[Assam] European Union and South Asian Federation
Chan Mahanta
cmahanta at gmail.com
Sun Jun 13 07:41:24 PDT 2010
On Jun 13, 2010, at 9:38 AM, kamal deka wrote:
>>>> The ol', when ordinary-reasoning-fails, turn-to- pseudo-
>>>> philosophy-routine<<<
>
> I,too,dismiss off your reasoning as mambo-jumbo:-)
>
>>>> language is playing tricks again in desi-minds, making a
>>>> federation seem
> like a re-union.<<<
>
> Federation,in one way,
**** Are there OTHER way of defining it? Other than below?
> can be defined as a group of states with a
> central government but independence in internal affairs.The catch
> phrase is " central government". India,for example, is a federal
> constitutional republic consisting of 28 states and seven union
> territories with a parliamentary system of democracy.The rest is
> self-explanatory.
**** What about EU ? Is it same as India, the FAKE federal state?
>
>>>> WHY it is good for India to hold on to Assam OR WHY it is bad for
>>>> Assam to be free?<<<
>
> Power of a fist vs power of a finger. United we stand,divided we
> fall.As simple as that.That's why we have The United States ,The
> United Kingdom or UAE et al.
> KJD
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>> Once you stop believing in shooting first and asking questions
>>>
>>> later,every obscurity will be clear and comprehensible.
>>
>> ######
>>
>>> I don't believe in building castles in the mirage.
>>
>>
>>
>> **** The ol', when ordinary-reasoning-fails, turn-to-
>> pseudo-philosophy-routine
>> here eh :-)?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> And what does India lose? Assam? B'deshi cheap labor? Or the
>>> lungi menace?
>>> I am stumped ! Any help in sorting it out :-)?<<<
>>>
>>> I am equally stumped not by the brilliance of the argument but
>>> rather
>>> lack of it.
>>
>>
>>
>> **** It was a QUESTION, looking for an answer, NOT an argument for or
>> against the proposition that brings so much consternation.
>> I can imagine why the answer is so elusive however. It is another
>> of those
>> confounding questions that many of our friends won't touch with a
>> forty feet
>> pole, while flailing around it to no end, very similar to the
>> question of
>> WHY it is good for India to hold on to Assam OR WHY it is bad for
>> Assam to
>> be
>> free? I have been unable to entice even the most informed,
>> articulate and
>> passionately anti-Assam-sovereignty friends of ours here to take
>> that bait
>> in
>> all these years. Must be a scary-as-all-hell question, that :-)!
>>
>> But I leave both these sets of questions open--in case a daredevil
>> appears amongst the opponents and flexes her/his intellectual muscles
>> to take them on, instead of just-saying-no :-).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> Should Assam become independent, it will be natural for Assam
>>>
>>> to be
>>> a part of such a federation too.<<<
>>>
>>> Why break away in the first place --only to join later? I just don't
>>> get this sort of hogwash:-)
>>
>>
>>
>> **** Um, let' s see now: Join later? Where did that come from? I
>> don't
>> recall
>> that DD proposed any such thing or yours truly seconded or defended
>> or attempted to propagate the notion, UNLESS, this damned English
>> language is playing tricks again in desi-minds, making a federation
>> seem
>> like a re-union. How I wished we could write in a language we all
>> understand
>> equally well, in which a ' suktiboddho raastro xomuh' will not
>> appear to be
>> the same
>> as a 'punor-xongjwjit-raastro' :-).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jun 12, 2010, at 6:55 PM, kamal deka wrote:
>>
>>>>>> There is no contradiction here. Not even by a long shot, obscure
>>>>>> American idioms or not.<<<
>>>
>>> Once you stop believing in shooting first and asking questions
>>> later,every obscurity will be clear and comprehensible.
>>>
>>>>>> But will it be a bad idea to TRY and make it happen?<<<
>>>
>>> I don't believe in building castles in the mirage.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> to gain from it, that its B'deshi migration problem might get
>>>>>> alleviated.
>>>
>>> And what does India lose? Assam? B'deshi cheap labor? Or the
>>> lungi menace?
>>> I am stumped ! Any help in sorting it out :-)?<<<
>>>
>>> I am equally stumped not by the brilliance of the argument but
>>> rather
>>> lack of it.When Assam's very existence will be on the verge of
>>> extinction,the question of illegal migration will remain out of the
>>> equation.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> Should Assam become independent, it will be natural for Assam
>>>
>>> to be
>>> a part of such a federation too.<<<
>>>
>>> Why break away in the first place --only to join later? I just don't
>>> get this sort of hogwash:-)
>>>
>>> KJD
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 5:06 PM, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> but I
>>>>>
>>>>> can say with certainty that this particular idiom is apt in
>>>>> connection
>>>>> with the discussion.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> **** OK, since it is not about semantics, I accept your verdict.
>>>> Having done that, let us now examine the two competing sides,
>>>> the conflict from which some of us might have something to gain.
>>>>
>>>> Should India, Pakistan, B'desh, SriLanka, Bhutan and Nepal
>>>> get together in some sort of a federation, as I might be screaming
>>>> for them to do, what do *I* gain from that? Oh, yes Assam does have
>>>> something
>>>> to gain from it, that its B'deshi migration problem might get
>>>> alleviated.
>>>> And what does India lose? Assam? B'deshi cheap labor? Or the
>>>> lungi menace?
>>>>
>>>> I am stumped ! Any help in sorting it out :-)?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I explained before the difference between ideal
>>>>>
>>>>> world and a real world.
>>>>
>>>> **** Surely I can appreciate that. The real world of India Pakistan
>>>> and B'desh reels from the centuries old Hindu-Muslim conflicts.
>>>> Thus for the three to set aside their blood feuds may take a lot of
>>>> doing.
>>>> And it may NOT happen.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But will it be a bad idea to TRY and make it happen?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> By getting together I don't mean or imply that they merge or
>>>> attempt to
>>>> merge
>>>> into one country, re-unify. They should NOT. It will be a bad
>>>> idea.
>>>> They
>>>> can remain separate
>>>> countries , but yet work together in many areas for mutual
>>>> benefit, while
>>>> bringing
>>>> the ancient conflicts to an end.
>>>>
>>>> Ram alluded to the ancient hatreds that will prevent it from
>>>> happening,
>>>> as
>>>> you do.
>>>> My point is that these hatreds are not something imprinted on the
>>>> genes,
>>>> like perhaps
>>>> a caste might be :-). And thus they can be reduced, if not
>>>> eradicated.
>>>> Surely it
>>>> will take leadership and farsightedness to affect it. It is a man
>>>> made
>>>> condition and
>>>> thus man can rise to undo it, should they wish to.
>>>>
>>>> **** Now about the purported dichotomy of my position espousing
>>>> Assam
>>>> sovereignty:
>>>> There is none! Should Assam become independent, it will be
>>>> natural for
>>>> Assam
>>>> to be
>>>> a part of such a federation too.
>>>>
>>>> **** It is not like I am advocating a secession of Assam on the
>>>> one hand,
>>>> and on the other
>>>> advocating a re-union of India, B'desh Pakistan, Sri Lanka and
>>>> Nepal.
>>>> Just
>>>> like it is a good
>>>> idea for Pakistan, B'Desh, Nepal etc. to remain the masters of
>>>> their own
>>>> destiny, so it is
>>>> for Assam.
>>>>
>>>> There is no contradiction here. Not even by a long shot, obscure
>>>> American
>>>> idioms or not.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jun 12, 2010, at 1:38 PM, kamal deka wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Obviously it is a case of a misapplied idiom<<<
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes,I may not have a good command over English idiom as you do,
>>>>> but I
>>>>> can say with certainty that this particular idiom is apt in
>>>>> connection
>>>>> with the discussion.I will never stand corrected.
>>>>> On one end of the spectrum,you are screaming on the idea that
>>>>> these
>>>>> countries should join together to form a federation while on the
>>>>> opposite end,you support the ULFA's cause of India's
>>>>> disintegration.
>>>>> This is what I call,once again,work both sides of the
>>>>> street.What is
>>>>> good or bad in this? I explained before the difference between
>>>>> ideal
>>>>> world and a real world.Why should anyone pursue a fool's errand?
>>>>> KJD
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jun 11, 2010, at 5:36 PM, kamal deka wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Again,it reminds me of a proverbial saying that goes---playing
>>>>>>> both
>>>>>>> sides from the middle
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *** You mean "playing both sides, AGAINST ( not from) the
>>>>>> middle, right
>>>>>> :-)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But HOW does that apply in this situation? The idiom means:
>>>>>> "---to try
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> make two
>>>>>> people or groups compete with each other in order to get an
>>>>>> advantage
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> oneself"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *** Who are the two competing sides here, whom this bad person,
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> messenger,
>>>>>> is attempting to play against each other, to reap the benefits
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> himself
>>>>>> therefrom?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Obviously it is a case of a misapplied idiom. But so be it. I
>>>>>> won't
>>>>>> dwell
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But returning to the subject at hand, let us analyze what is
>>>>>> involved.
>>>>>> It
>>>>>> has two
>>>>>> parts:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A: Is the proposition GOOD, or beneficial, or has the
>>>>>> potential
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> ameliorate,
>>>>>> if not eradicate the problem, namely uncontrolled migration?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> B: If it is good, then we will look into how to achieve
>>>>>> it. If,
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> the other hand,
>>>>>> it is not a good idea, then we must examine WHY it is not
>>>>>> a good
>>>>>> idea.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We can't just demonize the proposition, because we do not trust
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> messenger or have
>>>>>> doubts about his motives. It is OK to doubt the motives, but
>>>>>> since it
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> NOT
>>>>>> about him,
>>>>>> we, as thinking people have to revert back to the fundamentals
>>>>>> of the
>>>>>> proposition, its
>>>>>> possible benefits or its absence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *** IF you think the proposition is an undesirable one, pray
>>>>>> tell us
>>>>>> why.
>>>>>> It could be bad.
>>>>>> But you will have to tell us why it is bad or undesirable. The
>>>>>> least
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> could do.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *** IF it is NOT bad, then we go on to examine how to achieve it.
>>>>>> Nobody
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> suggesting it
>>>>>> is a piece of cake. Obviously it will be an uphill battle. But
>>>>>> there
>>>>>> would
>>>>>> be ways if there is the will.
>>>>>> That is the critical point.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *** To denounce or demonize the proposition, just because one
>>>>>> does not
>>>>>> like
>>>>>> the proposer
>>>>>> or has doubts about his motives, is not the reaction of a
>>>>>> thoughtful
>>>>>> person.
>>>>>> It makes the critic look
>>>>>> like someone who does not really want to see a solution.
>>>>>> Doesn't it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:10 PM, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at gmail.com
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Well, let us see if we can DE-Mystify this:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Allow me to agree that the mystifier here is a bad person, an
>>>>>>>> ULFA-Pal
>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> the image of say, a terrorist
>>>>>>>> pal like Obama as the great American intellectual Sarah Palin
>>>>>>>> might
>>>>>>>> say.
>>>>>>>> But
>>>>>>>> he is just a messenger. Is the
>>>>>>>> message he is carrying, sullied by his personal failings?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Or is the message a bad one? An undesirable one?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> IF, the message is bad, why so? Is it because it will harm
>>>>>>>> India?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And if it is NOT a bad message, that it would not only be in
>>>>>>>> (India's
>>>>>>>> interest, but also its neighbors, then
>>>>>>>> why tar-and-feather the message, pooh-pooh it, because of the
>>>>>>>> messenger's
>>>>>>>> personal failures?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Would a thinking person, able or willing to reason, do that?
>>>>>>>> Cut
>>>>>>>> his/her
>>>>>>>> own nose to spite the face?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That IS the question here.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Will we be blessed with an explanation?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Jun 10, 2010, at 8:04 PM, kamal deka wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That's exactly how an ULFA's pal engages himself in an
>>>>>>>>> exercise
>>>>>>>>> called
>>>>>>>>> MYSTIFICATION!!
>>>>>>>>> Somebody,please let me know if there is a superior double
>>>>>>>>> talker
>>>>>>>>> than
>>>>>>>>> this.
>>>>>>>>> KJD
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Alpana B. Sarangapani
>>>>>>>>> <absarangapani at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Isn't that something? Some are visioning of one big united
>>>>>>>>>> world
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>>>> are trying to divide one little (or big) country that they
>>>>>>>>>> live
>>>>>>>>>> in.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>>> From: Sushanta Kar <pragyan.tsc50 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 17:56:30
>>>>>>>>>> To: <assam at assamnet.org>
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Assam] European Union and South Asian Federation
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This is the Dream, most of the people is visioning these
>>>>>>>>>> days.
>>>>>>>>>> People
>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> this region will sure go for it!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I support your proposal Dilipda!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sushanta
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>>>>>>> From: Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> Date: 10 June 2010 23:22
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Assam] European Union and South Asian
>>>>>>>>>> Federation
>>>>>>>>>> To: A Mailing list for people interested in Assam from
>>>>>>>>>> around the
>>>>>>>>>> world
>>>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Precisely!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 10, 2010, at 12:48 PM, Dilip and Dil Deka wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I am sure most netters have read european history and know
>>>>>>>>>> how
>>>>>>>>>> viciously
>>>>>>>>>> > the european tribes (and subsequently nations) fought for
>>>>>>>>>> centuries.
>>>>>>>>>> World
>>>>>>>>>> > wars I and II were fought in Europe. If those people can
>>>>>>>>>> form an
>>>>>>>>>> economic
>>>>>>>>>> > and political union for the sake of survival, what is
>>>>>>>>>> wrong in
>>>>>>>>>> expecting
>>>>>>>>>> > India, Pakistan and Bangladesh (also Sri Lanka, Nepal
>>>>>>>>>> and Bhutan
>>>>>>>>>> possibly)
>>>>>>>>>> > to form a federation?
>>>>>>>>>> > There are 27 members in the EU and it is growing.
>>>>>>>>>> > Dilip
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> ===========================================================
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Member states
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > The continental territories of the member states of the
>>>>>>>>>> European
>>>>>>>>>> Union
>>>>>>>>>> > (European Communities pre-1993), animated in order of
>>>>>>>>>> accession.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Albania
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Austria
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Belarus
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Belgium
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Bos.
>>>>>>>>>> > & Herz.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Bulgaria
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Croatia
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Cyprus
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Czech
>>>>>>>>>> > Rep.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Denmark
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Estonia
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Finland
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > France
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Germany
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Greece
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Hungary
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Iceland
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Ireland
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Italy
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Latvia
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Lithuania
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Luxembourg
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Mac.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Malta?
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Moldova
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Mont.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Netherlands
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Norway
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Poland
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Portugal
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Romania
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Russia
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Serbia
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Slovakia
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Slovenia
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Spain
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Sweden
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Switz-
>>>>>>>>>> > erland
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Turkey
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Ukraine
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > United
>>>>>>>>>> > Kingdom
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > European Union is composed of 27 sovereign Member States:
>>>>>>>>>> Austria,
>>>>>>>>>> Belgium,
>>>>>>>>>> > Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,
>>>>>>>>>> Finland,
>>>>>>>>>> France,
>>>>>>>>>> > Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia,
>>>>>>>>>> Lithuania,
>>>>>>>>>> Luxembourg,
>>>>>>>>>> > Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovak
>>>>>>>>>> Republic,
>>>>>>>>>> > Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.[30]
>>>>>>>>>> > The Union's membership has grown from the original six
>>>>>>>>>> founding
>>>>>>>>>> > states-Belgium, France, (then-West) Germany, Italy,
>>>>>>>>>> Luxembourg
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> > Netherlands-to the present day 27 by successive
>>>>>>>>>> enlargements as
>>>>>>>>>> countries
>>>>>>>>>> > acceded to the treaties and by doing so, pooled their
>>>>>>>>>> sovereignty
>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>> > exchange for representation in the institutions.[31]
>>>>>>>>>> > To join the EU a country must meet the Copenhagen
>>>>>>>>>> criteria,
>>>>>>>>>> defined
>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> > 1993 Copenhagen European Council. These require a stable
>>>>>>>>>> democracy
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> > respects human rights and the rule of law; a functioning
>>>>>>>>>> market
>>>>>>>>>> economy
>>>>>>>>>> > capable of competition within the EU; and the acceptance
>>>>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>>>> obligations
>>>>>>>>>> > of membership, including EU law. Evaluation of a country's
>>>>>>>>>> fulfilment
>>>>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>>>> > criteria is the responsibility of the European Council.
>>>>>>>>>> [32]
>>>>>>>>>> > No member state has ever left the Union, although
>>>>>>>>>> Greenland (an
>>>>>>>>>> autonomous
>>>>>>>>>> > province of Denmark) withdrew in 1985. The Lisbon Treaty
>>>>>>>>>> now
>>>>>>>>>> provides
>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>> > clause dealing with how a member leaves the EU.
>>>>>>>>>> > There are three official candidate countries, Croatia,
>>>>>>>>>> Macedonia
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> > Turkey. Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro,
>>>>>>>>>> Serbia and
>>>>>>>>>> Iceland are
>>>>>>>>>> > officially recognised as potential candidates.[33]
>>>>>>>>>> Kosovo is
>>>>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>> listed as
>>>>>>>>>> > a potential candidate but the European Commission does
>>>>>>>>>> not list
>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>> > independent country because not all member states
>>>>>>>>>> recognise it
>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>> > independent country separate from Serbia.[34]
>>>>>>>>>> > Four Western European countries that have chosen not to
>>>>>>>>>> join the
>>>>>>>>>> EU
>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>> > partly committed to the EU's economy and regulations:
>>>>>>>>>> Iceland,
>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>> has now
>>>>>>>>>> > applied for membership, Liechtenstein and Norway, which
>>>>>>>>>> are a
>>>>>>>>>> part
>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> > single market through the European Economic Area, and
>>>>>>>>>> Switzerland,
>>>>>>>>>> which has
>>>>>>>>>> > similar ties through bilateral treaties.[35][36] The
>>>>>>>>>> relationships
>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> > European microstates, Andorra, Monaco, San Marino and the
>>>>>>>>>> Vatican
>>>>>>>>>> include
>>>>>>>>>> > the use of the euro and other areas of co-operation.[37]
>>>>>>>>>> >_______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> > assam mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> > assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>> > http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Sushnta Kar
>>>>>>>>>> ??????? ??
>>>>>>>>>> ??????????, ????
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ???? ????????:
>>>>>>>>>> http://sushantakar40.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>>>> http://ishankonerkahini.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>>>> http://ishankonerkotha.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>>>> ???? ???????? '????????'
>>>>>>>>>> http://pragyan06now.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>>>> http://sites.google.com/site/pragyan06now
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "??????????? ??????? ???? ?????? ????? ???????, ????? ????? ??????
>>>>>>>>>> ??????"
>>>>>>>>>> ???????????
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> assam mailing list
>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> assam mailing list
>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> assam mailing list
>> assam at assamnet.org
>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> assam mailing list
> assam at assamnet.org
> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
More information about the Assam
mailing list