- Welcome Public Depository
- Founder President Dr. Charles Mercieca
- Executive Office of the President
- Advisory Board
- Executive Secretariat 2017 - 2018
- National Chancellery 2017 - 2020
- Special Consultants 2016-2020
- International Liaisons 2016-2020
- Officers to the UNITED NATIONS
- UN-NGOs Collaboration
- Peace Ambassadors
- Virtual University for Peace Education
- Peace Progress Journal
- IAEWP Intro Movie
- Useful Links
- Public Notice
- Contact Us
- Organizing a Peace Congress guide
- Essential Reading for National Chancellors
- CHARTERED FELLOW
Tuesday, January 17, 2017
Monday, January 16, 2017
By Dr. Rene Wadlow
After some 20 months of discussions and preparations, a high political-level Conference on Cyprus was opened at the UN headquarters in Geneva on 12 January 2017. In some ways this was a continuation of inconclusive negotiations that have taken place in the 43 years that the country has been divided between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots.
However, in calling this conference the Special Advisor of the UN Secretary-General on Cyprus, Espen Barth Eide, former Foreign Minister of Norway felt that there had been important progress on a range of issues and that a “high profile” conference could move things forward. Thus on 12 January the new UN Secretary-General was back on his old Geneva grounds at the table with Mr Nicos Anastasiades, President of the Greek-administered segment of Cyprus, Mr Mustafal Akinci of the Turkish segment, Mr Jean-Claude Juncker of the European Union and (so that there would be at least one woman at the peace table) Ms Federica Magherini, the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs.
The complex political situation has three States as “guarantor powers” – the United Kingdom which was the colonial master until 1963 and Greece and Turkey which created the tensions in the first place. Their representatives were at the table as well.
There is general agreement that Cyprus should be one State and not two, that this one State would be federal in nature, and that this re-united State would be part of the European Union. But as Espen Eide said in a press conference, quoting an old saying “the Devil is in the details;”. The first but crucial “detail” is the geographic frontiers of the Greek and Turkish areas. Maps of preferred internal administrative borders were exchanged among the two presidents in Geneva but not made public. This is the first time that such maps have been exchanged. Given the emotional and complex nature of the situation, geographic divisions with no “natural” frontiers are an issue which can cause real disagreements. Moreover, frontiers that can be easily understood can serve as an excuse if the real disagreement is something else.
There is a prior agreement that when there is finally a firm proposal, the nature of a Federal Cyprus will be presented to both Greek and Turkish Cypriot populations in simultaneous referenda. Thus the negotiators must take into consideration the popular attitudes on both sides so that the agreement is mutually acceptable. The hope is that “the time is ripe” for agreement when both Greece and Turkey are preoccupied with other issues in the volatile region and many Cypriots are tired of the status quo.
The high political level start to the conference lasted for two days and is now to be followed by meetings among civil servants and bilateral contacts in the hope of an overall agreement and a proposal to be made public.
There are two aspects of the negotiations on which the Association of World Citizens would like to propose given its long-standing interest in developing appropriate constitutional structures. First, while for understandable reasons, the term “federal” is now most often used rather than “con-federal”, in the case of Cyprus “ a con-federal Cyprus” might be the better term, a looser form of union, one in which dealing with issues at the most local level possible would be the constitutional structure.
Borders and frontiers are often thought to be “natural and inviolable” even if they are only border in the mind. Attitudes toward borders are often conflict-perpetuating. Borders are a reflection of the past rather than of the future.
Today, there is a need for cross-communal cooperation. Thus there may be a possibility for a Cyprus con-federation based not on geographic divisions but on functions, such as economic initiatives, land law, personal status concerning marriage, separation and inheritance. Such a functionally-based con-federation has conflict-solving potential. There is the Ottoman Empire precedent of different legal rules for people living in the same area. However, neo-Ottoman ideology may not be the best approach to stress in the current Cyprus negotiations. Cyprus, which has one of the oldest UN forces keeping the two communities apart may be a spark of hope for advances in resolving conflicts in other areas as well.
Thursday, January 5, 2017
Maurice Béjart: Starting off the Year with a Dance
January first is the birth anniversary of Maurice Béjart, a innovative master of modern dance. In a world where there is both appreciation and fear of the mixing of cultural traditions, Maurice Béjart was always a champion of blending cultural influences. He was a world citizen of culture and an inspiration to all who work for a universal culture. His death on 22 November 2007 was a loss, but he serves as a forerunner of what needs to be done so that beauty will overcome the walls of separation. One of the Béjart’s most impressive dance sequences was Jérusalem, cité de la Paix in which he stressed the need for reconciliation and mutual cultural enrichment.
Béjart followed in the spirit of his father, Gaston Berger (1896-1960), philosopher, administrator of university education, and one of the first to start multi-disciplinary studies of the future. Gaston Berger was born in Saint-Louis de Sénegal, with a French mother and a Sénégalese father. Sénégal, and especially Leopold Sedar Sengore pointed with pride to Gaston Berger as a “native son” — and the second university after Dakar was built in Saint-Louis and carries the name of Gaston Berger. Berger became a professor of philosophy at the University of Aix-Marseille and was interested in seeking the basic structures of mystical thought, with study on the thought of Henri Bergson and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, both of whom were concerned with the basic energies which drive humanity forward. Berger was also interested in the role of memory as that which holds the group together writing that it is memory which allows us “to be able to hope together, to fear together, to love together, and to work together.”
In 1953, Gaston Berger was named director general of higher education in France with the task of renewal of the university system after the Second World War years. Thus, when Maurice-Jean Berger, born in 1927, was to start his own path, the name Berger was already well known in intellectual and administrative circle. Maurice changed his name to Béjart which sounds somewhat similar but is the name of the wife of Molière. Molière remains the symbol of the combination of theatre-dance-music.
Maurice Béjart was trained at the Opera de Paris and then with the well known choreographer Roland Petit. Béjart’s talent was primarily as a choreographer, a creator of new forms blending dance-music-action. He was willing to take well-known music such as the Bolero of Maurice Ravel or The Rite of Spring and The Firebird of Stravinsky and develop new dance forms for them. However, he was also interested in working with composers of experimental music such as Pierre Schaeffer.
Béjart also continued his father’s interest in mystical thought, less to find the basic structures of mystic thought like his father but rather as an inspiration. He developed a particular interest in the Sufi traditions of Persia and Central Asia. The Sufis have often combined thought-music-motion as a way to higher enlightenment. The teaching and movements of G.I. Gurdjieff are largely based on Central Asian Sufi techniques even if Gurdjieff did not stress their Islamic character. Although Gurdjieff died in October 1948, he was known as an inspiration for combining mystical thought, music and motion in the artistic milieu of Béjart. The French composer of modern experimental music, Pierre Schaeffer with whom Béjart worked closely was a follow of Gurdjieff. Schaeffer also worked closely with Pierre Henry for Symphonie pour un homme seul and La Messe pour le Temps Présent for which Béjart programmed the dance. Pierre Henry was interested in the Tibetan school of Buddhism, so much of Béjart’s milieu had spiritual interests turned toward Asia.
It was Béjart’s experience in Persia where he was called by the Shah of Iran to create dances for the Persepolis celebration in 1971 that really opened the door to Sufi thought — a path he continued to follow.
Béjart also followed his father’s interest in education and created dance schools both in Bruxelles and later Lausanne. While there is not a “Béjart style” that others follow closely, he stressed an openness to the cultures of the world and felt that dance could be an enrichment for all social classes. He often attracted large audiences to his dance performances, and people from different milieu were moved by his dances.
Béjart represents a conscious effort to break down walls between artistic forms by combining music, dance, and emotion and the walls between cultures. An inspiration for world citizens to follow.
Rene Wadlow: President, Association of World Citizens
IAEWP is pleased to announce the appointment of Mr Benard Ouma Wakoli as the IAEWP National Chancellor of Kenya, Africa.
Benard Wakoli is the Director of Nairobi Peace Institute as well as the Chairman, Yaya Education Trust, Kenya.
Benard Wakoli is the Director of Nairobi Peace Institute as well as the Chairman, Yaya Education Trust, Kenya.
Benard Ouma Wakoli has relevant and extensive knowledge and experience in Project Management, leadership, public policy, governance, programme development and resource mobilization, capacity building and workshop facilitation, partnership development, peace dialogue and mediation facilitation,advocacy and campaigns, with a history of success in national and regional public policy advocacy and influencing.
Holder of advanced Master of Science degree in Globalization and Economic Development from the University of Antwerp, Belgium, he professes a multidisciplinary academic background and a range of professional and management skills.
His career experience largely based in Kenya and Africa, spans several years of community peace-building, governance and leadership,and policy research and analysis. He can demonstrate ability to manage organizational resources,both human and material, to achieve organizational goals. He is experienced in national, sub-regional and international levels, working with donors, private sector, state and civil society, and boasts the ability to interact at the highest levels of decision-making, and across cultures.
Thank you for the opportunity to put this information on record on behalf of the President and the Executive Office of the President.
The Deputy Secretary General
IAEWP ( NGO UN )
Wednesday, December 28, 2016
This bright new year is given meTo live each day with zestTo daily grow and try to beMy highest and my best!Happy New Year 2017.
Just a new bloom spreads fragrance and freshness around…May the new year add a new beauty and freshness into your life.Happy New Year. Cheer to a New Year and another chance for us to get it right, Happy New Year 2017.
... for his resolute efforts to bring the country’s more than 50-year-long civil war to an end ...
Juan Manuel Santos
Juan Manuel Santos
The Nobel Lecture given by Juan Manual Santos (Oslo, December 10, 2016)
© The Nobel Foundation, Stockholm, 2016.
General permission is granted for the publication in newspapers in any language. Publication in periodicals or books, or in digital or electronic forms, otherwise than in summary, requires the consent of the Foundation. On all publications in full or in major parts the above copyright notice must be applied.
“Peace in Colombia: from the impossible to the possible”
Your Majesties; Your Royal Highnesses; distinguished members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee; dear fellow citizens of Colombia; citizens of the world; ladies and gentlemen,
Six years ago, it was hard for we Colombians to imagine an end to a war that had lasted half a century. To the great majority of us, peace seemed an impossible dream – and for good reason. Very few of us – hardly anybody – could recall a memory of a country at peace.
Today, after six years of serious and often intense, difficult negotiations, I stand before you and the world and announce with deep humility and gratitude that the Colombian people, with assistance from our friends around the world, are turning the impossible into the possible.
A war that has brought so much suffering and despair to communities all across our beautiful land has finally come to an end.
Like life itself, peace is a process with many surprises. Just two months ago, people in Colombia and indeed in the whole world, were shocked to learn that, in a plebiscite called to ratify the peace agreement with the FARC guerrillas, there were slightly more “No” votes than “Yes” votes.
This outcome was completely unexpected.
A flame of hope had been lit in Cartagena a week earlier, when we signed the agreement in the presence of world leaders, and now that flame appeared to be suddenly snuffed out.
Many of us in Colombia recalled a passage from One Hundred Years of Solitude, the great masterpiece of our Nobel Prize laureate Gabriel García Márquez, which seemed to illustrate the moment we were living:
“It was as if God had decided to put to the test every capacity for surprise and was keeping the inhabitants of Macondo in a permanent alteration between excitement and disappointment, doubt and revelation, to such an extreme that no one knew for certain where the limits of reality lay.”
We felt that we ourselves were inhabitants of Macondo, a place that was not only magical but also contradictory.
As Head of State, I sought to understand the significance of this unexpected setback and called at once for a broad national dialogue to seek unity and reconciliation.
I was determined to turn this setback into a chance to develop the widest possible consensus for reaching a new agreement.
I devoted myself to listening to the concerns and recommendations of those who had voted “No”, of those who had voted “Yes”, and of the majority who did not vote at all – with the aim of achieving a new and improved agreement, an agreement that all of Colombia could stand behind.
Not even four days had passed after the surprising plebiscite when the Norwegian Committee announced an equally surprising award of the Nobel Peace Prize.
I must confess to you that this news came as if it were a gift from heaven. At a time when our ship felt adrift, the Nobel Prize was the tailwind that helped us to reach our destination: the port of peace!
Thank you; thank you very much for this vote of confidence and faith in the future of my country.
Today, distinguished members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, I come to tell you – and, through you, the international community – that we achieved our goal. We reached our port.
Today, we have a new agreement for ending the armed conflict with the FARC, which incorporates the majority of the proposals we received.
This new agreement was signed two weeks ago, and it was endorsed last week by our Congress, by an overwhelming majority, so that it can be incorporated into our laws. The long-awaited process of implementation has begun, with the invaluable support of the United Nations.
With this new agreement, the oldest and last armed conflict in the Western Hemisphere has ended.
This agreement – as set forth by Alfred Nobel in his will – marks the beginning of the dismantling of an army – this time, an irregular army – and its conversion into a legal political movement.
With this agreement, we can say that the American continent – from Alaska to Patagonia – is a land in peace.
And we can now ask the bold question: if war can come to an end in one hemisphere, why not one day in both hemispheres? Perhaps more than ever before, we can now dare to imagine a world without war.
The impossible is becoming possible.
Alfred Nobel, the great visionary whose legacy gathers us here today on the 120th anniversary of his death, once wrote that war is “the horror of horrors, the greatest of all crimes.”
War must never be considered, under any circumstance, an end in itself. It is merely a means, but a means that we must always strive to avert.
I have served as a leader in times of war – to defend the freedom and the rights of the Colombian people – and I have served as a leader in times of making peace.
Allow me to tell you, from my own experience, that it is much harder to make peace than to wage war.
When it is absolutely necessary, we must be prepared to fight, and it was my duty – as Defence Minister and as President – to fight illegal armed groups in my country.
When the roads to peace were closed, I fought these groups with effectiveness and determination
But it is foolish to believe that the end of any conflict must be the elimination of the enemy.
A final victory through force, when nonviolent alternatives exist, is none other than the defeat of the human spirit.
Seeking victory through force alone, pursuing the utter destruction of the enemy, waging war to the last breath, means failing to recognize your opponent as a human being like yourself, someone with whom you can hold a dialogue with.
Dialogue…based on respect for the dignity of all. That was our recourse in Colombia. And that is why I have the honour to be here today, sharing what we have learned through our hard-won experience.
Our first and most vital step was to cease thinking of the guerrillas as our bitter enemies, and to see them instead simply as adversaries.
General Álvaro Valencia Tovar – a former Commander of the Colombian Army, a historian and humanist – taught me this distinction.
He said that the word “enemy” gives a sense of a passionate struggle and a connotation of hate, unfit for military honour.
Humanizing war does not just mean limiting its cruelty but also recognizing your opponent as an equal, as a human being.
Historians estimate that up to 187 million people died during the 20th century alone because of war. 187 million! Each one of them a precious human life, loved by their families and dear ones. Tragically, the death toll keeps climbing in this new century.
It is time to remember the haunting question sung by my fellow Nobel laureate Bob Dylan that touched so many youthful hearts in the Sixties, including mine:
“How many deaths will it take 'till he knows that too many people have died? The answer, my friend, is blowin’ in the wind”.
When people asked me whether I aspired to win the Nobel Peace Prize, I always answered that, for me, the actual prize was peace in Colombia. Because that is the real prize: peace for my country!
And that peace does not belong to a president or a government, but to all the Colombian people, because we must build it together.
That is why I receive this prize on behalf of nearly 50 million Colombians – my fellow countrymen and women – who finally see the end of more than a half-century nightmare that has only brought pain, misery and backwardness to our country.
And I receive this prize – above all – on behalf of the victims, the more than 8 million victims and displaced people whose lives have been devastated by the armed conflict, and the more than 220,000 women, men and children who, to our shame, have been killed in this war.
I am told by scholars that the Colombian peace process is the first in the world that has placed the victims and their rights at the center of the solution.
This negotiation has been conducted with a heavy emphasis on human rights. And that is something that makes us feel truly proud.
Victims want justice, but most of all they want to know the truth, and they – in a spirit of generosity – desire that no new victims should suffer as they did.
Professor Ronald Heifetz, founder of the Center for Public Leadership at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, from which I graduated, once gave me a wise piece of advice:
“Whenever you feel discouraged, tired, pessimistic, talk with the victims. They will give you the push and strength to keep you going.”
And it has been just this way. Whenever I had the chance, I listened to the victims of this war and heard their heartbreaking stories. Some of them are here with us today, reminding us why it is so important to build a stable and lasting peace.
Leyner Palacios is one of them. On May 2, 2002, a homemade mortar launched by the FARC, in the middle of a combat with the paramilitaries, landed on the church in his town, Bojayá, where its inhabitants had sought refuge.
Nearly eighty women, men and children – most of the victims were children! – died. In a matter of seconds, Leyner lost 32 relatives, including his parents and three younger brothers.
The FARC has asked for forgiveness for this atrocity, and Leyner, who is now a community leader, has forgiven them.
That is the great paradox I have found: while many who have not suffered the conflict in their own flesh are reluctant to accept peace, the victims are the ones who are most willing to forgive, to reconcile, and to face the future with a heart free of hate.
This peace prize belongs as well to those men and women who, with enormous patience and endurance, negotiated during all these years in Havana. They have reached an agreement that can be offered today as a model for the resolution of armed conflicts that have yet to be resolved around the world.
And here I am referring not only to the Government negotiators but also to the FARC negotiators – my adversaries –, who have demonstrated a great will for peace. I want to praise their willingness to embrace peace, to reach peace, because without it, the process would have failed.
In the same spirit, I dedicate this prize to the heroes of the Colombian Armed Forces, who have never ceased to protect the Colombian people, and who truly understood that the actual victory of any soldier or any police officer is peace itself.
And I wish to include a special acknowledgment – with all the gratitude in my heart – for my family: for my wife and my children, whose support and love throughout this task helped lessen the burden.
Finally, I also share this prize with the international community who, with generosity and unanimous enthusiasm, backed this peace process from the very beginning.
Let me also take this opportunity to convey my very special thanks to the people of Norway for your peaceful character and your extraordinary spirit of solidarity. It was because of these virtues that you were entrusted by Alfred Nobel to promote peace in the world. I must say you have done your job with great effectiveness for my country.
Norway and Cuba, in their role as guarantors; Chile and Venezuela, as witnesses; the United States and the European Union, with their special envoys; all the countries in Latin America and the Caribbean; even China and Russia… they all have reasons to take pride in this achievement.
The Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies at the University of Notre Dame in the United States has concluded, based on careful studies of the 34 agreements signed in the world to end armed conflicts in the past three decades, that this peace agreement in Colombia is the most complete and comprehensive ever reached.
As such, the Colombian peace agreement is a ray of hope in a world troubled by so many conflicts and so much intolerance.
It proves that what, at first, seems impossible, through perseverance may become possible even in Syria or Yemen or South Sudan.
The key, in the words of the English poet Tennyson, is “to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.”
A few lessons can be learned from Colombia’s peace process and I would like to share them with the world:
You must properly prepare yourself and seek advice, studying the failures of peace attempts in your own country and learning from other peace processes, their successes and their problems.
The agenda for the negotiation should be focussed and specific, aimed at solving the issues directly related to the armed conflict, rather than attempting to address all the problems faced by the nation.
Negotiations should be carried out with discretion and confidentiality in order to prevent them from turning into a media circus.
Sometimes it is necessary to both fight and talk at the same time if you want to arrive at peace – a lesson I took from another Nobel laureate, Yitzhak Rabin.
You must also be willing to make difficult, bold and oftentimes unpopular decisions in order to reach your final goal.
In my case, this meant reaching out to the governments of neighbouring countries with whom I had and continue to have deep ideological differences.
Regional support is indispensable in the political resolution of any asymmetric war. Fortunately, today all the countries in the region are allies in the search for peace, the noblest purpose any society can have.
We also achieved a very important objective: agreement on a model of transitional justice that enables us to secure a maximum of justice without sacrificing peace.
I have no doubt this model will be one of the greatest legacies of the Colombian peace process.
Ladies and gentlemen: there is one less war in the world, and it is the war in Colombia!
This is, precisely, what we are celebrating today in Oslo, the same city that hosted the launch of the public phase of the negotiations with the FARC in October 2012.
And I must say that I feel honoured and humbled to join the line of the brave and inspiring men and women who, ever since 1901, have received this most prestigious of prizes.
The peace process in Colombia – I say this with deep gratitude – is a fortunate synthesis of all what we have learned from them.
Peace efforts in the Middle East, in Central America, in South Africa, in Northern Ireland, whose architects have all received this award, showed us the way to move forward in a process specially designed for Colombia.
We also took up the legacy of Nobel laureates Jody Williams and the International Campaign to Ban Landmines.
After Afghanistan, Colombia holds the shameful record of having the most mines and the most victims of mines in the world. We are resolutely committed to have our territory free of mines by 2021.
We have received the support of other Nobel laureates such as the European Union and President Barack Obama, who have also committed their countries to support the critical process of the implementation phase in Colombia.
And I feel that I must take this opportunity to reiterate the call I have been making to the world since the Summit of the Americas in Cartagena in 2012, which led to a special session of the General Assembly of the United Nations in April this year.
I am referring to the urgent need to rethink the world War on Drugs, a war where Colombia has been the country that has paid the highest cost in deaths and sacrifices.
We have moral authority to state that, after decades of fighting against drug trafficking, the world has still been unable to control this scourge that fuels violence and corruption throughout our global community.
The peace agreement with the FARC includes their commitment to cut all ties with the drug business, and to actively contribute to fighting it.
But drug trafficking is a global problem that demands a global solution resulting from an undeniable reality: The War on Drugs has not been won, and is not being won.
It makes no sense to imprison a peasant who grows marijuana, when nowadays, for example, its cultivation and use are legal in eight states of the United States.
The manner in which this war against drugs is being waged is equally or perhaps even more harmful than all the wars the world is fighting today, combined. It is time to change our strategy.
In Colombia, we have also been inspired by the initiatives of Malala, the youngest Nobel Laureate, because we know that only by developing minds, through education, can we transform reality.
We are the result of our thoughts; the thoughts that create our words; the words that shape our actions.
That is why we must change from within. We must replace the culture of violence with a culture of peace and coexistence; we must change the culture of exclusion into a culture of inclusion and tolerance.
And in that vein of coexistence, we have also learned from former U.S. Vice President Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and their determination to preserve the planet.
It is quite comforting to be able to say that the end of the conflict in Colombia, the most biodiverse country per square kilometre in the world, will yield high environmental dividends.
By replacing illicit crops with legal ones, deforestation spurred by coca leaf growing will certainly diminish. And millions of barrels of oil will no longer be spilled in our rivers and seas because of attacks against our oil infrastructure.
We can say, in summary, that the Colombian peace process that you are recognising today in Oslo is the synthesis and result of many positive efforts made throughout history and all over the world, efforts that have been valued and distinguished by this Nobel Committee.
In a world where citizens are making the most crucial decisions – for themselves and for their nations – out of fear and despair, we must make the certainty of hope possible.
In a world where wars and conflicts are fuelled by hatred and prejudice, we must find the path of forgiveness and reconciliation.
In a world where borders are increasingly closed to immigrants, where minorities are attacked and people deemed different are excluded, we must be able to coexist with diversity and appreciate the way it can enrich our societies.
We are human beings after all. For those of us who are believers, we are all God’s children. We are part of this magnificent adventure of being alive and populating this planet.
At our core, there are no inherent differences: not the colour of our skin; nor our religious beliefs; nor our political ideologies, nor our sexual preferences. All these are simply facets of humanity’s diversity.
Let’s awaken the creative capacity for goodness, for building peace, that live within each soul.
In the end, we are one people and one race; of every colour, of every belief, of every preference.
The name of this one people is the world. The name of this one race is humanity.
If we truly understand this, if we make it part of our individual and collective awareness, then we will cut the very root of conflicts and wars.
In 1982 – 34 years ago – the efforts to find peace through dialogue began in Colombia.
That same year, in Stockholm, Gabriel García Márquez, who was my ally in the pursuit of peace, received the Nobel Prize in Literature, and spoke about “”
Today, Colombia – my beloved country – is living that second opportunity; and I thank you, members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, because, on this occasion, you have not only awarded a prize to peace: you helped make it possible!
The sun of peace finally shines in the heavens of Colombia.
May its light shine upon the whole world!
We are pleased to announce the appointment of Prof Maitreyee Bardhan Roy as a Special Consultant on the IAEWP World Board.
Professor Emeritus Maitreyee Bardhan Roy is the Ex Principal Basanti Devi College. Kolkata, India.
Presently , she have been awarded Emeritus Fellowship under the Department of Political Science of Basanti Devi College ,147B Rash Behari Avenue . Kolkata-700029. She have been teaching Political Science and Women`s Studies in Diamond Harbour Women University and also acting as a Guest Coordinator of the Department of Women Studies . Consecutively she has been involved in extending technical support to a Japan Government Project of Eriko Taramura on the topic ` Effect of Work Place Norms on Late Parenting and Female Labour . Evidence from Japan and India ` under Mekai University. Tokyo .Japan.
Here is her Autobiography:-
I am the mother of two sons . My youngest son is a special person ,having multifaceted problems . Hence for the benefit of the special children ,I am running a Centre named `Beautiful Mind `in my house. Beautiful Mind aims to motivate the parents of the special children through its parental involvement program. The organization also runs the vocational classes for the children . The very purpose of the project is to teach the children with special needs the habit of to mixing with each other, learn to share their ideas with other children. My institute does not ask fees from the special children . It runs on the donation of the willing donors.
Born in a beautiful hill station Shillong ,located in the north eastern corner of the country and it is famous for its scenic beauty . The cold temperature of the city ,taught me to handle all problems in my life coolly and with patients .My youngest son has also taught me to see the world from the eyes of a special child. .He is my inspiration and my strength. My life partner ,Dr. Subir Kumar Bardhan Roy is a scientist by profession and is still engaged in his research. I never faced any hurdles in my life from his side. My eldest son and daughter-in-law are supportive and well settled. Both of them are staying in Mumbai and are employed . They are the strength and support in my life too.
Dr. Maitreyee Bardhan Roy ( Emeritus Fellow)
Residential Address: AE 697 Salt Lake City.