign, use of drones by both sides, communications and the use of satellite networks, and the overbearing influence of ISR. The geopolitical fall-out of the war on India needs to be considered carefully. The comprehensive and large-scale sanctions imposed on Russia are already resulting in a multi-dimensional impact on the rest of the world.
The USA and its allies have pressurised India to not only denounce Russia’s military action against Ukraine but to go along with their sanctions by severing India’s military armament and energy relationship with Russia. When analysed carefully, we can see that the real objective of their strategy is to severe economic and military-industrial relations of the former Soviet republics with Russia and incorporate them into the western economic system. This has been done successfully in countries like Poland, the Czech Republic, Baltic states, Romania, and now is being attempted in Ukraine. A sanction is an important tool for this strategy. While the war is on in Europe, India’s lucrative defence market has been the primary objective of this strategy ever since 2014 and later when CAATSA was introduced. India has been careful to safeguard its strategic relations with not only Russia but the US and Western Europe as well. The US has gone on record to say that its objective is to wean India away from its reliance on military imports from Russia. The Ukrainian crisis has given a sense of urgency to the USA about its India strategy.
[powerkit_button size=”lg” style=”info” block=”true” url=”https://raksha-anirveda.com/indias-fighter-aircraft-needsstrategies-in-the-face-of-geopolitical-and-economic-crisis/” target=”_blank” nofollow=”false”] Read More
[/powerkit_button]
There is little doubt that the practice of handing out freebies undermines both democracy and development. But the problem doesn’t lie just with the opposition
Constitutional authorities in India have recently spoken about key challenges the country is facing.
The Chief Justice of India (CJI) has said that there is “diminishing” space for the opposition, that there was no longer any mutual respect between the Union government and the opposition, and that these developments pose a threat to Indian democracy.
Finally, the CJI blamed the government for the inadequacy of judicial infrastructure and lamented that 80% of the 6.1 lakh prisoners are undertrials and the “process has become the punishment”. He labelled prisons as ‘black boxes’ and prisoners the most vulnerable.
The CJI’s comments a few days later in Ranchi point to the anguish in the upper echelons of the judiciary when he said that media is “running kangaroo courts”, expresses “biased views” and runs “agenda driven debates”. He stated that many issues are difficult for the judges to decide but the media jumps into the fray all too quickly. He highlighted the threat to the judges after retirement. He also responded to the argument that judges – being unelected – should not get into legislative and executive areas by pointing to the constitutional responsibilities placed on the judiciary.
[powerkit_button size=”lg” style=”info” block=”true” url=”https://thewire.in/political-economy/narendra-modi-revdi-culture-political-economy” target=”_blank” nofollow=”false”] Read More
[/powerkit_button]
Many of history writing across the world is heavily influenced by nationalist narratives, religion, mythologies, and dominant accounts. However, it is now possible to re-establish past histories with the assistance of modern science through the use of anthropology, genetics, linguistics, etc. Sri Lanka’s history is intimately tied to that of the subcontinent, more particularly the Peninsula and Tamilnadu. Justice C M Wigneswaran provides a very incisive analysis of the island nation’s origins.
Ruwanwalisay Temple at Anuradhapura – Image Credit: M Matheswaran
Someone asked me; We read in the press your response to a question recently. You seem to be making sweeping statements about the Sinhalese. As far as we know the Sinhalese were the original inhabitants of this Island and the Tamils came in the 10th Century AD after the Chola Conquest. What proof have you about what you say?
My response was; Professor Wijeyanayake from London like many other Sinhala Scholars wrote in the Sunday Observer of 17th November 1996 as follows- “The Origin of the Sinhala Race is in Lanka. There is no scientific evidence of Indians originating in India who spoke Sinhala”. Sinhalese are those who speak the Sinhala Language. Of course these days there are Sinhalese who have forgotten their mother language and have embraced other languages like English and French in their countries of emigration. But in early times the Sinhalese would have been those who spoke the Sinhala Language mainly. Without the Sinhala Language, there could have been no Sinhalese.
When did the Sinhala Language come into being?
The earliest Sinhala work was Siyabaslakara around 848 CE (9th Century AD). The next was Dhampiya-atuva Gatapadayo which came out around 918 CE (10th Century AD). Pali words are used both in a modified and pure form quite heavily in this latter work. The first Sinhala grammar Sidath Sangaraya belongs to the 13th Century AD. The inscriptions before the 7th Century AD do not mention Sinhala as a language and ethnicity of the people. The term “Sihala” (Lion in Pali) occurs for the first time in the Dipawansa (5th Century AD). Only once is the term coming up to say the Island was known as Sihala on account of the presence of Lions.
In the Mahawansa the term Sihala appears twice. But there is no reference to the people called Sinhalese nor the Language called Sinhala. R.A.L.H. Gunawardana in his book “The People of the Lion: The Sinhala Identity and ideology in History and Historiography” (Sri Lanka Journal of the Humanities Vol V:1-2 (1979)) claims that before the 12th Century AD the Sinhala identity did not cover a whole people in Sri Lanka but only a small ruling class. This meant even by the 12th Century AD Sinhala had not become a full-fledged people’s language yet. What you have been fed to believe as per your question is pseudo-history created before the 1970s.
After the 1970s even Sinhala historians have begun to doubt the story of Sri Lanka’s history starting with the coming of Vijaya from North India. Now our history books do not start with the coming of Vijaya as before. They start with the Stone Age civilization which was long prior to (the fictitious) Vijaya landing in Sri Lanka. Our history books now accept that permanent settlements, agriculture, use of skills, use of iron, urbanisation etc took place in this Island before the coming of (the fictitious) Vijaya. It is interesting to note that none of the books on the ancient history of any of the States in North India refers to the emigration of a person called Vijaya with 700 followers from their shores at any time in their ancient history. So now we start history from dates anterior to the coming of (the fictitious) Vijaya. Historically it is more plausible to believe that Mahawamsa written in Pali was a fiction written for the glorification of Buddhism. In fact, the author mentions so at the end of every stanza.
But so far our Sinhala historians have not officially identified who these people who lived in this country before the coming of (the fictitious) Vijaya were. This is because any attempt, to tell the truth, will be beneficial to the Tamils and the pseudo-history of the Sinhalese hitherto purveyed would get exposed! I am told there was pressure recently to prevent the author of “Demala Baudhayo” bringing out a reprint of his book.
The importance of the 1970s and the post-1970s period lies in the fact that scientific archaeological research began to take place here from then on. Not only that, our local researchers were helped by erudite foreign archaeologists from France, Germany, Britain and USA together with UNESCO experts. The pseudo-Sinhala Buddhist historians found it difficult to make progress due to this.
A view of the Twin tanks: Archaelogical site at Anuradhapura – Photo Credit: M Matheswaran
There is now archaeological evidence that pre-historic Stone Age people lived on this Island from over 125000 years ago according to excavations made in Iranaimadu in Kilinochchi District and in certain areas in Southern Sri Lanka. Dr Siran Deraniyagala brought these matters out, through his researches.
The Stone Age could be generally divided into three periods 1. Paleolithic (Old Stone Age) (Before 10000 BC) 2. Mesolithic (Middle Stone Age) (Between 10000 BC and 8000 BC) 3. Neolithic (New Stone Age) (from 8000 BC to 3000BC). (Greek – lithos – Stone). But in certain regions, the Mesolithic period may have started even before 10000 BC.
There is evidence that from 30000 years ago the Mesolithic people lived in our Hill Country as well as the Low Lands. About 75 evidences have been unearthed. Also, there is evidence to show that majority of these Mesolithic people lived mainly in the Northern and Eastern parts of Sri Lanka. They led a nomadic life. Their advancement in civilization is perceivable from the findings in caves, hills and on level ground.
Thus the idea that the early inhabitants of Sri Lanka came from North India is now not accepted. It is agreed that long before the time of Mahawamsa, Sri Lanka enjoyed a culture similar to South India and those ancients were the progenitors of the present Sinhalese and Tamils.
They attribute close similarities in lifestyle between these people and those who lived in the South of present Tamil Nadu. These are confirmed by experts in the fields of archaeology, humanities, philology and history. About 200 words found in the Tamil Language spoken by these people were taken into the Sinhala language later.
It has been authoritatively said that the stone implements used by our Mesolithic people were the same as those used in Thirunelveli District in South India. According to Professor Indrapala, this civilization spread from South India to North Sri Lanka and thereafter spread to other parts of Sri Lanka.
Around 3000 years ago early Iron Age was introduced to this Island. There too we see very close similarities between what was found in Southern Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka. Vimala Begley who conducted researches in Kantharodai in the 1970s concluded that those who inhabited the Jaffna Peninsula in ancient times had very close relationship with the Southern part of present Tamil Nadu.
Their cultural affinity in Sri Lanka extended from Kantharodai up to Puttalam. Pomparipu in the Puttalam District especially had very close resemblance to what is found in Kantharodai. Professor Sudarshan Seneviratne too has confirmed this finding. Professor Indrapala too confirms that the culture of the Stone Age people in Sri Lanka came within the ambit of the South Indian cultural ambience of that time.
Thus the idea that the early inhabitants of Sri Lanka came from North India is now not accepted. It is agreed that long before the time of Mahawamsa, Sri Lanka enjoyed a culture similar to South India and those ancients were the progenitors of the present Sinhalese and Tamils. Professor Senaka Bandaranayake has said that these ancients had no ethnic differences but only cultural differences. These differences he says could have existed even before the time of the visit of the so-called Vijaya to the Island. If we examine the culture and life habits of the ancient Stone Age people they had a habit of inscribing their name or the names of those who shaped the clay pots and utensils, on them. This habit is seen to have existed both in South India and Sri Lanka during that period. This habit is not visible in any other part of India. These writings on clay pots have been unearthed in Tamil Nadu and in Anuradhapura. Anuradhapura pots belong to a period over 2750 years ago. The writings on pots have been identified as Tamil letters in the Tamil Language. Writing started in North India only about 2300 years ago. But both in Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka these writings have been found to exist much earlier. Now historians believe that the art of writing went from the South to North India.
Recent Keeladi excavations in Madurai, South India has shown evidence of a civilization anterior to all others in India. Thus, before the introduction of Buddhism to Sri Lanka, the fact that the progenitors of the present Sinhalese and the Tamils lived here, has been accepted scientifically. The recent DNA tests confirmed this.
When we examine the writings in Sinhala, Professor Fernando, Professor Saddha Mangala Karunaratne and Professor Ariya Abeysinghe have said that before the North Indian Prakrit was introduced with Buddhism into Sri Lanka, the Script similar to the South Indian Script was available in Sri Lanka. We could gather from their researches that Tamil Script and Tamil Language and Dravidian words were in use in Sri Lanka before Sinhala Language came into use. That is why I boldly said the language of our ancients was Tamil and the original indigenous population of Sri Lanka were Tamil.
Buddhism spread in this Island from the 3rd Century BC onwards. Over 1500 identified inscriptions confirm this. These inscriptions have Brahmi script from North India plus Tamil Script inscribed on them. There was no Sinhala script nor Sinhala language nor Sinhalese people then. Thus it is clear that the Tamil Language was in use in Sri Lanka prior to the introduction of Buddhism and before the introduction of the North Indian Brahmi Script.
Even though Professor Paranavithana tried to identify the North Indian Prakrit as an old Sinhala Script and tried to show wherever Prakrit was in use the Sinhalese lived there, this statement of the Professor is now not accepted because with the spread of Buddhism, the Prakrit script too spread all over South and South East Asia and was in use for over 700 years as the script of inscriptions. Prakrit was not old Sinhala. If it was, the Sinhala language should have been spoken in other South East Asian countries too.
But in Tamil Nadu the language of the Buddhist inscriptions was Tamil. If we examine the 1500 Brahmi inscriptions in Sri Lanka even though Northern Brahmi was generally used, in addition, many Tamil words were also used. Specially the names of individual Tamils were referred to in Tamil. Relationships among individuals were referred to in the Tamil Language. Place names have been written in Tamil. Even titles of Tamil rulers were written in Tamil. This shows the existence of the Tamil language in Sri Lanka before the introduction of Buddhism and hence Tamils were the original inhabitants of this Island at the time Buddhism was introduced.
If we examine the evolution of the Sinhala language we have a parallel in the evolution of Malayalam. The present Kerala was part of Tamil-speaking regions in Tamil Nadu. They were ruled by Chera Kings. The transformation of Tamil to Malayalam took place due to the heavy influence of Sanskrit from the 10th Century AD on the Tamil language. Tamil plus Sanskrit brought in Malayalam. Hence I referred to a new language in the offing in Chennai today. Tamil plus English might produce Tamilish in 25 to 50 years.
Similarly, the introduction of the Pali language in Sri Lanka as the language of Buddhism when it mixed with the local Tamil language it developed into a new language called Sinhalese around the 6th or 7thCentury AD.
The evidence for this could be found in Sigiriya. Sigiriya inscriptions of 5th Century AD portray early Sinhalese not yet developed into a proper language. Thus there is no evidence that the Sinhala language existed before the 7th Century AD. The Sinhala Script has developed due to the mixing of Brahmi letters with the Pallava period grantha letters.
The Sinhala literature like Rajavaliya and Poojavaliya belongs to the 13th Century AD.
Your question contains a reference to the Tamils coming here only during the Chola conquest in 10thCentury. There had been Tamils living on this Island from a long, long time ago. May be from the time of the Lemurian Continent which is now under the Indian Ocean. The earliest Tamil Sangam period and the Second Sangam period (Muthal Sangam and Idai Sangam) have been referred to in the last Sangam period (Kadai Sangam) literature and the literary works of the earlier Sangam Periods are referred to in the Kadai Sangam literature. Tamil is one of the earliest languages of this World if not the earliest. There have been Pandya, Pallava, and Chola conquests of Sri Lanka from ancient times. Thus there have been waves of Tamil intrusions. But the original Tamils of Sri Lanka have been occupying this Country from over 3000 years ago. The present tendency to refer to Buddhism as that of the Sinhalese and Hinduism as that of the Tamils is erroneous. When religions are introduced into a Country they are not introduced to be followed only by particular races. When Buddhism was introduced into this Island there were no Sinhalese. Thus the Tamil King Devanampiya Theesan got converted to Buddhism.
There is considerable evidence to show the existence of Tamil Buddhists in Pali literature and Brahmic inscriptions. Tamil Kings were given the titles Buddha thasan and Buddhadevan when they supported Buddhism and Buddhist causes.
Up to 15 th or 16 th Century there were Tamil Buddhists according to Pali literature. The inscriptions of Nainatheevu in North Sri Lanka refer to Tamil Buddhists. Professor Sunil Ariyaratne in his “Demala Baudhayo” refers to Tamil Buddhists.
In recent times Sinhalese portraying themselves as Buddhists and Tamils as Hindus have brought about polarization says Professor Pushparatnam. This could have been avoided he says.
When I was living in the old Anuradhapura Town in the 1940s there were Tamils who owned lots of lands around Nuwara Wewa who were more or less Demala Baudhayos. Even I used to go to Ruwanwelisaya and Mahabodhi to worship with my parents (both Hindus). We joined the Buddhists who came from nearby villages to do “Pongal” during Poson. Buddhist philosophy influenced me considerably. Together with Dr Adikaram and others, we were votaries of Philosopher J. Krishnamurthi whose teachings were close to Buddhist philosophy. Of course, later, Hindu Saints were able to point out the limitations of the Buddhist philosophy to me.
Professor Pushparatnam has said even the Mahawansa is a useful reference Book to prove the existence of Tamils at the time of the arrival of Vijaya.
Mahawansa refers to 700 Tamil Brides from Madurai together with 1000 Tamil families employed in 18 professions being brought down to Sri Lanka on Vijaya’s request. That means more Tamil families came into the Country from Madurai than the 701 who came from elsewhere! This is according to the Mahawansa!
Even the so-called statement of Dushta Gamini that the Tamils are on one side and the sea on the other side refers to the existence of a large amount of Tamils in the country at that time says Professor Pushparatnam. Ellalan was a Tamil King thus how could anyone say Tamils for the first time arrived at the time of the Chola conquest in the 10th century AD?
Finally a word about Homeland of the Tamils. Before the Bakthi Cult was born in Tamil Nadu there is evidence of Tamils living outside the North and East as well. Pali Literature and certain inscriptions refer to the presence and influence of Tamils in Anuradhapura.
Before Independence, the influence of Tamils in Anuradhapura was considerable in the Old Town. The new Town was constructed, one is forced to deduce, to reduce and negate the Tamil influence in Anuradhapura.
Mahawansa refers to 32 Petty Tamil Kings Dutugemunu had to overcome before reaching Ellalan’s Capital. Coins of that period have been unearthed which point to Tamil presence from South to North. There are Tamil letters in those Coins. Names of Tamil Petty Kings are found in some of them. After the Bakthi Cult prospered in the North and East many Tamils living in other parts of Sri Lanka preferred to go to the North and East since the famous Hindu Temples lay there. This was a time when Jainism and Buddhism were beginning to go out of vogue due to the re-emergence of Saivaism consequent to the Bakthi Cult. The Thevarams of Nayanmars in South India referred to Thiruketheeswaram and Thirukoneswaram in Sri Lanka.
Especially there is reference to Trincomalee being a full-fledged Saivite Tamil City. When the Cholas were ruling from Polonnaruwa their commercial outlet was Trincomalee. The North and East were distinct areas of Tamil habitation during the Chola Rule. The Jaffna Kingdom was consequent and subsequent to the Chola Rule. From the 13th Century to the 17th Century the Jaffna Kingdom existed. Puttalam came under the rule of the Jaffna King. Udapu is still a Tamil Village.
When the Dutch during their rule brought out Coins they referred to the North and East separately and had them minted in Tamil. Thus the North and East were the homelands of the Tamils.
To conclude – the Tamils were the Original inhabitants of this Island and there have been several waves of Tamil conquest but they only added to the Original indigenous Tamils who continued to live here from pre-historic times. Chola conquest was only one such intrusion from South India. Sinhala Language and Sinhala Race are very recent chronologically though the Sinhalese and the Tamils have had common progenitors from ancient times.
Feature Image: Kandy Temple Precincts – Photo Credit: M Matheswaran
The QUAD, a grouping of the United States, Japan, India, and Australia, began as a “Tsunami Core Group,” an impromptu group formed in response to the devastating Boxing Day tsunami of 2004. This core group brought together the four nations to swiftly mobilise and coordinate multilateral disaster relief and humanitarian assistance operations. The first meeting of the initial QUAD took place in May 2007 during the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) meeting in Manila. The meeting was characterised as an “informal grouping” that discussed themes of mutual interest to the dialogue participants (Buchan & Rimland, 2020). The group was established to deal with the immediate challenges posed by the tsunami and was never intended to become permanent. However, early cooperative efforts sparked a debate about QUAD’s overarching goal. When Australia withdrew from the QUAD in 2008, it ceased to exist. It was revived in 2017 against the backdrop of an increasingly assertive Chinese posture, and the emergence of the idea of the Indo-Pacific as a single maritime zone.
The first QUAD meeting, after its revival, happened on 12 November 2017, when the four ‘like-minded’ partners discussed seven key issues: the rules-based order in Asia; freedom of navigation and overflight in the maritime commons; respect for international law; enhancing connectivity; maritime security; the North Korean threat and non-proliferation; and terrorism (Jain, 2022). The QUAD aims to bring diverse perspectives together in a shared vision for a free and open Indo-Pacific, and it strives for a region that is free, open, inclusive, healthy, and anchored in democratic values.
Economic Potential
There are numerous reasons to increase economic engagement within the QUAD nations—the four countries, with a combined population of over 1.8 billion people, represent a quarter of the world’s population and over $30 trillion in GDP. In 2018, trade between the four countries totalled more than $440 billion, with nearly $6 trillion in trade with the rest of the world. QUAD intends to use both public and private resources to construct high-quality infrastructure in the Indo-Pacific region. According to the MEA’s website, since 2015, QUAD partners have invested more than $48 billion in regional infrastructure development. The commitment of the QUAD to regional infrastructure development can be strengthened by integrating India into the existing ‘Australia-Japan-US Trilateral Infrastructure Partnership’ and by broadening their reach into the Indo-Pacific region (“Fact Sheet: QUAD Leaders’ Summit,” n.d.). Except for India and the United States, the remaining two countries are also Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) members. This shows that, notwithstanding territorial and security differences, trade and commerce are still the primary focus (“Economic Dimension Key to QUAD Success”, 2021). Further, the Covid-19 pandemic has harmed the global economy, including the QUAD nations, in areas ranging from employment to investment. Thus, by bolstering their economic ties for greater freedom and cooperation, the group will facilitate a faster recovery from the pandemic’s effects.
The Indian Ocean, not the Indo-Pacific, is central to India’s vision. In the short term, India’s engagement with the Indo-Pacific framework will be primarily diplomatic and economic and will be constrained by the Indian Ocean’s strategic primacy and constraints on its sea-power projection
QUAD and the Indian Economy
India’s strong economic ties with the QUAD economies are reflected in its bilateral trade volume with each member. During 2019-2020, these three economies accounted for 15% of India’s total trade. The United States contributes the most with 11%, followed by Japan and Australia, with 2.15 and 1.6 per cent, respectively. Further, India already has a free-trade agreement with Japan, which was implemented in 2011, and negotiations with Australia and the United States are ongoing. India can now use this critical multilateral forum to help facilitate trade negotiations and increase economic activity with member economies (“Economic Dimension Key to QUAD Success” 2021).
According to Lunev and Shavlay (2018), the emergence of China, the expansion of India’s economic and strategic clout, and, most importantly, the growing importance of the Indian Ocean as a strategic trade route carrying nearly two-thirds of global oil shipments and a third of bulk cargo, have entailed a shift in the security architecture from the Asia-Pacific to the Indo-Pacific. These factors have contributed to the rise of regional stakeholders advocating for a free and open Indo-Pacific, resulting in the re-establishment of the QUAD. However, India’s maritime interests and strategies are at odds with those of the other QUAD members. The Indian Ocean, not the Indo-Pacific, is central to India’s vision. In the short term, India’s engagement with the Indo-Pacific framework will be primarily diplomatic and economic and will be constrained by the Indian Ocean’s strategic primacy and constraints on its sea-power projection.
The South and East China Seas, the Western Pacific, and the Indian Ocean are of particular concern to the United States and Japan. Unless and until these disagreements are resolved, QUAD’s effectiveness as an entity will be called into question
Tokyo Summit
The Tokyo Summit is the QUAD Leaders’ fourth interaction since their first virtual meeting in March 2021, in-person Summit in Washington DC in September 2021, and virtual meeting in March 2022. The Tokyo Summit took place against the backdrop of the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict and its repercussions. The joint statement issued following the QUAD summit in Tokyo on May 24, 2022, is more comprehensive than the first three summits. It has attempted to clarify the broad framework for cooperation by outlining eight specific areas. These include Peace and Stability; Covid-19 and Global Health Security; Infrastructure; Climate; Cybersecurity; Critical and Emerging Technologies; QUAD Fellowship; Space; and Maritime Domain Awareness and Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR) (Luthra, n.d.). A comprehensive QUAD joint statement and the launch of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) are key developments of the Tokyo summit. QUAD leaders also announced a maritime initiative to combat illegal fishing at the Tokyo summit, and a pledge to invest $50 billion in infrastructure in the Indo-Pacific to combat China’s growing power (“QUAD Joint Leaders’ Statement”, 2022).
The QUAD has long been criticised for lacking a common purpose or a substantive agenda. Furthermore, none of the objectives cited as reasons for bringing the four states together are unique to the QUAD. Other actors and institutions in the region already exist for these purposes. Thus, there is a need for QUAD partners to better articulate their distinct rationale for cooperation and collaborative efforts.
India is a key player due to its naval power and strategic location, and should thus be an active participant. However, there are differences in areas of interest among the QUAD nations, complicating its effectiveness. The South and East China Seas, the Western Pacific, and the Indian Ocean are of particular concern to the United States and Japan. Unless and until these disagreements are resolved, QUAD’s effectiveness as an entity will be called into question. While India is frequently portrayed as the holdout — and has recently been the most vocal — objections have come from other countries as well. The potential impact on Sino-Australian relations continues to make some in Australia nervous. Beijing’s reaction has factored into American caution as well, as has the preference for a trilateral format (Madan, 2017).
India requires investment, attractive financing for infrastructure, technology, and access to key raw materials, particularly rare earth elements, among the QUAD nations. QUAD’s other members are looking for market access and dependable investment destinations. Broadening QUAD’s current strategic focus to strengthen economic ties under the partnership’s auspices would be a win-win situation for all countries involved in such a scenario.
Bibliography
Buchan, P., & Rimland, B. (2020). Defining the diamond: The past, present, and future of the quadrilateral security dialogue. Defining the Diamond: The Past, Present, and Future of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue | Center for Strategic and International Studies. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://www.csis.org/analysis/defining-diamond-past-present-and-future-quadrilateral-security-dialogue
“Economic Dimension Key to Quad Success.” 2021. The Statesman. February 23, 2021. https://www.thestatesman.com/opinion/economic-dimension-key-quad-success-1502953752.html.
JAIN, Purnendra. 2022. “India’s Changing Approach to the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue.” East Asian Policy 14 (01): 56–70. https://doi.org/10.1142/s1793930522000046.
Lunev, Sergey, and Ellina Shavlay. 2018. “Russia and India in the Indo-Pacific.” Asian Politics & Policy 10 (4): 713–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/aspp.12430.
Luthra, Girish. n.d. “Forward from the Tokyo Quad Summit and IPEF.” ORF. https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/forward-from-the-tokyo-quad-summit-and-ipef/.
Madan, Tanvi. 2017. “The Rise, Fall, and Rebirth of the ‘Quad.’” War on the Rocks. November 16, 2017. https://warontherocks.com/2017/11/rise-fall-rebirth-quad/.
“Quad Joint Leaders’ Statement.” 2022. The White House. May 24, 2022. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/05/24/quad-joint-leaders-statement/.
Rahman, Mohammad Masudur, Chanwahn Kim, and Prabir De. 2020. “Indo-Pacific Cooperation: What Do Trade Simulations Indicate?” Journal of Economic Structures 9 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40008-020-00222-4.
With enormous developments in Space sciences overtaking us, it is important to refresh our understanding of orbital mechanics from a basic perspective. Agrim Arsh, a young amateur enthusiast provides an easy-to-understand piece.
The curiosity to learn about our place and purpose in the Universe prompted us to look at it through sceptical eyes, and understand it through the scientific method of observation and application. We made models to explain the occurrences that we observed and continually refined them to make them fit our observations and worldview.
The earliest models of the Universe known to us were those proposed by ancient astronomers, including those in Greece, India, and China. With time, the models of the Universe have changed much in acceptance and prominence— from the Platonic Geocentrism that saw major additions from Eudoxus and Hipparchus, to the Ptolemaic model (Plato’s geocentric model with refinements), after a lengthy period, the Copernican Heliocentric Model and finally, our present models of the Universe, the most widely accepted currently being the ∧CDM Model (Lambda cold dark matter model) where ∧ refers to the cosmological constant, a constant coming into the model from the Einstein Field Equations.
But to understand astronomy, we must first understand the motions of the Earth. And as for every motion, we must choose a reference frame (observer) for our motion. So let’s understand the motions of the Earth concerning certain reference frames.
Relative to the Sun, there are three main motions of the Earth— Revolution (orbital motion), Rotation (rigid-body motion), and Precession (motion of the axis of rotation). The motion of the Earth is very much similar to the motion of a top always acted upon by a normal force.
Revolution
Revolution refers to the actual displacing motion of the Earth around the Sun. The path followed by the Earth is an ellipse, with the Sun situated at one of the foci. Amongst other properties of an ellipse is the fact that the sum of the distances of any point on the ellipse from the two foci is constant.
Image: All (that is needed) about ellipses (made with Geogebra)
If the Sun is placed at A, then the distance of the planet ranges from AF to AE. The planet is farthest from the Sun at F. This point is called the ‘Aphelion’, while the point E where it is closest to the Sun is called the ‘Perihelion’ (for any general body, these points are called ‘Periapsis’ and ‘Apoapsis’ and for the Moon, they are called ‘Perigee’ and ‘Apogee’ respectively).
[Proof¹ for the mathematically-inclined reader (requires calculus):
We can write the force equation for the planet in its orbit as:
and in calculus form:
We can eliminate ω with the help of the equation obtained from the conservation of angular momentum. Henceforth, we obtain:
This second-order differential equation can be solved by substituting u for 1/r and ɵ (angle) for t:
As you might know, the solution of this kind of differential equation is of the form A sin ɵ + C for some parameters. Similarly, this equation yields:
where A is a parameter depending on the initial conditions. This equation satisfies the polar equation of an ellipse (see image on ellipse). This proves the orbital path of planets to be an ellipse. ]
This law was put forth by Kepler (proof was given by Newton) and is known as Kepler’s First Law of Planetary Motion. Kepler’s Second Law states that the line separation vector between the Sun and the planet sweeps equal areas in equal intervals of time, i.e.
Kepler’s Third Law states that the square of the time of revolution of a planet is directly proportional to the cube of its semi-major axis:
Choosing T in years (specifically, Julian Year; 1 Julian year=(exactly) 365.25 days), and R in AU (astronomical unit, defined as the distance between the Earth and Sun; approximately 149.6 million km), the constant of proportionality equals 1.
Problem (for the mathematically inclined): Prove the above two results.
The Earth’s eccentricity is quite small (about 0.0167) and very slightly variable, as the Earth is affected by the gravitational forces of other Solar System Objects in its orbit. The plane of the orbit of a planet around the Sun is known as the Orbital Plane and is not necessarily the same for all the planets and moons (in fact, it is extremely rarely the case so). For example, the orbital plane of the moon is inclined to that of the Earth at about 5°.
All the planets revolve around the Sun in a counterclockwise direction when viewed from the top because this was just the way remnant material and accretion disk from the solar nebula started spinning, by chance, during the birth of the Solar System.
Earth’s one tropical year, defined as the time taken by the Earth to reach the same spot in its orbit again, is 365 days 5 hours 48 minutes 46 seconds with minute variations.
Rotation
Rotation is the rigid-body motion of the Earth, i.e. its motion on its axis. The plane passing normally to the line connecting the Earth’s pole and through its center of rotation, the Equatorial Plane, is inclined to its Orbital Plane at an angle of about 23.4° which is responsible for the change in seasons on the surface depending on which side of the Earth faces the Sun.
So what’s the Earth’s period of rotation? 24 hours? Some might be a “bit more accurate” and say 23 hours 56 minutes 4 seconds. In fact, both are right, depending upon the definition:
Image: Completion of a Sidereal Day (pos. 2) compared to the completion of a Solar Day (pos. 3) (in source: Wikimedia Commons, licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0
1 Sidereal Day is defined to be the time taken for a general star to come to a specific position in the night sky again and is equal to approximately 23 hours and 56 minutes. 1 Solar Day, on the other hand, is defined to be the time taken for the Sun to come to a specific position in the sky again and is equal to about 24 hours. How? Let’s not forget to count in the effect of the Earth’s revolution when calculating the period for a day with the help of the Sun. We know the Earth takes about 365 days to complete a revolution (360°) around the Sun. This means that in a day, it has covered (360°/365≈0.986°) in its orbit. This means that the Sun needs to cover 0.986° more to be at the same position it was the day before. Therefore, the difference in time between 1 Solar Day and 1 Sidereal Day = (0.986°/360°)×24 hours ≈ 0.066 hours ≈ 4 minutes. This is what we see as the “extra daytime” in 24 hours of the solar day. It is due to this difference in solar and sidereal timekeeping that we see the appearance of zodiac changes in the night sky.
Furthermore, the length of the Solar Day is also variable! Remember that Second Law given by Kepler in the previous section. That implies that the Earth revolves faster when it is closer to the Sun (near the Perihelion), implying that the Sun needs to cover slightly more than 0.986° to complete 1 Solar Day, implying that the length of the Solar Day is even larger. The opposite is true in the case of Aphelion and the length of the Solar Day reduces. Presently, the Perihelion takes place on about the 3rd of January. Thus, the actual longest day for the whole of Earth takes place in Northern Hemisphere’s winters (the Southern Hemisphere residents enjoy more daylight than the Northerners!).
The Earth spins in the same direction it revolves, i.e. counter-clockwise as seen from the top. This is what is known as Prograde motion. In fact, most of the planets in the Solar System are in a prograde motion. Why? As told previously, the solar accretion, by chance, came to be spinning counter-clockwise. Thus, when the planets were formed by the lumping of this accretion material, they had to conserve their angular momenta. This sped up their rotation (just like a skater speeds up when drawing his arms together) in the prograde direction. Uranus and Venus are the only planets that spin retrograde, i.e. in the opposite direction to their revolving directions. The cause for this is thought to be collisions of these planets early on in their lives (you see, they had a pretty ‘rocky’ start), which impacted their angular momenta adversely and changed their directions of motion.
Another interesting corollary of celestial motion is that the period of rotation of some satellites might be in sync with their period of revolution. This is what is known as ‘tidal locking’. This is an effect of the barycentre’s (center of mass’) gravitational effect on the satellite.
Image: Mechanism of Tidal Locking— The central body generates a gravitational torque on the satellite that stresses mass along the orbital direction of the satellite. The changed angular momentum as a result of this gravitational torque synchronizes the rotation period and the revolution period in a 1:1 ratio (for orbits with low eccentricity). For periods with a large tidal effect and eccentricity of orbits, the synchronization is not in a 1:1 ratio, but other simple ratios like 3:2 are more stable, for example in the case of Mercury’s tidal locking around the Sun. The given image shows the net torques about the surface of the body (in Public Domain.
You might have heard that we see only one side of the Moon. This is a result of the Tidal Locking of the Moon around the Earth in a 1:1 ratio. With repeated observation, about 59% of the Moon is visible from the Earth, due to the effects of liberation (change in perspective from different locations).
Precession and Fine Adjustments
A lot of the figures above are reported to be only a neat approximation. The reason for this is that these figures might undergo a slow periodic change. The cause of this change is the third type of motion of the Earth, Precession. Axial Precession is defined as the circular motion of the Earth’s axis of rotation. It is caused because of the gravitational effects of the Sun and the Moon on the equatorial bulge of the Earth (the shape of Earth). The Earth ‘precesses’ once in about 25,772 years. It is responsible for a large number of fine effects in the motions of the Earth.
Image: Axial Precession of the Earth (in Public Domain)
Because of the Precession of the Earth, the time of the seasons has been slowly changing. If the currently accepted Calendar Year would have been equivalent to the Solar Year, then in some time, Christmas in the Northern Hemisphere would have been celebrated in the heat of summer in July. This is known as the ‘Precession of the Equinoxes’. However, this situation is avoided because the Gregorian Calendar is based on the seasons themselves. However, precession will have a clear effect on the climate of the Earth. As of the present, the perihelion lies during the winter of the Northern Hemisphere, making them less severe and the summer of the Southern Hemisphere more severe. However, in some time, this will reverse, resulting in more severe winters in the Northern Hemisphere.
Axial Precession also changes the star alignment on the Earth. Our pole star will change from Polaris to Vega and then to Thuban before coming back to Polaris within the next 26,000 years.
There is also an Apsidal Precession of the Earth— changes in the shape of its elliptical orbit (its eccentricity) due to fine adjustments (gravitational effects of other planets), resulting in an approximately 112,000-year cycle.
This is not all. The precessional trajectory of the Earth is also not a perfect circle, but a kind of wavy one. This causes a periodic change in the axial tilt of the Earth. The resulting motion of ‘wavy precession’ is what is known as Nutation.
Image: Earth’s rigid-body motions: Rotation, Precession, and Nutation (in Public Domain)
Thus, quoting my previous sentence, the Earth’s motion is pretty much like the spinning of a top— rotation, precession, and nutation. However, there are also a large number of very, very fine adjustments in these periods, as an exactly precise measurement requires a solution to the ‘Three-Body Problem’ (more on it in later articles).
So this was pretty much everything about the motion(s) of the Earth from the Reference frame of the Sun, and as a rigid body on its own. In the next article, we will take this idea further and will look through the motions of other celestial bodies with different frames of reference.
All images used are in the public domain otherwise stated.
India ranked 117 out of 180 countries as per the latest “The State of India’s Environment Report 2021” released by the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) in June 2021, while it ranked 87th out of 115 countries in the Energy Transition Index (ETI) released by the World Economic Forum in 2021
Taking adequate measures to combat climate change and global warming has become a key priority of nation-states today. With a global understanding that reducing greenhouse gas emissions, achieving carbon neutrality, and switching to renewable sources of energy are the ways forward for sustainable development, countries around the world, including India, have made various pledges and commitments to achieve defined targets in respect of climate change and environmental protection. While developing countries have called for the adoption of the principle of ‘Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities’ (CBDR–RC), India, as the third largest carbon emitter in the world, has considerable responsibility in enacting the much-needed changes. In the budget presented for 2022-23, the Indian government has pledged to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2070, and achieve a non-fossil fuel energy capacity of 500 GW by 2030. It further seeks to meet 50% of the energy requirements from renewable sources, while also reducing the total projected carbon emissions by 1 billion tonnes and reducing the carbon intensity of the economy to less than 45%. These are stiff targets to achieve, maybe even impractical in the view of some analysts.
While the Indian government has celebrated the inauguration of various policies and schemes which would contribute to these lofty goals, India’s performance according to global indices reveal an immediate need for a change of tactics. India ranked 117 out of 180 countries as per the latest “The State of India’s Environment Report 2021” released by the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) in June 2021, while it ranked 87th out of 115 countries in the Energy Transition Index (ETI) released by the World Economic Forum in 2021. Similar positions have been held by the country in other notable indices like the Climate Change Performance Index (CCPI) where India was ranked 10th out of 60 countries and the European Union released by German Watch. Thus, India’s rank of 180 out of 180 countries in the Environment Performance Index came as a surprise to many.
The Environment Performance Index presents a data-driven summary of the state of sustainability around the world using 40 performance indicators based on climate change performance, environmental health, and ecosystem vitality. It is released biennially by the Yale Centre for Environmental Law and Policy and the Columbia University Centre for International Earth Science Information Network in partnership with the World Economic Forum. India’s position in the latest 2022 report is a step down from EPI-2020 where it ranked 168th with a score of 27.6.
India’s aggregate score according to EPI -2022 is 18.9 with the report stating that “India slips to the bottom of the rankings for the first time, with increasingly hazardous air quality and quickly rising greenhouse gas emissions.” Further, according to EPI, India also ranks poorly in terms of rule of law, corruption control, and government performance. On its release, the results have been contested by the Indian government which claimed that many of the indicators used are based on “unfounded assumptions” and that these were based on “surmises and unscientific methods”.
According to the concerns raised by the Indian government, Projected GHG Emissions Levels in 2050 which is the new indicator in the Climate Policy Objective, is calculated in the Environment Performance Index using the average rate of change in emissions over the previous ten years rather than modelling that takes into account a longer time period and which considers other factors like the level of renewable energy capacity and usage, extra carbon sinks, energy efficiency and the like in the individual nations. While the principle of ‘Common But Differentiated Responsibility and Respective Capabilities’ (CBDR–RC) has been enshrined in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) acknowledges the different capabilities and differing responsibilities of individual countries in addressing climate change, the EPI report’s emphasis on data and statistics have led to the overlooking of this principle in the course of its analysis. The time period used by the EPI of 10 years with regards to projected Greenhouse Gas emissions is unlike other indices like the CCPI (Climate Change Performance Index) which uses a timeframe of 5 years for its calculations (to take into consideration the new and renewed commitments made by countries at the 2015 Paris conference). The CCPI in comparison also uses a past trends indicator under the category of GHG emissions (with a 40 % weightage) where historical GHG emissions (Co2, Methane, Fluorinated gases, Nitrous Oxide) are considered with reference to the base year of 1990 as put forth by the Kyoto Protocol. The absence of acknowledgement of India’s historical emissions which have been minimal i.e.: from 1870 to 2019, its emissions have added up to a minuscule 4 percent of the global total is also noticeable in the EPI findings.
The exclusion of the Indian Forest cover, which is far greater than many countries, as a vital carbon sink is a significant downfall of the EPI analysis
Forests and wetlands have been globally acknowledged as vital carbon sinks with great effectiveness in controlling carbon levels. The world’s forests absorb a total of 15.6 gigatons of CO2 per year although these figures are threatened by threats like deforestation, natural disasters, and forest fires. According to the latest Forest Survey of India report, the total forest cover in India (2022) is 7,13,789 square kilometres which are 21.71% of the total geographical area. In comparison, Denmark, which topped the EPI rankings 2022, officially possesses 608,078 ha or 6080.78 square kilometres of forest corresponding to 14.1% of the land area. The exclusion of the Indian Forest cover, which is far greater than many countries, as a vital carbon sink is a significant downfall of the EPI analysis.
Wetland ecosystems have been scientifically proven as one of the most biologically productive areas on the planet. They provide a wide range of important services, such as food, water, groundwater recharge, water purification, flood moderation, erosion control, microclimate regulation and landscape aesthetics outside of being viable carbon sinks. According to the National Wetland Inventory and Assessment compiled by the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), wetlands are spread over 1,52,600 square kilometres (sq. km) in India which is 4.63 percent of the total geographical area of the country. The difference in topography of the high-ranking countries in the index with India can mean that the effect of wetlands and forests can have a significant impact on India’s rankings as opposed to countries like Denmark where wetlands make up only 0.6 % of the land area where the impact is comparatively much lower.
The government further argues that the equity principle is given relatively little weightage in the form of statistics such as GHG emission per capita and GHG emission intensity trend which can be found to be grounded in the EPI’s disregard of the CBDR principle. The EPI rankings with regards to GHG emissions are also in contrast to other indices like the CCPI where seven G20 countries received a very low rating for their performance, including Russia (with 165 ranking with respect to GHG emissions and an overall ranking of 112), Australia (with 171 ranking with respect to GHG per capita and an overall rank of 17), the United States (with 167 ranking with respect to GHG per capita and overall rating of 43), and Canada (with 169 ranking with respect to GHG emissions and overall rating of 49).
While the EPI utilises indicators like Pesticides and N mgmt index under the category of agriculture and solid waste, recycling and ocean plastics under the category of waste management, other indicators such as agricultural biodiversity, soil health, food loss and waste are also not included in the report despite the fact that these are critical for developing nations with significant agrarian populations. Furthermore, the index computes the geographical distribution of various ecosystems but makes no mention of their efficiency and functioning with regard to climate change which can have a significant impact when gauging factors like biodiversity, waste management, air quality and fisheries.
India installed 15.4 gigawatts (GW) of renewable energy projects in 2021 alone but operations of these projects remain a fraction of these capacities
Thus, it can be found that certain critiques of the Environment Performance Index are well founded and must be acknowledged, and respective changes must be introduced to improve the reach, relevance, and functionality of the index. However, even with the addition of these factors, the fact remains that India’s performance on climate action is still underwhelming with significant gaps between capabilities and action in reality. India installed 15.4 gigawatts (GW) of renewable energy projects in 2021 alone but operations of these projects remain a fraction of these capacities. Therefore, the government must concentrate on redoubling its efforts to meet its 2030 targets and use the reports of various indices including the Environment Performance Index as a gauge of the country’s closeness to achieving its promised goals.
His Holiness the Dalai Lama, and his followers, were welcomed by then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru with open arms whose government helped them settle in India as they fled Tibet, following the Chinese invasion
Introduction
India is the largest democracy in the world, with a multi-party system, and a diverse set of cultures. It has a long tradition of hosting a large number of refugees. India has been particularly supportive of Tibetan refugees, right from the start of the Nehruvian era in the early 1950s. The number of Tibetan refugees living in India is estimated at well over 150,000 at any given time. However, a recent survey conducted by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in India, in association with the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), showed that only 72,312 Tibetans remain in the country.
In India, Tibetans are considered to be one of the most privileged refugees unlike other refugees in the country. His Holiness the Dalai Lama, and his followers, were welcomed by then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru with open arms whose government helped them settle in India as they fled Tibet, following the Chinese invasion. That period saw a large influx of Tibetans towards India as they sought asylum. The Tibetan refugees have been allotted settlements where they continue to live under the management of the MHA and the Tibetan government-in-exile, or the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA). These facilities have contributed to a sense of community-living and have enabled them to keep their culture alive till today. Tibetan refugees in India have enjoyed freedom, which was impossible in their own land under the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) rule. However, after residing in India for almost seven decades now, recent data estimates a large decline in the number of Tibetan refugees. Therefore, this study examines the theoretical concerns and empirical findings of refugee problems in general as well as distinctive features of the Tibetan refugee experience in India.
The status of Tibetans in India is determined under the Passports Act 1967, Foreigner’s Act of 1946, and the Registration of Foreigners Act of 1939 which refer to Tibetans as simply “foreigners”. These provisions cover everyone apart from Indian citizens thus, restricting refugees’ mobility, property, and employment rights. Recognizing this, the Government of India sanctioned the Tibetan refugees with the 2014 Tibetan Rehabilitation Policy (TRP) which caters to the issues faced by them and promises a better life for Tibetans in India. An array of provisions under this policy include land leases, employment, trade opportunities such as setting up markets for handicrafts and handlooms, housing, etc. to all Tibetans in possession of the RC (Registration Certificate). Further, certain policies applicable to Indian citizens are extended to Tibetan refugees as well. For instance, the Constitution of India grants the right to equality (Article 14) and the right to life and liberty (Article 21), and India is obliged to provide asylum as outlined in Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Despite these facilities and the cordial relationship that has been built over 70 years between the Tibetans and Indians, the question raised by many, including Indian authorities is – why is the number of Tibetans migrating out of India increasing?
With increased awareness about Tibetan refugees and their problems, many countries have opened their borders to Tibetans by introducing numerous favourable policies
The various push and pull factors- motivation for migration
The Tibetan Exit continues to grow with about 3000 refugees migrating out of India every year. The support and admiration of His Holiness the Dalai Lama gained worldwide has been partly due to the exhibition of the rich culture and traditions of Buddhism. With India being the birthplace of the religion, Tibetans in India caught the limelight in the global arena, leading many researchers to study their migration patterns to India. Attention is now being placed on Tibetans exiting India despite years of strong cultural and social bonding. General migratory trends of humans can be analyzed using eminent scholar Everett Lee’s comprehensive theory of migration of 1966. The term ‘migration’ is defined broadly as a permanent or semi-permanent change of residence. Many factors tend to hold people within the area or attract people towards it, and there are others that repel them from staying. This theory could also be applied to the Tibetan migratory trends by looking at the “Push and Pull” factors proposed by Lee. The ‘push theory’ here encompasses the aspects that encourage the Tibetans to emigrate outside India, and the pull theory is associated with the country of destination that attracts the Tibetans to emigrate. Ernest George Ravenstein, in his “Laws of Migration”, argues that ‘migrants generally proceed long distances by preference to one of the great centers of commerce and industry and that ‘the diversity of people defines the volume of migration’. Ravenstein’s laws provide a theoretical framework for this study, as Tibetans tend to migrate out of India with a special preference to Europe, the USA, Canada, and Australia. With increased awareness about Tibetan refugees and their problems, many countries have opened their borders to Tibetans by introducing numerous favourable policies. For instance, with the Immigration Act of 1990, the Tibetan community in New York grew exponentially. The US Congress authorised 1000 special visas for Tibetans under the Tibetan Provisions of the U.S. Immigration Act of 1990, leading to the rampant growth of Tibetan migrants in the US. The first 10 to 12 Tibetan immigrants arrived in the U.S. in the 1960s, and then hundreds in the 1970s. Today, New York alone consists of roughly 5,000 to 6,000 Tibetan immigrants.
Former Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper agreed to resettle 1,000 Tibetans from Arunachal Pradesh in 2007 (CTA 2013) encouraging substantial migration. The fundamental intention of migration is to improve one’s well-being from the current state.
The motivation for migration can be analysed by correlating origin and destination places with push and pull aspects. Push factors in the place of origin generally include lack of opportunities, religious or political persecution, genocide, hazardous environmental conditions, etc. The pull factors at the destination, on the other hand, are environment responsive to the push variables. The flow of migrants between the two points is hindered by intervening obstacles or intervening opportunities, which can also affect the motivations of individuals while migrating.
Fig. 2 Lee’s (1966) push-pull theory in graphic form
Fig.2 shows there are two points in the flow of migration – a place of origin and a destination, with positive and negative signs indicating the variables of pull and push factors with intervening obstacles between them. Both the origin and destination have pluses and minuses which means each place has its push and pull aspects. Every migrant is influenced by the positives of staying and the negatives of leaving a particular place. The factors to which people are essentially indifferent are denoted as zeroes. The logic of the push-pull theory is that if the pluses (pulls) at the destination outweigh the pluses of staying at the origin, as shown above, then migration is likely to occur.
The three main pull factors or the aspects that pull Tibetans out of India are – economic opportunities, better policies for Tibetan refugees outside India, and world attention.
Better opportunities and more earning capacity are the primary reasons for the migration of Tibetan refugees out of India. They claim that there are better options, job security, better facilities, and more accessible resources. All this put together expands their level of awareness. People outside treat them as equals which makes the living situation a lot easier, whereas in India, except for a handful who are well educated, Tibetans are mostly given very low-paid jobs such as servants, waiters, cleaners, etc.
Second, concerning open policies in other countries, it can be argued that the migratory trend of Tibetans started in 1963 when Switzerland allowed 1,000 Tibetan refugees who were then the country’s first non-European refugees. Their population is now around 4,000. Further, in 1971, under the Tibetan Refugee Program (TRP), the original 240 Tibetans arrived in Canada, which now is a community of 5,000.
Third, the migrants and His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s transnational travels have helped to promote Tibetan culture and give the West exposure to the richness and traditions of Tibetan Buddhism. Tibetans also migrate to spread awareness. Sonam Wang due, a young Tibetan activist from India who was the President of the Tibetan Youth Congress in Dharamshala, says that he moved to the U.S. to protest more effectively and freely. An important day known as the Tibetan Lobby Day is conducted annually in the U.S, where hundreds of Tibetans along with their supporters assemble to urge their respective governments and parliamentarians to continue their support for Tibet and the Tibetan people.
Fig. 3 Tibetan Lobby Day in the U.S
On the other hand, some factors tend to push people away from their origin country. Push factors from India are mainly restrictions and social reasons. There are many Tibetan schools and colleges in the subcontinent with a large number of Tibetan students. According to the Planning Commission’s data on Tibetan Demography 2010, there is growing unemployment among Tibetan youth, with levels as high as 79.4 percent. When students return to their settlements after graduation, only 5 percent of them get absorbed in employment in the Tibetan community, as jobs here are scarce with mediocre salaries. Finding a job in the Indian community is further restricted by the authorization issue which holds that they are not Indian citizens. Many of them join the Indian Army, work in call centers, or become nurses as these are a few employment opportunities in which they can earn reasonably to support their families. Those without RC are restricted while applying for business documents and procuring licenses, and the youths who have acquired education and skills are pushed out of India as they search for better job opportunities. The younger generation of Tibetans in India realizes the discrimination they face and are motivated to migrate elsewhere for a better life. Although there is Article 19 of the Indian Constitution for freedom of speech and expression and the right to assemble peacefully, when it comes to Tibetans’ protesting, they are restricted in every possible way. Tibetans must secure a legal permit before any protest outside Tibetan settlements. This varies from one region to another, for instance, Tibetans in Dharamshala can protest peacefully as that is their officially recognized place by the Central government. In spite of having authorized Tibetan settlement areas in Chandigarh, Delhi, Arunachal Pradesh, Karnataka, etc., protests conducted in these states are not tolerated and require permits because the decision-making power is solely vested in each of the State governments.
According to Mr. Sonam Dagpo, a spokesperson for the CTA, the main reason for the decline of refugees in India is because “Tibetans are recognized as ‘foreigners’, not refugees”. The Indian government does not recognize Tibetans as refugees primarily because India is not a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention. This Convention relates to the status of refugees and is built on Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which recognizes the right of people seeking asylum in other countries because of persecution in their own countries. Another important reason is the lack of awareness among Tibetan refugees that they are the stakeholders to benefit from the TRP. However, implementation of the policy is left to the discretion of the respective States, which makes it problematic. Many Tibetans use India as a transit spot. They enter India primarily to meet His Holiness the Dalai Lama and study here, after which in pursuit of a better life and the West’s influence, they tend to resettle abroad. Nepal in recent times, generously funded by the Chinese, started strictly patrolling the borders with India and are sending back Tibetans to their homeland. Therefore, this is also one of the reasons why Tibetans entering India have decreased drastically.
The introduction of the Rehabilitation Policy (TRP) in India has decreased the burden on Tibetans. However, efforts are to be made to widen the level of awareness about the policy among the stakeholders and States
Conclusion
Egon F. Kunz (1981) theorized about refugee movements and formulated two categories of refugee migrants namely – ‘Anticipatory’ and ‘Acute’. Anticipatory migrants are people who flee in an orderly manner after a lot of preparation and having prior knowledge about the destination, the latter category of migrants is those who flee erratically due to threats by political or military entities and from persecution in their place of origin. Tibetans migrating out of India are largely Anticipatory refugee migrants well aware and seeking betterment. The introduction of the Rehabilitation Policy (TRP) in India has decreased the burden on Tibetans. However, efforts are to be made to widen the level of awareness about the policy among the stakeholders and States.
Tibetans are mostly living and visiting India from abroad by and large because of His Holiness the Dalai Lama. Considering his advancing age and the number of Tibetans migrating out of India on the rise, will there be a time when Tibetans will give away the hold of solidarity by living in large communities in India? This is the burning question that lies ahead in the future of India-Tibet relations.
Thousands of galaxies flood this near-infrared image of galaxy cluster SMACS 0723. High-resolution imaging from NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope combined with a natural effect known as gravitational lensing made this finely detailed image possible.
Image Credit: NASA and STScI
Professor Avi Loeb, head of the Galileo Project and founding Director of Harvard University’s – Black Hole Project writes about the first pictures from NASA’s revolutionary James Webb Telescope. This article is published earlier in Medium.
From its vantage point L2, located a million miles away from Earth, the Webb Telescope just started to unravel new insights about the Universe. What is most exciting about the latest data caught in the “spider web” of the 18 hexagonal segments of its primary mirror?
The new Webb data shows evidence for water vapor, hazes and some previously unseen clouds, on the gas-giant planet WASP-96b. The planet’s mass is half of Jupiter’s mass and it transits in front of its star every 3.4 days, allowing a small fraction of the star’s light to pass through its atmosphere and reveal its composition to Webb’s instruments. This planet is not expected to host life-as-we-know-it because it does not possess a thin atmosphere on top of a rocky surface, like the conditions on Earth.
The image shows numerous red arcs stretched around a cluster of galaxies, named SMACS 0723, located about 5 billion light years away. NASA-administrator Nelson noted: “Mr President, we’re looking back more than 13 billion years”, an unusual statement to be heard in the household of DC politics which makes plans on a timescale of four years.
But there was also a “deep image” of the cosmos that was released in a dedicated White House event, hosted by President Biden and vice-President Harris. The image shows numerous red arcs stretched around a cluster of galaxies, named SMACS 0723, located about 5 billion light years away. NASA-administrator Nelson noted: “Mr President, we’re looking back more than 13 billion years”, an unusual statement to be heard in the household of DC politics which makes plans on a timescale of four years.
These amazingly sharp arcs were observed thanks to the unprecedented angular resolution of Webb’s optics. They feature ancient small galaxies from early cosmic times which happened to lie behind the cluster so that their images were deformed by the effect of gravitational lensing. Clusters of galaxies, like SMACS 0723, contain a concentration of about a thousand Milky-Way-like galaxies, buzzing around at five per cent the speed of light or a thousand miles per second. Most of the cluster mass is made of dark matter, an invisible substance which fills the dark gaps in Webb’s image. The luminous cores of galaxies are like fish swimming in a container filled with transparent water, bound together by gravity — which serves as the “aquarium” walls.
Ever since Fritz Zwicky observed clusters of galaxies in 1933, we know that most of the matter in them is invisible. While Zwicky inferred that dark matter must exist in order to bind the fast-moving galaxies, the same gravitational potential well can be probed directly through its lensing effect on background galaxies.
The Webb Telescope achieves unprecedented sensitivity to the faint galaxies that produced the first light during the dark ages of the Universe, hundreds of millions of years after the Big Bang. Its unprecedented ability to peer back in time stems from its observing site far away from the glowing terrestrial atmosphere, the area of its “light bucket” being 7.3 times larger than that of the Hubble Space Telescope, and its high sensitivity to the infrared band into which starlight from early cosmic times is redshifted.
In its released “deep image”, the 10 billion dollars Webb Telescope, is aided by the natural gravitational lens of SMACS 0723, graciously provided to us for free. The cluster lens magnifies distant sources behind it by bending their light. The combination of the Webb telescope and the cluster’s magnifying power allows us to peer deeper into the universe than ever before.
In a paper from 1936 titled “Lens-Like Action of a Star by the Deviation of Light in the Gravitational Field”, Albert Einstein predicted that a background star could be gravitationally lensed into a ring if it is located precisely behind a foreground star. This “Einstein ring” is an outcome of the cylindrical symmetry around the lens. A cluster of galaxies is not perfectly symmetric and so sources behind its center are lensed into a partial ring, or an arc — as evident from Webb’s image.
In 1992, I entered the neighboring office of Andy Gould, a postdoctoral fellow at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton, where Einstein wrote his lensing paper. Andy worked extensively on gravitational lensing by compact objects, considering the possibility that the dark matter is made of them. I asked Andy whether he ever considered the contribution of a planet to the lensing effect by a star. Andy responded promptly: “planets have a negligible mass relative to their host star and so their impact on the combined lensing effect would be negligible.” I accepted the verdict of the local lensing expert and retreated quietly to my office. Ten minutes later, Andy showed up in my office and said: “I was wrong … the Einstein ring radius of planets scales as the square root of their mass and so their effect is measurable and could serve as a new method for discovering planets around distant stars. Let’s write a paper about that.” And so we did in a paper titled: “Discovering Planetary Systems Through Gravitational Microlenses.” Today, gravitational lensing is the main method by which planets are discovered around distant stars where the transit method is less practical because the stars are too faint.
This anecdote from thirty years ago weaves together the themes of the two Webb images that were just unraveled.
A decade ago, I wrote two textbooks, one titled: “How Did the First Stars and Galaxies Form?”, and the second co-authored with my former graduate student, Steve Furlanetto, titled “The First Galaxies in the Universe”. Both books described theoretical expectations for what the Webb telescope might find in the context of the scientific story of Genesis: “Let there be light”. Last year, I co-authored a textbook with my former postdoc, Manasvi Lingam, titled: “Life in the Cosmos”. There is no doubt that I would be glad if the forecasts in these textbooks will be confirmed by future Webb data. But even better, I would be thrilled if Webb’s data will surprise us with new discoveries that were never anticipated.
This landscape of “mountains” and “valleys” speckled with glittering stars is actually the edge of a nearby, young, star-forming region called NGC 3324 in the Carina Nebula. Captured in infrared light by NASA’s new James Webb Space Telescope, this image reveals for the first time previously invisible areas of star birth.
Called the Cosmic Cliffs, Webb’s seemingly three-dimensional picture looks like craggy mountains on a moonlit evening. In reality, it is the edge of the giant, gaseous cavity within NGC 3324, and the tallest “peaks” in this image are about 7 light-years high. The cavernous area has been carved from the nebula by the intense ultraviolet radiation and stellar winds from extremely massive, hot, young stars located in the center of the bubble, above the area shown in this image.
