'We are only saying don't eat what we consider sacred'

'Muslims and Christians should understand that the cow is sacred to us. It is not good for health. They should eat something else.'

'Our mission is cow development. We want to produce rivers of milk. The cow should be sacred among people. It should be the national animal.'

The BJP's cow protection crusader Mayankeshwar Singh speaks to A Ganesh Nadar/Rediff.com

Mayankeshwar Singh is the national convenor of the Bharatiya Janata Party's cow development cell.

Last August he led a delegation to Prime Minister Narendra Modi seeking national legislation against cattle slaughter.

Singh, below, left, spoke to A Ganesh Nadar/Rediff.com about his crusade to save the "sacred" cow.

When most states were not slaughtering cows but only bulls and oxen, why are you insisting on banning the slaughter of bulls and oxen too? Hindus don't worship bulls and oxen.

We are protecting cows. We want to protect nature and the environment. We are interested in the progress of villages and employment in villages. You get milk and dairy products from cows.

Cow urine and dung can be used for so many purposes. They are a solution to many problems.

Cow protection is our aim. We have said it in our election slogans.

Why have you left out the water buffalo then? Why is there no ban on buffalo meat?

The cow is sacred, the buffalo is not.

The BJP is the only political party that supports cow development.

When you say cow dung is required for bio-gas, is buffalo dung not useful for the same bio-gas?

Yes, it can be used. But my mission is cow development. We want to produce rivers of milk.

The cow should be sacred among people. It should be the national animal.

There is a Rashtriya Gokul Mission Yojana. Rs 500 crore (Rs 5 billion) is being spent to take care of cows at the block level.

What about exports? Why are we not banning the export of beef?

Is it not wrong that you are depriving beef to Indians and killing the animals for export?

We are banning only cow slaughter. There should be no cow meat in beef exports.

It is the government's policy to allow beef exports and we are not objecting.

We are sending cattle to Bangladesh, but cows will not be allowed. We have all drunk cow's milk, we cannot kill it.

How can the State decide what people eat and what they should not eat?

We are only saying don't eat what we consider sacred. Millions of people believe this. The cow eats grass and gives us milk. People are drinking liquor and not milk.

Some of your supporters claim that pig slaughter is not allowed in Pakistan and therefore cow, ox and bull slaughter must not be allowed in India. We are a secular nation. How can you ban something which Muslims and Christians eat?

We are all human beings, Muslims and Christians included. They should understand that the cow is sacred to us. It is not good for health. They should eat something else.

With a ban on beef, don't you think other meat products like goat and chicken will become expensive and so will vegetables?

How do you plan to control inflation because there are a large number of people who eat beef and when you stop the sale of beef, those people will demand other meat items. What is the BJP doing about that?

'Muslims and Christians should understand that the cow is sacred to us. It is not good for health. They should eat something else.'

'Our mission is cow development. We want to produce rivers of milk. The cow should be sacred among people. It should be the national animal.'

The BJP's cow protection crusader Mayankeshwar Singh speaks to A Ganesh Nadar/Rediff.com

Mayankeshwar Singh is the national convenor of the Bharatiya Janata Party's cow development cell.

Last August he led a delegation to Prime Minister Narendra Modi seeking national legislation against cattle slaughter.

Singh, below, left, spoke to A Ganesh Nadar/Rediff.com about his crusade to save the "sacred" cow.

When most states were not slaughtering cows but only bulls and oxen, why are you insisting on banning the slaughter of bulls and oxen too? Hindus don't worship bulls and oxen.

We are protecting cows. We want to protect nature and the environment. We are interested in the progress of villages and employment in villages. You get milk and dairy products from cows.

Cow urine and dung can be used for so many purposes. They are a solution to many problems.

Cow protection is our aim. We have said it in our election slogans.

Why have you left out the water buffalo then? Why is there no ban on buffalo meat?

The cow is sacred, the buffalo is not.

The BJP is the only political party that supports cow development.

When you say cow dung is required for bio-gas, is buffalo dung not useful for the same bio-gas?

Yes, it can be used. But my mission is cow development. We want to produce rivers of milk.

The cow should be sacred among people. It should be the national animal.

There is a Rashtriya Gokul Mission Yojana. Rs 500 crore (Rs 5 billion) is being spent to take care of cows at the block level.

What about exports? Why are we not banning the export of beef?

Is it not wrong that you are depriving beef to Indians and killing the animals for export?

We are banning only cow slaughter. There should be no cow meat in beef exports.

It is the government's policy to allow beef exports and we are not objecting.

We are sending cattle to Bangladesh, but cows will not be allowed. We have all drunk cow's milk, we cannot kill it.

How can the State decide what people eat and what they should not eat?

We are only saying don't eat what we consider sacred. Millions of people believe this. The cow eats grass and gives us milk. People are drinking liquor and not milk.

Some of your supporters claim that pig slaughter is not allowed in Pakistan and therefore cow, ox and bull slaughter must not be allowed in India. We are a secular nation. How can you ban something which Muslims and Christians eat?

We are all human beings, Muslims and Christians included. They should understand that the cow is sacred to us. It is not good for health. They should eat something else.

With a ban on beef, don't you think other meat products like goat and chicken will become expensive and so will vegetables?

How do you plan to control inflation because there are a large number of people who eat beef and when you stop the sale of beef, those people will demand other meat items. What is the BJP doing about that?

When Hindus ate beef, India was NEVER conquered

'There is a remarkable link between the eating of beef (or at the very least, tolerating the eating of beef) and India being a superpower.'

'In India, whenever an empire was strong, religion took a back seat.'

'Alternatively, whenever religion asserted itself, the main empire of India crumbled...'

'By seeking to ban beef in every state that it rules, the BJP may well be taking India on the route to becoming a weakling,' warns Amberish K Diwanji.

The Bharatiya Janata Party-led government in Maharashtra has chosen to ban beef derived from oxen.

Many are up in arms against the move, saying it is aimed at harassing the Muslims and Christians, in particular, and against all non-vegetarians in general (including Hindus) since the cost of other meat will go up with the non-availability of beef in the market. Similar steps have been taken by BJP governments in other states.

For the BJP, banning the slaughter of bulls and oxen (the killing of cows was banned decades ago by the Congress) is part of its aim to assert the nation's Hindu identity.

But the BJP also styles itself as a nationalist government committed to turning India into a superpower. It often recalls a glorious Hindu past, harking back to the likes of Chandragupta Maurya, Ashoka, Chandragupta and Samudragupta, and Harshvardhan. This was in the millennium before Muslims hordes entered India (though Arabs had captured Sind in the 8th century).

The problem is that there is a remarkable link between the eating of beef (or at the very least, tolerating the eating of beef) and India being a superpower. Put another way: In India, whenever an empire was strong, religion took a back seat.

Alternatively, whenever religion asserted itself, the main empire of India crumbled and was soon destroyed by another power, either from within India or from outside India.

Today, by seeking to ban beef in every state that it rules and across India, the BJP may well be taking India on the route to becoming a weakling.

In ancient India, killing and consuming animals was part and parcel of life of all. Hindus then were overwhelmingly non-vegetarian. There are historians who have pointed out that back then Hindus ate beef. And back then, India was never conquered. Never!

Even the mighty Alexander (hailed as 'the Great' by Western historians) merely conquered the Punjab; his troops, fearful of facing the might of Magadha, preferred to return home. It was a Russian historian or military officer (regretfully I can't recall his name) who pointed out that rather than mutiny, as claimed by Western historians, Alexander's troops might have simply refused to fight Magadha after the bruising victory over Porus. The homesickness myth was merely created to explain away this embarrassing retreat across the Indus.

The Magadha Empire was followed by the Gupta Empire, and later that of Harshvardhan, all before or during the first millennium of the Common Era (CE), a time when, historians tell us, Hindus ate not just meat but also beef. Meat eating then was common practice (and caste was based on profession, not birth).

The very fact that Buddhism, which was born and blossomed in north India circa 200-300 BCE (Before CE), places absolutely no restriction on eating beef shows that back then, there was no restriction on eating beef among the Hindus, which practice Buddhism followed.

By contrast, Sikhism, born more than 1,500 years later in northwest India, accepted the then prevailing practice of not consuming beef (even as Sikhs devour other meat).

In contrast, Jainism, born around the same time as Buddhism, banned the killing of all animals, thus forever restricting itself to a narrow fringe of followers such as traders.

But do note, when consuming meat and beef was common practice, it was Hindu emperors who ruled over this huge subcontinent. Similarly, at the cusp of the first and second millennia CE, the Chola Empire, with meat-eating kings and soldiers, achieved unmatched glory in creating a maritime empire as far as Indonesia.

A later legatee of this empire, a Hindu based in Southeast Asia, would create the world's largest temple in faraway Angkor Wat of Kampuchea (Cambodia).

Towards the end of the first millennium CE, some changes took place in India. Buddhism waned and Hinduism, with a system of caste based on birth, reasserted itself. The revival was led by Adi Sankaracharya. Somewhere around this time, some castes chose to distinguish themselves from the Hindu masses by resorting to vegetarianism.

Brahmins, who had overcome the challenge of Buddhism, increasingly became vegetarian, along with the Banias (who were strongly influenced by the Jains). Why this happened is not yet very clear.

Simultaneously, there was born the ridiculous myth of vegetarian diet being 'superior' to the non-vegetarian diet, if only to help the Brahmin assert his own superiority over the other castes.

Now the coincidence: As vegetarianism spread among the influential sections of the Hindus, they suffered repeated defeats. Through the second millennium CE, Hindus would never rule over the larger part of India (till 1947), and would be subjugated to empires that were created by Turks, Afghans, Mughals, Portuguese, and lastly the British.

All of them meat eaters, all of them beef eaters. The only Hindus who came close to ruling India were the Marathas (who love their mutton!).

A professor of comparative religions, Arvind Sharma, has argued that Hindus turning away from beef actually happened after Hindus lost political power to the Muslims. Not killing the cow became a mark of identity and faith.

The theory is that Hindus stopped eating beef as a cultural assertion and reaction to the presence of Muslims in their midst, similar to Brahmins turning completely vegetarian to stand out among fellow Hindus.

There is merit in this argument: One tends to assert one's identity when feeling threatened. Just see how Indians abroad behave!

The rise and fall of empires is much more than just diet. When a Rajput defeated a fellow Rajput, they both shared similar diets, as did the different Muslims kings who fought each other (Turks, Afghans, Mughals), and later when the Portuguese and British faced each other.

Many, many factors go into the rise and fall of empires (it is an entire subject by itself). The better known reasons include politics, population, economic power, and military prowess.

There are also other reasons such as the role of religion (usually negative), social factors, and technological advancement (which, in itself, is a reflection of society).

But what is undeniable about the history of India is that those who ruled India for most of the first and second millennia, regardless of religion, ate meat. And beef. Let us ponder that thought as we go about banning various forms of beef.

Yet, eating or not eating beef is not really the issue. It is merely a reflection of the tolerance that the ruling class shows for the people and their faiths. What is undeniable in India is the inverse link between a strong State and secularism (howsoever defined).

In India, whenever religion has asserted itself, the State (empire or kingdom) has crumbled (sooner or later).

Alternatively, whenever a ruler kept religion (and religious practices howsoever important for the followers of that faith) at bay, that kingdom became an empire, and the empire in turn prospered.

Thus, Asoka's turn to Buddhism led to his empire ending within years of his demise. Akbar's secularism saw him create a strong Mughal empire, one of the mightiest in the world then (exactly what we aspire for India today), but with a few decades of his death, Aurangzeb's religious policies saw the Mughal empire crumble from within.

Less well known is that the Peshwas's increased religiosity is probably what stopped the Marathas from replacing the Mughals.

For instance, before the Third Battle of Panipat, the Marathas had in tow some 30,000 pilgrims keen to visit the temple towns of north India. Pilgrims accompanying an army! Then, when cholera broke out in the enemy camp and the best strategy would have been to attack (in the December 1760-January 1761 period), religious considerations about an auspicious time meant the Marathas waited till the day of Makar Sankranti.

How can religion decide battle tactics? A far cry from the time when Shivaji decided his battle plans based on intelligence, not religion. The Portuguese failed to build an empire because they were too busy converting people to Christianity, and turning the general public against them.

By contrast, the East India Company kept religion at bay even as its plunder activities turned to empire building.

In that context, the increasing Hinduisation of India, the determination of some politicians to assert the Hindu religion within India, is the recipe for the weakening of India. If that should happen it is just a matter of time before India weakens internally.

THE EXAMPLE OF GUJARAT

Gujaratis are perceived as being overwhelmingly vegetarian. They are not; but the dominant castes, such as the Jains, Banias, Brahmins, and Patidars are vegetarian. When under British rule, as the trading class of Gujaratis (vegetarian) set up trading post across India and the world, they gave the impression of a vegetarian Gujarat.

M K Gandhi, a Modh Bania, and Vallabhbhai Patel, a Patidar, further cemented the notion of Gujaratis as vegetarian. It is true that many Gujaratis are vegetarian. But not all! And no one can deny that Gujaratis are one of India's most successful communities in the commercial world.

While the Gujaratis's commercial success is undeniable, their military history is marked with failure. Gujarat (or what is now Gujarat) is one of India's most conquered states, having come under the Rajputs, Turks, Afghans, Mughals, Marathas, and finally the British. Excluding the British, the others over time became a part of the state.

While Gujarati society makes a virtue of being vegetarian, it has not helped fend off invaders.

There is nothing wrong in being vegetarian. It is every person's personal choice. There is, however, everything wrong in believing, and propagating, howsoever latently, the notion that vegetarian societies or people are superior. Or that a country is better for it.

The history of India, and Gujarat, shows that those not tolerating beef or meat, sooner or later, come under the rule of invaders. Let those who seek to ban beef realise that behind great powers have been meat consumers.

How black money finds its way out of India, and how it comes back as white

 In February 2008, R Prasad, the then chairman of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), led a team of tax sleuths to Port Louis, the capital city of Mauritius.

Backed by a team from the ministry of external affairs, Prasad made an attempt to convince Mauritius officials to re-negotiate the double tax avoidance agreement (DTAA), which was resulting in massive tax losses to India

Prasad's attempt was unsuccessful, but what he discovered in the process was startling: a handful of persons acted as directors for about 30,000 companies located in that island nation. Also, companies there exist only on paper, as addresses of many of those begin with a mere post box number.

"Mauritius and many other tax havens act as buffers to bring back India's black money as white.

And the challenge before the investigators is to establish the criminality of those involved in such activities," says Prasad, who retired as CBDT chairman six years ago.

Now, the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) on black money wants such tax treaties to be re-drafted, a move that will put the government in a spot.

Only this week, a reluctant government had to hand over to the apex court a complete list of 627 Indians who have accounts in HSBC Bank, Geneva.

"The debate so far has been what comes first: investment or tax? Is India ready to sacrifice investments worth billions of dollars for the sake of some tax gain? So far as Mauritius is concerned, any retreat from India's side will allow China to woo the island nation," says a finance ministry official who did not want to be named, explaining why New Delhi hasn't been assertive with Mauritius, a nation where Indian defence forces harbour strategic interests.

In Black and White

While tax havens like Mauritius will help black money come back into the country as white, Indians continue to send illicit money abroad.

This is done through various methods, hawala transactions — where money is transferred abroad without any real movement of funds — being one of them although, according to a finance ministry white paper on black money released two years ago, hawala transactions have actually dwindled over the past decade.

"In recent years, after the 9/11 incident in the US, due to intense scrutiny of banking transactions, enhanced security checks at airports and ports and relaxation of exchange controls, transfer of money through hawala has reduced significantly," says the report. "...increasing pressure on financial operators and banks to report cash transactions has also helped in curbing hawala transactions."

However, there are other methods to siphon black money out of the country, two of which are manipulation of export invoices and setting up of trusts abroad.

Two income-tax officials told ET Magazine that a large number of the accounts of the 627 names based on data stolen by an employee of HSBC, Geneva, would be of such trusts. The modus operandi adopted here is as follows: black money moves abroad through routes like hawala.

Then a trust is formed in, let's assume, the Netherlands. The trustees in this case will be Dutch nationals, but the beneficiaries will be relatives of an Indian back home who put in the initial corpus.

"But we can initiate a probe only when money gets reflected in the accounts of the beneficiaries," explains one of the tax officials.

As the incometax department and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) will now work under SIT, one can expect more urgency in the mission to bring back unaccounted money. Yet, genuine hurdles may come in the way of that endeavour.

The classic example of such a hurdle is seen in the case of Pune-based stud farm-owner Hasan Ali Khan, who was raided by the I-T department seven years ago. Documents and data in his laptop established that he had a Swiss bank account with a whopping $8 billion (roughly Rs 48,000 crore) in deposits. Ali was sent to jail, but the ED that probes money laundering cases found out from the Swiss authorities that Ali's accounts had been emptied.

The multi-billion dollar question then: how many of the 627 whose names exist in a sealed cover would have done the same?

How a two-year-old firm is hitting a daily turnover of Rs 4,000 crore today

If the lives of start-up founders are about sweat, blood and tears, no one told the trio at Mumbai-based discount broking firm RKSV.

"To be honest, we have had a considerably smooth ride," says Raghu Kumar, one of the three promoters, briefly describing in a matter-of-fact tone their two-year journey as entrepreneurs. He means it.

Rather, he prefers to let the numbers speak. Within two years of starting operations and largely operating in a dull market, RKSV is now clocking daily turnover of Rs 4,000 crore.

That's about 1.3 per cent of total turnover of NSE, in a business where even the leaders are at 5-6 per cent. For the US-bred trio — Raghu, brother Ravi and their friend Shrinivas Viswanath — it was a move by the Indian capital market regulator to allow algorithmic trading that encouraged them to dip their toes in Indian waters.

And when the Securities and Exchange Board of India allowed the direct market access (DMA) facility in April 2008, which gives investors direct access to a stock exchange's trading system, they decided to put in both their feet.

Prior to 2009, their only connection with India was the occasional visit to meet relatives. "DMA was the reason we came to India. We saw a lot of opportunities and wanted to explore them," says Raghu, a University of Illinois graduate in actuarial science and finance.

The concept of algorithmic, or high frequency, trading was not alien to them. Before coming to India, the brothers were active in the US foreign exchange markets between 2006 and 2008.

But, in October 2008, they had to wind up after the global financial markets imploded; trading opportunities had dried up, liquidity had shrunk and spreads had widened enough. By then, however, they made a killing of about $2 million, giving them the self-belief — and the capital — to explore other business ideas.

Against The Tide

In 2009, Raghu and Ravi, along with Viswanath, a computer engineer in New York, shifted base to India. Although the Indian markets were alien to them, funding a venture was never a problem.

Raghu and Ravi spent the first two years trading with their own money, which helped them gauge the pulse of the market here. Meanwhile, they secured a membership to the Bombay Stock Exchange, which had slashed its fees significantly to rope in more members.

After making good money in the two years in proprietary trading, they saw stockbroking as a natural progression. But to set up shop in India, at the time they did, was a contrarian call.

Disappointed by the previous government's tardy attitude towards business and economic policies, business confidence in India had hit its nadir. Foreign investors were wary and several nonresident Indians (NRIs) were returning to countries where they held passports. The broking industry was bleeding too. While competition in institutional broking business was fierce, retail investors had deserted the markets.

But there was still a segment of market participants that was underserved: traders, for whom high brokerage costs was making it difficult to make money. "We realised there were many traders who did not have cheaper options to trade," says Kumar. "What shocked us was the number of branches that retail brokerages had, which is not the case in the US."

It did not take too much time for RKSV's business to pick up as its relatively-older rival Zerodha had taken the plunge by then. Although there was little that RKSV could do to hold an edge in terms of technology, it managed to attract clients by launching the 'unlimited trading model', where traders can transact for as many times at a fixed cost.

Currently, RKSV has about 20,000 clients. They are serviced by about 50 employees from its office in Mumbai's emerging financial services hub, Bandra-Kurla Complex. Raghu said the firm is looking to double its client base to about 40,000 in 2014-15. That's not bad for a two-year-old, first-generation firm.

STARTED: 2012 (retail trading)

FOUNDERS: Raghu Kumar, Ravi Kumar, Shrinivas Viswanath

CLIENTS: 20,000

DAILY TRADING TURNOVER: Rs 4,000 crore

REVENUES: Not disclosed

EMPLOYEES: 50

Why are super-rich Indians buying helicopters and why they are different from their counterparts in West

Helicopters cost between $1.2 million and $15 million, depending on the size and type of machine. An hour of flying a chopper, accounting for insurance, landing fees, fuel and maintenance costs, and again depending on whether it has single or twin engines and its seating capacity, could set back its billionaire owners by `50,000 to Rs 1.75 lakh. Peanuts, as our finance minister would say.

In any case, as BS Singh Deo, managing director of Bell Helicopter India says, expenses related to helicopters are more than offset by cutting down the travel time.

Pradeep Srivastava, a helicopter pilot, says almost every day he encounters people wishing to buy copters. "They are taken aback only for a moment when they hear the price."

That's not to suggest they are reckless investors. "When Indians make an investment, they want to be sure it pays off," says Estill. "They look at the value they are getting. They want proof that the copter will operate as per the promised costs. They want to know how we will support the copter. They want us to train their personnel," he says.

Different Customers

Helicopters, from the accounts of Estill and his colleague Mick Maurer, president of Sikorsky Military Systems, offer a peek into the vanities and quirks of their owners. Maurer says one of his customers - a head of state from West Asia - wanted a shower in his copter. "When he came off the copter to meet people, he wished to be refreshed and clean. I said: 'Yes sir, you want a shower, you got one'."

Chopper Clients: Some of the private helicopter owners in India

Sikorsky has a customer in the UK who goes hunting with friends to Scotland in a chopper. Another client flies from building to building in a chopper for fear of kidnapping, says Maurer. Sikorsky, says Maurer, is never short of such "interesting" clients. With bankers and celebrities in New York, the imagination can run wild with interiors, he says.

Indians are not as demanding. Nor have they embraced choppers except to save time and for convenience. Their needs are limited to a television, a refrigerator and video games for the children.

One of Sikorsky's clients happens to be India's richest man, Mukesh Ambani, the chairman of Reliance Industries. Ambani's new home, Antilia, has three helipads. Sikorsky executives say Mukesh's wife Nita Ambani was very involved with designing the interiors of the two choppers. "We customised the interiors the way Mrs Ambani wanted," says Walia.

The interiors can also be configured for comfort with leather-clad seating accompanied by a drinks cabinet, a la luxury sedan of the skies. If these are unexciting demands compared with the West, they are a testament to a still fledgling market.

Diverse Clientele

The typical chopper client in India hails from businesses as diverse as petroleum and real estate. The majority belong to the offshore oil business like Reliance Industries' Mukesh Ambani and the Ruias of Essar. RWSI's Sridharan says at least 25 copters are being used daily to reach offshore oil platforms. Oil has long been the primary segment, but now corporate travel is driving sales.

Big business groups like the Ruias rely on choppers to fly top managers for strategic meetings. "Everybody is running a tight schedule," says a spokesman. Even smaller companies hire copters from charter companies for factory visits.

Chopper activity, says Airworks' Menon, is no longer confined to Mumbai, Surat and Hazira. It has moved to places like Bhuvaneshwar and Guwahati, he says. "In a sense, copters are driving industrial growth," he says.

Companies also use choppers for medical evacuations. An AgustaWestland copter was used to provide air ambulance cover at the inaugural Indian Formula 1 race last year. Still, copter use boils down to time and convenience.

The super affluent have the money, but lack time. They might want to fly to 3-4 sites a day. They have to be back for a business meeting or return home by evening. How long would that take by road?

Helicopters are, in that sense, godsend. They save time with their twin engines, plane-like streamlining and a top speed of around 350 kmph. Choppers can fly at night, bad weather, over open water and across built-up areas.

Easy Go, Easy Come

The important thing to note, according to Walia, is that people are going from point A to point B, completely bypassing the road network. "So if Mr Ambani is going from Mumbai to his refinery in Jamnagar in a copter, he can have people with him, he can have his meeting and by the time he reaches after an hour and a half... he's already got his feedback, he's already made up his mind about a decision."

Not only is there plenty of room on board to do business - there's enough leg space so that you don't have to knock each other's knees, says Walia - the interiors of a chopper have been "made quiet" so that people can talk without having to shout.

5 Smallest Airports Around the World

Juancho E Yrausquin Airport

Serves: Saba (The Netherlands), Caribbean
Airlines: Windward Islands Airways
Runways: One

Dutch-owned Caribbean island Saba is home to Juancho E. Yrausquin Airport which boasts the world’s shortest commercial runway. At only 400 metres, just a quarter of a mile, the runway is only slightly longer than the average aircraft carrier and jet aircraft are banned from using the runway through fear of over or under shooting the strip and hitting the ocean.

The only airline currently serving the airport is Winair which operates daily flights to nearby islands Saint Martin and Saint Eustatius. The flight to Saint Martin takes just 12 minutes. For the airport's Wikipedia site click here.

Moshoeshoe I International Airport

Serves: Maseru, Kingdom of Lesotho

Airlines: South African Airways (international), Mission Aviation Fellowship (domestic flights)

Runways: Two

The Kingdom of Lesotho, entirely landlocked by South Africa, is served by Moshoeshoe I airport. While officially referred to as an international airport, the only non-domestic flights are to Johannesburg with South African Airways.

Passengers can while away the hours waiting for their flight in the airport’s gift shop, restaurant, bar and newsagent. The airport sits at an elevation of 1,630 metres and the shorter of its two runways is just over 1000 metres. For more information click here.

Luang Prabang Airport, Laos

Serves: Luang Prabang, Laos

Airlines: Bangkok Airways, Lao Airlines, Tonlesap Airlines, Vietnam Airlines

Runways: One

The airport's runway currently measures a modest 2,200 metres, although an extension is planned to begin this year, which will see the airport capable of accommodating most large-sized planes except the Airbus 380. In the meantime, those frequenting the airport can enjoy shopping, restaurant and currency exchange facilities. For more information click here.

Morgantown Municipal Airport

Serves: Morgantown, West Virginia, USA

Airlines: United Airways (operated by Colgan Air)

Runways: Two

Morgantown Municipal is used primarily for general aviation but is also served by one commercial airline that connects the town with Clarksburg, West Virginia and Washington Dulles International Airport in Washington, DC.

Not only is there free parking, free coffee and wifi, but patrons can also enjoy lunch in the restaurant - recarpeted in 2008 - while watching planes take-off from the 844-metre runway. For more information click here.

Barra Airport

Serves: Barra Island, Outer Hebrides, Scotland

Airlines: Flybe

Runways: Three

Barra’s Traigh Mhor beach is the only beach runway in the world to handle scheduled airline services. Despite being little more than a shack on the beach, Barra Airport offers travellers ample parking, car hire facilities and public transport serving the rest of the island.

Flight times vary with the tide so the airport is open for no more than two and a half hours between Monday and Saturday. The shortest of the airport’s three runways is a mere 680 metres. For more information click here.

By Andy Tweddle

If you have any pocket-sized airports you'd like to add to the list, then please leave your comments below.

Bookmark with:

Top 10 Smallest Armies in the World

Most of us could have a pretty good crack at naming the world’s 10 biggest armies, but what about the smallest armies? In fact what about naming the countries that don’t have any army at all.

As well as having small armies these countries have small populations and not a lot of land to protect. The armies are no doubt useful for a range of security matters, drug enforcement, border protection and other illegal activities, but protecting the country against a direct attack by a sizeable enemy is going to stretch them.

10. Bahamas

Active Military Personnel: 1,500
Population: 320,000
Where: Caribbean, barely 200 km’s south east of Miami, USA.

The Royal Bahamas Defence Force is made up solely of the country’s Navy, although the Navy is responsible for the country’s military aircraft and works with the Bahaman Police on internal matters.

The Bahamas is part of the British Commonwealth of Nations and retains the Queen as the head of state. The British presence here goes back hundreds of years and the country formally became a colony of the British Empire in 1718 in part because of efforts to control pirates in the area. (Blackbeard used the Bahamas as a safe haven).

Nowadays Sean Connery is but one of many famous identities that call the Bahamas home. He can rest easy that the sea borders are well guarded by the Bahama’s strikingly large military force.

The Bahamas certainly has a good looking army. 

9. The Gambia

Active Military Personnel: 2,500
Population: 1,800,000
Where: West Africa, a sliver of land along each side of the Gambia River in Senegal.

The Gambia, or the Republic of Gambia, was a British colony up until its independence in 1965. It is now part of the Commonwealth of Nations but has a Presidential style of government in which the President is the head of state as well as the head of government.

In the context of this list Gambia has a big defence force and it regularly assigns contingents of troops to joint operations around Africa and in other parts of the world.

There are sources that point to the lack of balance and accountability in the relationship between the government of Gambia and the control of the armed forces as being a pretty major problem. The occasional coup attempt and subsequent arrests and, more recently, executions, lends that view some credibility.

The Gambia Independence March Past 2013: 

8. Barbados

Active Military Personnel: 1,000
Population: 283,000
Where: Caribbean, about 400km’s north east of Venezuela

The Barbados Defence Force (BDF) was established in 1979 and is responsible for internal security as well as external security. The Royal Barbados Police Force is a part of the BDF structure.

Details are sparse, but the figure of around 1,000 military personnel looks accurate when we consider the number of battalions in the regular forces, the Coast Guard and the Air Wing.

The British had a garrison stationed here going back to the 1600’s and many of the original buildings are now World Heritage sites.

We particularly like the fact that the Air Wing of the BDF looks to comprise one Cessna plane. It’s not a big country so the Cessna would be a handy thing to have for a quick skirt around the coast.

The Barbados army has quite possibly the coolest, hippest military band in the world.

7. Luxembourg

Active Military Personnel: 990
Population: 538,000
Where: A European country bordering France, Belgium and Germany.

The Luxembourg Army is a volunteer force that operates under the civilian control of the Grand Duke of Luxembourg and the Chief of Defence who both adopt the military rank of General while on Defence duties.

Although it’s a small force, the Luxembourg Army actively engages in peace keeping duties and other multinational engagements around the world, occasionally under Belgian operational command.

The commentary isn’t in English, but they’re running around in the night with rifles. You’ll get the gist of it. 

6. Seychelles

Active Military Personnel: 900
Population: 90,800
Where: Indian Ocean, about 1,200km’s south east of Somalia

Information about the Seychelles army is surprisingly difficult to find. This tiny island nation (actually something over 100 islands make up the Seychelles) is less than a quarter the size of New York City.

Although the Seychelles was a British colony up until independence in 1976, it has been a socialist republic since a bloodless coup in 1977. Much of the available information on the Seychelles military is centred on foreign powers. For example, Russian announced just a few weeks ago that it intends to build a military base in the Seychelles.

However they clearly do have an army there and we believe the number of active personnel is in the ball park.

The Seychelles Military on parade. It must be their entire defence force. 

5. Tonga

Active Military Personnel: 700
Population:
Where: South Pacific Ocean, about 700 km’s south east of Fiji.

The Tonga Defense Service has a long history going back to WW1 where Tonga was a part of the New Zealand Expeditionary Force. The formal Defence Force entity came into being at the start of WWII and carried out operations with New Zealand and the US in the Solomon Islands and other parts of the South Pacific.

More recently they have been involved in the Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts.

Over the last five years the TDS has expanded its military strength to around 700 personnel along with infrastructure such as barracks, a new mess hall and general military equipment like rifles and things.

Tongan marines do their traditional dance. They are a big unit. Don’t practice hand to hand combat with them. 

4. Sao Tome and Principe

Active Military Personnel: 600
Population: 187,000
Where: Gulf of Guinea about 300 km’s off the coast of Gabon, Africa.

Sao Tome and Principe is the smallest Portuguese speaking country in the world and the second smallest country in Africa after the Seychelles, which is also a small group of island but in the Indian Ocean, not the Atlantic Ocean like Sao Tome and Principe.

The army is variously described as being too small to be effective, rife with corruption, and hampered by an extremely humid and wet tropical climate. On top of that poor salaries and living conditions have led to several failed coups over the last twenty years.

A new military chief has just been sworn in to focus on “military discipline in the barracks” after a presidential honour guard failed to show up to give President Pinto da Costa a proper farewell as he left the country on a state visit.

Nevertheless, in the context of our list this is a reasonably large force and they no doubt have a strong and proud culture.

We’re not sure if they are displaying their military hardware or having a second hand sale. Perhaps if you understand Portuguese you’ll be able to find out. 

3. Antigua and Barbuda

Active Military Personnel: 170
Population: 90,000
Where: Caribbean, about 400km’s south east of Puerto Rico

The Antigua and Barbuda Defence Force (ABDF) definitely exists and the figure of 170 appears to be pretty accurate, but like a lot of these small nations Antigua and Barbuda doesn’t like to talk about its military too much. When it’s the second smallest in the world I guess that’s fair enough.

We do know that new recruits go through a pretty extensive basic training process. The course is five months long which is pretty long as far as basic training courses go. The recruits learn marching drills, minor field tactics (learning major field tactics would probably be a bit of a waste), basic security, arms training and 30 hours of swimming.

The swimming intrigues us as you would expect soldiers would spend most of their time on land. As the Coast Guard is part of the ABDF and the islands have a lot of coast line it seems rational enough.

Military exercises in the Caribbean seem to have the same level of urgency that is apparent in other aspects of their lives in those gorgeous, tranquil isles. 

2. Saint Kitts and Nevis

Active Military Personnel: 150
Population: 53,500
Where: Caribbean, about 300km’s south east of Puerto Rico

Reports vary on how big the Saint Kitts and Nevis army is. The official Government website makes no mention of their army although it does have press releases referring to their Defence Force. One welcomes 25 new soldiers, another talks about a new male barrack that can accommodate 200 soldiers.

Based on this evidence the country clearly has an army. Their Coast Guard falls within the Defence Force structure so this boosts the numbers a bit. As an aside, the US recently gave the SKN Coast Guard two boats, accompanying towing trailers, spare parts and a ‘4×4 Ford F350 pick-up truck’. Handy having the pick-up truck.

Whatever the exact numbers, the army is small. Very small.

Forget the army here, it’s so small there’s virtually nothing to see anyway. Just have a look around the islands. 

1. Countries with No Army

Active Military Personnel: 0

These countries don’t have an army. Some of them have a small paramilitary force, civil guard or similar, but it’s just not the same as having something you can call an army.

Costa Rica, Iceland, Mauritius, Monaco, Panama and Vanuatu.

This is what a country looks like when it has no army (except Iceland):

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

OddSpot

After victory in the Costa Rica civil war in 1948, President Jose Figueres Ferrer disbanded the countries military forces and enshrined his act in the constitution. The budget that had been spent on the military was thereafter spent on education and culture instead. They kept on a police force for security purposes.

So there’s a precedent.
______

Haiti abolished its military forces in 1995 but late last year was starting them up again. 41 recruits returned to the country last September after training in Ecuador. The aim is to get military engineers to help the country continue its rebuilding efforts after the devastating earthquake three years ago.

None of the new recruits will have a weapon but they may get handguns in a few years if the recruits buy the weapons themselves, or the government gets financing for them. It’s a pity; they might have made the list if their army had had guns.