The secret of success is constancy to purpose,mind meditation music 365,change language in word on a mac - How to DIY


I am naturally fond of adventure, a little ambitious, and a good deal romantic - but patriotism was the true secret of my success.
In life, as on the stage, it's not who I am but what I do that's the measure of my worth and the secret of my success. People are always asking what's the secret of my success, and the answer is easy - at least for me. The difference between the best worker on computer hardware and the average may be 2 to 1, if you're lucky.
Quite simply, neither Indonesia nor Australia have been able to articulate what they want out of the bilateral relationship, except for vague notions of ‘stability’, ‘security’ and ‘good relations’, which mean different things in Jakarta and Canberra. For Australia, the lack of purpose is a more acute problem, because we need Indonesia more than Indonesia needs us. How quickly we have become distracted by changes in Indonesia’s political leadership and President Joko Widodo’s lacklustre performance.
How unsubtle were the efforts by both Prime Minister Abbott and Foreign Minister Bishop to persuade President Widodo and Foreign Minister Marsudi to stay the executions of Chan and Sukumaran. How easily we took offence at President Widodo’s refusal to exercise clemency (recalling our Ambassador ‘for consultations’ was an unprecedented step).
How brittle our responses have been to both the electronic eavesdropping and ‘cash to captains’ questions raised by the Indonesian government. How peeved we continue to be that Indonesia isn’t working harder to solve our refugee problem.
And how concerned we remain that Indonesia isn’t prosecuting the ‘war on terrorism’ with the energy, exuberance (and shrill hyperbole) of Australia. The fundamental problem is that the relationship with Indonesia is conducted in the arena of domestic politics rather than international policy.
Former Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa, speaking at The Crawford School on Monday, was right to identify ‘a sense of disconnect’ in the present relationship, reinforced by a moribund ‘sense of communication’.
So how might we inject a measure of purpose and connection into Australia–Indonesia relations?


In Australia’s case, governments rely too much on the political levers of relationship management when they have a considerable range of alternative instruments at their disposal.
Howard displayed similar skills as Timor-Leste emerged from a quarter of a century of Indonesian ‘incorporation’.
First, there’s a desperate need on Indonesia’s part for institution building—something that Australia could do well at on many levels.
Second, Indonesia would benefit from quiet assistance in developing governance models for its departments, agencies and state-owned enterprises to reduce and eventually eliminate corruption. Third, a change of emphasis in the political relationship away from a focus on the executive as political agents to a focus on the democratic institutions as political forums would draw much needed attention to the processes of democratic politics as distinct from the (often clumsy) management of hot political issues.
Finally, on sensitive policy issues such as climate change, refugees, agricultural trade, education services, drug smuggling and security cooperation—especially counterterrorism—Australia would do well to pursue a ‘softly softly’ approach, allowing the agencies to do the hard work while political leaders provide modest encouragement from the sidelines.
This, of course, would require a level of intelligence and tact—the cornerstones of diplomacy—that neither side seems capable of at present.
Allan Behm is a former head of the International Policy and Strategy Divisions in the Department of Defence. It is a pity that recent prime ministers and foreign ministers, Liberal and Labor alike, have failed to see ‘constancy to purpose’ as the central precondition for successful bilateral relationships. Yet we appear unable to design and implement consistent, coherent and purposive policy settings on which to develop a sound, long-term relationship with a country that has a GDP that is moving towards parity with ours and a population almost ten times the size of ours. And where the dog whistle is amplified through our preferred instrument of diplomacy—the megaphone—is it any wonder that the bilateral relationship is under stress?
What Natalegawa failed to mention was that he helped create this predicament by playing sensitive bilateral issues (electronic intelligence collection) into Indonesia’s domestic politics in the lead-up to the Presidential election in mid-2014. Our long-term economic, diplomatic and security interests are best served by an Indonesia that is stable, democratic, prosperous and confident as a contributor to the development of a rules-based international system.
That’s a bit more difficult, since Indonesians are reluctant to indicate preferences, much less to make demands.
Our bilateral diplomatic history suggests that enduring relationships at the senior political level are fraught, and subject to sudden and intense disruption.


Menzies, for instance, was able to demonstrate during Konfrontasi that, notwithstanding a political relationship that was at its nadir, both sides could maintain a wide range of functional linkages. The trick here was to play to Indonesia’s unusual ability to manage relationships by remote control—the shadow play as a representation of more substantial realities. Through our banks, Telstra, our universities, government departments and agencies such as DFAT, AusAID, Defence and the AFP, Australia is able to engage in substantial ways without turning the political spotlight onto the relationship.
Symbolism is a powerful political medium in Indonesia, and Australia’s recognition of and support for the role of Indonesia’s parliament would boost Indonesia’s confidence as an Asian democracy. If you don't have a goal or purpose to strive for, I don't think that you have much of a life. But more than anything else, what they want from Australia is respect, understanding, support, quiet engagement and constructive advocacy of their growing role as a regional and global player. Prime ministers, presidents and foreign ministers rarely have the diplomatic or negotiating skills to sustain a robust and enduring relationship.
This wasn’t the result of some kind of Nelsonian blind eye on the part of either Soekarno or Menzies, but rather an acceptance that relationship management was a matter of policy, not simply a political issue.
You've got to have something to do that you want to apply yourself to - that's what living is all about. Yet at the institutional, functional and bureaucratic levels, Indonesia and Australia have long been able to maintain effective and practical relations, even during periods of political tension.
The secret of my success is that we have gone to exceptional lengths to hire the best people in the world.



The secret garden 2 book
Can i really changed my life








Comments to «The secret of success is constancy to purpose»

  1. Sensizim_Kadersiz
    Formulated in a method that glorified the and able to become capable to realize.
  2. KRASOTKA
    Meditation Heart's Dedicated Practitioner Program path of Islam The Sufi teacher.
  3. ILK_VE_SON_OPUS
    This yoga retreat in India is one snug.
  4. JXL
    Mother of two, dedicated it's quite a shock and Mindfulness Follow with an emphasis on Perception and Love. Western.