China's Influence Seen From The Eyes Of Esteban Colberto

Interesting things are happening in China these days. While the rioting goes on and there are lot of reports of excessive violence against the Tibetan rioters, the world seems to be silent. Does that surprise anyone? Well, if you look at the world the way it has changed in last 20 years, it would probably make a lot of sense. To be able to talk about China these days really requires a lot of guts. China has followed a very aggressive foreign policy in recent years and a lot could be attributed to the power vacuum that exists today because of the mess in which America finds itself in Iraq. This open ended commitment to the occupation has means that any opposition from America to what China does really does not have any teeth. No wonder, China has been able to carve some very strongly oasis of influence around the world: Asia Pacific region, Latin America and regimes like the one in Iran, Sudan, Nigeria and Venezuela.

Chinese have gone around the world looking for natural resources to fuel their economy. That means a lot of investment in Latin America either in countries that see China as a counter balance to American influence or a country like Brazil, which is the largest producer of iron ore around the world. Esteban Colberto( Spanish alter ego of Stephen Colbert) points this fact in his own humorous way...check out the embedded video.

The Way To Bring About Change Is By All Manner Of Exchange

New York Philharmonic performed in Pyongyang yesterday and this event is interesting from quite a few perspectives. First of all, this is the first exchange that has happened between US and North Korea for a long time. Since the time Madeline Albright gifted Kim Jong Il a basketball during the Clinton administration, nothing but acrimony has happened between the two countries. North Korea in recent years decided to pursue nuclear weapons and US came down, and rightly so, hard on it. 6 party talks followed and now North Korea has somewhat agreed to abandon its nuclear program.

So what does it all mean? These kind of exchanges have a very interesting effect on the overall tone of conversation. I remember when India and Pakistan decided to start cross border movement in Kashmir and Punjab regions. There were a lot of sceptics but then there was a story about how a Pakistani kid's life was saved because she could get a heart surgery in Bangalore. The problem with diplomacy is that it too often involves decision making at the top without creating the settings which would make the agreements acceptable on the ground. Think about what happened at Camp David. All the people at the table: Ehud Barak, Bill Clinton and Yasir Arafat were truly in a position to solve a problem that the world has faced for a long long time...the problem on Jerusalem...who gets what part of this interesting piece of land that is important for Jews, Christians and Muslims alike. The problem with the summit was that Yasir Arafat never felt that he would be able to go back with a solution and sell it to his own people. Generations of fighting between Israelis and Palestinians had left too much mistrust amongst people on the ground. Oslo agreement in 1992 was the first right step but 6 years of relative peace was not enough. A whole generation had been brought up baying for the blood of the other side. Same is the case with India and Pakistan and you can very well say the same with US viz-a viz North Korea, Iran and Cuba. What India and Pakistan have done rightly is to let the healing happen. I don't think the healing has happened to the level where India and Pakistan are ready to sit down at a table and discuss Kashmir but it is happening. Probably 5 years down the line would be a good time to revisit things.

So this exchange between US and North Korea is definitely a right step. Same could be done between US and Iran. In fact, within US, there is a huge Persian population and that could be used as a bridge for starting some of the exchange activities...ditto with Cuba and the huge Cuban American contingent in Florida. Any agreement at the top has to be preceded by building up trust amongst people who would experience the effect of the agreement and this trip by New York Philharmonic is a good example of how to bring change using all manner of exchange.

Musharraf's Blue Star & The Fine Art of Feeding a Monster

Lets first quickly get ourselves updated with the terminology. Blue Star refers to the operation by the Indian Army in 1984 to purge militants out of the Golden Temple in the state of Punjab. Inside was held up Jarnail Singh Bhidranwale who became a relevant force in Punjab politics with the help of then prime minister Indira Gandhi but decided to turn against her soon enough.

What has happened at Lal Masjid, or Red Mosque, has a lot of similarities with Operation Blue Star. Jarnail Singh Bhidranwale is widely believed to be the creation of Indira Gandhi to divide the Khalistan movement. It is wonderful how many monsters Indira Gandhi managed at any particular point of time. She boiled up the Sikh separatist movement. She created Tamil Tigers to have a say into Sri Lanka. And then his own son, Sanjay Gandhi...well, the balancing act had to become overwhelming at some time. Within a few months after Blue Star, Indira Gandhi was shot dead by her own Sikh bodyguard. Nothing has shaken the foundation of the Indian republic more than those days of 1984 starting from Blue Star in June and ending in the murder of more than 3000 Sikhs as revenge for Indira Gandhi's assasination.

Musharraf, after seizing power, used Mohammad Aziz of Lal Masjid to talk against Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif. Aziz, with the help of Musharraf, soon became powerful enough to issue edicts about bigger things. Suddenly, girls in one of the
Madrassas associated with Lal Masjid started kidnapping women not Islamic enough in their deeds. And all this was happening not very far off from Musharraf's residence. So time was ripe to fight the monster. Musharraf, like Indira Gandhi, has done
just that. It seems that the first round of battle has been won by Musharraf. What is still not known are the longer term implications of this action. Time will tell...

Being able to create monsters,being able to tame them and then dispose them off, forms the basis of political power that is cold and completely impersonal. Musharraf has perfected the art of balancing monsters that have completely opposite interests. One the one hand are Americans who want him to fight Islamists. Their lies his core support and the basis for his international status despite being a dictator. Then there are the Islamists that were created by Pakistan but since 9/11 have become more of a burden. And finally, there is India...for keeping Islamists in control, Musharraf has to talk as well as send terrorists in Kashmir. Recently, a fourth monster sprang up in form of the dismissed chief justice of supreme court. By sending the army to Lal Masjid, he has tried to create the image of a fighter for moderate voices in Pakistan and consolidate his core constituency that was slowly shifting towards the fired judge.

In years to come, we will know the ultimate result of his policies but till now, Musharraf has done a fine job. As Niccolo Machiavelli would say:"For a Prince, Survival is not a mean but an end in itself". If this is the case, then Musharraf gets a perfect A.

Sarkozy, the American

French people will start voting for the new President in a couple of hours and it is a classical left vs. right fight. On the right of the center is Nicolas Sarkozy and to the left of the center is Segolene Royal. Dividing the two are two key issues, what should France do with Globalization and Immigration?

First round elections threw up a strong contender right in the center called Francois Bayrou. He got 18% of the total vote casted and did not qualify for the 2nd round but does look like a very interesting prospect for the future. Now is the time for the tough choice for a lot of people who did not vote for either Sarkozy or Royal in the 1st round, As they say, first round is to vote for the person you like and the second round is to vote for someone you dislike the least.

The election might very well be decided by where Bayrou's supporters will vote and it seems that Sarkozy is holding on to his lead.He has to deal with some pretty tough problems. France has a 35 hour week with 210 maximum working days in a year. Compare this with US: 40 hour(minimum) week with at least 230 days in a year( this includes every conceivable leave you can think of). In a world with no competition amongst nation states, this would probably work( I am sure a lot of us at some point of time or the other have wished for the quality of life that can be afforded with a 35 hour week) but the problem is that things are much more complex. Economic problems for France have a cascading effect. Life expectancy like most of the developed world is at an all time high and the people who are living longer are covered by one of the most comprehensive medical system around the world. This system is paid for by the ever decreasing working population that has to bear the burden of one of the highest tax rates in Europe. Mainstream manufacturing migrated to Asian countries long time back, the concern is that any industry in general finds it very difficult to work out of France. Also, when France is not performing, it screws the report card of the whole of EU.

Europe in general has not done a great job on the immigration front. Some of the home grown terror in countries like Britain, as opposed to US, is blamed on the isolation of immigrant communities in European countries: Algerians in France, Turks in Germany and Pakistanis and Bangladeshis in Britain. I have no doubt that America has to be the role model for all countires on how to manage immigration( recent illegal immigration problem is an exception). No wonder that despite everything that has happened in last 4 years, there has not been a single home grown terrorist in America. Immigrants get the opportunity to assimilate and intergrate here. While some Scandinavian countries have slowly stopped immigration altogether, France inherited a huge population that came to France after Algeria got its freedom. All time high unemployement in France is hitting the immigrant youth specially hard. Sarkozy, who was also the interior minister under Chirac at the time of riots last year, is proposing a relaxed policy toward skilled foreign workers while tightening the laws for existing immigrants towards naturalization.

Sarkozy, as against all his predecessors, is running on a very clear policy platform. He has conveyed in no uncertain terms that it is time to make painful choices to make France better. And it seems that people seem to be listening. France will decide by Monday and we will know in which direction it is going to go.And by the way, Sarkozy is good news for America as well. His policies are so much influenced/inspired by American economic and foreign policies that some actually call him Sarkozy, the American!!

Kemal Ataturk & Sustainable Democracy

Turkey is going through a very interesting turmoil right now. The government of Tayyip Erdogan decided to nominate his foreign minister Abdullah Gul for the President position. To everyone's surprise, Turkish army pushed back and said that they would not accept a president from the ruling Islamic party. You would think that this is yet another case of army interfering in the working of a well functioning democracy...seems like another coup brewing similar to the ones in Pakistan and Thailand. I contend, not really. This situation is very specific to Turkey and requires a little more understanding. It all goes back to the days of Kemal Ataturk.

Kemal Ataturk founded the Republic of Turkey after a successful campaign against Allied armies that had earlier defeated the Ottoman empire. Though in modern day definitions, he would qualify as a dictator but he did establish a very forward looking republic. Some people have called it "enlightened authoritarianism"!!.The state was to be strictly secular with women banned from wearing the hijab. in 1915 he wrote:
In November 1915, he wrote in his journal "The social change can come by (1) educating capable mothers; knowledgeable about life; (2) giving freedom to women. (3) A man can change, his morals, thoughts, and feelings by leading a common life with a woman as there is an inborn tendency towards the attraction of mutual affection"
He wanted Turkish women to be taught not only child care, dress-making and household management, but also the tools which they can use to become part of general economy.
Fascinating, isn't it? This when Istanbul at that time was the seat of the caliphate!!

So Kemal Ataturk left a legacy of a secular state with a strong belief in western values of economic independence and separation of religion and state.The legal system was based on western law rather than sharia.

Fast forward to modern Turkey. Turkish is definitely the most progressive predominantly Muslim nation around the world. It has even had a woman prime minister in 90s. The opposition from the Turkish army to the candidacy of Tayyip Erdogan first and then Abdullah Gul lies in the strong secular ethos that Kemal Ataturk left and the legacy still runs strong. Tayyip Erdogan leads AKP which is definitely not that Islamic in character from the standards of organizations like Hamas, Islamic Jihad or Mulim Brotherhood but from Turkish standards, it is definitely a religious party. No wonder that in support of army's position, more than one million people marched in Istanbul last week to express their opposition to the decision by Erdogan to run for president.

So I ask EU to think a little bit before denouncing what is happening on the ground in Turkey. Things are not black and white. No one wants to see the army anywhere except the barracks but sometimes the situation requires some drastic action. Even in case of Pakistan and Thailand, army intervened to stop phenomenally corrupt leaders. Nawaj Sharif had stifled opposition and was planning to declare himself Allah's representative when Musharraf kicked him out. Thaksin Shinawatra in Thaliand had embezzled tons of money and was becoming a public nuisance.
Clearly, if army can correct the corrupt leaders and then quietly go back to barracks, it would be great. Problems happen when they decide to hang on. Musharraf seems to be on that path but I still believe that he is a better alternative for both people in Pakistan and outside.

Finally, there are some broader lessons out of the things happening in Turkey. Kemal Ataturk essentially laid the foundation for a sustainable democracy. Secular state, gender equality, economic independence( and the existence of a merchant/middle class),universal education, independent judiciary and a working bureaucracy. He built this institutions using an iron hand and used enforcement rather than consensus but the legacy was long lasting. As soon as Turkey became multi party, democracy was there to stay. Democracy is sustainable only if laid on these pillars.( By the way, I strongly recommend reading Future of Freedom by Fareed Zakaria if you want to read a very compelling argument about the same) There are a lot of examples of countries that tried democracy without these tenets and fell into chaos but Turkey is on solid foundation and therefore, please think for a while before criticizing the army there.

Lest We Forget Srebrenica

In July 1995, a renegade group of Serbian army that called itself Scorpions massacred 8000 Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica.

Bosnia declared independence in 1991 and Serbs tried to maintain unity. Srebrenica had strategic importance to achieve this objective of keeping Bosnia in the fols and was predominantly inhabited by Bosniaks(who are Muslims). Skirmishes started happening in 1992 itself and in 1993, it was declared a "Safe Area". Safe Area in quotes because 400 Dutch Peacekeepers representing United Nations were going to keep it safe!!!

Well, in 1995, the world found out how safe this safe area was. In July, Serbian President Radovan Karadzic issued the following directive:

"Complete the physical separation of Srebrenica from Žepa as soon as possible, preventing even communication between individuals in the two enclaves. By planned and well-thought out combat operations, create an unbearable situation of total insecurity with no hope of further survival or life for the inhabitants of Srebrenica."

Tensions started mounting and the peacekeeping force kept sending missives for reinforcements. None came...hail United Nations!!! Remember the scene from Hotel Rwanda?Well, 8000 men of combat age were taken out of refugee camps and were slaughtered. Yesterday, 4 of the perpetrators were sentenced in Serbia( first such indictment within Serbia of the numerous war crimes committed by the army there in the Balkan conflict). Radovan Karadzic is still at large.

Bottom line, United Nations needs to be revamped. There have been too many massacres in last 20 years and only a powerful international force with means and moral force can help. NATO did a good job when they decided to intervene in Kosovo to avoid the repetition of Srebrenica but they also ignored Rwanada Burundi. Why? This selectivity has to go. UN, and US being the most powerful nation in its roster, need to be much more forceful and develop much better quick mandates. That is the only hope otherwise the world is not short of people like Karadzic, Milosevic, Omar Al-Bashir, Charles Taylor, Foday Sankoh...the list goes on.

Nobel Prize for Musharraf ???

Musharraf today said something which India should grab before he goes back on his position. This is as big a moment in the history of the subcontinent as possible. Here is the 4-point plan Musharraf suggested in his interview with Prannoy Roy on NDTV:

• Kashmir will have the same borders but people will be allowed to move freely back and forth in the region




• The region will have self-governance or autonomy, but not independence




• Troops will be withdrawn from the region in a staggered manner




• A joint supervision mechanism will be set up, with India, Pakistan and Kashmir represented

And these 4-points are not the first step to a future negotiated settlement. This is the end!! Pakistan would not ask for a plebiscite or 1948 UN resolutions or independence for Kashmir. I don't think anything like this has ever come up in the 60 year history of this dispute. This is not very different from the present status-quo in Indian administered Kashmir.It is now for the Indian leadership to step up and reciprocate the gesture. Please, please, please....don't let this opportunity slip away...too many lives, too much money and too much of everything has gone down the drain. Its time that the misery for all come to an end.

I will stick my neck out and nominate Musharraf for Nobel Peace Prize( and hope that he doesn't get killed within Pakistan for what he has said today).

Down with Putin

Putin finally did it. When he decides to strike, these pictures are a testament to what happens to you. He tried to do it on Victor Yuschenko a few years back but the poison only disfigured his face. This time, the poison was precise and lethal. Alexander Litvinenko died of overdose of Polonium 210, quantity so large that it could have been produced only in a nuclear reactor( still small enough to be put on the tip of a safety pin!!). Hail the Russian Democracy and hail the world of Vladimir Putin.

True, at least in the classical sense, cold war has ended. Putin is West's partner in its fight against global terrorism. But behind the scenes, Russia has seen some of the most blatant forms of state sponsored hooliganism. Remember Yukos? Remember Mikhail Khodorkovsky? Russia's richest man is rotting in some jail in Siberia. Interestingly, the spy killed in London, Alexander Litvinenko, by poisoning also had a dossier which talked about how Kremlin pressured the stockholders of Yukos to sell their stake to Gazprom.

Energy assets have been consolidated under state owned Gazprom and then these have been used as a tool to scare regimes in Georgia,Ukraine and others that do . This is some interesting kind of state sponsored Russian private equity game going on. If Russia has democracy than so does Jordan, Iran, Syria, Egypt & Saudi Arabia. Putin is as big a despot as Hosni Mubarak & King Abdullah and someone needs to step up to stop him.

Assertion of the Red Dragon

The world media has conveniently missed it but a very interesting conference is happening in Beijing at the moment. More than 50 African head of states and ministers are participating in the first China-Africa summit.

From a pure economic perspective, this might not be a monumental event. China's trade volume with African continent is still only 20 billion dollars as opposed to, for example US. United States exported $ 43 billion of goods and imported $ 243 billion worth of goods from China in 2005. So what is the significance of this summit? I see a silent Chinese hand in a lot of things that happen these days on the world stage. Iran, North Korea, Sudan, all have certain amount of patronage from China despite the problems they are creating. Iran and Sudan are part of a very aggressive energy policy which China is following at the moment. The crisis in North Korea has give the Chinese the perfect opportunity to tell the world, and specifically the US, that from now on nothing would happen in the Pacific without their consent.This administration has accepted this reality through the six party talks. Iraq's situation has further helped Chinese assert control when they would have been more cautious otherwise. Who wants to host Omar Al-Bashir these days but China?

I cannot help but remember the scenario which Samuel Huntington writes in his famous 1992 book called Clash of Civilizations. He talks about how the next big war would start by China trying to take over the oil fields held by Vietnam in South China sea. A look around the world and this scenario doesn't look outrageous at all. China's rise with the demise of acceptance of America as the referee in the world affairs has really opened up a completely new era of the Dragon's flight.

The white hand in the picture above is not American, Russian or European...its Chinese!!!

On the Dilemma Of the French..

France, as we all know, was once a world power. Their colonial empire was as big as the British. But things have changed considerably in the last hundred years and more so in the last fifty years. The more you look at French diplomats playing their part on the international scene and more you wonder about the size of their pomp and splendor.

Historically, France was the biggest country in Europe accounting for more than 1/5th of European population. Today France is beset by abysmally low birth rates and abysmally high life expectancy( 80.5 years). A country with GDP barely topping a trillion dollars, a growth rate which just exceeds 1% and a huge old-age population( which comes with big social security costs). The industry is primarily industrial which by its very nature is low growth and very capital intensive.

Coming back to the point, why are French diplomats so vocal about the problems they have? I got my answer when I read Kissinger's classic,Diplomacy. Kissinger has a very simple answer to the French Dilemma. The defining moment in French diplomacy and in general, for pre-war world powers of Europe was the Suez Canal crisis. Britain in 1957 happened to be the other accomplice of France along with Israel and they understood their role in the future world well. They would toe American line from thereon and get some concessions of their own. And French decided to champion the cause of Europe and become the de facto leader of Europe because they initiated the concept.

I believe that France has done well to carve out a niche for itself as a Western power that tries to exercise control over unhindered American influence. From that perspective, in the modern era of Anti-Americanism, Britain has been a big loser on the world stage. I also think that one area in which French and US can collaboarte is the United Nations. A lot of places where trouble is happening right now were French colonies and France, along with American and NATO millitary power, can play a bigger role in solving African crisis.