[Assam] European Union and South Asian Federation
Chan Mahanta
cmahanta at gmail.com
Sun Jun 13 08:43:17 PDT 2010
On Jun 13, 2010, at 10:19 AM, kamal deka wrote:
>>>> Are there OTHER way of defining it?<<<
>
> That's why,I used the word " one way".
*** Did I ever notice or what :-)? That is why I countered with the
query if there are
OTHER ways. Because the first way, of the fake federalism touted about
India,
was not only a very bad one, but also was a dishonest one.
> As political pundits say, the
> European Union of today is neither a confederation nor a federation,
> but rather an association of compound states.
*** I am not hung up on nomenclature. We can call it whatchmacallit .
What is inherent in the concept is what matters.
> EU has a central component, too.As I understand,it operates according
> to the principle of subsidiarity, which dictates that action by the EU
> will be taken where an objective cannot be sufficiently achieved by
> the member states alone.
*** That is one of the reasons for creating the whatchmacallit out of
the many
independent nations.
Question is , can some such structure be beneficial for the south-
asian subcontinent,
in which individual countries ( states) can remain sovereign, yet
benefit from open
borders, open trade, travel, development of scarce and/or shared
resources like rivers,
healthcare, education, cultural activities and so forth.
The big economic winner in such a set-up will be India and Indians. .
But it will also benefit the
surrounding less developed countries. MOst of all it will diffuse the
trans-migration issue
and can offer a win-win solution to Assam's sovereignty aspirations as
well.
Won't it, if it could be pulled off?
> KJD
>
> On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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