Research and Analysis Wing

The Cabinet Secretariat Research and Analysis Wing [RAW], India's most powerful intelligence agency, is India’s external intelligence agency. RAW has become an effective instrument of India's national power, and has assumed a significant role in formulating India's domestic and foreign policies. RAW has engaged in disinformation campaigns, espionage and sabotage against Pakistan and other neighboring countries. RAW has enjoyed the backing of successive Indian governments in these efforts. Working directly under the Prime Minister, the structure, rank, pay and perks of the Research & Analysis Wing are kept secret from Parliament.

Current policy debates in India have generally failed to focus on the relative priority given by RAW to activities directed against India's neighbors versus attention to domestic affairs to safeguard India's security and territorial integrity. The RAW has had limited success in dealing with separatist movements in Manipur and Tripura in the northeast, Tamil Nadu in the south, and Punjab and Kashmir in the northwestern part of the country. Indian sources allege the CIA has penetrated freedom fighters in Kashmir and started activities in Kerala, Karnataka, and other places, along with conducting economic and industrial espionage activities in New Delhi.

In 1968 India established this special branch of its intelligence service specifically targeted on Pakistan. The formation of RAW was based on the belief that Pakistan was supplying weapons to Sikh terrorists, and providing shelter and training to the guerrillas in Pakistan. Pakistan has accused the Research and Analysis Wing of sponsoring sabotage in Punjab, where RAW is alleged to have supported the Seraiki movement, providing financial support to promote its activities in Pakistan and organizing an International Seraiki Conference in Delhi in November-December 1993. RAW has an extensive network of agents and anti-government elements within Pakistan, including dissident elements from various sectarian and ethnic groups of Sindh and Punjab. Published reports allege that as many as 35,000 RAW agents have entered Pakistan between 1983-93, with 12,000 are working in Sindh, 10000 in Punjab 8000 in North West Frontier Province and 5000 in Balochistan. As many as 40 terrorist training camps at Rajasthan, East Punjab, Held Kashmir, Uttar Pradesh and other parts of India are run by the RAW's Special Service Bureau (SSB).

Throughout the Afghan War RAW was responsible for the planning and execution of terrorist activities in Pakistan to deter Pakistan from support of Afghan liberation movement against India's ally, the Soviet Union. The assistance provided to RAW by the KGB enabled RAW to arrange terrorist attacks in Pakistani cities throughout the Afghan War. The defeat of the Soviet Union in Afghanistan did not end the role of RAW in Pakistan, with reports that suggest that India has established a training camp in the town of Qadian, in East Punjab, where non-Muslim Pakistanis are trained for terrorist activities. Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has blamed India for funding the current upsurge of terrorism in Pakistan, and senior ministers have blamed the Research and Analysis Wing for the sectarian violence between Shias and Sunnis which has resulted in thousands of deaths every year.

The Government of Pakistan frequently assigns responsibility for terrorist activity to the Indian Government, even when no evidence can be verified. It is evidently in the interest of the Pakistani government to blame terrorist actions on external rather than internal sources, just as it would be in the interest of Indian services to obscure their hand in such actions. Terrorist activities in Pakistan attributed to the clandestine activities of Indian and Afghan intelligence agencies include:

* A car bomb explosion in Saddar area of Peshawar on 21 December 1995 caused the deaths of 37 persons and injured over 50 others.
* An explosion at Shaukat Khanum Hospital on 14 April 1996, claimed the lives of seven persons and injured to over 34 others.
* A bus traveling from Lahore to Sahiwal was blown up at Bhai Pheru on 28 April 1996, causing the deaths of 44 persons on the spot and injuring 30 others.
* An explosion in a bus near the Sheikhupura hospital killed 9 persons and injured 29 others on 08 May 1996.
* An explosion near Alam chowk, Gujranwala on 10 June 1996 killed 3 persons and injured 11 others.
* A bomb exploded on a bus on GT Road near Kharian on 10 June 1996, killing 2 persons and injuring 10 others.
* On 27 June 1996, an explosion opposite Madrassah Faizul Islam, Faizabad, Rawalpindi, killed 5 persons and injured over 50 others.
* A bomb explosion in the Faisalabad railway station passenger lounge on 08 July 1996 killed 3 persons and injured 20 others.

RAW has responded to Pakistani arms and training for Muslim militants in the disputed region of Kashmir state. RAW allegedly executed a hijacking of an Indian Airliner to Lahore in 1971 which was attributed to the Kashmiris, to give a terrorist dimension to the Kashmiri national movement. However soon the extent of RAW's involvement was made public.

RAW has a long history of activity in Bangladesh, supporting both secular forces and the area's Hindu minority. The involvement of RAW in East Pakistan is said to date from the 1960s, when RAW promoted dissatisfaction against Pakistan in East Pakistan, including funding Mujibur Rahmanh's general election in 1970 and providing training and arming the Mukti Bahini.

During the course of its investigation the Jain Commission received testimony on the official Indian support to the various Sri Lankan Tamil armed groups in Tamil Nadu. From 1981, RAW and the Intelligence Bureau established a network of as many as 30 training bases for these groups in India. Centers were also established at the high-security military installation of Chakrata, near Dehra Dun, and in the Ramakrishna Puram area of New Delhi. This clandestine support to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), some of whom were on the payroll of RAW, was later suspended. Starting in late 1986 the Research and Analysis Wing focused surveillance on the LTTE which was expanding ties with Tamil Nadu separatist groups. Rajiv Gandhi sought to establish good relations with the LTTE, even after the Indian Peace Keeping Force [IPKF] experience in Sri Lanka. But the Indian intelligence community failed to accurately assess the character of the LTTE and its orientation India and its political leaders. The LTTE assassination of Rajiv Gandhi was apparently motivated by fears of a possible re-induction of the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) in Sri Lanka and a crackdown on the LTTE network in Tamil Nadu.

The RAW and the Ministry of External Affairs are provided Rs 25 crore annually as "discretionary grants" for foreign influence operations. These funds have supported organisations fighting Sikh and Kashmiri separatists in the UK, Canada and the US. An extensive network of Indian operatives is controlled by the Indian Embassy in Washington DC. The Indian embassy's covert activities are reported to include the infitration of US long distance telephone carriers by Indian operatives, with access to all kinds of information, to r blackmail relatives of US residents living in India. In 1996 an Indian diplomat was implicated in a scandal over illegal funding of political candidates in the US. Under US law foreign nationals are prohibited from contributing to federal elections. The US District Court in Baltimore sentenced Lalit H Gadhia, a naturalised US citizen of Indian origin, to three months imprisonment. Gadhia had confessed that he worked as a conduit between the Indian Embassy and various Indian-American organisations for funnelling campaign contributions to influence US lawmakers. Over $46,000 from the Indian Embassy was distributed among 20 Congressional candidates. The source of the cash used by Gadhia was Devendra Singh, a RAW official assigned to the Indian Embassy in Washington. Illicit campaign money received in 1995 went to Democratic candidates including Sens. Charles S. Robb (D-Va.), Paul S. Sarbanes (D -Md.) and Reps. Benjamin L. Cardin (D-Md.) and Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.).

Source : http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/world/india/raw.htm

India to offer military package to Maldives

As part of the overall strategy to provide military aid to Indian Ocean Region (IOR) countries, and prevent China from further spreading its influence in the region, India will hand over a small warship and other supplies to Maldives next month.

Defence minister Pranab Mukherjee will be travelling to Male in mid-April to "transfer" INS Tillanchang, a 260-tonne fast-attack craft commissioned in 2001, to Maldives.

The military package will also include Rs 6-crore for training, material and technical assistance. Moreover, an Indian Navy survey ship, INS Darshak, will conduct a hydrographic survey in the waters around Maldives.

INS Tillanchang, with a deployment range of 3,600-km, is designed for fast and covert operations against smugglers, gun-runners and terrorists. "Our country's central location within IOR makes us a major stake-holder in the security and stability of the region," said an officer.

India has taken several steps to build bridges with IOR nations, which range from joint patrols with Indonesian and Sri Lankan navies and exercises with Singapore and Oman to providing seaward security for international summits in Mozambique.

Maldives constitutes an important part of this strategy since China is making persistent moves in the region as part of its military diplomacy. China, in fact, plans to establish a full-fledged naval base in Marao, one of the islands of Maldives, by 2010.

India has always been willing to help Maldives in times of crisis. Indian paratroopers and naval warships, for instance, were rushed to Maldives in November 1988 by the Rajiv Gandhi government under Operation Cactus to thwart the coup attempt against the Abdul Gayoom government.

10 things I hate about India

I liked this article published on Rediff.com website. The author have pointed out exact points where India need to improve. Please remember that this author is a foreigner and written this article with his point of view.


Original Author - Claude Arpi

Many years ago a friend of mine wrote a book, The Wonder that IS India. Both of us have lived more for than 30 years in the Land of the Bharatiyas and share a love for this nation. When he showed me the manuscript of his book, I had pointed out that his representation of India was too rosy and suggested one more chapter -- 'The Horror that is India'. I think he did.
I have the same feelings for India today: 95 per cent is good, but there are some aspects that I am still not able to swallow, even after all these years. I have listed ten of them. Even if it does not change anything, at least some of my frustrations will be released while penning them down.
Before I begin, I must first say that during a recent visit to France, it was a pleasant surprise to see that India's image is fast changing in the West. When I left France in the early 1970s to settle in India, my family and friends considered it a shocking decision. To leave France, a 'developed' country and emigrate to the end of the world to a 'land of misery' populated 'by elephants and cobras' was unimaginable!

I was told that for a student in France today, it was of great added-value on his CV, if he had undergone training or internship in India. This 'Indian' wave has been reinforced since Mittal Steel tried to purchase Arcelor, the jewel of the French steel industry.
Though the nation has grown and matured over the last few decades, unfortunately not all domains have followed the same evolution.

Here is my list of the 10 things I still can't 'digest' about India:

1. Power cuts: While typing this article, the electricity board cut off the power supply. The reason -- a storm last night which lasted for 15 to 20 minutes. 'As a precautionary measure' the officials very compassionately disconnected vast areas from the network in the night and the following morning.
Being in rural Tamil Nadu, these officials want to protect us from broken wires due to fallen trees (it could electrocute passersby, they say). While I appreciate their reasoning, I was surprised to see that during the cyclonic rains in New Orleans last year, though thousands perished, electricity was not switched off. Indian officials will tell you that the US is a rich and developed country, not comparable to India. Where is the connection?

2. Indian babus: One could write volumes on the famous babus of India. They run one of the largest bureaucracies in the world, but have not been able to change their mindset.
A particularly bothersome aspect is that their laws often come from antiquated rules and regulations that nobody knows of. The consequence is what we call red-tapism, though for them it is 'implementing the letter, the law of the land'. But what about its spirit? In any case, the law has always to 'follow its own course'.
A few years ago, a diligent minister found hundreds such laws and regulations dating back to the British. In the era of modern technology and communications, this is preposterous.
Another aspect that irritates me about the bureaucracy is that babus never respond to letters. Probably they consider themselves to be the government's servants, not 'civil' servants and therefore find no need to reply to ordinary citizens.

3. No access to historical documents: Though a better understanding of the history of the subcontinent could be one of the keys to disentangle difficult problems such as the Kashmir issue, today nobody can access primary sources. They are locked away in the vaults of the Nehru Memorial Library or the almirahs of South Block.
All those who have tried to access historical documents since India's independence will tell you that till the end of babudom, one bureaucrat or another will ensure that you do not access the dusty files. Without fail, you will be courteously informed that India's security and integrity will be endangered if these precious documents are opened to the public. It is sad that Indians are not entitled to study their past (though they can always visit archives in the West to know more about India!)

4. Discrimination against the white tourist: Something particularly irritating for a 'white man' is that wherever he goes in India, he has to pay a special rate. Whether he visits the Taj Mahal where the 'white' tourist has to cough up Rs 750 to see the mausoleum, or a national museum, or even hotels or airlines, there is a true racial discrimination.
Rates are often ten times higher for those who have a 'white' or 'yellow' (Japanese) skin. Those who have made these rules do not understand that this policy harms India's image.
The desire to make a quick buck from the so-called rich tourists leaves a bitter taste in the mouth of the visitors who in any case would have spent their budget during the stay in India. To my knowledge, India must be the only nation in the world implementing these separate rates.

5. Paranoia about maps: Another strange thing in India is the paranoia about maps. Several years ago I visited the Tawang district of Arunachal Pradesh. One day I was invited to the office of a local tahsildar. To my astonishment, the poor babu did not have a map of the area under his jurisdiction. He only had a vague sketch of the district. When I expressed surprise, he explained that maps were 'classified' and only the army was authorised to use them.
Is it not foolish to believe that the Chinese do not possess detailed maps of Arunachal? And what about Google Earth which is now available the world over?
One can only be surprised by this 'official' paranoia about maps. India is today a great power; technological advancements have occurred in the world during the past decades and will undoubtedly continue to occur and India has no choice but to accept them and make the best use of them.
A year ago, the Union Cabinet approved a new National Map Policy, but unfortunately, the mindset of the implementers remains the same.

6. And photographs: The paranoia is not about maps alone, it extends to photos, particularly of the sites under the Archeological Survey of India. A friend told me of her nightmarish experience while doing research in Chennai and the number of forms she had to fill to take some photos in a museum. Though one pays in hard currency, one has still to justify why one needs a particular photo. The poor researcher is looked upon as someone trying to 'steal' the national patrimony.
In contrast, a few weeks earlier, I visited the Louvre museum in Paris which receives tens of thousands of visitors every day. All of them were happily clicking away at statues, paintings, art artefacts (it is only prohibited to photograph the Mona Lisa for security reasons) and amongst them, a great number of Indians, perhaps the most frenetic clickers. This is understandable, as they have to compensate for their frustration at home!
A French television crew told me about their adventure while trying to shoot in a fort once occupied by Rajaji (C Rajagopalachari). Before leaving Paris, they had planned a short sequence at the fort. They dutifully applied to the Indian embassy for permission. After paying a hefty Rs 5,000 they were given a stamped and signed permission. When they arrived on the spot, the local official told them: "No way, as your permission does specifically mention it, you are not authorised to shoot with a stand. You have to go to Chennai (150 km away) and get the permission duly modified. No problem, it will take you a day only!" They left disgusted, the fort will not appear in their film.

7. Politicians: The topic of politicians is an easy one. Everything appalling and more can be said of them and one will still remain below the truth. In their defense, they are part of a system which is uniquely based on votes.
To win votes, one needs money and all compromises are permissible to get the required funds 'to serve the people'. It is true the world over, but here like in many other domains India excels.

8. Neglect for the environment: Another frustrating aspect for me is the lack of care for the environment (though it has been recently improving). While Indians are the most conscious people as far as personal hygiene goes, there is very little civic awareness or concern for the environment.
Education could help (for example for disposal of garbage or plastic bags), but it is often government policies such as free electricity for farmers, incentives for asbestos sheets (one of the most carcinogenic material) or chemical pesticides which harm the environment the most.

9. Traffic: I hate the Indian traffic (with its absence of rules). Each time I return from a visit abroad, it is a terrible shock. It is difficult to comprehend how there are not more casualties on the road. A friend explained to me that the multitude of gods in India probably protect their flock. The fact is that there are no law enforcement authorities (most of the police force is busy with VIP duty).
In France and elsewhere if the cops were not around, very few would follow the traffic rules. Extremely severe punishment for breaking traffic rules has a strong dissuasive effect. Here in India, you can always get away with a few rupees.

10. Corruption: It is better to not comment.

Please allow me to add a last point: the number of 'holidays' taken for a myriad of family 'problems', (marriages, engagements, funerals, etc.), cultural, local or religious festivals (of all faiths: India is secular), then you have bandhs, hartals, riots, strikes (India is the only place in the world where the government sometimes calls for a strike), etc... The worst are 'French leaves', absolutely unknown in France.

Apart from the above, India is an incredible place and I have never regretted, even for one day, to have settled here.

Public Transport in Pune

During Internet surfing I found link to this site http://www.gopetition.com/online/8517.html which is collecting signs from general public to file a petition against Pune Municipal Corporation to improve public transport system in Pune. I think every citizen in Pune should sign it.


Public Transport in Pune 716 Signatures
Category: Roads & Transport
Region: India
Description/History:May 5, 2006

Pune is amongst the most polluted cities in India. Due to growing wealth within the low/middle-income groups, the number of cars, two and three wheelers plying on the roads have increased substantially. Pune traffic has become increasingly unruly and dangerous.
Individuals could easily consider giving up on their 2 wheelers and cars, provided an efficient public transport was available. There may be a need to cut down on the number of rickshaws as well.

This petition is aimed at solving some of these difficulties.

Petition:

Pune needs an efficient and a safe rapid public transport system in place. We need not look too far for inspiration. Bombay can serve as an example.
We request Civic & State Transport Authorities to implement the following

1) Allow private public transport system within Pune.

2) Existing PMT buses should not only be increased in numbers but replaced with modern energy efficient vehicles.

3) Further all major parts of Pune should be linked with each other.

4) PMT should function more like a Corporate providing detailed information on bus frequencies, time-tables & ensuring bus-stops of high standards (but not occupying entire width of pavements).

5) To ensure a rapid transport system, create dedicated bus lanes on major roads.

6) Encourage use of Public Transport by introducing competitive fares (including season & annual passes).

7) Discourage use of personal vehicles (2 wheelers and cars) by introducing a road tax collected as a percentage of the amount of petrol used/bought. This way road tax cannot be evaded and will be proportional to amount of use of cars.

8) Restrict rickshaws to periphery of Pune. If there is fear of job losses, rickshaw drivers should be given an opportunity to re-train and become a part of expanding PMT or any private public transport enterprise.

Jai Hind, Jai Maharashtra

North Korea's Missile Ploy: No Good Options

To say that the Bush Administration is exasperated by North Korea's provocations is an understatement. After all, the only thing worse than watching a charter member of President Bush's "Axis of Evil" thumb its nose at the international community, is not having an effective means to respond. And despite all the tough talk emanating out of Washington, the U.S. has few good options for responding to the latest bit of saber-rattling from the hermit Stalinist regime in Pyongyang, this time involving an all-too-real saber: A Taepodong 2 long-range missile, capable of hitting Alaska and Japan, which North Korea appears to be shaping up to test-fire.

Such a test would end a moratorium on missile testing the North Korea adopted in 1998 to create confidence in six party talks over its nuclear program. But with those talks stalled since last November over widely differing interpretations between Washington and Pyongyang over what had been agreed, North Korea appears inclined to reclaim the spotlight from Iran by reminding the international community that left untended, it can cause plenty of trouble.

But if the North Koreans are engaged in political theater with missiles, the U.S. may have decided to respond in kind. U.S. officials reportedly acknowledged Tuesday that Washington's multi-billion-dollar missile defense system has been made operational in the past two weeks, despite the fact that that the system — whose record even in tests rigged in its favor has been so dismal that testing was eventually suspended — has yet to prove capable of actually doing its job. That gesture seemed to sum up the Administration's dilemma: Its policies to pressure North Korea to desist from bad behavior have simply not worked. And now North Korea is raising the stakes.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stressed that a missile test would be a provocation. "I can assure everyone that it would be taken with utmost seriousness," she warned, although she did not specify what consequence might result. The U.S. would consult with its allies on the next step, she said. Those other parties to the talks certainly share the U.S. alarm at the prospect of a North Korea test — Japan warned that if the missile fell on its territory, it would be regarded as an attack (although it later softened that position), while South Korea urged its neighbor not to "put a friend in danger" by firing a missile, and China called for calm. But it's not clear that any possible consequences would substantially alter North Korea's cost-benefit analysis.

Western economic sanctions mean comparatively little to an economy already largely isolated; and the two countries on which Pyongyang substantially depends, China and South Korea, have long made clear that they have no intention of putting a serious economic squeeze on Pyongyang, for fear that it would topple the regime and spread chaos across the Korean peninsula. Still, China values its ties with the U.S., even as that relationship becomes strained by geopolitical conflicts of interest, and it is therefore reportedly furious at North Korea's tactics. Quiet pressure from Beijing may be the best bet for restraining the North Koreans, but even that is far from a sure thing.

The most perceptive warning, however, may have come from Australia: "North Korea would be gravely mistaken if it thinks that a missile test would improve its bargaining position in the six-party talks," said foreign minister Alexander Downing. If brinkmanship is his game — and the pattern of previous North Korean tactics suggests that the missile threat may indeed be a negotiating ploy as much as anything else — North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il may also be aware that actually going ahead with a missile test (rather than simply dangling the threat of doing so) could weaken rather than strengthen his bargaining position. That's because North Korea has profited diplomatically from the view in Beijing and Seoul that the impasse in the six-party process is as much a result of the Bush Administration's hard line as of Pyongyang's recalcitrance.

A missile test could destroy South Korea's strategy of engagement with the North, and force China to distance itself from Pyongyang, dashing any hope of a breakthrough that would improve the regime's prospects of reviving its sclerotic economy. Kim Jong-il may, however, believe that a missile test will create a crisis that will, as it has repeatedly since 1994, force the great powers to deal with North Korea in ways that ultimately reward his brinkmanship. With the volatile fuel reportedly already in the rockets, it may be a matter of days before the answer is known.

Why Do Humans Have So Few Genes?

When leading biologists were unraveling the sequence of the human genome in the late 1990s, they ran a pool on the number of genes contained in the 3 billion base pairs that make up our DNA. Few bets came close. The conventional wisdom a decade or so ago was that we need about 100,000 genes to carry out the myriad cellular processes that keep us functioning. But it turns out that we have only about 25,000 genes--about the same number as a tiny flowering plant called Arabidopsis and barely more than the worm Caenorhabditis elegans.

That big surprise reinforced a growing realization among geneticists: Our genomes and those of other mammals are far more flexible and complicated than they once seemed. The old notion of one gene/one protein has gone by the board: It is now clear that many genes can make more than one protein. Regulatory proteins, RNA, noncoding bits of DNA, even chemical and structural alterations of the genome itself control how, where, and when genes are expressed. Figuring out how all these elements work together to choreograph gene expression is one of the central challenges facing biologists.

In the past few years, it has become clear that a phenomenon called alternative splicing is one reason human genomes can produce such complexity with so few genes. Human genes contain both coding DNA--exons--and noncoding DNA. In some genes, different combinations of exons can become active at different times, and each combination yields a different protein. Alternative splicing was long considered a rare hiccup during transcription, but researchers have concluded that it may occur in half--some say close to all--of our genes. That finding goes a long way toward explaining how so few genes can produce hundreds of thousands of different proteins. But how the transcription machinery decides which parts of a gene to read at any particular time is still largely a mystery.

The same could be said for the mechanisms that determine which genes or suites of genes are turned on or off at particular times and places. Researchers are discovering that each gene needs a supporting cast of hundreds to get its job done. They include proteins that shut down or activate a gene, for example by adding acetyl or methyl groups to the DNA. Other proteins, called transcription factors, interact with the genes more directly: They bind to landing sites situated near the gene under their control. As with alternative splicing, activation of different combinations of landing sites makes possible exquisite control of gene expression, but researchers have yet to figure out exactly how all these regulatory elements really work or how they fit in with alternative splicing.

In the past decade or so, researchers have also come to appreciate the key roles played by chromatin proteins and RNA in regulating gene expression. Chromatin proteins are essentially the packaging for DNA, holding chromosomes in well-defined spirals. By slightly changing shape, chromatin may expose different genes to the transcription machinery.

Genes also dance to the tune of RNA. Small RNA molecules, many less than 30 bases, now share the limelight with other gene regulators. Many researchers who once focused on messenger RNA and other relatively large RNA molecules have in the past 5 years turned their attention to these smaller cousins, including microRNA and small nuclear RNA. Surprisingly, RNAs in these various guises shut down and otherwise alter gene expression. They also are key to cell differentiation in developing organisms, but the mechanisms are not fully understood.

Researchers have made enormous strides in pinpointing these various mechanisms. By matching up genomes from organisms on different branches on the evolutionary tree, genomicists are locating regulatory regions and gaining insights into how mechanisms such as alternative splicing evolved. These studies, in turn, should shed light on how these regions work. Experiments in mice, such as the addition or deletion of regulatory regions and manipulating RNA, and computer models should also help. But the central question is likely to remain unsolved for a long time: How do all these features meld together to make us whole?

What Is the Biological Basis of Consciousness?

For centuries, debating the nature of consciousness was the exclusive purview of philosophers. But if the recent torrent of books on the topic is any indication, a shift has taken place: Scientists are getting into the game.

Has the nature of consciousness finally shifted from a philosophical question to a scientific one that can be solved by doing experiments? The answer, as with any related to this topic, depends on whom you ask. But scientific interest in this slippery, age-old question seems to be gathering momentum. So far, however, although theories abound, hard data are sparse.

The discourse on consciousness has been hugely influenced by René Descartes, the French philosopher who in the mid-17th century declared that body and mind are made of different stuff entirely. It must be so, Descartes concluded, because the body exists in both time and space, whereas the mind has no spatial dimension.

Recent scientifically oriented accounts of consciousness generally reject Descartes's solution; most prefer to treat body and mind as different aspects of the same thing. In this view, consciousness emerges from the properties and organization of neurons in the brain. But how? And how can scientists, with their devotion to objective observation and measurement, gain access to the inherently private and subjective realm of consciousness?

Some insights have come from examining neurological patients whose injuries have altered their consciousness. Damage to certain evolutionarily ancient structures in the brainstem robs people of consciousness entirely, leaving them in a coma or a persistent vegetative state. Although these regions may be a master switch for consciousness, they are unlikely to be its sole source. Different aspects of consciousness are probably generated in different brain regions. Damage to visual areas of the cerebral cortex, for example, can produce strange deficits limited to visual awareness. One extensively studied patient, known as D.F., is unable to identify shapes or determine the orientation of a thin slot in a vertical disk. Yet when asked to pick up a card and slide it through the slot, she does so easily. At some level, D.F. must know the orientation of the slot to be able to do this, but she seems not to know she knows.

Cleverly designed experiments can produce similar dissociations of unconscious and conscious knowledge in people without neurological damage. And researchers hope that scanning the brains of subjects engaged in such tasks will reveal clues about the neural activity required for conscious awareness. Work with monkeys also may elucidate some aspects of consciousness, particularly visual awareness. One experimental approach is to present a monkey with an optical illusion that creates a "bistable percept," looking like one thing one moment and another the next. (The orientation-flipping Necker cube is a well-known example.) Monkeys can be trained to indicate which version they perceive. At the same time, researchers hunt for neurons that track the monkey's perception, in hopes that these neurons will lead them to the neural systems involved in conscious visual awareness and ultimately to an explanation of how a particular pattern of photons hitting the retina produces the experience of seeing, say, a rose.

Experiments under way at present generally address only pieces of the consciousness puzzle, and very few directly address the most enigmatic aspect of the conscious human mind: the sense of self. Yet the experimental work has begun, and if the results don't provide a blinding insight into how consciousness arises from tangles of neurons, they should at least refine the next round of questions.

Ultimately, scientists would like to understand not just the biological basis of consciousness but also why it exists. What selection pressure led to its development, and how many of our fellow creatures share it? Some researchers suspect that consciousness is not unique to humans, but of course much depends on how the term is defined. Biological markers for consciousness might help settle the matter and shed light on how consciousness develops early in life. Such markers could also inform medical decisions about loved ones who are in an unresponsive state.

Until fairly recently, tackling the subject of consciousness was a dubious career move for any scientist without tenure (and perhaps a Nobel Prize already in the bag). Fortunately, more young researchers are now joining the fray. The unanswered questions should keep them--and the printing presses--busy for many years to come.

What Is the Universe Made Of?

Every once in a while, cosmologists are dragged, kicking and screaming, into a universe much more unsettling than they had any reason to expect. In the 1500s and 1600s, Copernicus, Kepler, and Newton showed that Earth is just one of many planets orbiting one of many stars, destroying the comfortable Medieval notion of a closed and tiny cosmos. In the 1920s, Edwin Hubble showed that our universe is constantly expanding and evolving, a finding that eventually shattered the idea that the universe is unchanging and eternal. And in the past few decades, cosmologists have discovered that the ordinary matter that makes up stars and galaxies and people is less than 5% of everything there is. Grappling with this new understanding of the cosmos, scientists face one overriding question: What is the universe made of?

This question arises from years of progressively stranger observations. In the 1960s, astronomers discovered that galaxies spun around too fast for the collective pull of the stars' gravity to keep them from flying apart. Something unseen appears to be keeping the stars from flinging themselves away from the center: unilluminated matter that exerts extra gravitational force. This is dark matter.

Over the years, scientists have spotted some of this dark matter in space; they have seen ghostly clouds of gas with x-ray telescopes, watched the twinkle of distant stars as invisible clumps of matter pass in front of them, and measured the distortion of space and time caused by invisible mass in galaxies. And thanks to observations of the abundances of elements in primordial gas clouds, physicists have concluded that only 10% of ordinary matter is visible to telescopes.

But even multiplying all the visible "ordinary" matter by 10 doesn't come close to accounting for how the universe is structured. When astronomers look up in the heavens with powerful telescopes, they see a lumpy cosmos. Galaxies don't dot the skies uniformly; they cluster together in thin tendrils and filaments that twine among vast voids. Just as there isn't enough visible matter to keep galaxies spinning at the right speed, there isn't enough ordinary matter to account for this lumpiness. Cosmologists now conclude that the gravitational forces exerted by another form of dark matter, made of an as-yet-undiscovered type of particle, must be sculpting these vast cosmic structures. They estimate that this exotic dark matter makes up about 25% of the stuff in the universe--five times as much as ordinary matter.

But even this mysterious entity pales by comparison to another mystery: dark energy. In the late 1990s, scientists examining distant supernovae discovered that the universe is expanding faster and faster, instead of slowing down as the laws of physics would imply. Is there some sort of antigravity force blowing the universe up?

All signs point to yes. Independent measurements of a variety of phenomena--cosmic background radiation, element abundances, galaxy clustering, gravitational lensing, gas cloud properties--all converge on a consistent, but bizarre, picture of the cosmos. Ordinary matter and exotic, unknown particles together make up only about 30% of the stuff in the universe; the rest is this mysterious anti-gravity force known as dark energy.

This means that figuring out what the universe is made of will require answers to three increasingly difficult sets of questions. What is ordinary dark matter made of, and where does it reside? Astrophysical observations, such as those that measure the bending of light by massive objects in space, are already yielding the answer. What is exotic dark matter? Scientists have some ideas, and with luck, a dark-matter trap buried deep underground or a high-energy atom smasher will discover a new type of particle within the next decade. And finally, what is dark energy? This question, which wouldn't even have been asked a decade ago, seems to transcend known physics more than any other phenomenon yet observed. Ever-better measurements of supernovae and cosmic background radiation as well as planned observations of gravitational lensing will yield information about dark energy's "equation of state"--essentially a measure of how squishy the substance is. But at the moment, the nature of dark energy is arguably the murkiest question in physics--and the one that, when answered, may shed the most light.