Bharat Rakshak

matrimc wrote:What are the entry requirements to DoS?

Poor Preet Bharara. His office just won a big criminal insider-trading case against a portfolio manager from SAC Capital, but all anyone wants to talk about is the controversy over the arrest of an Indian diplomat.

Bharara runs the Justice Department for the Southern District of New York, and last week the office charged a deputy consul general named Devyani Khobragade with visa fraud. According to the Justice Department, Khobragade tried to get a visa for her nanny/maid and told the U.S. government that she’d pay the maid $4,500 a month, when in reality Khobragade paid her less than $600.


To call what followed a dust-up doesn’t do it justice. Indian officials jumped in, saying Khobragade was handcuffed as she dropped off her daughter at school, and was kept in a cell with drug addicts. The Indian Embassy proclaimed itself “shocked and appalled.” India took down the security barriers protecting the U.S. embassy in New Delhi. And Secretary of State John Kerry called India’s national security adviser to say he understood India’s anger.

Bharara, known for being hard-charging and attention-getting, didn’t lay low. Instead, he took the extremely unusual step of issuing a press release defending the Justice Department. In it, Bharara (who is Indian-American and was born in India) said Khobragade had been arrested “in the most discreet way possible,” not in front of her children and not in handcuffs. In fact, Bharara said, she was given courtesies “well beyond what other defendants, most of whom are American citizens, are accorded.” The agents let her keep her phone for two hours to arrange for child care and other personal matters, let her sit in their car to stay out of the cold, “and even brought her coffee and offered to get her food,” Bharara said.


– Christina Rexrode.

ramana wrote:I think GOI stance is the arrest is illegal in the first place, so where for the plea bargain?

The case of an Indian consular official accused of visa fraud appeared headed toward a new crisis Tuesday as her attorney and the Manhattan prosecutor handling the case filed dueling federal court petitions, each charging the other side with negotiating in bad faith to resolve the issue.

The arrest last month of Devyani Khobragade, 39, India’s deputy consul general in New York, on charges of submitting fraudulent U.S. visa documents for her Indian maid, has become a major crisis in U.S.-India relations and a source of contention within the Obama administration. India has demanded that the charges be dropped, while the State Department and federal prosecutors are at odds over the wisdom of the arrest and how it was conducted.

An easing of tensions appeared possible Monday night, when Khobragade agreed to waive for 30 days the government’s Jan. 13 deadline to indict her. Her attorney, Daniel N. Arshack, told the court that “significant communications . . . between the prosecution and the defense and amongst other government officials” could be undermined if the indictment threshold was crossed.

In a response filed later Monday, U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara appeared to reject that offer, saying that plea discussions “are simply not at a stage that merits” any delay in the schedule. “We have participated in hours of discussion in the hope of negotiating a plea that could be entered in Court before January 13,” he wrote. “Indeed, as recently as Saturday, January 5, the Government outlined reasonable parameters for a plea that could resolve the case, to which the defendant has not responded.”

“The timing under which the Government seeks an indictment is in the discretion of the Government,” Bharara wrote, “and the defendant cannot alter that.”

In a Tuesday response, Arshack told the court he was “surprised and distressed” at Bharara’s public characterization of their discussions, which he said violated agreed secrecy ground rules. “We can only think that the violation of that agreement is a distressingly calculated one,” he wrote.

“As the court is well aware,” Arshack wrote, “the issuance of an indictment is a polarizing event and one which cannot easily be undone.”

State Department and Indian government efforts to resolve the case diplomatically would be made significantly more difficult once Khobragade is indicted, and she has clearly pinned her hopes on avoiding that step. A conviction could also hamper any future plans that Khobragade, whose husband is a U.S. citizen, may have to visit or reside in the United States.

The new controversy came as Indian authorities said they had unearthed cases of tax and other legal violations by U.S. Embassy staff members in New Delhi. The authorities warned that they are prepared to make public and act upon the information if Khobragade’s case is not resolved to India’s satisfaction.

Indian officials declined to characterize their plans as a threat. But “it could all come out in the open like a can of worms,” said one senior official who was not authorized to speak openly to the news media on the matter.

“What we have is a wide array of issues that are under the scanner. Each aspect will be proceeded on with due care, if we have to,” the official said. Among the alleged irregularities, the senior official mentioned the sale by U.S. diplomats of duty-free alcohol and other goods to those who are not legally entitled to them and the employment of diplomatic spouses without the necessary papers or tax filings.

On Friday, India asked the U.S. Embassy in New Delhi to stop screening movies at the American Center there unless the proper licenses and certificates from Indian censors are obtained.

India claims that Khobragade had diplomatic immunity. Reports of her strip search and brief incarceration inflamed Indian public opinion and led to demonstrations in which President Obama has been burned in effigy.

The State Department has tried to keep U.S.-India relations, already drifting apart following the heady days after a landmark 2008 civil nuclear agreement, from collapsing.

“The U.S. government endeavors to always be in compliance with local laws and regulations,” State Department spokeswoman Emily Horne said Monday in response to the Indian allegations. Indian diplomatic notes to the State Department “raise highly technical and complicated issues. . . . It’s also clear that there are differences of opinion about the privileges and immunities of our respective diplomatic and consular personnel.”

Although India believes it is within the Obama administration’s power to resolve the case, administration officials have repeatedly stressed that their hands are tied when it comes to legal matters.

“We’re the diplomatic part that focuses on the relationship and all the issues we work together on,” spokeswoman Marie Harf told reporters at a State Department briefing. “There is a separate judicial and legal process that is working its way through right now.”

But the Indian government has said that the relationship itself is at stake.

Ties between the two countries have “been severely undermined,” Indian Foreign Ministry spokesman Syed Akbaruddin said. “This matter has a huge divisive potential in our relations with the United States.”

Many State Department officials say the strip search and the lack of warning to the Indian government was beyond the bounds of normal diplomatic courtesy. U.S. diplomats do not say, however, that Khobragade’s consular status afforded immunity outside her consular duties or that the U.S. attorney did not have the right to detain and charge her with falsifying a visa document. She is accused of submitting a contract, required by U.S. law, falsely promising to pay the housekeeper, Sangeeta Richard, the minimum or prevailing hourly wage of $9.75.

According to the charges against her, Khobragade signed a separate, secret contract with Richard agreeing to pay her only a fraction of that amount and illegally forced her to work long hours without required benefits.

Richard ran away from Khobragade’s Manhattan home in June, sought refuge with the New York Indian community and eventually ended up with a victim assistance organization that brought her case to the attention of the U.S. attorney.

After Richard fled her home, Khobragade subsequently accused her of stealing items from the house and trying to extort support for a permanent U.S. visa. Indian government officials have provided copies of e-mail exchanges with the State Department indicating that the initial U.S. response to those charges — before Richard alleged abusive working conditions — was to cancel Richard’s visa and note that she had 30 days to leave the country.

Beyond the specifics of the case, India has presented the State Department with a document, dated Aug. 26, 2013, temporarily accrediting Khobragade to the Indian U.N. mission as an adviser through the end of December — a date that India argues would have afforded her full immunity at the time of her arrest.

matrimc wrote:A little OT may be. DoS site has the bio of Asst. Secy. Desai-Biswal. Interesting tidbits - her highest qualification is a BA (from U of Virginia), worked in an NPO called Inter<something or other> (whose annual budget is about $5-6 million - not a big NPO by any measure), and then Red Cross, campaigned for Secy Kerry (during his presidential bid? I suppose), and is quite young. Looks to me she has too little of an experience to play Chanakyan games with Indian diplomats (or the untrustworthy Pakistanis) who will eat her up for a snack. There are 25 Asst. Secys. in DoS and another 12 or so (but not Asst. Secy. designation) at the same level in the organization.

What are the entry requirements to DoS?

ManjaM wrote:If PB indicts, and looks like he will ,is there a chance now that Ms Khobragade will serve time in prison if convicted or will her current immunity status mean she can just walk away inspite of the conviction?

ramana wrote:Its a political appointment. Shows how much the Adminstration values that position which interacts with India among others.

Amber G. wrote:Also, from the same DoS site you will know her experience in USAID ("oversaw $1.2 Billion),HFAC, among others..

ManjaM wrote:If PB indicts, and looks like he will ,is there a chance now that Ms Khobragade will serve time in prison if convicted or will her current immunity status mean she can just walk away inspite of the conviction?

Amber G. wrote:

ManjaM wrote:If PB indicts, and looks like he will ,is there a chance now that Ms Khobragade will serve time in prison if convicted or will her current immunity status mean she can just walk away inspite of the conviction?

You may already know it but, indictment is just charging (formally). It is not conviction. In normal case, the case may be dropped, or charges reduced with plea bargaining. The trial, if it take place, will take some time and chances of conviction in such cases are fairly low (and there are always appeals etc) and even if DK had no immunity there is little chance that there will be any Jail term.

But that is not the point because even without conviction, a trial is a hardship and extremely expensive (this is why many agree to plea deal even if they are innocent) and DK ought not to go through it.

Negotiations between India and the US to resolve the spat over the arrest of Devyani Khobragade have hit a wall over a new proposal by American prosecutors to allow the diplomat to skip jail time — if she accepts guilt.

US attorney for Manhattan Preet Bharara has suggested a plea bargain that will need the diplomat to accept guilt on charges that she committed visa fraud and lied to American consular officers to bring her nanny Sangeeta Richard to New York.

In exchange, she will receive either a reduced jail term or a complete waiver from time in prison, under the proposal that senior Indian officials here and in the US confirmed.

But Bharara’s proposal, made to Khobragade’s lawyer Daniel Arshack on January 5, cannot be accepted by India because it would set a precedent that could be used by US authorities against other diplomats, the officials said.

India has been demanding that US prosecutors drop all charges against Khobragade. “Accepting a plea bargain is a strict no-no,” an official said. “It’s not an option.”

Plea bargain, which requires the final approval from the judge, is the manner in which more than 90 per cent of all cases in the US are settled.
...
Officially, Khobragade has not yet responded to Bharara’s suggestion. But the proposal itself has left Indian officials frustrated at what they see as “bad faith” on the part of the US state department.

During key discussions over the past two weeks, senior state department officials advised their Indian counterparts that a resolution could be reached if Khobragade and her lawyers discussed the case and possible options with Bharara’s office.

Despite apprehensions, officials said, Khobragade’s lawyer has held talks with Bharara’s team over the past week.

As the dialogue between Indian and US officials, on the one hand, and between Bharara’s office and Khobragade’s lawyer, on the other, failed to yield any outcome acceptable to India, Arshack has sought more time before prosecutors sought an indictment.

...
...
The US state department had indicated in back-channel conversations with Indian interlocutors two weeks ago that it would grant a formal recognition of Khobragade’s accreditation to the UN — the global body has already accepted the diplomat’s application.

But it has not yet submitted its recognition of Khobragade’s accreditation — recognition that would formally accept her immunity as a diplomat to the UN.

“Logically, you would imagine the US would recognise her accreditation when the UN has,” an Indian official said. “But the way things have gone, especially with Bharara’s latest proposal, you have to wonder whether ties with India are really that important to the US.”

I met Devyani early this year, at a dinner following a book reading at Columbia. We were seated next to each other and soon started talking about Afghanistan and Pakistan. Devyani had previously spent time in Pakistan. It was a matter of time before we realized that we had common friends from my time in Kabul.

She was genuinely engaged and curious. She asked incisive questions and it was obvious early on that this was some one deeply invested in the future of the region.

It was towards the end of the dinner when I was about to leave, that I knew she was the acting Counsel General.

I was pleasantly surprised. She had none of the airs of self importance or stuffiness of the bureaucracy the Indians are notorious for. I walked away thinking she was nice.

We met soon after for coffee, that turned out to be a three hour long conversation about politics, life, love, relationships, dreams and aspirations. Devyani was easy to talk to and relate to. That is her greatest strength. She makes genuine conversations possible. Perhaps this is because she is open and honest about her own life.

We met often and soon forged a friendship. Over the course of the year, Devyani I have gotten to know is not the one you have read in papers. She has been portrayed in a way that seems alien to everyone who has ever meet her, worked with her and gotten to know her.

She is no different than the thousands of hardworking, talented, working mothers who straddle professional life and career. She works seven days most weeks, drops her kids at school taking the subway, between hectic work commitment makes time for friends and family.

Devyani represents some of the best things about the Indian mission -- our ambassadors of soft power. Young, humane, open to ideas with a deep commitment to her country and the work she does. She is a talented, hardworking diplomat who is diligent, affable and generous.

Her work means the world to her. She strongly believes that India is important to the world and that in return the best opportunities for the world lies in India.

She is a medical doctor, a Dalit women in a predominantly male Foreign service cadre. Her incredible success is a result of her work, who she is and the path she has forged for herself. Her politics is one that is inclusive, to make opportunities and possibilities available to a wide group of Indians.

I have seen this happen over and over again in the time that I have known her. One simply has to ask the hundreds, if not thousands who have meet her in the last decade of her work as a diplomat to vouch for these acts.

The utter vitriol on social media and newspapers has been disheartening.

One article callously mentioned how she had picked up the "women's rights advocate" tag. Other in the name of analysis wrongly called her incompetent and unfit. Most headlines make a mockery of her beliefs by stating how she was a women's rights advocate who has erred. Others claimed wrongly that she was involved in trafficking and mistreatment.

These go to show a deep lack of acquaintance with who she is, deep seated prejudice and envy that rear its ugly head in social media.

In a single headline her years of work advocating for women has been tarnished. In a world full of women of success who pay lip service to women rights, but remain deeply territorial and unhelpful to other women, she is an exception.

You won't see her mouthing feminist discourse but doing things that are important. Her philosophy is simple, pay it forward, share opportunities and if there is the least you can do to help, you make sure that you always do so.

I was awoken to the news of her arrest whilst I was in Turkey. My initial response was one of shock and disbelief. When more news started pouring in and I heard that she was handcuffed and arrested outside her children's school, I was deeply saddened and concerned for her children. All I could think about was their faces and the terrible aftermath.

How could some one not understand the stigma of social shaming on young children? There was no requirement to orchestrate the arrest in front of her children's school.

Probity in public life remains paramount and law must execute its mandate. These are serious allegations, not to be tried in the court of public opinion or by journalism of outrage.

These allegations could have been dealt with in a manner that fits her position as a diplomat and the crime.

The basic mores of legal proportionality were violated. Handcuffing is only used when there are grounds for restraint and no reasonable grounds for the use of handcuffs was produced.

The theatrics of the arrest and the press conference that coincided are gross overreach of judicial authority and is unacceptable. It takes little to sully someone's reputation and years to build one. However this plays out, the Devyani we have all come to know will weather it with dignity. This episode has caused her and her family deep pain and I can only hope the semblance of normalcy returns soon.

This is not a defense of Devyani, she does not require one. But this is to tell you about the person behind the headlines, one you haven't met.

I am re-stating what a common friend said. I am writing this as a friend. Knowing well that if I was in need she would do the same.

ramana wrote:Well most of their memoirs talk of Delhi being hardship posting!

In India, US diplomats even get a 20 per cent hardship allowance, which goes up to 25 per cent for their consulate in Kolkata.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/in ... z2plawZJvV

With less than a week left for Indian diplomat Devyani Khobragade's formal indictment in New York for visa fraud, New Delhi's pressure on the American embassy here has begun to hit where it hurts.

Two fresh diplomatic notes verbales accessed by Mail Today reveal that the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) wants the embassy's club shut down and the sale of duty-free liquor within it to end.


The commissary in the US Embassy in New Delhi that sells duty-free liquor is not allowed to do so, and this should be discontinued, one of the notes verbales says.

...
The second diplomatic note confirms what Mail Today reported earlier - that the government has sent a formal notice to the embassy to shut the American Club situated near its Gate E.


The club, whose official name is the American Community Support Association (ACSA), has a restaurant, swimming pool, soccer field, tennis court besides a host of facilities used by American diplomats and US nationals in India.

...

The note verbale says that the US is violating diplomatic protocol by running a beauty salon, restaurant and other facilities, and that these should be shut within 10 days.

ACSA has seven categories of members, including non-diplomats in categories such as guest members, affiliate members, and affiliate special members. It also provides membership to diplomats of other countries who also make duty free purchases at the commissary.

...

The ongoing tussle will hurt the diplomatic community, especially their families, who have enjoyed the facilities at the American club.


The decision is clearly the fallout of the Devyani Khobragade incident, but MEA officials say that it also sets right a diplomatic anomaly as the Indian mission in the US has never enjoyed the special diplomatic privileges the US has been given here.
...
...
Another recommendation that forms part of the MEA's proposals is related to an understanding of 1973 between India and the US that exempted 16 employees of the American School from paying taxes.


This concession has been misused by the US mission and no American School staffer pays taxes now. This has also being referred to the Department of Revenue in the Ministry of Finance.


The MEA also wants to examine employment contracts of all local employees and make it mandatory for the US mission to file all contracts with the MEA.
...

arshyam wrote:
Wonder what's so hard in an Indian posting!

Devyani Khobragade's arrest has resulted in an unprecedented Indo-US row which shows little sign of abating. Since I was Consul General in New York from September 2008 till February 2013, I feel duty-bound to put the situation in a full and correct perspective.
Devyani worked as my deputy towards the end of my term. Moreover, I also faced a lawsuit about which some misinformed comments continue to be made in sections of the media.
I met (Devyani's domestic help) Sangeeta Richard several times at the consulate. She not only seemed happy and cheerful, but also struck me as being quite well-groomed and educated - not the usual type of domestic worker.
Given the recent history of problems faced by the consulate, I advised Devyani to be careful. I also told her that there were plenty of people around who could misguide Sangeeta and create trouble.
Cases of desertion by domestic assistants are not new. For decades, domestic assistants accompanying our diplomats to the US have gone missing, preferring to stay there illegally and pursue their dollar dreams.
Countless security guards, including many from the police and paramilitary services, have also done likewise.
Although the US authorities have invariably been informed whenever this has happened, they have done nothing to nab them. As is well known, the US has a very large number of illegal, undocumented aliens who provide cheap labour.
However, in October 2000, the US Congress enacted the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act (TVPA). In terms of this Act, our domestic assistants who abscond can now obtain a trafficking visa by alleging that they were subjected to involuntary servitude and not paid wages as per US laws. They can get a three year T Visa which gets converted to full resident status.
Naturally, such persons allege that they would face extreme hardship if they were deported back, as Sangeeta Richard has done. In return, they have to cooperate with the law enforcement agencies against the alleged traffickers - their former employers.
Then in 2010, New York state enacted the Domestic Workers Bill of Rights, after which there has been a spate of lawsuits filed by domestic workers.

It is no secret that many Indians go to the US and try to stay on by hook or crook. Thousands of Sikhs have managed to obtain political asylum by alleging that they are being persecuted in India and thus getting full resident-status.
Privately, many of them admit that they only took the asylum route as it was the only way they could get a Green Card. However, the US authorities continue to give asylum visas to many Sikh applicants, blindly ignoring the fact that the Sikhs are a thriving community in India, and that our Prime Minister is himself a Sikh.

<snip .. whole article is worth reading for those who are interested in the background..>
(The writer is a senior diplomat who has served as India's Consul General in New York)

Influence on the United Nations[edit]
Several studies suggest that foreign aid is used as a political weapon for the U.S. to elicit desired actions from other nations. A state's membership of the U.N. Security Council can give a considerable raise of U.S. assistance.[49]

In 1990 when the Yemeni Ambassador to the United Nations, Abdullah Saleh al-Ashtal, voted against a resolution for a U.S.-led coalition to use force against Iraq, U.S. Ambassador to the UN Thomas Pickering walked to the seat of the Yemeni Ambassador and retorted: "That was the most expensive No vote you ever cast". Immediately afterwards, USAID ceased operations and funding in Yemen.[50][51]

Amber G. wrote: Meanwhile, if this has not been posted before or people have not seen it, I think it is worthwhile to read in full. It gives lot of background on our NY consulate and its interaction with local law-enforcement and other entities.. by ex consul general of India. People may recall that he himself was a victim of almost a similar case and settled out of court. So I think it is very important to guard Indian diplomats like other countries do. (And, Matrimc, it may answer some of the questions you were asking)

Here is the link from Daily Mail:
Fear and loathing in New York:
Former diplomat Prabhu Dayal reveals how Indian envoys to the US can fall victim to maids pursuing their American dreams

CRamS wrote:My take: On Nisha Biswal. She is way too inexperienced, no matter what her qualifications might be. By appointing some 2-bit entity like her, it only shows how much value US puts in its relationship with India.

Interesting comparison between Indian American appointees like her to US missions in India, and Jewish American postings in Israel. For the latter, its home coming to Israel. And for Israelis, its one of their own American son/daughter they welcome. Its mutual back scratching, a celebration of US Israel family.

But in the case of Nisha types, its a personal elevation as an honorary white, as having arrived. I doubt has has any vision to do something for her parents' country of birth whose imprint is written all over her appearance. Witness her condescending mouthpiece like comment on Modi's visa. I would wager to bet she would not dare deviate from the SD line visa vi Modi and other issues. In other words, both out of inclination and systemic constraints imposed on her, she will be only marginally better than an automated robot executing SD's "South Asia" policy.

Incidentally, she is due to visit India, and will everyone from MMSJI onward have to pay obeisance to her? Can you imagine a 2-bit counterpart to her in the MEA getting to meet Obama?