For an industry globally classified as hazardous, protections such as health insurance and a provident fund for workers are necessities. In Sivakasi, they remain elusive.
The industry forecasts exports are set to grow 16% in 2025-26, boosted by surplus domestic production and a drive to push into 26 underserved global markets with strong potential.
Indigenisation level will progressively increase up to 60 percent with key sub-assemblies, electronics and mechanical parts being manufactured locally.
It is a brilliant, reasonably priced, and mostly homemade aircraft with a stellar safety record; only two crashes in 24 years since its first flight. But its crash is a moment of introspection.
“Soaring rhetoric on big themes could not hide the deeply contested territoriality of the two nations across the Himalayas that continues to derail efforts to build a sustainable relationship,” …policy that has been followed “more in breach than in its observance”.
The article is just a trigger for my thoughts. Not the absolute. The idea of sovereignty in the twenty first century is the same it was in the eighth century or prior, so to speak. Expansionism was always about money, wealth and bounty. Only occasionally was there a battle between just for prestige and territory. Even so they were subsumed by the aim of wealth and power to achieve wealth.
I can hear someone whispering “Hitler”. To them, I say, when a Nation is to be rallied for something big, the deliverables has to be now and here. The obvious may not always be the final aim.
So it is, even now. Aggressions and expansionism is for power and wealth. In this context we may ask the question whether China’s territorial aggression is just a smoke screen for economic expansion.
Tail piece: Most times, what we see is not what it is. Whatever it is, a mighty military is imperative to be a strong Nation, else Nations will be forced to suck up to some other Nation who has a mighty military).
There is no need of another hard lesson to Peking; They have learnt a hard one at LAC aim last 10 months. They are very mindful of lessons they get. Their prestige is at stake. You professional writers should learn that.
“Soaring rhetoric on big themes could not hide the deeply contested territoriality of the two nations across the Himalayas that continues to derail efforts to build a sustainable relationship,” …policy that has been followed “more in breach than in its observance”.
The article is just a trigger for my thoughts. Not the absolute. The idea of sovereignty in the twenty first century is the same it was in the eighth century or prior, so to speak. Expansionism was always about money, wealth and bounty. Only occasionally was there a battle between just for prestige and territory. Even so they were subsumed by the aim of wealth and power to achieve wealth.
I can hear someone whispering “Hitler”. To them, I say, when a Nation is to be rallied for something big, the deliverables has to be now and here. The obvious may not always be the final aim.
So it is, even now. Aggressions and expansionism is for power and wealth. In this context we may ask the question whether China’s territorial aggression is just a smoke screen for economic expansion.
Tail piece: Most times, what we see is not what it is. Whatever it is, a mighty military is imperative to be a strong Nation, else Nations will be forced to suck up to some other Nation who has a mighty military).
There is no need of another hard lesson to Peking; They have learnt a hard one at LAC aim last 10 months. They are very mindful of lessons they get. Their prestige is at stake. You professional writers should learn that.