Geopolitical thread

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Philip »

Despite the UKR crisis,the G-20 desperately want pres.Putin to attend the next mtg. in Oz,media reports.This is because at the moment,there is only one tough world leader who can help formulate a joint east-west strategy to take out ISIS and work out agreements reg. noko and Iran's nuclear postures.Despite the combined efforts of the US/West and an Obama in terminal decline,handling ISIS has become a disaster.It appears unstoppable.

Meanwhile,Pres.Putin has warned of the resurgence in Europe of fascism through recent neo-Nazism seen in the UKR and the rise of ultra-right parties in the political spectrum.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/o ... rbia-visit
Vladimir Putin warns over rise of neo-Nazism before Serbia visit
Russian president to attend military parade commemorating 70th anniversary of Belgrade’s liberation from Nazi occupation

Vladimir Putin will seek to use a military parade in Belgrade on Thursday to portray Russia and its allies as a bulwark against the rise of neo-Nazism across Europe.

The cold war-style parade involving tanks, phalanxes of soldiers and a flyover by military jets will be the first of its kind that Serbia has held for nearly three decades. The last time, the country was still part of socialist Yugoslavia.

The event is to commemorate the liberation of Belgrade from Nazi occupation by Yugoslav Partisans and the Red Army 70 years ago. The date of the ceremony was moved forward four days to fit in with Putin’s timetable.

At a time of deep rifts between Russia and the European Union over Ukraine, Putin’s one-day visit will be an opportunity to show he has friends and influence close to the heart of Europe. For the Serbian government it is a chance to curry favour with an important friend and energy supplier at a time of chronic economic crisis with winter approaching, and to counter rightwing criticism that it is leaning too far towards the west in the hope of eventual EU membership.

For much of Wednesday the skies above Belgrade shook as Russian jets rehearsed formation flying for the parade. Rightwing groups had plastered central Belgrade with pictures of Putin and the slogan “Let us welcome our president”.

As part of intense security measures for the visit, roads in Belgrade and to the airport will be closed on Thursday, as will airspace over the capital. Residents who live in buildings along the route have been ordered to keep their windows closed, their blinds shut and to remove any laundry drying outside, as a precaution against snipers.

In an interview due to be published in the Serbian newspaper Politika, Putin is expected to attribute the simmering conflict in Ukraine and friction between Russia and its neighbours to the resurgence of Nazi ideology.

“Unfortunately, the vaccine against the Nazi virus, developed at the Nuremberg trials, is losing its effectiveness in some European countries. A clear sign of this trend is open manifestations of neo-Nazism, which have become common in Latvia and other Baltic states,” Putin told Politika, according to early excerpts published by the Russian agency RIA Novosti.

“Today, our common goal is to counter the glorification of Nazism, firmly counter attempts to revise the results of world war II and consequently fight any forms and manifestations of racism, xenophobia, aggressive nationalism and chauvinism.”

The Serbian prime minister, Aleksandar Vucic, said there was no contradiction between his government’s aspirations for EU accession and its warm welcome for Putin. “Serbia is going towards the EU, which is a strategical goal, but that it will not impose sanctions on Russia for many reasons, economical being one of them,” he said in a television interview this week. “Our policy is not swaying but firm, hard, decisive and clear. For a year and a half it is not moving, neither to the left nor to the right.”

Vucic said he hoped the visit would lead to trade and investment deals, particularly in agriculture and energy. But any such deals would cool relations between Belgrade and Brussels, which has slapped sanctions on Russia for its annexation of Crimea and its armed support for Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine.

Putin is expected to press the Serbian government to start construction work on the planned South Stream pipeline intended to bring Russian gas to southern Europe. Belgrade has been hesitating because of a dispute between Moscow and the EU, which wants the pipeline to be available to all gas producers, not just Russia’s Gazprom. Gazprom owns a majority stake in Serbia’s main energy corporation.

Putin is due to sign seven agreements with the Serbian government while he is in Belgrade, including one on exchange of military technology, a further irritant to Brussels, which has imposed an arms embargo on Russia. There will also be an agreement on the “immunity and privileges” of a Serbian-Russian humanitarian response centre set up last year in the city of Nis.

According to Jelena Milic, head of the Centre for Euro-Atlantic Studies in Belgrade, the Nis centre has been used not just for flood relief and fighting forest fires but also to supply equipment to “civil protection” units run by minority Serbs in northern Kosovo. Russia has supported Serbian opposition to Kosovo’s 2008 declaration of independence, refusing to recognise the former Serbian province.

“There has been a mushrooming of pro-Russian NGOs in north Kosovo,” Milic said. “The worst of the seven agreements is the one giving special status to the Russians at the Nis base. It is a completely non-transparent agreement. Out of the blue, they are using a Sofa [status of forces agreement] template used by the US for military bases.”

Jovo Bakic, a sociologist at Belgrade University said: “The Kosovo issue is rather painful for the majority of Serbs and this is an opportunity for the government to show gratitude for Russian non-recognition of Kosovo.

“It’s not often presidents of powerful countries come to Serbia, and meanwhile it’s important for Russia to show it has friends in Europe. Of course this could have been done without the parade. It’s not really necessary to organise such an expensive event, but politicians – especially in Serbia – are not known for being reasonable.”
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Philip »

http://www.stratfor.com/geopolitical-di ... sprv[quote] Oil Prices Continue to Define Geopolitics
Geopolitical Diary
Tuesday, October 14, 2014 - 19:04 Text Size Print

Editor's Note: Oil prices dropped steeply Oct. 14, with crude oil futures falling 4.6 percent to $81.84 per barrel -- the biggest decrease in more than two years. Brent crude dropped by more than $4 a barrel at one stage in the day, dipping below $85 for the first time since 2010. While these are relatively substantial drops, they are just one part of a continuing trend Stratfor has been tracking over the past few months. Factors behind the slump include weak demand, a surfeit of supply and the fact that many large Middle Eastern producers are reluctant to reduce their output.

In light of today's developments, we are republishing the following diary from Oct. 2, which details the reasons behind the falling prices and how the drops could affect oil-dependent countries around the world.

The global oil benchmark, Brent crude, fell Thursday to about $92 per barrel before rebounding to finish the day at around $94 per barrel, the lowest price since mid-2012. The latest sell-off follows one of the sharpest declines in a quarter in recent years, in which the price of oil slid about 16 percent. It may be premature to forecast sustained international oil prices lower than $90 per barrel, but if the price of oil remains close to where it is now, many oil exporting countries will feel the pain after basing their budgets on previous price expectations.

Simply put, the oil market has gotten overstocked. After spending much of the year producing only around 200,000 barrels per day, Libya has seen its production jump up by about 700,000 bpd since mid-June. The United States has continued its relentless expansion of oil production, with the latest Energy Information Agency figures estimating that U.S. production has increased by about 300,000 bpd since the beginning of August, and Iraq has experienced similar gains. Russia, Angola and Nigeria have also seen marked boosts in production. While most of the recent production increases are one-offs, North America could add another 1 million to 1.5 million barrels of production by the end of next year.

What is a Geopolitical Diary? George Friedman Explains.

Despite these noteworthy hikes in oil production, sluggish demand by European and Asian (particularly Chinese) consumers has proved just as important to oil prices. While China's demand will continue to grow, demand in developed countries will remain flat, as it has for a while. These factors only add to the concern that if left unchecked, oil prices per barrel in the $90-$100 range may persist for the foreseeable future.

Lower global oil prices will create challenges for several OPEC producers and others, particularly Russia. While some have suggested that OPEC will lower its production targets, it may not have the ability or the unity to coordinate a large enough drop in production to counter trends elsewhere and bring prices to a level more desirable to it (above $100 per barrel). If oil prices do return to this level in the near future, it likely will have little to do with OPEC's actions.
The Standoff Between Russia and the West

The first and most import consequence of lower oil prices is the effect it will have on the ongoing struggle between Russia and the West. Energy commodities dominate the Russian economy, particularly its exports. Any sustained drop in oil prices would directly impact the country's export revenues, and Russia's GDP would take a significant hit. The Kremlin's 2014 budget was based on oil prices averaging $117 per barrel for most of the year, with the exception of prices of $90 per barrel for the fourth quarter. For 2015, however, the budget has been pegged at $100 per barrel after much debate within the Russian leadership. While Moscow has significant financial reserves and can run a budget deficit if need be, Finance Ministry officials have estimated that lower oil prices could shave off 2 percent of Russia's GDP.

Although Russia has been able to weather the effects of U.S. and EU sanctions thus far for its action in Ukraine, the restrictions have already led some firms, such as Rosneft, to ask for financial assistance from the country's National Wealth Fund. A reduction in oil prices, and in turn lower revenues for Russia's budget, will constrain the Kremlin's ability to support Russian businesses hurt by sanctions the longer they are in place. With less of a financial cushion to soften to consequences of sanctions in the longer term, the Kremlin will have to moderate its position in the ongoing negotiations over the future of Ukraine to meet the demands of Western partners and achieve a reduction in sanctions.
Competition in the Middle East

As the West looks to gain from low oil prices in its struggle with Russia, it is also looking for an opportunity to negotiate with a beleaguered Tehran to come to some sort of a resolution on the Iranian nuclear program. For Europe, Iran and its large natural gas reserves represent one of the most promising long-term sustainable alternatives to Russian natural gas. Tehran is facing sanctioned export volumes, lower profit margins and ongoing expenses because of proxy conflicts in Syria and Iraq, and it can ill afford a sustained downturn in global oil prices. Progress on coming to an agreement with the West may be slow, which will only place more pressure on Tehran to negotiate.

Saudi Arabia is also set on maintaining its global market share and has an opportunity in the short term to rely on its considerable foreign exchange reserves and low production costs to wait out other global producers. Riyadh's oil output is its most strategic resource, and one that the government is quick to use to its advantage. With summer temperatures beginning to cool and regional consumption starting to taper off, Riyadh can free up larger volumes to export, even at lower prices. The Saudis are also looking to leverage their short-term economic stability over rivals such as Russia, especially as they square off with Iran over the future of the Syrian government.

Saudi Arabia also has the ability to take a considerable number of barrels of oil offline if it wants to. Recently, however, it has offered discounts on its crude oil to secure market share for November, perhaps signaling to other OPEC members that while Riyadh may be willing to take its supply offline, others will have to do the same. But there is no incentive for other countries to reduce their output, since most Gulf producers will still manage to make a profit in the $90-$100 per barrel range; lowering production levels, therefore, would only reduce revenues.
The Americas and Beyond

Outside the Middle East, a decline in oil prices will also affect Venezuela. Officially, Caracas sets its budget at the low target of $60 per barrel of oil, a precedent begun by former President Hugo Chavez. Excess revenue could then be funneled elsewhere to off-budget expenditures to satisfy political patrons. Venezuela is in a dire financial position, needing oil prices perhaps as high as $110 to meet expenditures both on and off the book. Sustained low oil prices would severely hamper Caracas' ability to finance its imports, perhaps forcing government officials to get serious on selling foreign assets, such as Citgo, and gold from its central bank reserves, or offering even more attractive terms on loans for oil deals with the Chinese, though Beijing has recently balked at this. If oil prices stay low for an extended period, Caracas could also be forced to reconsider its deals with Cuba or programs like Petrocaribe.

Meanwhile, for developed massive oil importers -- Japan, China, India and the European Union -- low oil prices will give some respite to significant import bills. On the other hand, prices could also increase short-term strain in Europe, where energy has been the main factor pushing monthly inflation lower. While lower energy costs are good for Europe in the long run, they also raise the threat of deflation and inflame tension between the European Central Bank and Germany.

Even though prices have likely bottomed out, the recent plunge in the price of oil serves as a reminder of how geopolitically significant energy prices can be. Energy supplies form the backbone of modern industrial economies, and energy resources are critical export commodities for those who possess a lot of them. As long as fossil fuels remain the dominant source of energy -- something that is likely to last at least another few decades -- oil supply and oil prices will remain critical.
Send us your thoughts on this report.

[/quote]
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Philip »

http://www.stratfor.com/geopolitical-di ... sprv[quote] Oil Prices Continue to Define Geopolitics
Geopolitical Diary
Tuesday, October 14, 2014 - 19:04 Text Size Print

Editor's Note: Oil prices dropped steeply Oct. 14, with crude oil futures falling 4.6 percent to $81.84 per barrel -- the biggest decrease in more than two years. Brent crude dropped by more than $4 a barrel at one stage in the day, dipping below $85 for the first time since 2010. While these are relatively substantial drops, they are just one part of a continuing trend Stratfor has been tracking over the past few months. Factors behind the slump include weak demand, a surfeit of supply and the fact that many large Middle Eastern producers are reluctant to reduce their output.

In light of today's developments, we are republishing the following diary from Oct. 2, which details the reasons behind the falling prices and how the drops could affect oil-dependent countries around the world.

The global oil benchmark, Brent crude, fell Thursday to about $92 per barrel before rebounding to finish the day at around $94 per barrel, the lowest price since mid-2012. The latest sell-off follows one of the sharpest declines in a quarter in recent years, in which the price of oil slid about 16 percent. It may be premature to forecast sustained international oil prices lower than $90 per barrel, but if the price of oil remains close to where it is now, many oil exporting countries will feel the pain after basing their budgets on previous price expectations.

Simply put, the oil market has gotten overstocked. After spending much of the year producing only around 200,000 barrels per day, Libya has seen its production jump up by about 700,000 bpd since mid-June. The United States has continued its relentless expansion of oil production, with the latest Energy Information Agency figures estimating that U.S. production has increased by about 300,000 bpd since the beginning of August, and Iraq has experienced similar gains. Russia, Angola and Nigeria have also seen marked boosts in production. While most of the recent production increases are one-offs, North America could add another 1 million to 1.5 million barrels of production by the end of next year.

What is a Geopolitical Diary? George Friedman Explains.

Despite these noteworthy hikes in oil production, sluggish demand by European and Asian (particularly Chinese) consumers has proved just as important to oil prices. While China's demand will continue to grow, demand in developed countries will remain flat, as it has for a while. These factors only add to the concern that if left unchecked, oil prices per barrel in the $90-$100 range may persist for the foreseeable future.

Lower global oil prices will create challenges for several OPEC producers and others, particularly Russia. While some have suggested that OPEC will lower its production targets, it may not have the ability or the unity to coordinate a large enough drop in production to counter trends elsewhere and bring prices to a level more desirable to it (above $100 per barrel). If oil prices do return to this level in the near future, it likely will have little to do with OPEC's actions.
The Standoff Between Russia and the West

The first and most import consequence of lower oil prices is the effect it will have on the ongoing struggle between Russia and the West. Energy commodities dominate the Russian economy, particularly its exports. Any sustained drop in oil prices would directly impact the country's export revenues, and Russia's GDP would take a significant hit. The Kremlin's 2014 budget was based on oil prices averaging $117 per barrel for most of the year, with the exception of prices of $90 per barrel for the fourth quarter. For 2015, however, the budget has been pegged at $100 per barrel after much debate within the Russian leadership. While Moscow has significant financial reserves and can run a budget deficit if need be, Finance Ministry officials have estimated that lower oil prices could shave off 2 percent of Russia's GDP.

Although Russia has been able to weather the effects of U.S. and EU sanctions thus far for its action in Ukraine, the restrictions have already led some firms, such as Rosneft, to ask for financial assistance from the country's National Wealth Fund. A reduction in oil prices, and in turn lower revenues for Russia's budget, will constrain the Kremlin's ability to support Russian businesses hurt by sanctions the longer they are in place. With less of a financial cushion to soften to consequences of sanctions in the longer term, the Kremlin will have to moderate its position in the ongoing negotiations over the future of Ukraine to meet the demands of Western partners and achieve a reduction in sanctions.
Competition in the Middle East

As the West looks to gain from low oil prices in its struggle with Russia, it is also looking for an opportunity to negotiate with a beleaguered Tehran to come to some sort of a resolution on the Iranian nuclear program. For Europe, Iran and its large natural gas reserves represent one of the most promising long-term sustainable alternatives to Russian natural gas. Tehran is facing sanctioned export volumes, lower profit margins and ongoing expenses because of proxy conflicts in Syria and Iraq, and it can ill afford a sustained downturn in global oil prices. Progress on coming to an agreement with the West may be slow, which will only place more pressure on Tehran to negotiate.

Saudi Arabia is also set on maintaining its global market share and has an opportunity in the short term to rely on its considerable foreign exchange reserves and low production costs to wait out other global producers. Riyadh's oil output is its most strategic resource, and one that the government is quick to use to its advantage. With summer temperatures beginning to cool and regional consumption starting to taper off, Riyadh can free up larger volumes to export, even at lower prices. The Saudis are also looking to leverage their short-term economic stability over rivals such as Russia, especially as they square off with Iran over the future of the Syrian government.

Saudi Arabia also has the ability to take a considerable number of barrels of oil offline if it wants to. Recently, however, it has offered discounts on its crude oil to secure market share for November, perhaps signaling to other OPEC members that while Riyadh may be willing to take its supply offline, others will have to do the same. But there is no incentive for other countries to reduce their output, since most Gulf producers will still manage to make a profit in the $90-$100 per barrel range; lowering production levels, therefore, would only reduce revenues.
The Americas and Beyond

Outside the Middle East, a decline in oil prices will also affect Venezuela. Officially, Caracas sets its budget at the low target of $60 per barrel of oil, a precedent begun by former President Hugo Chavez. Excess revenue could then be funneled elsewhere to off-budget expenditures to satisfy political patrons. Venezuela is in a dire financial position, needing oil prices perhaps as high as $110 to meet expenditures both on and off the book. Sustained low oil prices would severely hamper Caracas' ability to finance its imports, perhaps forcing government officials to get serious on selling foreign assets, such as Citgo, and gold from its central bank reserves, or offering even more attractive terms on loans for oil deals with the Chinese, though Beijing has recently balked at this. If oil prices stay low for an extended period, Caracas could also be forced to reconsider its deals with Cuba or programs like Petrocaribe.

Meanwhile, for developed massive oil importers -- Japan, China, India and the European Union -- low oil prices will give some respite to significant import bills. On the other hand, prices could also increase short-term strain in Europe, where energy has been the main factor pushing monthly inflation lower. While lower energy costs are good for Europe in the long run, they also raise the threat of deflation and inflame tension between the European Central Bank and Germany.

Even though prices have likely bottomed out, the recent plunge in the price of oil serves as a reminder of how geopolitically significant energy prices can be. Energy supplies form the backbone of modern industrial economies, and energy resources are critical export commodities for those who possess a lot of them. As long as fossil fuels remain the dominant source of energy -- something that is likely to last at least another few decades -- oil supply and oil prices will remain critical.
Send us your thoughts on this report.

[/quote]
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Philip »

Russia at the gates? US State Dept, Pentagon grilled over NATO expansion
http://rt.com/news/196924-nato-russia-hagel-borders/

Published time: October 17, 2014
Russia at the gates? US State Dept, Pentagon grilled over NATO expansionPublished time: October 17, 2014
US State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki and Pentagon Press Secretary Rear Adm. John Kirby have been challenged over the Department of Defense's claims that the US must “deal” with “modern and capable” Russian armed forces on NATO's doorstep.

Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu expressed “grave concern” and “surprise” at a Wednesday speech made by US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel during the Association of the United States Army’s annual conference. Hagel declared that US armed forces "must deal with a revisionist Russia - with its modern and capable army - on NATO's doorstep.”

READ MORE: US works on military 'scenarios' near our borders - Russian defense minister

During a State Department briefing on Friday, however, an AP journalist suggested that it would be more logical to say that “NATO has moved closer to Russia’s borders.”

“Is it not logical to look at this and say – the reason why Russia’s army is on NATO’s doorstep, is because NATO expands,” journalist Matt Lee said.

“That’s the way [Russian] President Putin probably looks at it, it’s certainly not the way that we look at it,” Kirby said in response to the journalist’s reasoning.

Though he eventually admitted that NATO has expanded,
Kirby added that “NATO is not an anti-Russia alliance, it is a security alliance.”

“It wasn’t NATO that was ordering tons of tactical battalions and army to [the] Ukraine border,” Kirby added, before being reminded that Ukraine is not part of NATO.

Kirby then refused to agree with the point that the Russians could understandably perceive NATO’s expansion as a “threat,” especially given that the alliance existed as “anti-Soviet” for half a century.

“I’m not going to pretend to know what goes in President Putin’s mind or Russian military commanders…I mean, I barely got a history degree at the University of South Florida,” Kirby joked, dodging the question.


Kirby assured that NATO's moves were not “hostile and threatening,” but rather a matter of security. He added that he was “worried about their [Russia’s] moves around Ukraine.” Psaki then cut in, saying that “other countries feel threatened,” and urged the conversation to move on.

In terms of new threats at NATO’s borders, Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu said on Friday that it is the US which has been “stubbornly approaching...closer to our doors.”


Relations between Russia and NATO have been tense since the alliance accused Russia of becoming involved in the Ukrainian conflict – a claim Russia has continuously denied.

Following Crimea's accession to Russia in March, the US and Europe bombarded Moscow with sanctions. NATO also significantly increased its military presence near Russia's borders, especially in Poland and the former Soviet Baltic states of Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, which have expressed concern at the potential for Russian incursions into their territories.

WATCH THE FULL VIDEO OF THE GRILLING:
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by abhishek_sharma »

anmol
BRFite
Posts: 1922
Joined: 05 May 2009 17:39

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by anmol »

The Similarities Between Germany and China
by George Friedman, realclearworld.com
October 22nd 2014

I returned last weekend from a monthlong trip to East Asia and Europe. I discovered three things: First, the Europeans were obsessed with Germany and concerned about Russia. Second, the Asians were obsessed with China and concerned about Japan. Third, visiting seven countries from the Pacific to the Atlantic in 29 days brings you to a unique state of consciousness, in which the only color is gray and knowing the number of your hotel room in your current city, as opposed to the one two cities ago, is an achievement.

The world is not getting smaller. There is no direct flight from the United States to Singapore, and it took me 27 hours of elapsed travel to get there. There is a direct flight from Munich to Seoul, but since I started in Paris, that trip also took about 17 hours. Given how long Magellan took to circumnavigate the world, and the fact that he was killed in the Philippines, I have no basis for complaint. But the fact is that the speed of global travel has plateaued, as has the global economic system. There is a general sense of danger in Europe and Asia. There is no common understanding on what that danger is.

I was in Seoul last week when the news of a possible wave of European crises began to spread, and indications emerged that Germany might be shifting its view on austerity. It was striking how little this seemed to concern senior officials and business leaders. I was in the Czech Republic when the demonstrations broke out in Hong Kong. The Czechs saw this as a distant event on which they had opinions but which was unlikely to affect them regardless of the outcome.

There has been much talk of globalization and the interdependence that has flowed from it. There is clearly much truth in arguing that what happens in one part of the world affects the rest. But that simply was not evident. The eastern and western ends of the Eurasian landmass seem to view each other as if through the wrong side of a telescope. What is near is important. What is distant is someone else's problem far away.

Germany and China as Economic Centers

There is symmetry in this view. Europe cares about Germany and Asia about China. In some fundamental ways these countries have a substantial amount in common. China is the world's second-largest economy. Germany is the world's fourth-largest exporter. Both countries are at the center of regional trade blocs -- Germany's formal, China's informal. Both trade on a global basis, but both also have a special and mutual dependency on their regions. China and Germany both depend on their exports. Germany's exports were equivalent to 51 percent of its gross domestic product, or about $1.7 trillion, in 2013, according to the World Bank. China's exports equaled 23.8 percent of a larger GDP, or about $9.4 trillion.

The two countries at the center of their respective regional systems have both been extremely efficient exporters. The United States, by comparison, exports only 14 percent of its GDP. But it is precisely this ability to export that makes both Germany and China vulnerable. Both have created production systems that outstrip their capacity to consume. For Germany, increasing consumption can be only marginally effective because it is already consuming at near capacity. For China, there is more demand, but much of it is among the roughly billion people who lack the purchasing power to the buy the goods China produces for the regional and global market. China's society lives on a steep cliff. On top of the cliff is a minority who can purchase goods. In the deep valley are those who cannot -- and also cannot readily climb the cliff. Thus, like Germany, China's effective demand cannot absorb its exports.

Therefore, economic viability for both Germany and China depends largely on maintaining exports. No matter how much they import, their exports maintain domestic social order by providing a significant source of jobs right away, rather than in some future scenario involving the rebalancing of their work forces. For Germany, which has memories of massive social dislocation in the 1920s, maintaining full employment cuts to the heart of the country's social order. For China, whose Communist Party was shaped by the rising up of the unemployed in Shanghai in 1927, maintaining full employment is a bulwark in defense of the government. Both countries look at unemployment not only in terms of economics, but also in terms of social stability and governmental survival. Therefore, exports are not simply a number, but the foundation of each country.

An Economic Model's Shortcomings

The problem with an export-based economy is that the exporter is the hostage of its customers. Germany's and China's well-being depend not only on how they manage their economies, but on how their customers manage their own economies. If the customer's economy fails, the customer cannot buy. It doesn't matter whether the problem is a policy failure or a cyclical downturn -- the exporter will pay a price. Both Germany and China exist in this precarious position.

Germany and China are dealing with the fact that their customers' appetites for goods are declining -- whether because of price competition or because of economic decline. Europe is in economic turmoil. Southern Europe is suffering from massive unemployment, and the rest of Europe is experiencing slower economic growth, no growth, or even decline. Demand in this market is essential to Germany, and it is difficult to maintain demand under these circumstances. It is not surprising, then, that the German economy appears to be moving to recession.

China's problem is different from Germany's, if somewhat more hopeful in the long run. The 2008-2009 global financial crisis decimated China's low-end export sector. The crisis halted the decadeslong low-cost export boom that the Chinese government had kept alive well beyond its natural life span through years of systematic wage repression and wasteful subsidies, both direct and indirect, to manufacturers. As a result of the crisis, the portion of China's GDP tied to exports collapsed almost overnight, from 38 percent in 2007 to just under 24 percent now. This collapse has forced Beijing to keep the economy on life support through massive expansion of state-led investment into housing and infrastructure construction. The housing boom is showing signs of having finally run its course.

Beijing is pinning its hopes, in part, on a revival of China's export manufacturing might -- not of the low-cost, low-value added goods that were once the country's mainstay, but increasingly of the kind of value-added goods proffered by more-advanced export economies such as South Korea and Germany. However, this evolution is a long-term goal, not one that can be realized in one, two or even five years. In the meantime, Beijing will struggle to maintain stable growth and high employment in the face of an anemic low-end export sector, a deflated housing and construction bubble, less-than-robust domestic consumption, and inadequate services and high-end manufacturing sectors.

Germany's and China's regional partners may not, in the long run, benefit from German and Chinese export power. It is interesting that in general, everyone fears the major readjustment that might be coming. Germany's power and ability to flood markets are seen regionally as problems that need to be corrected. At the same time, Germany's regional trade partners understand the instability that readjustment would bring and are content, particularly among the corporate and financial communities, to maintain the current order with Germany at the center. The same might be said for China. When I spoke of China's weakness, there was no longer any resistance to the idea, as there was a few years ago. At the same time, no one was eager to see a changing of the guard. The western and eastern parts of Eurasia were each built around the power of a single country: Germany in the west and China in the east. Each region understands the economic price it pays for German and Chinese power, and each region understands that pivoting around these two countries provides an element of stability.

Variables in East Asia and Europe

Another wild card exists in each region. In Europe, it is Russia. In East Asia, it is Japan. Russia has already become active in asserting itself. It is not challenging German power, as Russia is not an industrial competitor with German exports. Rather, the country is an exporter of energy needed by Germany and Europe, and it is a significant, if regional, military power. In Eastern Europe where I travelled, the discussion frequently turned on the question of whether Germany and Russia had reached some sort of secret accord that was playing out around the Ukraine crisis. If there is an agreement, then the region will have to dance to the Moscow-Berlin tune. If there is no deal, then no one wants to see Germany destabilize. But there is also a sense that there is nothing to be done about it.

In East Asia, there was also a sense that Japan is reappraising its postwar pacifism and preparing to take a more active military role in the region. Concerns about Japanese remilitarization were much less visible in Singapore than in Korea, and it is not an overwhelming concern anywhere. But there was still the feeling that as China enters an unpredictable phase economically, it enters one socially and politically as well. All of Japan's forays among the small islands to China's east may portend more aggressive moves. My own view -- that China is not nearly as capable militarily as it might appear -- was at once acknowledged and brushed off. In the region, risks can't be taken. Japan was seen as the wild card. Still the world's third-largest economy, with a substantial military establishment already, Japan might find it necessary to be a counterweight to China. There is as much enthusiasm for this in East Asia as there is for Russian aggressiveness in Europe.

Seeing Both Sides of Eurasia

A trip to both East Asia and Europe allowed me to see two things I never quite noticed before. The first is the symmetry between the two ends of Eurasia. Both are built around a strong exporting power that is now in very dangerous waters. Neither export powerhouse is loved in its home region, but few regional trade partners are eager to deal with the risks that instability might bring. And in each region there is an actor just off stage that is flexing its muscles and potentially changing the way the regional game is played.

The second thing I noticed, which I don't think I would have seen without flying first to Singapore, then to Europe and then to South Korea, is the degree to which the two ends of Eurasia are decoupled. We talk about global interdependence, and it is real. But while, whatever the economic dynamics, each region is intellectually aware of what is going on at the other end of Eurasia, each sees the other as distant and ultimately unconnected from its concerns. They are aware of each other, but not concerned about each other, as each region plays its own game. What makes this ironic is how similar the two games are.

The primary question that people on both sides of Eurasia asked was, "What is the United States going to do?" I was always asked about the decline of the United States and then, in the next sentence, asked about what the United States will do in Ukraine, Iraq or the South China and East China seas. There is a sense that Europe and China are far apart, but the United States is near. There was also a frustration that the United States is not prepared to play roles that would serve these regions' best interests and instead insists on pursuing what is seen as its own foolish ends. It was good to hear this, as it assured me the world has not completely uncoupled.

Distance does seem to disconnect people. Money might flow in milliseconds, and flights can be made in (too many) hours, but human lives are built around what is nearby and therefore familiar. Each region saw itself as unique. I might have been startled by how much they have in common, and Europe's and Asia's fates might be similar. But I have the sense that despite all we say about a small planet, similarity is not the same as being linked.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Philip »

The Chinese are building the largest naval base on the E.African coast,in Tanzania,once one of India's closest friends.Why did our MEA drop the ball?

https://news.vice.com/article/china-joi ... -goes-nuts
China Joins Tanzania In Naval Exercise as the Indian Ocean Region Goes Nuts
By Ryan Faith
October 25, 2014

The Chinese People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) — or as many Chinese like to call it, "the navy" — is kicking off the month-long "Beyond 2014" bilateral naval exercises with the much less frequently discussed Tanzanian navy. The two nations actually have strong defense cooperation ties, and this exercise will focus on anti-piracy, marine security, and counter-terrorism operations.

While Tanzania isn't exactly a fulcrum of Great Power struggle, these exercises are a fantastic chance to get a snapshot of the many different roles a naval presence can fill in international relations.

China is, on one hand, a global power. If you start listing countries according to the sizes of their economy, population, military, and so on, you mention China way more often than you have to count to 10. That said, China is not at all global, and so a major Chinese naval expedition or military presence in Tanzania sounds a bit strange.

And so more specifically, China is a rising global power. Power is tied closely with how a nation projects its hard and soft power beyond its borders, and oceangoing navies are all about projecting. That's why a growing naval presence is very nearly a corollary to being a rising global power.

Aircraft carriers — the ultimate weapons of peace. Read more here.

Some of the expanding Chinese naval presence is very public, open, and internationally engaging, like the ongoing Chinese participation in anti-piracy patrols in the Gulf of Aden. These patrols, which started in 2008, were China's first big global naval field trip, and have netted them operational experience, credit for contributing to the global maritime commons, and international goodwill.

Perhaps as a result, China has been expanding its activity in the Gulf, sending a submarine to join the anti-piracy operation. The submarine, a Type 039 Song-class diesel attack submarine — China's first fully indigenous submarine class — shipped out just last month, making a stop in the Sri Lankan capital of Colombo, and marking the first time that a Chinese submarine had "openly visited a nation in the Indian Ocean."

This move raised a great many eyebrows in India. Sri Lanka is about 20 miles from the Indian coast, and India tends to regard the Indian Ocean as being their very own personal ocean. Maybe the name has something to do with it.

The reaction prompted the Chinese Ministry of Defense to issue a press release telling people, essentially, to just chill. Very poorly paraphrased: "Submarines are ships. Ships need to dock for supplies. Ships dock at ports. Colombo is a port. You guys can see what I'm getting at here, right? No reason to freak out."

Colombo is an interesting port, because ships going to and fro between the center of gravity of the world's energy supplies (the Middle East) and the scene of the world's most aggressive economic expansion (Asia) pop into Colombo very frequently. In fact, last December, the Iranian navy dropped by Colombo, as Iran continues the process of building up its own long-distance oceangoing capabilities.

Iran has been using its navy to make diplomatic statements and carry out a soft power presence mission, venturing further and further afield in recent years. For instance, last March the Iranian navy paid its first official visit to China, stopping at the port of Zhanjiang.

These growing ties with Iran are the context behind the Chinese navy's first visit to Iran. A trip that, coincidentally, took on even more import when an Iranian navy ship on patrol in the Gulf of Aden rescued a Chinese container ship from pirates. Last month's visit of Chinese warships to an Iranian port, kicking off a five-day joint training exercise, also marked the first entry of a Chinese naval vessel into the Persian Gulf. Since then, China and Iran have been continuing high-level dialog about further naval cooperation.

That said, the Chinese Navy is far from being able to effectively challenge the US naval presence in the Gulf. Aside from supporting air and ground operations, the US Navy's focus has been on both maintaining free movement of shipping — i.e., oil tankers — in and out of the Gulf in general, and deterring Iran in particular from getting any bright ideas about messing with the free flow of the world's oil supply.

China is none too keen to disrupt the world's flow of oil, and would be very unlikely to oppose any efforts to keep the Persian Gulf open. This led some observers to speculate that this visit and associated diplomatic developments are part of a counter to the Obama administration's strategic (and semi-apocryphal) "Pivot to Asia."

The idea that China is showing the flag in the Persian Gulf as a signal to the US is an interesting suggestion. This year marked China's first participation in the world's largest naval exercise, the US-led Rim of the Pacific Exercise, or RIMPAC. China agreed to send four ships to participate, including the hospital ship Peace Ark (which VICE News toured for an episode of War Games).

The Chinese also sent a spy ship to monitor the exercise. Privately, US Navy officials suggested that the spy ship was a good thing, since it further cemented the precedent that you can do anything you want in international waters, so long as you're not hurting anyone.

In Photos: The world's largest naval exercise, RIMPAC 2014. Read more here.

This concept of "freedom of navigation" is something that China hasn't entirely signed onto. In December 2013, a Chinese warship cut off a US Navy ship monitoring a Chinese exercise, nearly causing a collision and an international incident. Demonstrating the fact that the US are cool about the Chinese monitoring in the international waters near Hawaii would, it is hoped, convince the Chinese to chill out a bit.

This year also marked the debut appearance of India's new stealthy guided-missile frigate the INS Sahyadri at RIMPAC. India is becoming an increasingly important naval power as it pushes modernization and expansion of its capabilities. Although some have feared a naval arms race with China, Southeast Asia seems to be serving as an effective partition between China and India's regional naval expansions, at least in the short term. China may be pushing aggressively into the South China Sea, and India may regard the Indian Ocean as its own personal lake, but geography is keeping the two from getting too far up in each other's business.

The existence of that buffer may be a major factor in slowing a naval arms race, but the rapid acquisitions of new submarines, amphibious warships, and other assets by countries throughout the region mean fears of a regional naval arms race aren't unfounded.

Which brings us back to Tanzania. An added complication is that China is shelling out $10 billion for a deep water port on the Indian Ocean — in, yes, Tanzania at the town of Bagomoyo. Some observers argue that this port, which will be the biggest in Africa, is destined to become one more pearl in China's "String of Pearls" — a series of commercial and military bases China has been building from the Chinese mainland to Africa.

As a major naval base, it would vastly expand China's ability to project power throughout the Indian Ocean and around Africa. This would almost certainly cause the Indian Navy to start losing its collective shit, which would likely be followed by a sharp change in Indian naval acquisitions.

Other commentaries have contended that the port couldn't function as a major naval base, because the port access is only 14 meters deep — too shallow for submarines. But being unable to host submarines wouldn't preclude China from running anti-piracy patrols in the Gulf of Aden out of Bagomoyo.

The Vietnam-India-Russia military ménage à trois leaves China in the cold. Read more here.

In any case, even if the port merely serves as a commercial hub for Chinese interests in Africa, it will still be important to Beijing. Increasing amounts of Chinese commercial shipping to and from Africa will mean that China is going to be more heavily invested in maintaining free movement of its own shipping across the Indian Ocean, likely drawing the Chinese Navy further toward the Tanzanian coast whether they're planning for it right now or not.

So the Tanzanian navy may not be one of the world's, say, 100 most powerful navies right now, but it could turn out it'll have a hell of a front row seat to what could become one of the world's most fascinating Great Power struggles of the 21st century: The possibility of China trying to strangle India with its String of Pearls.

Follow Ryan Faith on Twitter: @Operation_Ryan
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Philip »

Brazil re-elects Dilma.Latin America stays Socialist.MNCs suffer defeat.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/o ... -president
Brazil re-elects Dilma Rousseff as president
Decade-long domination of South American politics by leftist parties goes on as Aécio Neves is defeated

Jonathan Watts in Rio de Janeiro
The Guardian, Monday 27 October 2014

Dilma Rousseff supporters
Supporters of Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff celebrate in Brasilia. Photograph: Evaristo Sa/AFP/Getty Images

After the closest Brazilian election in generations, president Dilma Rousseff was re-elected by a narrow margin on Sunday, ensuring that Latin America’s biggest nation will remain under the control of a Workers party (PT) committed to tackling inequality.

Rousseff won 51.6% of the valid votes cast to secure a much reduced mandate, having fought off a strong challenge by pro-business challenger Aécio Neves.

In a victory speech, a beaming Rousseff said she hoped the nation could rally together. “Instead of increasing differences and creating gaps, I strongly hope that we create the conditions to unite,” she told supporters in Brasilia. “I want to be a much better president than I have been until now.”

She gave particular thanks to former president Inácio Lula da Silva, who many tip to run again in 2018. Rousseff is ineligible to stand for a third consecutive term.


Neves said he had called the president to offer his compliments and expressed thanks to supporters.

In Rio de Janeiro, more than a thousand Workers party supporters braved driving rain to gather under the arches in Lapa, where they watched the results come in on a giant screen. As Rousseff’s victory flashed up, they erupted in cheers, waved campaign flags, danced and chanted, “Olé, olé, olé, olé, Dilma, Dilma!”

“This is good for Brazil,” said one campaigner, Vinicius Barchilon. “Dilma has done a lot for the poor and we have a government that is determined to tackle inequality.”


Dilma Rousseff supporters in Rio de Janeiro. Photograph: Pilar Olivares/Reuters

Rousseff’s support remained strong in the poor north and north-east, areas that have benefited most from state development projects and where a high proportion of the electorate are recipients of bolsa familia, a poverty relief programme that covers almost a quarter of the population. But she lost many voters in the more affluent south-eastern cities of São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro due to middle-class frustration with the moribund economy and corruption scandals.

Voters appeared divided – and confused – by an often dirty campaign characterised by name-calling, accusations of corruption, nepotism and incompetence, rumour-mongering on social networks and suspicious delays in the release of government data on deforestation and poverty.

The overwhelmingly anti-Rousseff mainstream media focused on a huge bribes-for-votes scandal in which kickbacks from the country’s biggest company, Petrobras, were used to buy off politicians and fill campaign coffers. A report in Veja magazine this week claimed that Rousseff and her predecessor, Da Silva, were aware of the wrongdoing, a charge they deny.

Neves made this the focus of his appeal to voters. “There’s one measure above all others to end corruption: vote the PT out of office,” he said during the final televised debate.

But his message was ultimately drowned by a string of attacks. The Workers’ party accused Neves of corruption for building an airport on his family’s land, of nepotism by adding half a dozen cousins and relatives to the public payroll during his time as governor of Minas Gerais state, and of disrespecting women – an allusion to a widely circulated report that he punched his wife before they were married. Neves’ denial failed to stop his support plunging among female voters.

Supporters of Aécio Neves at campaign headquarters in Belo Horizonte. Photograph: Sergio Moraes/Reuters

The name-calling was no more edifying. Neves compared Workers’ party campaign manager João Santana to the Nazi propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels. In response, Lula da Silva said the Social Democrats persecuted the poor north-east region of Brazil in the same way the Nazis maltreated the Jews, and that Neves, whom he has described as a drunk and a playboy, was as intolerant as King Herod.

Nonetheless, the 143 million eligible voters appear to have carried out their electoral duties peacefully – if not enthusiastically. Although voting is mandatory, more than 29 million abstained and about 7 million votes were blank or nullified.

Rousseff, a marxist guerrilla during her student years, has pledged to build on her government’s success in reducing inequality. Over the 12 years of Workers party rule, almost 40 million people – or a fifth of the population – have moved out of poverty. The rich-poor gap remains one of the highest in the world, but the Gini coefficient measure of inequality of 0.49 is down from 0.56 in 2001 and unemployment is close to record lows.

But the overall condition of the economy is less impressive. Brazil entered a technical recession earlier this year and the financial markets have turned more sharply against the Workers party. A key indication of how Rousseff, an economist by training, plans to turn this around will be her choice of finance minister. The current holder of the post, Guido Mantega, is standing down at the end of the year.
This is a huge defeat for the US which invested heavily in Neves.The current trend in Latin America is to re-elect Socialist leaders who have delivered on their promise (in some decent measure) to reduce inequality. Development not at the cost of the poor is the mantra.This will also be a big boost for the direction of BRICS which is trying to offer an alternative to the Western eco apparatus that has done little to alleviate global inequality.Wherever countries have swallowed IMF medicine,they have remained mired in their poverty.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by svinayak »

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles ... eview.html

America in Retreat: The New Isolationism and the Coming Global Disorder

After recognizing America’s recent weak responses to provocations (N. Korea’s testing of a ballistic missile and nuclear weapons, Syria’s use of chemical weapons, Russia’s seizure of Crimea), Stephens proscribes a way out of this mess. The immediate goal of U.S. foreign policy should be to arrest the slide, introduce a “broken-windows” approach of deterrence rather than reaction, put cops on the street by deploying personnel globally, increase military spending, punish violations of geopolitical norms, be global in approach, distinguish core interests, and prevent local conflicts from escalating into regional catastrophes. While this may seem like a common sense approach, our current policy-makers and leaders would benefit from a tutorial.

There is a growing sense that if America provides no leadership, authoritarian regimes will quickly fill the breach; that if our red lines are exposed as mere bluffs, more of them will be crossed; that if our commitments to our allies – both the ones we generally like and the ones we have no option but to accept – aren’t serious, those friends might abandon us; that if our threats against our enemies are empty, our enemies will be emboldened, and we will have more of them. If history does not end – and it hasn’t – then the United States does not get a holiday from it.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by ramana »

X-Post...
ravi_g wrote:Image

This graph was made in 2013 in a HDI report of whatever. Has 2014 followed the trend.

So once again, how should we Indians carry out our foreign and defence policies?
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by svinayak »

Broken Window Theory

http://online.wsj.com/articles/yes-amer ... 1415984889


The most urgent goal of U.S. foreign policy over the next decade should be to arrest the continued slide into a broken-windows world of international disorder. The broken-windows theory emphasizes the need to put cops on the street—creating a sense of presence, enforcing community norms, serving the interests of responsible local stakeholders. It stresses the need to deter crime, not react to it, to keep neighborhoods from becoming places that entice criminal behavior.

A broken-windows approach to foreign policy would require the U.S. to increase military spending to upward of 5% of GDP. That is well above the 3.5% of GDP devoted to defense in 2014, though still under its 45-year average of 5.5%. The larger budget would allow the Navy to build a fleet that met its long-stated need for 313 ships (it is now below 290, half its Reagan-era size). It would enable the Air Force to replace an aircraft fleet whose planes are 26 years old on average, the oldest in its history. It would keep the U.S. Army from returning—as it now plans to do, over the warnings of officers like Army Chief of Staff Gen. Raymond Odierno —to its pre-World War II size.

The key to building a military ready to enforce a broken-windows policy is to focus on numbers, not on prohibitively expensive wonder-weapons into which we pour billions of research dollars—only to discover later that we can afford just a small number of them.

Broken-windows foreign policy would sharply punish violations of geopolitical norms, such as the use of chemical weapons, by swiftly and precisely targeting the perpetrators of the attacks (assuming those perpetrators can be found). But the emphasis would be on short, mission-specific, punitive police actions, not on open-ended occupations with the goal of redeeming broken societies.

The idea that the mere appearance of disorder encourages a deeper form of disorder cuts against the conventional wisdom that crime is a function of “root causes.” Yet municipalities that adopted policing techniques based on the broken-windows theory—techniques that emphasized policing by foot patrols and the strict enforcement of laws against petty crimes and “social incivilities”—tended to register sharp drops in crime and improvements in the overall quality of life.

We are disposed to think that, over time, order inevitably dissolves into disorder. But the drop in crime rates reminds us that we can go the other way—and impose order on disorder. Could it be that there’s a “broken windows” cure not just for America’s mean streets but for our increasingly disorderly world?
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Prem »

http://thediplomat.com/2014/11/managing ... ic-crises/
Managing Indo-Pacific Crises
Tensions in Asia are rising over unresolved territorial disputes and sovereignty issues. In contrast to the immediate post-Cold War period, recent tensions are characterized by the evident proclivity of some, if not all, parties towards the threat or use of limited force. As a much preferred tool of statecraft, maritime platforms tend to be the archetypical instrument for this sort of diplomacy.
The spike in maritime encounters in recent years have largely involved coastguard-type forces in disputed waters of the East and South China Seas. More recently, though, regular naval ships have begun to appear on the scene. The risk of collision, especially in the constrained littorals that characterize the region, has risen as a result of these encounters. The risk rises further still if modern combat systems, characterized by long-range, short response time, high precision, and heavier destructive power are involved. As the stakes in a potential confrontation can be extremely high (involving, for instance, the loss of an entire platform and many of its crew) local commanders may feel compelled to escalate. And should over-zealous local commanders decide to take matters into their own hands, the outcome could be devastating.Perhaps it is with such dire scenarios in mind that – notwithstanding the public hardline stances adopted by the countries to those disputes – efforts are afoot to develop mechanisms that can help manage potential crises stemming from inadvertent aerial and maritime standoffs. China and Japan, for instance, recently began informal talks on establishing one such mechanism. Even more notably, during the last Western Pacific Naval Symposium in April 2014 naval leaders agreed to adopt a Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea (CUES), a non-binding standardized protocol of safety procedures for naval and aerial forces.
India, for one, has become increasingly active in projecting its naval presence into the Western Pacific. And it is not impervious to potential encounters. Back in July 2011, the Indian warship INS Airavat was reportedly harassed by the “Chinese Navy” when it was sailing northward from the Vietnamese port of Nha Trang to Haiphong. Both Beijing and New Delhi sought to downplay or even deny this incident. Even if this was an isolated case, it demonstrates that maritime and aerial encounters may no longer involve only resident actors in specific regions. Extra-regional actors may potentially be involved.
An Indo-Pacific Air-Maritime Crisis Management Framework?
So perhaps it is prudent to examine the plausibility of an Indo-Pacific framework for crisis management at sea and in the air. This would take into account the interconnectedness and increasing strategic and economic importance of both the Western Pacific and the Indian Ocean seen in the context of the shift of the world’s economic and military balance towards Asia.In addition, it takes into account Asia’s two rising powers – China and India – and their strategic forays, including the projection of military power into the two oceans. The reported visits by Chinese submarines to Sri Lanka signify Beijing’s firm resolve to not just maintain but elevate its military profile in the Indian Ocean. This is mirrored by India’s increasing naval presence in the Western Pacific, particularly in Southeast Asia.While it may be presumptuous to assume that Sino-Indian aerial and maritime encounters will necessarily ensue simply because they have increasingly projected military power into the two oceans, it pays to be prepared. Misunderstandings and escalations of tensions stemming from close-proximity encounters might result in the absence of an existing mechanism. If Chinese and Indian ground forces can be involved in close-proximity incidents along the Line of Actual Control, is it not possible to envision similar encounters in the Indian Ocean and South China Sea?Of course, there have been bilateral initiatives in this area in Southeast and Northeast Asian regions. But if an Indo-Pacific crisis management mechanism or framework is to be considered, it would be multilateral in nature.
.This DCL mechanism is a model worth looking at if an Indo-Pacific wide framework is to be considered in the future. However, this multilateral mechanism must first demonstrate its workability; only then will it be possible to consider expanding it into a wider arrangement. The ideal platform in this regard is the ADMM-Plus which was established in 2010, four years after ADMM, to include the eight extra-regional powers: Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand, the Russian Federation, South Korea and the U.S. The ASEAN Maritime Forum was also subsequently enlarged to become the Expanded ASEAN Maritime Forum, which includes the Plus-Eight partners. This “building block” approach is thus not unusual.This wider arrangement couched within the Indo-Pacific geostrategic construct fits nicely within ASEAN’s objective of sustaining its centrality in an inclusive regional architecture. ASEAN can serve as an honest broker in an Indo-Pacific crisis management framework, encouraging mutual understanding amongst regional militaries and coastguards via a common regional platform. An Indo-Pacific air-maritime crisis management framework could naturally stem from this ASEAN DCL initiative, using ADMM-Plus as the avenue.
member_22733
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3788
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by member_22733 »

svinayak wrote:Broken Window Theory

http://online.wsj.com/articles/yes-amer ... 1415984889

The idea that the mere appearance of disorder encourages a deeper form of disorder cuts against the conventional wisdom that crime is a function of “root causes.” Yet municipalities that adopted policing techniques based on the broken-windows theory—techniques that emphasized policing by foot patrols and the strict enforcement of laws against petty crimes and “social incivilities”—tended to register sharp drops in crime and improvements in the overall quality of life. :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

We are disposed to think that, over time, order inevitably dissolves into disorder. But the drop in crime rates reminds us that we can go the other way—and impose order on disorder. Could it be that there’s a “broken windows” cure not just for America’s mean streets but for our increasingly disorderly world?
The man is high on something, along with being high on white privilege. Overall quality of life increased for the whites when there were more policemen, that is because they usually drove off all the non-whites from that area. That increase in quality of life is very temporary, since the cost to the white citizen is going to be his freedom, which sooner or later will be reduced to zero.

Now this jackass wants mmmurica to do the same thing with the world, to make it safe for the white man.

Pot should be legalized, but people like him should be barred from ever sniffing it, for we will get such delusional fartikals pulled out from his colorful mush.
Tuvaluan
BRFite
Posts: 1816
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Tuvaluan »

The broken window theory just states that if a neighbourhood has broken windows that are not being patched by their residents, then there is a deeper malaise that is prevalent in the neighbourhood that needs to be fixed. But when we talk of geo politics, the broken windows are being created by the same aholes that are analyzing why windows are being broken. What exactly what the logic in the US color revolution in Ukraine "broken window? other than that the mofos in the US state dept. thought they could get away with creating trouble on russia's borders in a deniable manner.

It is always important to apply such theories in their contexts, "broken windows" are a symptom only in places where houses with shiny windows is the norm. It does not apply to places where windows do not exist or where windows do not have any glass. Apply the wrong theory in the wrong context and the only person who will be surprised is you.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by svinayak »

It’s now total war against the BRICS
November 11, 2014 Pepe Escobar, RT.com

The BRICS immensely annoy Washington – and its Think Tankland – as they embody the concerted Global South push towards a multipolar world.

http://in.rbth.com/world/2014/11/11/its ... 39647.html
Fasten your seat belts: the information war already unleashed against Russia is bound to expand to Brazil, India and China.

Brazil, Russia, India and China, as it’s widely known, are the top four members of the BRICS group of emerging powers, which also includes South Africa and will incorporate other Global South nations in the near future. The BRICS immensely annoy Washington – and its Think Tankland – as they embody the concerted Global South push towards a multipolar world.

Bottles of Crimean champagne could be bet that the US response to such a process couldn’t be but a sort of total information war - not dissimilar in spirit to the NSA’s deep state Total Information Awareness (TIA), a crucial element of the Pentagon’s Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine. The BRICS are seen as a major threat – so to counteract them implies domination of the information grid.

Vladimir Davydov, director of the Russian Academy of Sciences' Institute of Latin America, was spot on when he remarked, “The current situation shows that there are attempts to suppress not only Russia but also the BRICS given that the global role of this association has only intensified.”
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by RajeshA »

Cross-posted from "India-US Relations : News and Discussion" Thread

The crux of American politics is still oriented towards neutralizing Russia. As long as Russia stands independent, American hegemony over the West is incomplete, and just as Sunnis can't stand Shi'a, same way Americans can't stand Russians.

The only way, USA would come out of this dynamic is if the Western world (Whites) again become tripolar with Germany becoming a separate pole. If Scotland had got its independence, this would have become reality. Then American policy would again have revolved around balancing, and in some cases it would have involved balancing the Germans with the help of the Russians as it happened in World War II.

For that UK has to disappear from EU, and Germany has to take over the reins of EU, perhaps with the help of the French. Then West is again tripolar and American obsession with Russia ends.

Until the obsession with Russia endures, US would sleep with every bit of trash in the world - Chinese, Pakis, Saudis, ISIS, whatever...
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Philip »

The cruel fate of Christians in Iraq.The same is happening in Syria,where in both countries,the "Syrian Christians" are being decimated and forced to flee from their homes where they have lived for about 2000 years.The "Christian" West does nothing,other than arm the "good Muslims" fighting Assad who are persecuting the SChristians!

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 77698.html
Patrick Cockburn
Sunday 23 November 2014

Isis in Iraq: The trauma of the last six months has overwhelmed the remaining Christians in the country
World View: After 2,000 years, a community will try anything – including pretending to convert to Islam – to avoid losing everything
vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by vishvak »

Fate of Yazidis is worse still; being not big in numbers the Yezidis are now scattered too across regions without ID papers, money to travel even by public transport, and looked down upon by other communities because of nothing but beliefs and traditions. Not unlike beggars, and at best not unlike Romas in Europe or at worst running from ISIL traps across Sinjar mountains for months on end in winter and rains without food, shelter, clothing and also weapons to defend with.
Samudragupta
BRFite
Posts: 625
Joined: 12 Nov 2010 23:49
Location: Some place in the sphere

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Samudragupta »

The German insecurity is rising again....resulting in the re-rising of the The German Question in Europe.....four geostrategic moves are causing this,

The American pivot in the pacific shifting from the Atlantic.

The Russian Resurgence.

Resurrection of the Anglo-French entente in Europe

Neo-Ottomanism of Turkey aligning with the Islamo- Arab world.

Germans are looking for powerful strategic partners for their security in Europe...if they dont find one there will be resurrection of the German militarism...

This could be powerful opportunity for India...why not try to bend the iron cross again to Swastika!!! :idea:
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12195
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Pratyush »

Or may be Germany will link with Russia. Poland gets thrown under the bus.
kmkraoind
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3908
Joined: 27 Jun 2008 00:24

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by kmkraoind »

Blast from past. Its an dated article, i.e. August 2013.

Exclusive: Saudi offers Russia deal to scale back Assad support - so
Syrian opposition sources close to Saudi Arabia said Prince Bandar offered to buy up to $15 billion of Russian weapons as well as ensuring that Gulf gas would not threaten Russia's position as a main gas supplier to Europe.
Do not know how much KSA may lose due to ISIS advances, but Russia is facing a huge loss. Clearly Russia is caught between honor and economic trouble.

Russia losing 'up to $140B' from sanctions, oil drop
Russia is suffering losses at a rate of about $40 billion per year because of Western sanctions and $90-100 billion from the drop in the oil price, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov said on Monday.
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6919
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by habal »

kmkraoind, you have to understand how Russia became the powerful Soviet Union and then from Russia of Yeltsin to the Russia of today. It didn't become so by pleasing everybody. It has always ploughed a lonely furrow and walked a narrow path. You do understand that Russia was what stood between the western sponsored genocide of Alawis in Syria, it is for that reason they are trying to make it pay. But the day Russia falls down, that genocide will be magnified manifold across the world.

It was the fall of Soviet Union which launched a flurry of wars in the past 2 decades. If Soviety Union were around those wars would never have taken place. If Russia falls, then multiply that by 20 times. Again, if Russia crosses this tough phase they will be more powerful than ever. Great countries are built upon such sacrifices and great countries are not built on the back of some spendthrift oligarchs.
RSoami
BRFite
Posts: 771
Joined: 23 Apr 2010 14:39

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by RSoami »

Or may be Germany will link with Russia. Poland gets thrown under the bus.
Poland is the new France for Germany. The relations between the two were never better. They are synchronising their foreign policy objectives vis a vis Russian problem in Ukraine.
devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by devesh »

Samudragupta wrote:The German insecurity is rising again....resulting in the re-rising of the The German Question in Europe.....four geostrategic moves are causing this,

The American pivot in the pacific shifting from the Atlantic.

The Russian Resurgence.

Resurrection of the Anglo-French entente in Europe

Neo-Ottomanism of Turkey aligning with the Islamo- Arab world.

Germans are looking for powerful strategic partners for their security in Europe...if they dont find one there will be resurrection of the German militarism...

This could be powerful opportunity for India...why not try to bend the iron cross again to Swastika!!! :idea:

Germans will not repeat old mistake of unilateral aggression. they learned the lesson that any such actions end up unifying diverse powers such as US & Russia against them. Merkel is walking a fine path. her successors, for better or worse, will continue similarly.

but what we can expect is that in diplomatic/foreign-policy initiatives, the new Germany will no longer blindly toe Ango-US line. to a large extent, they've already stopped doing that. this means that India can independently negotiate with Germany w/o Uncle's influence. whether anything concrete comes out of it, is an entirely different question. it depends on how Germany perceives its interessts vis-a-vis PRC.

I'm not quite sure that Germany has ever seriously fought Islamism in its history. we see a Martel in France, but no similar figure in Germany.

and even now, most Jihadi plotting of international terror seems to have a free hand in Germany w/o much public activism against it.
Samudragupta
BRFite
Posts: 625
Joined: 12 Nov 2010 23:49
Location: Some place in the sphere

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Samudragupta »

Germans will not repeat old mistake of unilateral aggression. they learned the lesson that any such actions end up unifying diverse powers such as US & Russia against them. Merkel is walking a fine path. her successors, for better or worse, will continue similarly.
Germans sees multilateralism as the best insurance policy against their strategic threat....ie threat from the East.....
I'm not quite sure that Germany has ever seriously fought Islamism in its history. we see a Martel in France, but no similar figure in Germany.

and even now, most Jihadi plotting of international terror seems to have a free hand in Germany w/o much public activism against it.
Germans dont see Islamism as a serious threat to their insecurity.... in fact Germans sees themselves as a natural partner to the middle East....
Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3800
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Paul »

Telegraph

Kapil Sibal thinks Sri Lanka is the bad news in the neighbourhood. No surprises on Pakistan. Bangladesh and more recently Nepal appear to be the silver lining on the dark horizon.
Unfriendly neighbour

- Stronger rule in Delhi has not changed Pakistan's attitude

Kanwal Sibal

With a tougher leader and a stronger government in Delhi, it would have been normal for our neighbours to examine whether they needed to review their India-related policies. In a positive scenario for us, we could have expected them to seek a better understanding with us, work to build greater trust, show more receptivity for our sensitivities, take greater cognizance of our security interests and avoid provocations that could invite a more robust response from a more self-confident government.

One could have also thought that, with the increased international attention that the Narendra Modi government was getting, the rising interest in the Indian market because of the prime minister's business-friendly credentials and the likelihood of the reforms process gaining momentum under his leadership, they would think of promoting greater economic links with India.

They might have concluded, too, that the Indian prime minister is very pragmatic in his thinking, that he wants good relations with all major countries irrespective of outstanding problems, including with China, and that this all-round bridge-building might require them to reassess whether they had the same external cards to play against India as in the past.

In actual fact, early signs are that in spite of the Modi government's emphasis on good-neighbourly ties and gestures in reaching out to our neighbours, not all of them are redefining their approach towards India. Pakistan, of course, stands out as a prime example of this and signals from Sri Lanka are not comforting.

Pakistan is a unique case. Unless it ceases to think that its national mission is to counter India with all means, including terrorism, our differences will defy reasonable solutions. Even now there is no sign that Pakistan has changed its basic thinking towards India. It continues to harp on Kashmir, feeling no need to rethink its sterile position even after 67 years. It is undeterred by the loss of Western support on the issue. The end of the Cold War changed the contours of international relations, but not those of India-Pakistan relations.

It is unclear what Pakistan wants in Kashmir realistically, as it possesses two-fifths of it already, which has given it a common border with China and denied us one with Afghanistan. It can neither seize Kashmir by force, nor win it through negotiations. It can, at best, support the separatists there and abet periodic violence.

Some in India blame the government for rebuffing Nawaz Sharif's desire to improve ties with India, recalling that, during the last elections in Pakistan, the manifestos of mainstream parties advocated good relations with us, indicating changed sentiments towards India. This, they argue, merits continued effort by India to engage Pakistan, especially the India-friendly civil society there. They rue that India, now insisting that Pakistan end terrorism for a dialogue to continue, is emulating Pakistan that had long made peace with India contingent on a resolution of the Kashmir issue.

These arguments are questionable. If the public in Pakistan is now electorally disinterested in the Kashmir issue and Nawaz Sharif wants better ties with India, then why is he aggressively posturing on Kashmir, seeking Western intervention and demanding self-determination under United Nations resolutions, and why has even Bilawal Bhutto begun ranting about Kashmir? If Pakistan's civil society can show little tangible achievement all these years to settle any of our differences, why do we cling to hopes that it can do so in the future with our support? Our previous government had formally de-linked terrorism and dialogue, without Pakistan willing even to place curbs on Hafiz Saeed, much less eradicate the India-directed jihadi infrastructure in the country. Our legitimate insistence that Pakistan must abjure terrorism cannot be equated with Pakistan's illegitimate position that we make territorial concessions to it in Kashmir as otherwise Pakistan's "diplomatic and moral support to freedom fighters in Kashmir" will continue.

The argument - that infiltration into Jammu and Kashmir and Pakistan-abetted terrorist incidents having declined, the case for engaging Nawaz Sharif becomes stronger - is flawed. Since these downward trends began before his election, should the credit go to the civilians that want better relations with India or the armed forces that actually control Pakistan's India-related policies and impede good relations with us? How to explain this contradiction except to conclude that, at the end of the day, there is consensus in Pakistan that, for the reward of peace, India must pay the price of making concessions of the kind that Pakistan's armed forces want. Even that may not provide the final answer to India-Pakistan differences because of Pakistan's increasing Islamization.

Globalization has knit countries together in several ways, especially economic, but without bringing India and Pakistan closer. Pakistan is unable to extend even the most- favoured-nation treatment to India because of domestic, economic and religious lobbies. Even calling it "non-discriminatory market access" does not permit Nawaz Sharif to end this absurdity for fear of "public opinion", which, at the same time, is supposed to have become more India-friendly. When the rest of the world is signing free trade agreements and forging trans-continental economic partnerships, Pakistan refuses to even normalize trade relations with India, much less agree on investments and services.

In Asia in particular, connectivity is the buzzword. China is focusing on creating connectivities to expand its commercial influence in Asia as a whole, with links extended to Europe, but Pakistan will not allow transit rights to India through its territory to Afghanistan and reap the revenues, apart from preventing the contribution this step will make to improved economic conditions in Afghanistan. It is, of course, willing to promote connectivities that bolster China's geo-political ambitions in the region.

Terrorism has become a global phenomenon. If many believe that this menace has spread because of the manner in which the West has dealt with the Arab world, controlling their ruling classes and resources, bringing about regime changes there, not to mention supporting Israel at the cost of Palestinian rights, Pakistan's involvement with terrorism has no such 'justification'. Pakistan voluntarily became the instrument of the United States of America to counter the former Soviet Union in order to boost its capacity to confront India. It nurtured jihadi groups within the country for carrying out asymmetric warfare against India, and spawned the Taliban with 'strategic depth' with India in mind. Now Pakistan is paying internally the costs of its pernicious policies. Pakistan is a unique case of a country resorting to terrorism to back its territorial claims on another.

China's spectacular rise, the enormous financial resources it commands, its search for more markets for its huge export capacities in certain sectors, especially infrastructural, the land and sea connectivities it is building to expand its commercial presence - with greater political influence to follow inexorably - are being increasingly felt in our neighbourhood, presenting new challenges to us for maintaining control over our neighbourhood in a way that our fundamental security interests are not threatened. Pakistan apart, we have to contend with mounting pressures on our vital interests in Sri Lanka, the Maldives, Nepal, Bangladesh and even Bhutan with which we have an excellent understanding. The challenge building up in the Indian Ocean with Sri Lanka's accord is particularly problematic.

The author is former foreign secretary of India. sibalkanwal@gmail.com
Hope Modi's economic focus on Nepal and also excellent relations with Sheikh Haseena pays off.
vijaykarthik
BRFite
Posts: 1169
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by vijaykarthik »

^^ Kanwal Sibal, you mean. I was for a moment surprised to see how Kapil Sibal become so smart and sane in foreign policy.
devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by devesh »

Nepal and Bhutan need to be brought closer first. which means eliminating (by Nepalese elements or Indian) pro-PRC interests. in the long run, as long as Tibet is under PRC, Nepal will always be unstable. Tibet liberation in long term cannot be compromised on.
vijaykarthik
BRFite
Posts: 1169
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by vijaykarthik »

Tuvaluan
BRFite
Posts: 1816
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Tuvaluan »

It is sad when alleged geostrategic analysts make such arguments, and they are all part of India' think tanks apparently. It is pointing out the obvious that India has to play less by the rules and do what it needs to, but at the same time it cannot sign on to WTO agreements willingly knowing that it will create problems for the government down the line. If these guys had watched what Ms. Niramala Seetharaman had to say about why the Indian govt. balked at signing the WTO agreement, they would not be writing crap like this:

"By no means is this a case for India to be a wholesale rule-breaker, but it does suggest that our negotiators need not spend enormous amounts of time hammering out perfect clauses."

A missing comma can make all the difference, and there is no guarantee that five years from now, a poorly written clause will not come back to haunt India in the guise of a trade violation, just for protecting its farmer's interests. The above is only true after India gets rich enough with sufficient funds to not care what the WTO does, and even then it is stupid to sign on to treaties without knowing what one is signing up for -- which is why hordes of lawyer types assist countries like the US in drafting such agreements. It took china no less than 20-30 years to get to that point from 1978, where they could brazenly violate treaties and show everyone the finger, like other powers like the US already do. This is the same "think tank" that hosts the paki Hussain Haqqani and teaches in its classes that India should hand over Pok to the pakis -- why are such Indian thinktanks populated by utter #$@%ing losers, one wonders. "The Indian policy maker is a world policy maker" it seems. Such delusions of grandeur -- this is the same kind nonsense Nehru peddled as he stepped on his own schlong and made generations of Indians pay for his mistakes. How about making Indian policy for Indian people and let all the side effects on other countries' policies a matter that is none of our concern?
vijaykarthik
BRFite
Posts: 1169
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by vijaykarthik »

I feel like puking when people confuse their concepts in the WTO deal.

The agriculture subsidies were different and the food stock-piling was different... and as different as chalk and cheese.

The author refers to the food stock-piling (the one that got accepted) and safely assumes that the food subsidies problem is done. Huh? Think tank indeed. Think stank, rather.

* - the food subsidy got approved through the peace clause, for the curious. However, even there the quality of reporting is piss poor. RanDeeTV initially said the peace clause was indefinite and ydays farticle said 2017. FWIW, India WASNT OK with a 4 yr peace clause last time around [was it August?]. What changed now?

The quality of reporting has been pretty poor too in this aspect. Amazing idiots.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Philip »

A veritable 'miracle'!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... -away.html
Vatican finds hundreds of millions of euros 'tucked away'

Australian Cardinal George Pell, appointed by Pope to oversee the Vatican's often muddled finances, says hundreds of millions of euros did not appear on balance sheet

George Pell
Reuters
05 Dec 2014

The Vatican's economy minister has said hundreds of millions of euros were found "tucked away" in accounts of various Holy See departments without having appeared in the city-state's balance sheets.

In an article for Britain's Catholic Herald Magazine published on Friday, Australian Cardinal George Pell wrote that the discovery meant overall Vatican finances were in better shape than previously believed.

"In fact, we have discovered that the situation is much healthier than it seemed, because some hundreds of millions of euros were tucked away in particular sectional accounts and did not appear on the balance sheet," he wrote.

"It is important to point out that the Vatican is not broke ... the Holy See is paying its way, while possessing substantial assets and investments," Pell said, according to an advance text made available on Thursday.

Pell did not suggest any wrongdoing but said Vatican departments had long had "an almost free hand" with their finances and followed "long-established patterns" in managing their affairs.

"Very few were tempted to tell the outside world what was happening, except when they needed extra help," he said, singling out the once-powerful Secretariat of State as one department that had especially jealously guarded its independence.

"It was impossible for anyone to know accurately what was going on overall," said Pell, head of the new Secretariat for the Economy that is independent of the now downgraded Secretariat of State.

Pell is an outsider from the English-speaking world transferred by Pope Francis from Sydney to Rome to oversee the Vatican's often muddled finances after decades of control by Italians.

Pell's office sent a letter to all Vatican departments last month about changes in economic ethics and accountability.

As of Jan 1, each department will have to enact "sound and efficient financial management policies" and prepare financial information and reports that meet international accounting standards.

Each department's financial statements will be reviewed by a major international auditing firm, the letter said.

Since the pope's election in March, 2013, the Vatican has enacted major reforms to adhere to international financial standards and prevent money laundering. It has closed many suspicious accounts at its scandal-rocked bank.

In his article, Pell said the reforms were "well under way and already past the point where the Vatican could return to the 'bad old days'."
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by ramana »

Spinster sent this
sequence

Stumbling toward a solution on Syria

Stumbling toward a solution on Syria
Either Syria will give up its chemical weapons or you have more solid ground for military options.

View on www.washingtonpos... Preview by Yahoo





Speaking in London earlier today, John Kerry appeared to issue a long-shot ultimatum to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, suggesting that if he turned over his complete stockpile of chemical weapons within the next week he could avoid an attack from the United States. The State Department, however, would later walk back those comments, saying they were a "rhetorical argument" and not an actual proposal, adding that Assad "cannot be trusted" to take such action.

Putin Check mated when Kerry moved is Pawn(mouth).
Azad destroying the Chem Weapons did not end the Syrian war instead into went into inferno with Turkey taking it out on Syrian Kurds/Iraqi kurds.
Then Saudi Prince Bandar goes to Putin...
Saudis offer Russia secret oil deal if it drops Syria - Telegraph

Saudis offer Russia secret oil deal if it drops Syria - ...
Saudi Arabia has secretly offered Russia a sweeping deal to control the global oil market and safeguard Russia’s gas contracts, if the Kremlin backs away fr...

View on www.telegraph.co.uk Preview by Yahoo





Prince Bandar, head of Saudi intelligence, allegedly confronted the Kremlin with a mix of inducements and threats in a bid to break the deadlock over Syria. “Let us examine how to put together a unified Russian-Saudi strategy on the subject of oil. The aim is to agree on the price of oil and production quantities that keep the price stable in global oil markets,” he said at the four-hour meeting with Mr Putin. They met at Mr Putin’s dacha outside Moscow three weeks ago.
“We understand Russia’s great interest in the oil and gas in the Mediterranean from Israel to Cyprus. And we understand the importance of the Russian gas pipeline to Europe. We are not interested in competing with that. We can cooperate in this area,” he said, purporting to speak with the full backing of the US.
As-Safir said Prince Bandar pledged to safeguard Russia’s naval base in Syria if the Assad regime is toppled, but he also hinted at Chechen terrorist attacks on Russia’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if there is no accord. “I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us,” he allegedly said.
Prince Bandar went on to say that Chechen s operating in Syria were a pressure tool that could be switched on an off. “These groups do not scare us. We use them in the face of the Syrian regime but they will have no role in Syria’s political future.”
Recall also "The offer of Blank Check by Bandar to Putin to write his price ..." this was mentioned in BRF

This was also spurned by Putin
Now back in tubelightbad they topple UKR prez and Maidan tamasha starts, opening a new war front far from Syria but right on the door of Putin!!
As if (like in the Billy Joel Song we didn't start the fire) not enough things were burning, the extreme isis(pure of pure) created initially to take on Syrian and Lebanon forces supporting the Assad regime, since Iran was meddling there, so some one in tubelight city said since these guys need funds (are pure of the pure cant do drugs) so these guys need to take over oil fields unlike talibs who can do drugs. so the crusade now reaches Iraq oil fields and the destruction of Yezdi's.
Bandars now realize that this wild fire is coming towards KSA and to cut the oxygen of money supply from oil, to pure of the pure, start pumping oil and the price plunge takes, the side effects but beneficial Bandars is curb shale, curb Putins money, curb Iran, curb Libiyan militants(making money) on tha way Venezuela Nigeria, North Sea, Canada Brunei

Now its a game of who will blink first... ...
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Philip »

http://rt.com/news/227691-morales-rt-voice-people/

Evo Morales: RT is voice of developing countries, peoples of the world
Published time: January 30, 2015
Published time: January 30, 2015 04:19
Bolivia's President Evo Morales (Reuters/Juan Carlos Ulate)

RT has become the voice of revolutionaries and countries that the United States would like to silence, said Bolivian leader Evo Morales, commenting on remarks by the BBG chief who compared the challenge posed by RT with those of ISIS and Boko Haram.

READ MORE: Head of US state media put RT on same challenge list as ISIS, Boko Haram

Morales was responding to comments made by Andrew Lack, the new head of the US Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), in which he compared RT to terrorist organizations.

“When the media turns into the voice of the people, especially in the voice of revolutionaries, there are those people and the media, who will judge them and falsify the truth,” Morales told RT. “This media is the voice of the developing countries, the voice of the peoples of the world, and it deserves our admiration.”

Despite smear campaigns, misrepresentation of facts, and pure lies, such media should continue their work to “give the microphone to the peoples of the world,” he added.
RT has become the Al Jazeera of the former East Bloc,rivalling the BBC and CNN. Let's be honest,it represents the Russian line,but ts programmes are slick and has excellent foreign western origin anchors,talking heads of repute and even a special show with...Larry King! All over the world people are becoming fed up with the absurd propaganda spewed by old channels of repute.Take the BBC for example.There is scarce mention/coverage of the momentous Greek election,where the radical left has won a stunning victory that threatens the stability of the EU/Euro.The sweeping victories in S.America for Left parties representing the poor indigenous peoples of the continent is also generally ignored. The BBC was far more independent years ago and had greater credibility until the Tony B.Liar era and the western invasion of Iraq and the wars of the Middle East.

The coverage of the Ukraine by Western channels has scarcely ever looked at the conflict from the Russian viewpoint and when former Western icon and star Russian,Gorbachev ,who ended the Cold War with Reagan, accuses the West of betraying the agreement made with the USSR not to expand NATO to Russian borders,supporting fascists in the UKR ,and engineering a new Cold War that might lead to armed conflict between east and west, is ignored ,one-sidedness of the media has been taken to new depths of the ditch.

RT has become so successful that the US now has placed it as great a threat as ISIS! The absurdity of it all,especially coming from the so-called champion of democracy ,which boasts about global democracy.free speech,blah,blah,but practices in a manner that would bring a smile to the late Dr.Joseph Goebbels!
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by ramana »

Philip, Mull over this. Total grand strategy even if it finishes one.
Sean Mcmeekin, "The Russian Origins of the First World War"
English | ISBN: 0674062108 | 2011 | 344 pages |

The catastrophe of the First World War, and the destruction, revolution, and enduring hostilities it wrought, make the issue of its origins a perennial puzzle. Since World War II, Germany has been viewed as the primary culprit. Now, in a major reinterpretation of the conflict, Sean McMeekin rejects the standard notions of the war's beginning as either a Germano-Austrian preemptive strike or a 'tragedy of miscalculation'. Instead, he proposes that the key to the outbreak of violence lies in St. Petersburg. It was Russian statesmen who unleashed the war through conscious policy decisions based on imperial ambitions in the Near East. Unlike their civilian counterparts in Berlin, who would have preferred to localize the Austro-Serbian conflict, Russian leaders desired a more general war so long as British participation was assured. The war of 1914 was launched at a propitious moment for harnessing the might of Britain and France to neutralize the German threat to Russia's goal: partitioning the Ottoman Empire to ensure control of the Straits between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean. Nearly a century has passed since the guns fell silent on the western front. But in the lands of the former Ottoman Empire, World War I smolders still. Sunnis and Shiites, Arabs and Jews, and other regional antagonists continue fighting over the last scraps of the Ottoman inheritance. As we seek to make sense of these conflicts, McMeekin's powerful expose of Russia's aims in the First World War will illuminate our understanding of the twentieth century.
anmol
BRFite
Posts: 1922
Joined: 05 May 2009 17:39

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by anmol »

thediplomat.com/2015/01/india-the-austria-hungary-of-the-21st-century/

India: The Austria-Hungary of the 21st Century?
by Franz-Stefan Gady, thediplomat.com
January 31st 2015

If it heeds the lessons of history, the US would do well not to foster close ties with India in the next few years.

During this week’s podcast I briefly mentioned an idea that I would like to explore a bit further: The striking similarities between the strategic position of India in the 21st century with that of the now vanished empire of Austria-Hungary in the 19th and early 20th century. I’ve published similar pieces looking at this analogy previously at The Huffington Post and China-US Focus, but I thought I would repost some of my observations here as well.

To this day, India’s foreign policy, much like Austria-Hungary’s is – more than most other emerging titans – constrained by a quest for internal security and a deep introspection – making it a reluctant power and conducting a more or less ‘introverted foreign policy’.

The Austrian Empire, like India, was considered to be a bridging power between East and West for much of its existence. It was a multi-national empire, more concerned with its internal security and stability than with great power politics, and after humiliating defeats in 1859 and 1866, reluctant to use military power to achieve its political objectives (for most of the late 19th century-early 20th period it spent comparatively little on military defense). As with the Sino-Indian war of 1962, these defeats lead to various military and political reforms culminating in the Austro-Hungarian compromise of 1867 and the establishment of a dual monarchy. Also, like India, Austria-Hungary was held together by an omnipotent, if slightly inefficient, bureaucracy.

Austria’s “Pakistan” in the 20th century was Serbia, a small state in the Balkans trying to lure the South Slavic subjects of the empire to revolt through subversive means (as with Pakistan there was a clandestine connection between government circles and radical elements in the Serbian intelligence community). Most importantly, Austria’s stance vis-à-vis Serbia was emboldened by its dual alliance with the German Empire, which in 1914 , after the assassination, gave Austria a diplomatic carte blanche, to deal once and for all with the “Serbian problem”.

Before this dual alliance, Austria always had to play a rather careful diplomatic game between East and West. The great protector power of Serbia was Russia, Austria’s powerful eastern neighbor (cf. the Russian, Count Vronsky, who in the novel, Ana Karenina, departs for Serbia at the end of the novel to participate in the Orthodox Serbian revolt against the Turks) threatening Austria’s exposed eastern borders. As the years progressed and tensions between the great powers mounted and the dual alliance solidified, Austria took an increasingly more aggressive stance against Serbia’s agitations.

In 1914, after the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand of Austria, Austria’s Chief of Staff Conrad von Hoetzendorf’s repeated request for preventive war with Serbia was finally granted. Not before Austria, however, thought it had secured Germany’s guarantee to help defend its eastern borders, plunging all of Europe into the First World War.

India today faces many similar problems as Austria did in the early 20th century. A powerful peer competitor in the East conducting a relatively subtle anti-Indian South Asian policy and a smaller, but more real subversive threat coming from Pakistan (notwithstanding the nuclear component of this equation) and continuing internal unrest. Add the world’s strongest military power, the United States, to this mix and the results could be explosive. According to various foreign policy experts in New Delhi, India is very aware of the delicate situation it occupies.

The United States would do well not to foster too close of a relationship with India in the next few years of its ‘rebalance’ to Asia and should maintain the status quo. India has cautiously positioned herself between both parties in US-China competition. China has made it clear in numerous statements that it is not a threat to India, whereas India’s defense ministry clearly stated that India is not interested in containing China.

India’s diplomacy of peace and non-alignment is deeply felt and comes more naturally to it than war. In the near term the much bigger danger of an emboldened India may well be an increase in crypto-nationalism and inter-communal extremism.

The United States should heed the maxim “be careful what you wish for.” For closer military and diplomatic ties between India and the United States may embolden India’s foreign policy, which could potentially destabilize the entire region of South Asia. As history teaches us, multicultural great powers often have a need to define their national identities by overarching national ‘exertions’ such as a war. In conclusion, the Obama Administration should carefully evaluate its relationship with India in 2015 and beware of the unintentional but often hazardous consequences of Great Power politics. What do you think dear reader?

Note: Similar versions of this piece have been published over at The Huffington Post and at China-US Focus, as was mentioned earlier.
Tuvaluan
BRFite
Posts: 1816
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Tuvaluan »

The Franz-Stefan Gady seems to be a pro-china tool working for the East-West Institute which has articles like "China's righteous claims on the South China Sea", which kind of explains his poppycock comparing Austria in the 20th century to modern day India, with the same message the chinese have for India, that is "don't get too close to the US". This kind of messaging is transparently pathetic, actually. China is indulging in more of the nationalistic, war-mongering behavior right now, not India.
RSoami
BRFite
Posts: 771
Joined: 23 Apr 2010 14:39

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by RSoami »

Thanks for the article. Some of the points made are ok despite the many shortcomings.
Post Reply