Board Resolution Sample Format Malaysia: Fill & Download for Free

Development of peaceful nuclear energy is one thing. The Persians aren’t really interested in that though, given their penchant for secrecy about their supposed energy program.Look at South Korea - they developed a domestic commercial nuclear power industry and have started exporting their reactor design. They did all this in the open, not behind closed doors.Information from THE NUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE:“Iran signed long-term nuclear cooperation agreements with Pakistan and China, in 1987 and 1990 respectively. Accords with both countries involved the training of Iranian personnel, China also agreed to provide Iran with a 27KW miniature neutron source reactor (MNSR) and two 300MW Qinshan power reactors. In January 1995, Russia announced that it would complete Bushehr's construction and agreed to build three additional reactors.U.S. intelligence agencies have long suspected Iran of using its civilian nuclear program as a cover for clandestine weapons development, and the U.S. government has actively pressured potential suppliers to limit nuclear cooperation with Iran. As a result, China did not ultimately supply Iran with the research reactor (which would have been suitable for plutonium production), the two Qinshan power reactors, or the uranium conversion plant it had previously offered Iran. The United States also blocked Iran's agreement with Argentina for uranium enrichment and heavy water production facilities.Russia and Iran signed a bilateral nuclear cooperation agreement in August 1992. [10] In a follow-up agreement in 1995, Russia agreed to complete construction of the Bushehr-1 nuclear power plant and also secretly offered to supply Iran with a large research reactor, a fuel fabrication facility, and a gas centrifuge plant. Hearing of these covert negotiations, U.S. President Bill Clinton expressed concerns about the technology transfers to Russian President Boris Yeltsin, who eventually agreed to scale back Russian-Iranian nuclear cooperation at least until Bushehr's construction had been completed. Despite this top-level ban on nuclear cooperation with Iran, American officials believe that individual Russian scientists and institutes assisted Iranian engineers in sensitive areas of the nuclear fuel cycle, and with the construction of a 40MW heavy water research reactor at Arak.On 14 August 2002, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) revealed the existence of undeclared nuclear facilities in Iran, including Natanz Enrichment Complex, the address of the Kalaye Electric Company, a heavy water production plant under construction at Arak, and the names of various individuals and front companies involved with the nuclear program. Between September and October 2003, the IAEA carried out a number of facilities inspections and met with Iranian officials to determine the history of Iran's nuclear program. In November, the IAEA Board of Governors adopted a resolution welcoming Iran's decision to sign the Additional Protocol and suspend enrichment. However, the Board noted with concern Iran's previous concealment efforts and pointed out that Iran's new declarations contradicted the Agency's previous information about its nuclear program. The Board requested that the Director General take all of the necessary steps to confirm Iran's past and present nuclear activities.To avoid referral to the UN Security Council, Iran entered into negotiations with the EU-3 (France, Germany, and the United Kingdom), and agreed in October 2003 to cooperate with the IAEA, sign the Additional Protocol, and temporarily suspend conversion and enrichment activities. However, Iran exploited ambiguities in the definition of "suspension" to continue to produce centrifuge components and carry out small-scale conversion experiments. Faced with renewed sanctions threats, Iran concluded the Paris Agreement with the EU-3 on 15 November 2004. Tehran agreed to continue the temporary suspension of enrichment and conversion activities, including the manufacture, installation, testing, and operation of centrifuges, and committed to working with the EU-3 to find a mutually beneficial long-term diplomatic solution.In early November 2004, the CIA received thousands of pages of information from a "walk-in" source indicating that Iran was modifying the nose cone of its Shahab-3 missile to carry a nuclear warhead. Furthermore, in early 2004, the IAEA discovered that Iran had hidden blueprints for a more advanced P-2 centrifuge and a document detailing uranium hemisphere casting from its inspectors. Iranian officials dismissed these documents as forgeries. The IAEA called on Iran to be more cooperative and to answer all of the Agency's questions about the origins of its centrifuge technology. Iran amended its previous declaration and admitted that it had clandestinely imported P-1 centrifuges through a foreign intermediary in 1987. Iran also acknowledged for the first time that it had imported P-2 centrifuge drawings in 1994. The Agency determined that the traces of highly enriched uranium (HEU) on Iranian centrifuge equipment most likely originated from the foreign intermediary, as they did not match any samples from Iran's declared inventory.Diplomatic progress broke down on 1 August 2005, when Iran notified the IAEA that it would resume uranium conversion activities at Esfahan. On 5 August, Iran rejected the EU-3's Long Term Agreement, because Tehran felt that the proposal was heavy on demands, light on incentives, did not incorporate Iran's proposals, and violated the Paris Agreement. The Board of Governors responded by adopting a resolution that found Iran in non-compliance with its Safeguards Agreement. On 28 June 2005, President George W. Bush signed Executive Order 13382, blocking the financial assets of individuals and entities supporting WMD proliferation. Four Iranian entities were designated as agents of proliferation concern, including the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran and the Aerospace Industries Organization.In February 2006, Tehran ended its voluntary implementation of the Additional Protocol and resumed enrichment at Natanz. The IAEA Board of Governors subsequently voted to report Iran's case to the UN Security Council (UNSC). On 15 March, the UNSC released a Presidential Statement, calling on Iran to cooperate with the IAEA. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad responded by delivering a speech in April in which he discussed Iran's possession of a second uranium enrichment facility with P-2 centrifuges. In June, the EU-3 together with the United States, China and Russia (P5+1) offered to provide Tehran with advanced civilian nuclear technology if Iran suspended enrichment activities and resumed implementation of the Additional Protocol. Iran responded to this proposal in a letter addressed to President George W. Bush, which made only brief reference to the nuclear issue and did not address the demands of the international community. In response to Iranian defiance, the UNSC unanimously passed Resolution 1696 in July, which demanded that Iran suspend enrichment activities, banned the international transfer of nuclear and missile technologies to Iran, and froze the foreign assets of twelve individuals and ten organizations involved with the Iranian nuclear program. President Ahmadinejad vowed to ignore the UNSC resolution and continue enrichment. That same month, Iran inaugurated a heavy water production plant at Arak, prompting yet another UNSC resolution. As it had with Resolution 1696, Iran also ignored Resolution 1737 and continued to operate and expand its Natanz enrichment facility.In November 2007, Iran admitted that the foreign intermediary from its previous declarations was the illicit global nuclear trafficking network of Pakistani scientist A.Q. Khan. Iran also admitted to purchasing a complete set of P-2 centrifuge blueprints from the Khan network in 1996, which it used when it began constructing and testing P-2 centrifuges in 2002. However, Iran refused to answer the Agency's outstanding questions about its UF4 conversion activities ("The Green Salt Project"), high explosives testing, and re-entry vehicle design.On 14 June 2008, the EU's foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, met in Tehran with Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, and Iran's top nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili to deliver a new P5+1 incentives package. The proposal offered economic incentives, access to LWR technology, and a guaranteed nuclear fuel supply in exchange for the freezing of Iran's enrichment efforts. Speaking just days before the deadline set by world powers for Iran's reply, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Iran would "continue with its path" of nuclear development. The UN Security Council responded by adopting Resolution 1835 on 27 September 2008, reaffirming previous resolutions demanding a halt to Iran's nuclear activities.On 21 September 2009, ahead of the public revelation by the leaders of the United States, France, and the United Kingdom, Iran disclosed to the IAEA that it was building a second pilot enrichment facility. [40] According to IAEA Spokesperson Marc Vidricaire, Iran's letter "stated that the enrichment level would be up to 5%," and the Agency was assured that additional information would be provided in due time. The facility was located in an underground tunnel complex on the grounds of an Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) base near the city of Qom. Managed by Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant (FFEP) was slated to hold 2,784 centrifuges, and began operations using 696 centrifuges in late 2011. Moreover, Iran contradicted its declaration to the IAEA concerning planned enrichment levels by moving 19.75% enrichment activities from Natanz to Fordow. A May 2012 report from the IAEA raised concerns over the activity at Fordow, citing uranium enriched past the stated target of 19.75%, and the “difference between the original stated purpose of the facility, and the purpose for which it is now used.” The plant's size, secrecy, and location on an IRGC military base led some analysts in the U.S. government to argue that Iran constructed it in order to produce HEU for nuclear weapons.In fall 2009, Iran and the P5+1 resumed talks-first on October 1 in Geneva, and then on 19 October in Vienna. During the October negotiations with the P5+1, Iran agreed to IAEA inspections at the FFEP and, in principle, to send 1,200kg of LEU to Russia for further enrichment and to France for fuel plate fabrication. The Tehran Research Reactor was expected to run out of 19.7% enriched LEU fuel soon after 2009. This prompted Iran to seek a replacement for the fuel and, reportedly, to signal readiness to ship its domestically produced LEU to a third country for further enrichment. Representatives from the P5+1 and Iran tentatively agreed to this fuel swap arrangement at the meeting in Geneva on 1 October 2009. [46] Iran, however, subsequently rejected the deal and proposed instead to conduct the exchange in phases, with the first phase involving the swap of 400kg of LEU for fuel on the Gulf island of Kish. The proposal, announced by Iran's Foreign Minister Mottaki, was dismissed by the IAEA and the United States as inconsistent with earlier negotiations.Following the breakdown in negotiations, Iran informed the IAEA that it would begin enriching some of its LEU to up to 20% U-235. Four days later, President Ahmadinejad announced that Iran had produced 20% enriched uranium and had the ability to enrich it further if it chose to do so. Following President Ahmadinejad's announcement, France, Russia, and the United States sent a letter to the IAEA expressing their commitment to the fuel swap agreement and their resolve to ensure that the deal would be implemented in full.Tensions with the international community further increased after President Ahmadinejad announced that Iran intended to construct 10 additional uranium enrichment facilities. Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of the AEOI, announced that Iran had identified close to twenty sites for these future plants and that construction work on two of the plants would begin "within the year." On 15 December 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill stipulating the imposition of sanctions on "foreign companies that help supply gasoline to Iran."Agency inspectors visited the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant (FFEP), and carried out the first design information verification inspection from 26-27 October 2009. The Agency verified that the facility was being built to house 3,000 IR-1 centrifuges. In November 2009, the IAEA Board of Governors voted to rebuke Iran for building the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant in secret. The resolution urged Iran to clarify the original purpose of the Fordow enrichment site, stop its construction, confirm that there were no more undeclared facilities, and comply with the UN Security Council Resolutions adopted earlier.In June 2010, the UN Security Council approved another set of sanctions under UNSCR 1929, primarily aimed at Iran's nuclear-related investments; three affiliates of the state-owned shipping company the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL), which had already been targeted by unilateral U.S. and EU sanctions; and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. In 2011, the United States increased pressure on the IRISL, and several companies and individuals were indicted on charges of aiding the IRISL in conducting fraudulent transactions through nine major banks located in New York. In October 2011, the United States sanctioned a ring of six front companies in Panama which allegedly took over control of some IRISL vessels after the June 2011 indictment.In a letter dated 19 February 2010, Iran informed the IAEA that it was still seeking to purchase LEU for the Tehran Research Reactor on the international market and would be willing to exchange LEU for fuel assemblies "simultaneously or in one package inside the territory of Iran." Iran requested that the IAEA convey this message to the P5+1 but the sides were not able to restart negotiations. The breakdown of talks was followed by a new nuclear fuel swap proposal brokered by Brazil and Turkey. On 17 May 2010, Brazil, Turkey and Iran issued a joint statement in which Iran agreed to export half of its LEU stock (1,200kg) to Turkey as a confidence-building measure, in return for 120kg of 20% enriched uranium for use in its medical research reactor. The deal, however, was not accepted by Western countries, who saw Iran's agreement to the removal of only 1,200kg of LEU from its territory as too little, too late.In October 2010, the P5+1 extended another invitation to Iran to discuss its nuclear program, but did not accept Iran's request for Turkey or Brazil to attend. Talks resumed on 6 December 2010 in Geneva, during which the P5+1 requested assurances that the Iranian nuclear program remained peaceful and Iran requested that international sanctions be lifted. Diplomats convened for the next round of talks in Istanbul, Turkey in late January 2011. The talks broke down due to Iran's insistence on the lifting of all economic sanctions as a precondition for substantive discussions on its nuclear program.On 13 July 2011, Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov proposed a phased approach to addressing the nuclear dispute with Iran. Under the Russian proposal, Iran's cooperation with the IAEA would be met with reciprocal steps from the P5+1. According to Iranian former chief nuclear negotiator Hossein Mousavian, the proposal envisioned five stages, with Iran limiting its enrichment activities to one site; capping enrichment levels at 5% U-235; implementing modified Code 3.1 of the Subsidiary Arrangements that provides for early provision of design information; ratifying the Additional Protocol to its safeguards agreement; and finally, suspending enrichment for three months. In response, at each stage the P5+1 would gradually lift sanctions imposed unilaterally and through the UN Security Council. Iran initially welcomed the Russian plan, but the United States, the United Kingdom and France did not accept the idea of lifting sanctions at an early stage. Formal discussions on the basis of the proposal never took place.On 8 November 2011, the IAEA released a safeguards report that more fully detailed Iran’s secret nuclear weapons program for the first time. According to the report, the IAEA estimated that the program, named “Project Amad,” was established in the late 1990s or early 2000s, though the bulk of the activity occurred between 2002 and 2003. The Agency presented a lengthy, detailed account of "possible military dimensions" to Iran's nuclear program. Most of the information in the annex had been known previously, but the November 2011 report was the first time that the IAEA assembled available evidence into one overview document. According to the report, Iran engaged in a range of activities "relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device." These included efforts to "procure nuclear related and dual-use equipment and materials by military-related individuals and entities;" to develop "undeclared pathways for the production of nuclear material;" to acquire "nuclear weapons development information and documentation," presumably from the A.Q. Khan network; and to "work on the development of an indigenous design of a nuclear weapon including the testing of components." The report further stated that prior to the end of 2003 those activities took place under a "structured program," and that there are indications that "some activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device continued after 2003, and that some may still be ongoing." The IAEA report led to the adoption of a new resolution by the Board of Governors that expressed "deep and increasing concern" about the unresolved issues and urged Iran to fully comply with its obligations.After the November 2011 IAEA report, and given that Russia and China both opposed a new UN Security Council resolution and new sanctions, the United States and the European Union launched a series of unprecedented unilateral measures. For the first time, the United States designated the Government of Iran and all financial institutions in the country as entities of money laundering concern, warning financial institutions around the world that doing business with Iranian banks entailed significant risks. In December 2011, the U.S. Congress enacted the Menendez-Kirk amendment, requiring the President to sanction the Central Bank of Iran, as well as foreign financial institutions, including central banks, for processing transactions related to oil and petroleum products on behalf of Iranian companies and the Iranian government. The measures entered into force in the summer of 2012. The Obama administration granted waivers to 20 countries, exempting them from financial sanctions because they significantly reduced their purchases of Iranian oil. These countries included China, Turkey, South Korea, Japan, Sri Lanka, South Africa, Taiwan, India, and Malaysia. The administration also granted waivers to 10 European Union members after the bloc agreed on 23 January 2012 to freeze all assets of the Central Bank of Iran and phase-out Iranian oil imports by 1 July 2012. On 5 February, the United States ordered the freezing of all property of the Government of Iran, including its Central Bank, and all other Iranian financial institutions.In late January 2012, an IAEA team headed by the Deputy Director General for Safeguards Herman Nackaerts visited Iran to discuss ways to resolve outstanding issues. A follow-up visit took place in late February 2012, but the two sides were unable to agree on a plan, and the IAEA expressed its disappointment in the meeting due to Iran's refusal to grant access to the Parchin military complex―a site where Iran has allegedly conducted high explosive and hydrodynamic experiments relevant to the development of nuclear weapons. On 6 March 2012, Iran announced that it would allow IAEA inspectors to visit Parchin. However, subsequent IAEA-Iran talks throughout 2012 did not produce an agreement on a "structured approach" that would include a visit to the site. Furthermore, at a meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors in September 2012, the U.S. envoy accused Iran of "systematically demolishing" the very facility IAEA inspectors wanted to visit. The Institute for Science and International Security has published satellite images of the site that show items that "could be associated with the removal of equipment or with cleansing it." A May 2013 report by the IAEA Director General noted that Iran has "[spread, leveled and compacted] material over most of the site, a significant portion of which it has also asphalted."In March 2012, the EU foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, speaking for the Western powers, announced that she had "offered to resume talks with Iran on the nuclear issue." On 14 April 2012, Iran and the P5+1 countries met in Istanbul to re-open discussions about Iran's nuclear program. The talks lasted two days and were described as constructive, with the two sides reportedly refraining from confrontational rhetoric, and agreeing to hold another round of talks in May 2012 in Baghdad. On 23 May 2012, the second round of new P5+1 talks with Iran was held in the "Green Zone" of Baghdad, Iraq. In an attempt to build on the momentum from the Istanbul talks, both sides went to Baghdad with specific proposals on key issues. The P5+1 requested that Iran stop uranium enrichment up to 20% U-235, ship out all of the 20% enriched uranium already produced, and close the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant. In return, the P5+1 were reportedly prepared to discuss the provision of medical isotopes, cooperation in nuclear safety, and the supply of parts for Iran's civil aviation. They also "offered to refrain from imposing further United Nations sanctions against Iran." Iran signaled a willingness to halt the 20% enrichment if the move were met with lifting of some of the current sanctions, such as those imposed against its oil industry and central bank. The P5+1 position, however, was that an end to 20% uranium enrichment and greater transparency needed to precede the lifting of any sanctions, rather than happening simultaneously. Iran has insisted that its "inalienable right" to enrich uranium be recognized by the P5+1. Media reported that Iran's five-point proposal included non-nuclear issues, such as regional security, but no further details were publicly available. The parties were once again unable to agree on substantive actions.At June 2012 negotiations in Moscow, the parties did not change their positions, but more details on Iran's proposal were reported. The five-point proposal included the following: recognition of Iran's right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes; sanctions relief in return for Iran's cooperation with the IAEA; cooperation in nuclear energy and safety; a possible cap on 20% enrichment; and several non-nuclear issues. With no agreement achieved, the high-level talks were suspended. On 3 July 2012, the P5+1 and Iran held a technical meeting in Istanbul among lower-level officials. [85] At the gathering, "the experts explored positions on a number of technical subjects." On 24 July, Iran's deputy nuclear negotiator Ali Bagheri and EU deputy foreign policy chief Helga Schmid met in Istanbul to find "common ground and coordination" between the parties. Although the talks were described as constructive, no agreement was achieved and details of the discussions were withheld.On 10 August 2012, President Barack Obama signed into law the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act, expanding sanctions against Iran. The law included a ban on the provision of insurance, reinsurance, and other shipping services to vessels of entities involved in proliferation. The European Union also tightened its restrictions on trade with Iran, prohibiting the import, financing, insurance, and brokering of Iranian natural gas, and banning the supply of vessels to transport or store Iranian oil. The EU banned the provision of ship-building, flagging, and classification services to Iran's ships, as well as the sale of graphite, aluminum, and steel. The shipping sanctions affected not only U.S.- and EU-sanctioned IRISL, but also the vessels of the National Iranian Tanker Company, which transport oil.In November 2012, the P5+1 agreed to pursue new talks with Iran. Bringing updated proposals, the parties met in late February 2013 in Almaty, Kazakhstan. Initial political consultations were followed by a technical meeting in Istanbul, but the subsequent round in Almaty failed to end the stalemate, and no further talks were scheduled. Media later reported that the P5+1 proposal envisioned that Iran would suspend enrichment to 20% U-235; ship its 20%-enriched stockpile out of Iran (except material used for production of medical isotopes); agree to enhanced IAEA verification measures; and "suspend operations at, but not dismantle the cascades," at Fordow for six months, while the parties negotiated a long-term settlement. In return, the P5+1 offered some relief from "sanctions on trade in gold and precious metals and petrochemical sales," as well as licensing U.S. repairs of Iran's civilian aircraft. Iran's counterproposal, presented at the second Almaty meeting, suggested that Iran suspend 20% enrichment and continues to convert existing stock to oxide in return for recognition of its right to enrichment and "lifting of some banking sanctions."In May 2013, a U.S. Congressional committee approved legislation to further limit Iran's oil exports and access to foreign currency reserves. On 3 June 2013, President Obama signed an executive order that authorized, effective 1 July 2013, sanctions against "any foreign financial institution that conducts 'significant transactions' in the Iranian rial…or maintains rial accounts outside Iran."Hassan Rouhani's victory in the June 2013 Iranian presidential elections signaled a shift in Iran's position on nuclear negotiations. In his inaugural address, President Rouhani, who served as Iran's chief nuclear negotiator from 2003 to 2005, put priority on "elevating Iran's position based on national interest and lifting of the oppressive sanctions," signaling his intent to resume negotiations with the P5+1. Secret bilateral talks between U.S. and Iranian officials in Oman, which reportedly started in March 2013, received new impetus following Rouhani's election and began to focus on the outline of an eventual deal.The first round of talks between Iran and the P5+1 was held in Geneva from 15-16 October 2013. After two additional rounds of intensive negotiations, Iran and the P5+1 announced on November 24th that they had reached an agreement on a Joint Plan of Action (JPOA), including interim steps over the next six months and elements of a longer-term, comprehensive solution. In addition, the IAEA and Iran agreed on a Framework for Cooperation (FFC) binding both parties to cooperate further "with respect to verification activities to be undertaken by the IAEA to resolve all present and past issues." Both sides were unable to negotiate a comprehensive agreement and numerous deadlines were imposed, and allowed to expire, before the final negotiation process began with a 30 June 2015 deadline. Negotiations extended beyond the 30 June deadline with both side’s negotiating teams remaining in the Palais Coberg hotel in Vienna, Austria until an agreement could be reached.Joint Comprehensive Plan of ActionOn 14 July 2015 the P5+1 States and Iran signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Although there was strong opposition in both the Iranian and the U.S. governments, legislation was passed in the U.S. Congress and the Iranian Parliament approving the deal. On 20 July 2015, the UN Security Council adopted UNSCR 2231 endorsing the plan. The JCPOA is designed to limit Iran's "breakout time" to a nuclear weapon from an estimated few months to one year or more. This is being accomplished by the implementation of several measures to limit Iran's ability to enrich uranium. First, the JCPOA requires Iran to reduce operational centrifuges at the Natanz enrichment facility from 19,000 to 5,060 until 2025. The Fordow enrichment facility will be converted to research and development, and will not enrich uranium for a period of 15 years, while also having its centrifuges reduced to two cascades totaling 1044 machines. Iran agreed to ratify the Additional Protocol, in addition to its comprehensive safeguards agreement, and enact inspection measures that will enable IAEA inspectors unprecedented access to its nuclear facilities. In addition, Iran signed a "Roadmap for Clarification of Past and Present Outstanding Issues" agreement with the IAEA to resolve any questions the Agency still has concerning the possible military dimensions (PMD) of its nuclear program. This issue was reported as resolved by the IAEA Director General in his report to the Board of Governors on 15 December 2015.In order to address concerns Iran could feasibly construct and operate a clandestine enrichment facility similar to Natanz or Fordow, the agreement allows for inspections of the entire fuel cycle; for up to 25 years at some facilities. This allows IAEA inspectors to inspect Iran's uranium supplies from the mining stage through waste disposal, and monitor all centrifuge production facilities.Finally, the JCPOA establishes a procurement channel monitored by a joint commission that will allow Iran to obtain the materials it needs to operate its nuclear facilities under the guidelines of international nuclear supply regimes such as the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).On 16 January 2016, the Director General of the IAEA issued a statement declaring Iran to be in compliance with all of its obligations under the JCPOA necessary to declare Implementation Day. This cleared the way for comprehensive sanctions relief for Iran while allowing IAEA inspectors continued, access to Iranian nuclear facilities. ]Since 2016, the IAEA has released quarterly verification and monitoring reports on Iran's implementation of the JCPOA in accordance with UNSCR 2231. These reports have been generally consistent with Iranian compliance in implementing the JCPOA. However, some experts are concerned that JCPOA compliance monitoring has been incomplete. Analysts at the Institute for Science and International Security have criticized the IAEA reports as being too sparse to dispel controversies about Iran's compliance. These analysts also claim that Iran has exploited a loophole in the JCPOA to exceed its allotment of heavy water on two occasions.Even before the JCPOA was signed and implemented, the U.S. Congress sought to hold the Obama administration accountable for the deal by passing the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015, which required the president to certify Iran's compliance with the deal to Congress every 90 days. With the election of President Donald Trump, these periodic reviews became an opportunity for President Trump to follow through on his campaign promise to "dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran." In April and July 2017, the Trump administration certified Iranian compliance, but voiced strong reservations and reluctance. On 13 October 2017, President Trump announced that his administration would no longer certify Iran’s compliance with the JCPOA. He alleged that Iran had not complied with the “spirit” of the deal, although he cited only minor and swiftly rectified Iranian technical violations of the deal involving surpassing the allowed limit of heavy water. President Trump left it to the U.S. Congress to re-impose nuclear sanctions against Iran in December 2017. Congress let the deadline pass without action, allowing the deal to remain intact. In January 2018, President Trump again expressed his criticisms of the deal. While he agreed to renew the sanctions waivers, he challenged European allies to “join with the United States in fixing significant flaws in the deal” or face U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA.On 30 April 2018, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered a presentation in which he revealed the seizure of over 100,000 documents by Israeli intelligence from what he called “Iran’s secret atomic archives.” Netanyahu claimed that the documents showed that Iran did in fact pursue a nuclear weapons program which comprised five 10-kiloton warheads and ended in 2003. These figures suggested that Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions envisioned a rudimentary program compared to other nuclear weapon states. Netanyahu contended that Iranian opacity about its prior nuclear efforts meant that the JCPOA had been negotiated under false pretenses, while others, such as UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, maintained that the revelations of Iran’s nuclear activities supported the necessity of the JCPOA and its inspections regime.International and expert community reactions to Netanyahu’s presentation were largely dismissive of its informational value, and suspicious that the timing and theatrics of the event were intended to persuade President Trump to withdraw from the JCPOA. Iran pushed back immediately: Iranian Defense Minister Brig. Gen. Amir Hatami responded to the Israeli allegations as a “baseless and unfounded … propaganda show,” while Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif referred to Netanyahu as “the boy who can’t stop crying wolf.” The IAEA also released a statement reiterating that “the Agency had no credible indications of activities in Iran relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device after 2009.” White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders stated on May 1, 2018 that the United States had discussed the rollout of the presentation with Israel, suggesting some coordination between the two governments.On 8 May 2018 President Trump announced that the United States would cease implementing the JCPOA and begin to reimpose nuclear-related sanctions on Iran. He declared that the deal was “defective at its core,” and cited Iranian support for terrorism and pursuit of ballistic missiles, as well as the Israeli intelligence revelations on Iran’s earlier nuclear pursuits, as justifying the U.S. withdrawal. He did not cite any specific Iranian violations of the JCPOA. As a result of the administration’s decision, U.S. companies with business relationships with Iran must sever contracts within 180 days, and the U.S. Treasury will re-impose secondary sanctions against the Central Bank of Iran. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani stated that Iran plans to discuss options for preserving the deal with the P5+1 nations. However, he expressed his displeasure with the United States’ lack of commitment to the agreement and also announced that he has “asked [Iran’s] Atomic Energy Organization to prepare the necessary orders to start unlimited enrichment.” The leaders of France, the United Kingdom, and Germany issued a joint statement on behalf of their countries that reemphasized their support for the deal and its importance to the nonproliferation regime. United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said that he was “deeply concerned” by Trump’s decision and released a statement in support of the continued implementation of the JCPOA. Russia’s Foreign Ministry also reiterated its support for the JCPOA, and further stated that U.S. actions compromise international trust in the IAEA.”Iran's Nuclear Program Timeline and History

President Xi Jinping, born in 1953, has indicated his intent to rule indefinitely after China’s legislature amended the constitution in March 2018 to scrap term limits for the presidency. This move was also emblematic of the increasing repression under Xi’s rule.The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) also strengthened its power over the government bureaucracy in a major overhaul of central government structure in March. The party oversees a powerful new government body, the National Supervisory Commission, which is empowered to detain incommunicado anyone exercising public authority for up to six months without fair trial procedures in a system called “liuzhi.”In October, Meng Hongwei, then-president of Interpol, the international police organization, and China’s vice minister for Public Security, disappeared upon return to China and was assumed to be held in “liuzhi.” The CCP also subsumed state bodies in charge of religious, ethnic, and overseas Chinese affairs under a party agency, the United Front Work Department.Authorities dramatically stepped up repression and systematic abuses against the 13 million Turkic Muslims, including Uyghurs and ethnic Kazakhs, in China’s northwestern Xinjiang region. Authorities have carried out mass arbitrary detention, torture, and mistreatment of some of them in various detention facilities, and increasingly imposed pervasive controls on daily life. New regulations in Tibet now criminalize even traditional forms of social action, including community mediation by religious figures. In Hong Kong, a region promised “a high degree of autonomy” under the Sino-British Joint Declaration, the Chinese and Hong Kong governments hastened their efforts in 2018 to undermine people’s rights to free speech and political participation.Human rights defenders continue to endure arbitrary detention, imprisonment, and enforced disappearance. The government maintains tight control over the internet, mass media, and academia. Authorities stepped up their persecution of religious communities, including prohibitions on Islam in Xinjiang, suppression of Christians in Henan province, and increasing scrutiny of Hui Muslims in Ningxia.Authorities increasingly deploy mass surveillance systems to tighten control over society. In 2018, the government continued to collect, on a mass scale, biometrics including DNA and voice samples; use such biometrics for automated surveillance purposes; develop a nationwide reward and punishment system known as the “social credit system”; and develop and apply “big data” policing programs aimed at preventing dissent. All of these systems are being deployed without effective privacy protections in law or in practice, and often people are unaware that their data is being gathered, or how it is used or stored.In 2018, animated by the global #MeToo movement, a number of Chinese women stepped forward exposing people who they said had sexually harassed them. Government censorship dampened subsequent public outrage.In one of its only human rights concessions all year, Chinese authorities allowed Liu Xia, an artist and the widow of 2010 Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo, to leave for Germany in July after eight years of legally baseless house arrest. However, the decision of authorities to bar her family members from also leaving reflects Beijing’s campaign to punish dissent and restrict expression globally.China’s growing global power makes it an exporter of human rights violations, including at the United Nations, where in 2018 it sought to block participation of its critics. China again ranked among countries singled out for reprisals against human rights defenders, and in March successfully advanced a Human Rights Council (HRC) resolution on a retrograde approach that it calls “win-win” or “mutually beneficial” cooperation. In this view, states do not pursue accountability for serious human rights violations but engage merely in “dialogue”; moreover, there is no role for independent civil society, only governments, and a narrow role for the UN itself.Few governments spoke forcefully against these developments, even in the face of Chinese government harassment of people in their own countries or pressure on foreign companies to publicly support Chinese government positions.Human Rights DefendersThe case of human rights lawyer Wang Quanzhang is emblematic of authorities’ ruthlessness toward human rights defenders and those activists’ fortitude. Beijing police detained Wang amid a national crackdown on human rights lawyers and activists in August 2015; while detained he was reportedly tortured with electric shocks and forced to take medications. In July, Wang was finally allowed to meet his lawyer for the first time. Charged with “subversion of state power,” he could face life imprisonment if convicted. During Wang’s detention, Li Wenzu, his wife, along with families of other lawyers and activists detained during the crackdown, have campaigned relentlessly for his release despite having to endure incessant intimidation and harassment.Authorities continued politically motivated prosecutions and disbarments of human rights lawyers. In January, police detained lawyer Yu Wensheng, charging him with “inciting subversion of state power” and “obstructing public duties.” Judicial authorities revoked or suspended the licenses of over a dozen human rights lawyers, and even some who retain licenses have been unable to find work due to police pressure on employers.In 2018, the courts handed down lengthy prison terms to a number of prominent human rights activists after protracted and sham prosecutions. In July, a Wuhan court sentenced veteran democracy activist Qin Yongmin to 13 years in prison for “subversion of state power.” Qin, 64, has previously spent a total of 22 years in prison or in “Re-education Through Labor.”Also in July, a Chongqing court sentenced political cartoonist Jiang Yefei to six-and-a-half years in prison for “subversion of state power” and “illegally crossing a national border.” In 2015, Thai authorities forcibly repatriated Jiang and human rights activist Dong Guangping to China even after the pair had been granted UNHCR refugee status. Dong, who was tried alongside Jiang, was given a three-and-a-half-year sentence for inciting subversion and illegal border crossing.Other defenders continue to face long detentions without trials or verdicts. Liu Feiyue, founder of the human rights news website Civil Rights and Livelihood Watch, was detained in November 2016 and charged with “inciting subversion of state power.” He was tried in August 2018 but had not yet been sentenced at time of writing. Veteran activist and founder of the human rights website “64,” Tianwang Huang Qi, has been detained since November 2016 but not yet tried. Huang suffers from several health conditions for which he has not received adequate treatment, including possible imminent kidney failure and lung inflammation.More human rights defenders were detained in 2018. In July, authorities detained Dong Yaoqiong after she poured ink over a poster of President Xi in Shanghai. Police later held her in a psychiatric hospital and prevented her father from seeing her. In August, Guangxi police detained activist and a leader in the Tiananmen Square protests Zhou Yongjun for possessing materials related to Falun Gong, a banned religious group in China. Also in August, Shenzhen police detained dozens of labor and student activists after they gathered to show support to factory workers at the welding machinery company Jasic International, who were fired for trying to form a union. Some were later released but 14 remained in custody or under house arrest at time of writing.Authorities also tried to silence Chinese human rights defenders abroad by harassing and detaining their families in China. In January 2018, Guangzhou authorities forcibly disappeared Li Huaiping, wife of Chen Xiaoping, a US-based journalist for the Chinese-language Mirror Media Group. The disappearance came shortly after Chen interviewed Guo Wengui, a Chinese billionaire fugitive who exposed corruption among China’s ruling elite. Authorities continually harassed the China-based family members of Canadian human rights activist Anastasia Lin, banning them from travel abroad and threatening to persecute them “like in the Cultural Revolution.”In 2018, authorities continue to subject various activists and lawyers to travel bans, surveillance, detention, and torture and ill-treatment for their efforts to engage with the UN. Using human rights treaties for advocacy was cited in the criminal indictment against activist Qin Yongmin, who was sentenced to 13 years in prison.Freedom of ExpressionChinese authorities continue to harass and detain journalists who cover human rights issues, as well as their interviewees. In May, Beijing police physically assaulted and briefly detained a cameraperson for the Hong Kong broadcaster Now TV reporting on a human rights lawyer’s court hearing. In July, Hunan police detained independent blogger Chen Jieren after he wrote articles alleging corruption by provincial party officials; state media repeatedly attacked Chen as an “internet pest” who had “polluted the online space.” In August, Shandong police broke into the home of retired professor Sun Wenguang as he was giving a live interview with the US broadcaster Voice of America (VOA). Sun was subsequently put under house arrest. Police later also briefly detained VOA journalists who attempted to interview Sun again.Authorities expanded their internet censorship regime to suppress politically sensitive information and “vulgar” content. In January 2018, social media platform Weibo suspended several of its most popular programs after authorities ordered it to clean up “wrong-oriented” and “vulgar” information. In April, regulators shut down Neihan Duanzi, a parody and meme app with over 38 million monthly users.In January 2018, Chinese authorities forcibly disappeared Swedish citizen and bookseller Gui Mihai while he was traveling with Swedish diplomats. Gui, a publisher of books about China’s political intrigues, had been imprisoned for two years from 2015 to 2017 after being abducted from Thailand.In August, media reports revealed that Google, which suspended its search service in China in 2010 citing censorship concerns, had been developing a censored search engine app for the Chinese market. The app would reportedly comply with China’s expansive censorship requirements by automatically identifying and filtering sites blocked by the Great Firewall, China’s internet filtering system.The government also tightened its ideological grip over universities. A number of professors, including foreigners, were punished for making comments critical of the government. In July, the University of Nottingham Ningbo China removed Stephen Morgan from its management board after he wrote an online essay critical of the Chinese Communist Party. In August, Guizhou University dismissed economics professor Yang Shaozheng, alleging him of “disseminating politically incorrect views.” Peking University did not renew the contract of American professor Christopher Balding, who had previously launched a campaign calling on Cambridge University Press to resist the Chinese government’s pressure to censor academic articles.The Chinese government also pressured foreign companies to adhere to disputed terms and policies. In January, US-based Marriott International apologized for listing Taiwan and Tibet as separate countries on its website after authorities shut down the website and app in China for a week. In March, Marriott fired an employee for “liking” a pro-Tibet tweet. After Chinese authorities threatened to ban them from operating in China, dozens of international airlines made changes on their websites to refer to Taiwan as part of China.Freedom of ReligionThe government restricts religious practice to five officially recognized religions in officially approved premises. Authorities retain control over religious bodies’ personnel appointments, publications, finances, and seminary applications. The government classifies many religious groups outside its control as “evil cults,” and subjects members to police harassment, torture, arbitrary detention, and imprisonment.In February, revised Regulations on Religious Affairs came into effect. Designed to “curb extremism” and “resist infiltration,” they ban unauthorized teaching about religion and going abroad to take part in training or meetings.In March, a Yunnan court sentenced Christian pastor John Sanqiang Cao to seven years in prison for “organizing others to illegally cross the border” between China and Myanmar. Cao had been involved in educational projects for impoverished minority groups in Myanmar.A crackdown on Christian churches intensified in Henan province during the year, as authorities demolished dozens of church buildings or the crosses atop of them, prevented believers from gathering in house churches, and confiscated bibles and other religious materials.In September, the Vatican and Beijing reached a historic deal, ending a decades-long standoff over authority to appoint bishops in China. China’s estimated 12 million Roman Catholics are divided between an underground community that pledges allegiance to the Pope and a government-run association where bishops are state appointed. Under the accord, Beijing will propose names for future bishops and the Pope will have veto power over the appointments.In August, in the heavily-Hui Muslim Ningxia region, thousands of Huis gathered to protest the demolition of the Grand Mosque in the town of Weizhou. Ningxia authorities have reportedly also moved Islamic icons and Arabic signs from streets across the region.Hong KongBeijing’s assault on Hong Kong’s freedoms, particularly the rights to free expression, association and political participation, worsened considerably in 2018.The Hong Kong government has continued to disqualify pro-democracy figures from running for seats on Hong Kong’s Legislative Council (LegCo). In January and October, the Hong Kong Electoral Affairs Commission disqualified Demosisto Party candidate Agnes Chow and Labor Party candidate Lau Siu-lai, respectively, stating that their promotion of “self-determination” for Hong Kong is “inconsistent” with the Basic Law.The Hong Kong and Chinese governments have harassed people for peaceful pro-independence speech. In March, they denounced pro-democracy scholar Benny Tai, equating his hypothetical discussion of Hong Kong independence with “a threat to national security.” In August, Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs officials had requested that the Hong Kong Foreign Correspondents Club cancel a talk by Andy Chan, a pro-independence activist. After the club refused, Hong Kong authorities rejected without explanation its vice-president’s application to renew his work visa.In August, Demosisto reported that police had briefly detained and interrogated two members in the mainland in March and August. In September, a pro-independence group, Studentlocalism, said police in the mainland had harassed relatives of two members for their political activities in Hong Kong.In September, new regulations went into effect allowing mainland law to prevail in Hong Kong’s West Kowloon railway terminus and all operating trains going between Hong Kong and mainland China—a significant step in China’s erosion of Hong Kong’s autonomy.In an unprecedented move, the Hong Kong government in September banned a political party—the pro-independence Hong Kong National Party. Authorities stated that the party “poses a real threat to national security,” against which they had to take “preventive measures.”XinjiangChinese authorities are hostile to many expressions of Uyghur identity, and have in recent years justified sweeping repression as a necessary response to threats of terrorism.The Chinese government began waging a “Strike Hard Campaign against Violent Extremism” in Xinjiang in 2014. But the level of repression increased dramatically after Communist Party Secretary Chen Quanguo was transferred from the Tibet Autonomous Region to assume leadership of Xinjiang in late 2016.Since then, authorities have stepped up mass arbitrary detention, including in pretrial detention centers and prisons, both of which are formal facilities, and in “political education” camps, which have no basis under Chinese law. Credible estimates indicate that 1 million people are being indefinitely held in the camps, where Turkic Muslims are being forced to learn Mandarin Chinese, praise the government and party, and abandon many aspects of their distinct identity. Those who resist or are deemed to have failed to “learn” are punished.Outside these detention facilities, authorities subject Turkic Muslims in Xinjiang to extraordinary restrictions on personal life. Authorities have recalled passports throughout the region, and to travel from one town or another, people have to apply for permission and go through checkpoints. They are subjected to persistent political indoctrination, including compulsory flag-raising ceremonies and political or denunciation meetings. With unprecedented levels of control over religious practices, authorities have effectively outlawed the practice of Islam in the region.They have also subjected people in Xinjiang to pervasive surveillance. Authorities employ high-tech mass surveillance systems that make use of QR codes, biometrics, artificial intelligence, phone spyware, and big data. And they have mobilized over a million officials to monitor people, including through intrusive programs in which officials regularly stay in people’s homes.The campaign has divided families, with some family members in Xinjiang and others abroad caught unexpectedly by the tightening of passport controls and border crossings. Children have at times been trapped in one country without their parents. The government has barred Turkic Muslims from contacting people abroad, and has pressured some Uyghurs and ethnic Kazakhs living outside the country to return to China, while requiring others to provide detailed personal information about their lives abroad.The collective punishment of families was particularly striking in the case of five US-based Radio Free Asia Uyghur Service journalists. Media reports in February said their relatives in Xinjiang have been detained in retaliation for their journalism about the region.In November, China underwent scrutiny of its human rights record through the Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR). More than a dozen mostly Western countries challenged China’s widespread detention of Turkic Muslims in Xinjiang, with some echoing the high commissioner’s call to allow UN experts access to the “political education” camps. No member country of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation explicitly addressed the issue, although Turkey expressed concern at the “confinement of individuals without legal grounds” without making specific reference to Xinjiang.TibetAuthorities in Tibetan areas continue to severely restrict religious freedom, speech, movement, and assembly, and fail to redress popular concerns about mining and land grabs by local officials, which often involve intimidation and arbitrary violence by security forces. Authorities intensified surveillance of online and phone communications.There were clear findings by UN human rights experts that the charges were baseless. Nonetheless, courts sentenced former political prisoner Tsegon Gyal in January to three years in prison and language activist Tashi Wangchuk in May to five years.Several hundred Tibetans traveling on Chinese passports to India for a January 2018 teaching by the Dalai Lama were forced to return early when officials in Tibetan areas threatened retaliation against those traveling abroad and their family members back home.Intensified political education has been reported in monasteries and schools, and for the public at large. Tibetan authorities have used a nationwide anti-crime campaign to encourage people to denounce members of their communities on the slightest suspicion of sympathy for the exiled Dalai Lama or opposition to the government.Several more cases were reported in 2018 of land grabs by local officials for construction projects, both in the Tibet Autonomous Region and other Tibetan areas. In Driru county, 30 villagers were detained in May for allegedly sharing with international media information about the arrest of a village leader who had led popular opposition to a mining project on a sacred mountain.Tibetans continue to self-immolate to protest Chinese policies; four more such protests took place between November 2017 and time of writing.Women’s and Girls’ RightsIn 2018, the #MeToo movement gained momentum in China as a slew of prominent academics, journalists, and activists were accused on social media of sexual misconduct. After a prominent state media TV host and a senior Buddhist monk at a government-controlled temple were accused of sexual harassment, censors deleted social media posts about those cases. In June, China University of Petroleum authorities held Ren Liping, a student who had accused an ex-boyfriend of raping her on campus, for six days in a hotel room after she protested against the university and police for mishandling her allegations.While women in China may be more willing to speak out against sexual harassment, seeking legal redress is still very difficult. Chinese law prohibits sexual harassment, but its failure to define the term makes meaningful legal action nearly impossible.Women continue to face widespread discrimination in the job market. In the 2018 national civil service job list, 19 percent specified a requirement or preference for men, up from 13 percent from the previous year. Technology giants including Alibaba and Tencent pledged to ensure gender equality in their recruitment.As China faces an unprecedented sex ratio imbalance and aging population, authorities promoted traditional roles for women, encouraging them to marry early and have children. The “bride shortage” in China has triggered trafficking of women from a number of neighboring countries, an abuse largely ignored by the Chinese government. Although the “one-child policy” has been relaxed to a “two-child policy,” women and girls continue to face violations of their reproductive rights.The Chinese government remains hostile to women’s rights activism. In March, social media platforms Weibo and WeChat permanently suspended the accounts of Feminist Voices, a social media publication run by outspoken feminists.Sexual Orientation and Gender IdentityWhile China decriminalized homosexuality in 1997, it lacks laws protecting people from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, and same-sex partnership is not legal.In March, the Beijing International Film Festival pulled an award-winning film featuring a homosexual relationship, “Call Me By Your Name,” after it failed to pass government approval. In April, Chinese social media platform Weibo announced that posts related to gay culture would be taken down, as part of a “cleanup” effort. The move prompted widespread protest: many people posted messages with the hashtag “I am gay” and rainbow emoticons. Weibo subsequently dropped the restriction.In Hong Kong, the territory’s highest court in July ruled that the government’s denial of a visa and associated benefits to the same-sex spouse of a legal resident amounted to discrimination. Around the same time, Hong Kong authorities decided to move a selection of 10 children’s books with LGBT themes to the “closed stacks” in public libraries.A gay teacher in September filed a suit against his former school, alleging that he was fired because he posted information on social media about a lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT)-themed event that he had attended.Refugees and Asylum SeekersChina continued to arrest and forcibly return hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of North Koreans, who Human Rights Watch considers refugees sur place, to North Korean state security services, who has long tortured, sexually abused, and imprisoned them. Beijing refused to consider fleeing North Koreans as refugees and would not grant UNHCR access to them or areas on the North Korea-China border, further violating its obligations as a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention.Key International ActorsWhile some governments and parliaments publicly expressed concerns about Beijing’s human rights violations, and continued to try to observe trials and meet with human rights defenders in China, few took forceful action to end abuses or press for accountability.In March, China proposed a resolution at the Human Rights Council, focusing on its vision for “win-win cooperation” while omitting any role for independent civil society, any mention of accountability, and other core parts of the council’s mandate. The resolution was adopted by a comfortable margin with the US as the only no vote. Throughout the year, members of the US Congress and the administration called for sanctions and export controls.In July, Germany secured the release of Liu Xia. In September, Malaysia’s new premier, Anwar Ibrahim, publicly called for talks with China about violations in Xinjiang. Sweden did not secure the release of bookseller Gui Minhai; Australia adopted new laws to counter Chinese political interference at home, but took few meaningful steps to challenge the root cause of political repression in China. The European Parliament and the European Union’s External Action Service repeatedly called for release of jailed and disappeared human rights lawyers, dissenters, and activists and expressed concerns about the situation in Xinjiang, but their efforts were partly frustrated by the EU leaders’ failure to echo these concerns and calls publicly at a summit in July.UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres visited China in April and September without publicly expressing his concern about these issues. However, new UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet, the Committee to Eliminate Racial Discrimination, and the assistant secretary-general for human rights expressed concern particularly about Xinjiang and abuses of human rights defenders.China continues to use its permanent seat on the UN Security Council to block important discussions of human rights issues. In March 2018, China and Russia successfully mobilized other council members to prevent then-High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein from addressing the council on Syria. In October 2018, it circulated a letter expressing its opposition to the "internationalization" of efforts to address the Rohingya crisis in Myanmar and its opposition has stymied stronger Security Council action to react to the crisis.Foreign PolicyThroughout the year China pressed ahead with its “One Belt, One Road” initiative despite the lack of safeguards or respect for human rights in many participating countries. Some governments, including Myanmar and Malaysia, backed away from previously agreed bilateral investment arrangements, citing unsustainable debt and concerns about sovereignty.China also pressed other governments, including Egypt, Kazakhstan, and Malaysia, to forcibly return asylum seekers to China.Major Chinese technology companies, including Huawei, iFlytek, and ZTE, all of which enjoy close relations with the government and contribute to the police’s mass surveillance efforts, tried to expand abroad in 2018. Some were rebuffed by Australia, Canada, and the US due to security concerns.

Taare Zameen par.I shed tear many times watching this movie.Taare Zameen Par, titled Like Stars on Earth internationally, is a 2007 Indian drama film produced and directed by Aamir Khan. The film explores the life and imagination of Ishaan, an 8-year-old dyslexic child. Although he excels in art, his poor academic performance leads his parents to send him to a boarding school. Ishaan's new art teacher suspects that he is dyslexic and helps him to overcome his disability. Darsheel Safary stars as 8-year-old Ishaan, and Khan plays his art teacher. Creative director and writer Amole Gupte initially developed the idea with his wife Deepa Bhatia, who served as the film's editor. Shankar–Ehsaan–Loy composed the film's score, and Prasoon Joshi wrote the lyrics for many of the songs. Principal photography took place in Mumbai and in Panchgani's New Era High School, and some of the school's students make appearances.Quick facts: Edited by, Box office …The film made its theatrical debut in India on 21 December 2007, and UTV Home Entertainment released a DVD for Indian audiences in 2008. Disney's later release of the international edition DVD marked the first purchase of distribution rights for an Indian film by a global company.Taare Zameen Par has received numerous awards, including the Filmfare Award for Best Film for 2008 and the 2008 National Film Award for Best Film on Family Welfare. It was India's official entry for the 2009 Academy Awards Best Foreign Film, but did not progress to the short-list.PlotEight-year old Ishaan Nandkishore Awasthi dislikes school and fails every test or exam. He finds all subjects difficult, and is belittled and berated by his teachers and classmates. However, Ishaan's internal world is full of wonders that he is unable to convey to others, magical lands filled with colour and animated animals. He is also an artist whose talent is unrecognised.Ishaan's father, Nandkishore Awasthi, is a successful executive who expects his children to excel. His mother, housewife Maya Awasthi (Tisca Chopra), is frustrated by her inability to educate her son. Ishaan's elder brother, Yohaan (Sachet Engineer), is an exemplary scholar and athlete, which Ishaan is frequently reminded of.After receiving a particularly poor academic report, Ishaan's parents send him to a boarding school. There he sinks into a state of fear and depression, despite being befriended by Rajan Damodharan a physically disabled boy and one of the top students in the class. He even contemplates suicide by climbing up the fence in a terrace, which Rajan manages to save him from.Ishaan's situation changes when a new art teacher, Ram Shankar Nikumbh, joins the school's faculty. An instructor at the Tulips School for young children with developmental disabilities, Nikumbh's teaching style is markedly different from that of his strict predecessor, and he quickly observes that Ishaan is unhappy and contributes little to class activities. He reviews Ishaan's work and concludes that his academic shortcomings are indicative of dyslexia.On his day off, Nikumbh sets off to Mumbai, to visit Ishaan's parents. Nikumbh is surprised to learn that Ishaan is passionate about painting, and shows great talent in art. Nikumbh then asks Mr Awasthi as to why he sent Ishaan to a boarding school. Mr. Awasthi replies that Ishaan was an ill-mannered boy and was a poor student. Nikumbh shows Ishaan's mother her son's notebooks and gives an analysis of the script. Nikumbh deduces that Ishaan has severe difficulty in understanding letters and words. Mr. Awasthi tries to dismiss it as a mere excuse for Ishaan's laziness. Nikumbh demonstrates what Ishaan experiences every day at school. He states that Ishaan has dyslexia as well as he may be having other conditions, which make him a difficult child.Still unsatisfied with Nikumbh's interpretation, Mr. Awasthi bluntly dismisses Ishaan's disability as mental retardation, which frustrates Nikumbh, who criticizes Mr. Awasthi for his crude and inaccurate explanation of Ishaan's condition. Nikumbh argues that Ishaan is an above-average child whose condition suppresses his artistic and mental talent, leading Mr. Awasthi to feel regret for his treatment of Ishaan.Nikumbh returns, and subsequently brings up the topic of dyslexia in class, and offers a list of famous people who were dyslexic. Later, Nikumbh reveals to Ishaan, that he too is a dyslexic and faced problems similar to Ishaan. Nikumbh then visits the school's principal and obtains his permission to become Ishaan's tutor. He attempts to improve Ishaan's reading and writing by using remedial techniques developed by dyslexia specialists; Ishaan soon develops an interest in language and mathematics, and his grades improve.Towards the end of the school year, Nikumbh organises an art fair for the staff and students. The competition is judged by artist Lalita Lajmi. Ishaan, with his strikingly creative style, is declared the winner and Nikumbh, who paints Ishaan's portrait, the runner-up. The principal announces that Nikumbh has been hired as the school's permanent art teacher. When Ishaan's parents meet his teachers on the last day of school they are left speechless by the transformation they see in him. Overcome with emotion, Ishaan's father thanks Nikumbh. As Ishaan gets into the car to leave with his parents for summer vacations, he turns around and runs toward Nikumbh, who gives him a hug and tells him to return next year. The film ends with a freeze-frame shot of Nikumbh tossing Ishaan into the air!CastDarsheel Safary's initial screentest lacked dialogue. When Aamir Khan saw the expression in his eyes and face, however, he instantly knew, "That's the child. He is Ishaan."Darsheel Safary as Ishaan Nandkishore Awasthi: In looking for an actor to play the central figure of Ishaan, writer Amole Gupte turned to Shiamak Davar's Summer Funk workshops. Gupte had several boys informally audition by explaining to him how they would react to scripted situations from the film. Of his decision to cast Darsheel Safary, Gupte recalls that "it was a tough call. But Darsheel has the mischief in his eyes to be Ishaan. Everyone just naturally gravitated towards him."Aamir Khan as Ram Shankar Nikumbh ("Nikumbh Sir"): Gupte, who based the character on his art teacher Ramdas Sampat Nikumbh, initially asked Akshaye Khanna to play the role.Tanay Chheda as Rajan Damodran: Ishaan's classmate at New Era High School.Sachet Engineer as Yohaan Nandkishore Awasthi ("Dada"): Ishaan's elder brother.Tisca Chopra as Maya Awasthi ("Maa"): Ishaan's mother, who gave up her career to raise her children. Chopra tended to speak softly during filming and was subsequently required to re-record some scenes using automated dialogue replacement.Vipin Sharma as Nandkishore Awasthi ("Papa"): Ishaan's "strict, hard, dominating father". Part of the reason for Sharma's casting was his "extremely strong and dominating" face that "exudes harshness." Described by Khan as "naturally polite" and sensitive, Sharma was instructed to lower his voice to sound "harsh" and "dominating".Girija Oak as Jabeen, Nikumbh's co-workerBugs Bhargava and Shankar Sachdev as Sen Sir and Tiwari Sir: Two teachers at New Era High School, whose attitude towards Ishaan softens as his grades improve and he wins the art contest. The roles are caricatures of teachers in general.M. K. Raina as the principal of New Era High School.Lalita Lajmi as herself in a cameo role. It was her first appearance as an actor.ProductionDevelopmentThe husband and wife team of Amole Gupte and Deepa Bhatia developed the story that would eventually become Taare Zameen Par as a way of understanding why some children cannot conform to a conventional educational system. Their initial work began as a short story that evolved into a screenplay over seven years. Deepa Bhatia later stated in an interview with The Hindu that her original inspiration was not dyslexia but rather the childhood of Japanese filmmaker Akira Kurosawa, who performed poorly in school. Her goal was thus to explore the story of "a child who did not fit into the school stream." She referenced a specific moment in Kurosawa's biography where he began to excel after meeting an attentive art teacher, and noted that this scene "became the inspiration for how a teacher could transform the life of a student".In developing the character of a young boy based on Kurosawa, Bhatia and Gupte explored some possible reasons why he failed in school. Their research led them to groups such as the Maharashtra Dyslexia Association and Parents for a Better Curriculum for the Child (PACE). Dyslexia eventually became the central topic and theme of the film. The pair worked with dyslexic children to research and develop the screenplay, basing characters and situations on their observations. Bhatia and Gupte carefully concealed the children's identities in the final version of the script."While Amole has written what I think is a brilliant and moving script, his contribution towards the film is not limited to that of a writer. The entire pre-production was done by him including the most important task of creating the music ... he has been present on set throughout the shooting as the Creative Director, and has been a big support and strong guiding force in my debut as a director. I thank him for that, and more so for having the faith in me by entrusting to me something that is so close to him."— Aamir KhanKhan and Gupte first met in college. Khan has said that he admired Gupte's abilities as an actor, writer, and painter. Three years before the film's release Gupte brought Khan to the project as a producer and actor. Gupte himself was to direct, but the first week's dailies were a great disappointment to Khan, who "lost faith in Amol and his capability of translating on screen what he had so beautifully written on paper". Khan was on the verge of withdrawing his participation in the film because of these "creative differences", but Gupte kept him onboard by stepping down as director. Contrary to Khan's claim, Gupte lashed out saying that after the wrap-up party, Khan announced that he was the director of the film, despite Gupte acting as director. Had it been necessary to hire a third party, production would have been postponed for 6–8 months as the new director prepared for the film. Keen to keep Safary as Ishaan—the actor might have aged too much for the part had production been delayed—Khan took over the role of director. Taare Zameen Par was Khan's first experience in the dual role of actor and director. He has admitted that the transition was challenging, stating that while he had always wanted to direct a film, it was unknown territory for him. Gupte remained on set, "guiding [Khan] and, at times, even correcting [him]".Title and translationInitially the film was to retain the short story's title of "High Jump", because of Ishaan's inability to achieve the high jump in gym class. This subplot—filmed but later cut—tied into the original ending for the movie. In this rendition, a "ghost image" separates from Ishaan after the art competition and runs to the sports field; the film would end on a freeze frame of Ishaan successfully making the leap. Khan, however, was unhappy with that proposed ending and convinced Gupte to rewrite it.With the working title no longer relevant, Khan, Gupte, and Bhatia discussed several alternatives, eventually deciding on Taare Zameen Par. Possible translations of this title include Stars on the Ground and Stars on Earth. According to Khan:Taare Zameen Par is a film about children and it is a film which celebrates the abilities of children. Taare Zameen Par is a title which denotes that aspect. It is a title with a very positive feel to it. All the kids are special and wonderful. They are like stars on earth. This particular aspect gave birth to the title.FilmingPrincipal photography for the film took place in India over five months. Khan spent his first two days as director blocking the first scene to be filmed—Ishaan returning home from school and putting away his recently collected fish—and becoming comfortable with his new responsibilities. Believing that the audience should not be aware of the camera, he chose a simple shooting style for the film that involved relatively little camera movement.At the same time, Khan also made use of illusory camera tricks. For example, the opening scene of Ishaan collecting fish outside his school was shot on location and at Film City. Shots focusing on Ishaan took place at the former, while those involving the gutter terrarium were filmed at a water tank at the latter. The tank's water often became murky because the mud would rise to the top, forcing production to constantly empty and refill it. Due to this hindrance, the scene took eight hours to film. The film's next sequence involved Ishaan playing with two dogs. To compensate for the "absolutely petrified" Safary, most joint shots used a body double, though other portions integrated close-up shots of the actor. Ishaan's nightmare—he becomes separated from his mother at a train station and she departs on a train while he is trapped in a crowd—was filmed in Mumbai on a permanent railway-station set. To work around the train set piece's immobility, production placed the camera on a moving trolley to create the illusion of a departing train. For the sequences related from the mother's point of view—shot from behind the actress—Chopra stood on a trolley next to a recreated section of the train's door.All the school sequences were filmed on location. The production team searched for a Mumbai school with an "oppressive" feel to establish the "heaviness of being in a metropolitan school", and eventually chose St. Xavier's School. As the school is situated along a main road filming took place on weekends, to minimise the background noise, but an early scene in which Ishaan is sent out of the classroom was filmed on the day of the Mumbai Marathon. The production staff placed acrylic sheets invisible to the naked eye on the classroom windows to mask the sounds of nearby crowds and helicopters. New Era High School served as Ishaan's boarding school. The change of setting was a "breath of fresh air" for the production crew, who moved from Ishaan's small house in Mysore Colony, Chembur to the "vast, beautiful environs" of Panchgani.Production relied on stock footage for the brief scene of a bird feeding its babies. Khan carefully selected a clip to his liking, but learned three weeks before the film's release that the footage was not available in the proper format. With three days to replace it or else risk delaying the release, Khan made do with what he could find. He says that he "cringes" every time he sees it.ChildrenReal schoolchildren participated throughout the movie's filming. Khan credited them with the film's success, and was reportedly very popular with them. Furthermore, Khan placed a high priority on the day-to-day needs of his child actors, and went to great lengths to attend to them. The production staff made sure that the students were never idle, and always kept them occupied outside of filming. New Era Faculty Coordinator Douglas Lee thought the experience not only helped the children to learn patience and cooperation, but also gave them a better understanding of how they should behave towards children like Ishaan who have problems in school. Because filming at New Era High School occurred during the winter holiday, those portraying Ishaan's classmates gave up their vacation to participate. To fill out the campus background, students from nearby schools were also brought in. A total of 1,500 children were used for wide-shots of the film's art-fair climax; medium shots only required 400 students.New to acting, the children often made errors such as staring into the camera, and Khan resorted to unorthodox methods to work around their rookie mistakes. For example, an early scene in the film featured a school assembly; Khan wanted the students to act naturally and to ignore the principal's speech, but recognised that this would be a difficult feat with cameras present. First Assistant Director Sunil Pandey spoke continuously in an attempt to "bore the hell out of [them]", and they eventually lost interest in the filming and behaved normally. A later scene involved Nikumbh enlightening his class about famous people who suffer from dyslexia, and the children's responses to his speech were the last portion to be filmed. Having already spent 3–4 days hearing the dialogue the children's reactions were "jaded". Khan opted to film them while he recited a tale, and manipulated his storytelling to achieve the varying spontaneous reactions. The following scene had the children playing around a nearby pond. Horrified when he learned that the water was 15 feet (4.6 m) deep, Khan recruited four lifeguards in case a child fell in.Khan found it important that the audience connect the film to real children, and had Pandey travel throughout India filming documentary-style footage of children from all walks of life. Those visuals were integrated into the end credits.Art and animationWhile claymation has been used in Indian television commercials, the film's title sequence—a representation of Ishaan's imagination—marked its first instance in a Bollywood film. Khan gave claymation artist Dhimant Vyas free rein over the various elements. The storyboarding took one and a half months and the shooting required 15 days. The "3 into 9" sequence, in which Ishaan delves into his imagination to solve a math problem, was originally conceived as a 3D animation. Halfway through its creation, however, Khan felt it was not turning out as he had envisioned it. Khan scrapped the project and hired Vaibhav Kumaresh, who hand-drew the scene as a 2D animation.Artist Samir Mondal composed Ishaan and Nikumbh's art-fair watercolour paintings. He held a workshop with the schoolchildren, and incorporated elements from their artwork into Ishaan's. Mondal also instructed Khan on a painter's typical mannerisms and movements. Gupte created the rest of Ishaan's artwork and Assistant Art Director Veer Nanavati drew Ishaan's flipbook. The art department's designs for Ishaan's school notebooks disappointed Khan, who had familiarised himself with dyslexic writing. Using his left hand, Khan instead wrote it himself.Musical sequencesThe musical sequence of "Jame Raho" establishes the characters of the four members of Ishaan's family; for example, the father is hardworking and responsible, and Yohaan is an "ideal son" who does all the right things. A robotic style of music overlaps most of the sequence—this is mirrored by the machine-like morning routines of the mother, father, and Yohaan—but changes for Ishaan's portion to imply that he is different from the rest. This concept is furthered by speed ramping and having the camera sway with the music to create a distinct style. The twilight scenes of "Maa" were a particular issue for the production crew. Because the specific lighting only lasted ten to fifteen minutes a day, the scenes took nearly ten evenings to film. Production at one time considered having a child singing, but ultimately deemed it too over the top and felt it would connect to more people if sung by an adult. Shankar initially performed the song as a sample—they planned to replace him with another singer—but production eventually decided that his rendition was best.The trio of Shankar Mahadevan (left), Ehsaan Noorani (middle), and Loy Mendonsa (right) composed most of the film's music.Ishaan's truancy scene—he leaves school one day after realising that his mother has not signed his failed math test—originally coincided with the song "Kholo Kholo," but Khan did not believe it worked well for the situation. In his opinion, the accompanying song should focus on what a child wants—to be free—and be told from the first-person perspective instead of "Kholo Kholo"'s second person. When Khan took over as director, he opted to use "Mera Jahan"—a song written by Gupte—and moved "Kholo Kholo" to the art fair. Viewers of test screenings were divided over the truancy scene. Half thoroughly enjoyed it but the rest complained that it was too long, did not make sense, and merely showed "touristy" visuals of Mumbai. Khan nevertheless kept the scene, because he "connected deeply" with it and felt that it established Ishaan's world.Shiamak Davar choreographed the dance sequence of "Bum Bum Bole," and was given free rein over its design. He had intended to use 40 students from his dance school, but Khan did not want trained dancers. Davar gave the children certain cues and a general idea of what to do, but left the style and final product up to them to avoid a choreographed appearance. Time constraints meant that while Khan was busy filming "Bum Bum Bole," Ram Madhvani took over as director for "Bheja Kum". The latter sequence, containing a "fun-filled" song of rhythmic dialogue, allowed the audience to perceive how Ishaan sees the world and written languages. It was intended to represent "a young boy's worst nightmare, in terms of ... the worst thing that he can think of"; Madhvani based the visual concept on his son's fear of "creepy-crawlies" such as cockroaches, dragonflies, and lizards. Tata Elxsi's Visual Computing Labs made the creatures out of the English alphabet and numbers, although Khan insisted they include the Hindi alphabet as not all the audience would be familiar with English. The chalkboard writing's transformation into a snake was included to surprise the audience and "end the song on a high note."In writing the song "Taare Zameen Par," lyricist Prasoon Joshi followed the theme of "however much you talk about children, it's not enough." Every line throughout the song describes children, and only one repeats: "Kho Naa Jaaye Yeh / Taare Zameen Par" ("Let us not lose these / Little stars on earth"). The song is mostly set to the annual day performance by the developmentally disabled children of Tulips School. Actual students from Tulips School and Saraswati Mandir participated, and were filmed over a period of five days. The sequence originally featured numerous dance performances, but was trimmed down when test audiences found it too long. A song accompanying the scene in which Ishaan's mother is watching home videos of her son was also cut, and replaced with background music after test audiences expressed their opposition to yet another song.Background music"It is easier when you have to create a song like "Move Your Body" in Johnny Gaddaar. There you can add a lot of nonsense in the recording studio. On the other hand, something like Taare Zameen Par requires melody to hold center stage. There is a different level of energy that you have to bring in composing for such different soundtrack as we had to be subdued yet effective in Taare Zameen Par."— Shankar MahadevanTiming and other aspects are usually planned when scoring a film, but Khan chose to take a more improvised approach. Instead of using a studio, he and the trio Shankar–Ehsaan–Loy recorded it at Khan's home in Panchgani, to clear their heads and not be in the mindset of the city. As they watched the film, Khan pointed out when he wanted music to begin and of what type. Ehsaan Noorani noted that this strategy allowed the score to have a "spontaneity to it."Different styles of background music were used to convey certain things. For example, a guitar is played when Ishaan is tense or upset, sometimes with discordant notes. The music of the opening scene—the recurring "Ishaan's Theme," which represents the character's peace of mind—overpowers the background noise to show that Ishaan is lost in his own world; the noise becomes louder after he snaps back to reality. But the scene in which Nikumbh explains dyslexia to Ishaan's family took the opposite approach. Silent at first, the music is slowly introduced as the father begins to understand his son's dilemma. The almost seven-minute long scene scarcely used any background music, to slow the pace and make it seem more realistic.ReleaseBox officeTaare Zameen Par was released worldwide on 21 December 2007, although countries such as Australia, Malaysia, New Zealand, and Fiji opened it on 20 December. It debuted in India with 425 prints, although revenue-sharing issues between the film's distributors and theatre owners caused some slight delays. The movie grossed ₹150 million (US$2.3 million) domestically within the first three days. Its theatre occupancy in Mumbai dropped to 58 percent during its third week, but climbed back to 62 percent the following week—this brought the total to ₹770 million (US$12 million)—after the Maharashtra government granted the film exemption from the entertainment tax. Anticipating further tax exemption in other states, world distributor PVR Pictures circulated 200 more prints of the film. The film completed its domestic run with $19,779,215. To reach more audiences, the film was later dubbed in the regional languages of Tamil and Telugu. Both were scheduled for release on 12 September 2008, the former under the title Vaalu Nakshatram. It grossed $1,223,869 in the US by its seventh week, and £351,303 in the UK by its ninth week. Reports regarding the film's worldwide gross have conflicted, with sources citing ₹889.7 million (US$14 million), ₹1.07 billion (US$16 million), ₹1.31 billion (US$20 million), and ₹1.35 billion (US$21 million).Protests in GujaratIn response to Khan's support for the Narmada Bachao Andolan and his criticism of Chief Minister Narendra Modi, approximately 50 activists of the Sardar Patel Group conducted protests outside of PVR and INOX theatres in Vadodara, Gujarat. The group also issued statements to all the multiplexes of Gujarat, suggesting that the film not be screened unless Khan apologised for his comments. The INOX cinema eventually boycotted the film; INOX Operations Manager Pushpendra Singh Rathod stated that "INOX is with Gujarat, and not isolated from it".International Dyslexia AssociationThe International Dyslexia Association screened Taare Zameen Par on 29 October 2008 in Seattle, Washington. Khan noted in his official blog that there were about 200 people in the audience and that he was "curious to see the response of a non-Indian audience to what we had made." He felt some concern that Taare Zameen Par was shown in a conference room rather than a cinema hall and was projected as a DVD rather than as a film. He said that the showing concluded to an "absolutely thunderous standing ovation" which "overwhelmed" him and that he "saw the tears streaming down the cheeks of the audience." Khan also noted that the reaction to the film "was exactly as it had been with audiences back home in India".ReceptionCritical responseCritics praised Aamir Khan for his directorial debut, which garnered him many awards.Taare Zameen Par received positive reviews from critics. Subhash K. Jha suggests that the film is "a work of art, a water painting where the colors drip into our hearts, which could easily have fallen into the motions of over-sentimentality. Aamir Khan holds back where he could easily resort to an extravagant display of drama and emotions." Rajeev Masand of CNN-IBN argued that the true power of the film lies in its "remarkable, rooted, rock-solid script which provides the landscape for such an emotionally engaging, heart-warming experience." Manish Gajjar from the BBC stated that the film "touches your heart and moves you deeply with its sterling performances. [It is] a film full of substance!" Jaspreet Pandohar, also of BBC, posited that Taare Zameen Par is a "far cry from the formulaic masala flicks churned out by the Bollywood machine," and is "an inspirational story that is as emotive as it is entertaining; this is a little twinkling star of a movie." Furthermore, Aprajita Anil of Screen gave the film four stars and stated, "Taare Zameen Par cannot be missed. Because it is different. Because it is delightful. Because it would make everyone think. Because it would help everyone grow. Because very rarely do performances get so gripping. And of course because the 'perfectionist' actor has shaped into a 'perfectionist' director." In addition, filmmaker Anurag Kashyap stated that, "Taare Zameen Par took me back to my hostel days. If you take away the dyslexia, it seems like my story. The film affected me so deeply that I was almost left speechless. After watching the film, I was asked how I liked Taare Zameen Par. I could not talk as I was deeply overwhelmed."However, there were some criticisms. Jha's only objection to the film was Nikumbh's "sanctimonious lecture" to Ishaan's "rather theatrically-played" father. Jha found this a jarring "deviation from the delectable delicacy" of the film's tone. Although she applauded the film overall and recommended "a mandatory viewing for all schools and all parents", Nikhat Kazmi of The Times of India believed the second half was "a bit repetitive," the script needed "taut editing," and Ishaan's trauma "[seemed] a shade too prolonged and the treatment simplistic." Despite commending the "great performances" and excellent directing, Gautaman Bhaskaran of The Hollywood Reporter, too, suggested that the movie "suffers from a weak script." Likewise, Derek Kelly of Variety criticised it for what he described as its "touchy-feely-ness" attention to "a special needs kid's plight." Kelly also disliked the film for being "so resolutely caring ... and devoid of real drama and interesting characters" that "it should have 'approved by the Dyslexia Assn.' stamped on the posters."Scholarly responseIn his article "Taare Zameen Par and dyslexic savants" featured in the Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology, Ambar Chakravarty noted the general accuracy of Ishaan's dyslexia. Though Chakravarty was puzzled by Ishaan's trouble in simple arithmetic—a trait of dyscalculia rather than dyslexia—he reasoned it was meant to "enhance the image of [Ishaan's] helplessness and disability". Labeling Ishaan an example of "dyslexic savant syndrome", he especially praised the growth of Ishaan's artistic talents after receiving help and support from Nikumbh, and deemed it the "most important (and joyous) neurocognitive phenomenon" of the film. This improvement highlights cosmetic neurology, a "major and therapeutically important issue" in cognitive neuroscience and neuropsychology.Likewise, in their article "Wake up call from 'Stars on the Ground'" for the Indian Journal of Psychiatry, T. S. Sathyanarayana Rao and V. S. T. Krishna wrote that the film "deserves to be vastly appreciated as an earnest endeavor to portray with sensitivity and empathetically diagnose a malady in human life". They also felt it blended "modern professional knowledge" with a "humane approach" in working with a dyslexic child. However, the authors believed the film expands beyond disabilities and explores the "present age where everyone is in a restless hurry". The pair wrote, "This film raises serious questions on mental health perspectives. We seem to be heading to a state of mass scale mindlessness even as children are being pushed to 'perform'. Are we seriously getting engrossed in the race of 'achievement' and blissfully becoming numb to the crux of life i.e., experiencing meaningful living in a broader frame rather than merely existing?" The film depicts how "threats and coercion are not capable of unearthing rich human potentialities deeply embedded in children", and that teachers should instead map their strengths and weakness. With this in mind, the author felt that Khan "dexterously drives home the precise point that our first priority ought to be getting to know the child before making any efforts to fill them with knowledge and abilities". Overall, the pair found a "naive oversimplification" in the film. With India "only recently waking to recognizing the reality and tragedy of learning disability", however, they "easily [forgave the film's fault] under artistic license".Public responseThe film raised awareness of the issue of dyslexia, and prompted more open discussions among parents, schools, activists, and policymakers. Anjuli Bawa, a parent-activist and founder of Action Dyslexia Delhi, said that the number of parents who visit her office increased tenfold in the months following the film's release. Many began taking a more proactive approach by contacting her after noticing problems, rather than using her as a last resort. Gupte himself received "many painful letters and phone calls" from Indian parents. He noted, "Fathers weep on the phone and say they saw the film and realized that they have been wrong in the way they treated their children. This is catharsis."These reactions have also brought about a change in policies. The film, only ten days after its debut, influenced the Central Board of Secondary Education to provide extra time to special children—including the visually impaired, physically challenged and dyslexic—during exams. In 2008, Mumbai's civic body also opened 12 classrooms for autistic students. In Chandigarh, the education administration started a course to educate teachers on how to deal with children with learning disabilities.The film has had a similarly positive response in Greater China, where the film was not officially released yet has a large online cult following due to Aamir Khan's popularity in the region after the success of 3 Idiots (2009). The film has been well received by Chinese audiences for how it tackles issues such as education and dyslexia, and is one of the highest-rated films on popular Chinese film site Douban, along with two other Aamir Khan films, 3 Idiots and Dangal (2016).AccoladesMain article: List of accolades received by Taare Zameen ParAmong its many awards, Taare Zameen Par won the Filmfare Best Film Award for 2008, as well as the National Film Award for Best Film on Family Welfare. Khan's directorial role and Safary's performance were recognized at the 2008 Zee Cine Awards, 2008 Filmfare Awards, and 4th Apsara Film & Television Producers Guild Awards.2009 Academy Awards submission and Slumdog MillionaireTaare Zameen Par was initially acclaimed as India's official entry for the 2009 Academy Awards Best Foreign Film, but after it failed to progress to the short list, a debate began in the Indian media as to why Indian films never win Academy Awards. Speculation for the reasons behind Taare Zameen Par's failed bid included Rediff.com's Arthur J. Pai's observation that it lacked mainstream media attention; AMPAS jury member Krishna Shah criticised its length and abundance of songs."Three days before Chandni Chowk [to China] hit theaters in the U.S. and India, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced its shortlist of nine films edging closer to a foreign-language nomination. India's submission, the powerful and moving Taare Zameen Par by Aamir Khan, didn't make the cut. Sadly, that film never will be seen by mainstream American audiences; yet Chandni Chowk is enjoying a hefty publicity push. If only Taare Zameen Par could have gotten its hands on that magic potato."— American film critic Lisa Tsering in The Hollywood Reporter.Khan claimed that he was "not surprised" that Taare Zameen Par was not included in the Academy Award shortlist, and argued, "I don’t make films for awards. I make films for the audience. The audience, for which I have made the film, really loved it and the audiences outside India have also loved it. What I am trying to say is that film has been well loved across the globe and that for me it is extremely heartening and something that I give very high value to."The Indian news media also frequently compared Taare Zameen Par's nomination failure with the British film Slumdog Millionaire's multiple Academy Award nominations and wins, and noted that other Indian films in the past were overlooked. Film critic Rajeev Masand argued that it is difficult to compare the two films and noted that Slumdog Millionaire was being marketed in a way that Indian films such as Taare Zameen Par could not compete with. In this context, Slumdog Millionaire actor Mahesh Manjrekar stated, "I’m sad that Aamir’s Taare Zameen Par didn’t make it to the final round of the Oscars. I thought it to be way better than Slumdog [Millionaire]..., without taking away anything from Boyle and the kids. But, Indian movies are underestimated there