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.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60277
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by ramana »

X-posted from TSP thread....

Navigating a complex world: Maleeha Lodhi
Navigating a complex world


Dr Maleeha Lodhi
Tuesday, January 31, 2012

The writer is special adviser to the Jang Group/Geo and a former envoy to the US and the UK.

“Anyone who tells you America is in decline or that our influence is waning doesn’t know what they’re talking about”. So declared President Barack Obama in last week’s election year state-of-the-union address. Zbigniew Brzezinski certainly knows what he is talking about when he discusses these issues in his new book: ‘Strategic Vision: America and the Crisis of Global Power’.

The former national security adviser is among America’s most insightful strategic thinkers and his latest book doesn’t disappoint. The book is a tour de force of his country’s place in a vastly transformed world when the era of western supremacy has passed.

In assessing America’s relative decline Brzezinski joins the wide-ranging debate about whether America’s hour of power has receded and its implications for the world. Recent literature offers conflicting views about the emergence of new powers and what this means for US global pre-eminence. From the analysis of the US decline popularised by Paul Kennedy to others who have examined how strategic overstretch and the relative erosion of economic power have contributed to the loss of global influence, a rich though inconclusive debate has been raging. Writers and historians engaging in this debate include Niall Ferguson, Kishore Mahbubani, Joseph Nye, Fareed Zakaria, Thomas Friedman and Richard Hass among others.

Brzezinski’s book positions him in this debate as a realist rather than as a doomsayer. :mrgreen: His evaluation of the world’s strategic complexity and new power realities is neither new nor original. But it is the clarity with which he lays this out and draws significant conclusions that makes his analysis compelling.

His principal concern is with the risk of global instability as an immediate consequence of the ongoing dispersal of power. He depicts a world in which the shift of power from the West to the East, what he calls the ‘dynamic political awakening’ of people worldwide and America’s deficient domestic and international performance have combined to create a crisis of power.

He argues that while America remains the pre-eminent power, its leadership is increasingly questioned across the world because of its internal and external challenges. He holds these domestic shortcomings and a misguided foreign policy responsible for denuding America of its global appeal. He identifies an unsustainable national debt, decaying infrastructure and dysfunctional, gridlocked politics to be among his country’s internal liabilities. He does not see these as irreversible and asserts that America can correct them by leveraging its other assets. But this requires political will and national consensus, which have so far been elusive.

The financial crisis of 2007 exposed two things: the systemic defects of the American economic ‘model’ and how political and economic power had in fact ebbed away from the West to the East. For Brzezinski the date 9/11 similarly laid bare the flaws in America’s foreign policy. :mrgreen: This in turn accounts for the dramatic fall in its global standing. 9/11, he writes, provoked three major US reactions: the 2001 military intervention in Afghanistan, endorsement of the 2002 military operation undertaken by Israeli Prime Minister Sharon to crush the PLO in the Palestinian West Bank, and the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

These actions heightened negative public sentiment towards the US in the Middle East. Engagement in two wars – described as “expeditionary military operations in hostile territories” – was undertaken with little regard for complex settings and conflicted regional neighbourhoods. In an era of global transparency, they led to erosion in America’s global position and delegitimation of its goals.

Brzezinski argues that by pursuing this course the US invited “strategic solitude” notwithstanding ‘cosmetic’ or half-hearted support from its friends and regional allies. The consequences of a foreign policy out of sync with the post imperial age and domestic economic weakening now threaten America’s capacity to play a major world role.

This brings the writer to the central thesis of his book. In a setting of global flux with a high potential for turbulence and increased tension among competitors vying for regional pre-eminence, the lack of global leadership risks economic and political chaos. If America slips when there is no other claimant to global power even by 2025, the post-America scramble will produce instability and turmoil. Brzezinski posits that China is not yet ready to assume a global role, something that Chinese leaders themselves have repeatedly stated.

In an engaging discussion of Chinese ‘strategic patience’ he shows how its leaders are still influenced by Deng Xiaoping’s advice: “Observe calmly, secure our position ...... hide our time, be good at maintaining a low profile, and never claim leadership”.

This urges Brzezinski to offer his own counsel for how to manage this transitional phase in world history. He insists that his call for a renewed US role is not an argument for global supremacy. He rules this out because a strategically complicated world makes this outcome unattainable. :(( But he sees an America pursuing a “new, timely strategic vision” to be crucial to averting the world’s slide into chaos. For this his prescription is plain: renewal at home and acting wisely abroad. :mrgreen: Over coming internal shortcomings will also help the US confidently adjust to a rising China.

Brzezinski outlines this geopolitical vision with characteristic lucidity. He makes the case for future relations between the West and East to be reciprocally cooperative. America’s strategy should be to ensure a revitalised and enlarged West (to include Russia and Turkey) while engaging constructively with an ascending Asia. That would mean playing the role of a ‘balancer’ and ‘conciliator’ with Asia’s rising powers, avoiding direct military involvement and consolidating a globally cooperative relationship with China.

{Paul Kennedy in "Rise and Fall of Great Powers" says that Balance of Power is a weak strategy. Great Britain did that in Continental Europe and it worked as they were divided. But when they unite it becomes self defeating.}

This aligns him with the views of Henry Kissinger, who has been the most prominent advocate of peaceful co-evolution with China. His arguments also echo Kissinger’s frequently stated belief that any American project designed to organise Asia on the basis of containing China is unlikely to succeed.

Of special interest to Pakistani readers are Brzezinski’s numerous references to the country both in his assessment of the state of geopolitical play in Asia and his advice to Washington about how to navigate through regional complexity to promote stability, rather than compound tensions.

Asia’s stability, he says, will rest in part on how America reacts to two regional triangles centred on China. The first being China, India and Pakistan, while the second relates to China, Japan and Korea. Brzezinski asserts that the US will remain the key player to influence ‘balances’ and determine outcomes.

In the China-India-Pakistan triangle he urges a cautious US role, taking issue with those in his country who advocate a policy of building India as a counterweight to China. He sees such a policy to be inimical to American security interests. This will risk the US getting embroiled in avoidable Asian conflicts. He casts as “unwise” the US decision to sell advanced weaponry to India and enhancing India’s nuclear programme. He disapproves of these for signalling a ‘contain China’ policy. :rotfl:

He also regards a US-India alliance as likely to heighten Muslim animosity towards America, as this will be construed as implicitly directed against Pakistan. :rotfl: Better relations with India are in America’s interest, but says Brzezinski, these “should not imply support on such contentious issues as Kashmir”.


{There are more Muslims in India than in Pakistan. And even otherwise what Pakistanis doing is to export radical terrorists to other Muslim countries and endangering those countries and providing safe haven for such elements. Speaks volumes of Zbig being out of touch.}

He advocates an active US role in Asia aimed at establishing a constructive American-Chinese relationship that can provide both global economic and political stability at a time of unprecedented change and growing volatility in the world.

Wise counsel for the next occupant of the White House especially as the present incumbent like his predecessor has had no strategic thinker in his team. Its consequence for US policy has been all too telling.

Zbigniew Brzezinski, Strategic Vision: America and the crisis of American power, New York, Basic Books, 2012.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21234
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Prem »

Is America Getting Weaker?
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com ... e-ctd.html
For
The United States remains very powerful -- especially when compared with some putative opponents like Iran -- but its capacity to lead security and economic orders in every corner of the world has been diminished by failures in Iraq (and eventually, Afghanistan), by the burden of debt accumulated over the past decade, by the economic melt-down in 2007-2008, and by the emergence of somewhat stronger and independent actors in Brazil, Turkey, India, and elsewhere. ... If it the United States remains far and away the world's strongest state, its ability to get its way in world affairs is declining.
Against
It Walt overestimates America's influence during the Cold War, he also underestimates American influence now. The funny thing about the "stronger and independent actors in Brazil, Turkey, India, and elsewhere" is that they're siding with the United States on multiple important issues. Coordination between Turkey and the United States on the Arab Spring has increased over time, and their policy positions on Iran are converging more than diverging. Brazil has turned a cold shoulder to Iran and has been warier about China's currency manipulation and rising influence in Latin America. India seems perfectly comfortable to be a partner in America's Pacific Rim pivot, as are Australia, Japan and South Korea.
devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by devesh »

ZB is a two-bit moron who is past is "use by" date, let alone sell-by date. the idiot is still chasing the shadows of the Cold War. a classic British plant, or at least subconsciously so well trained in channeling his thoughts in that direction, that prejudice against India burns very deep in him. the same idiot also was instrumental in starting the campaign to fund and equip the Afghan jihadis....and he still hasn't learned his lessons!!!

for people like him, it is ingrained to think of India as the "heathen" and "dangerous". they will never change.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14222
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by svinayak »

What Z Brezwnski has planned for the last 40 years will continue to go on. Same with Kissinger policy

All the policy makers will follow them since this is considered the long term strategy for USA for Asia and world.

Upsetting Muslims and Pakistan is considered against the US policy goals.

Undermining the PRC power is considered weakening US policy
CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6865
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by CRamS »

RamanaGaru,

Jihadi Lodhi, quintessential, westernized, cigarette-smoking TSP RAPE only confirms what we all sort of know: Their degenerate hatred of India, and it was to advance their interests visa vi India that they so sanctimoniously joined the so called "war on terror". What TSP wants is India's head on a silver platter as the logical segue to Zbieg's recommendation, and TSP treated as TFTA cousin of USA, which means lotsa moolah and weapons. Thats their sore gripe with US at the moment. But as AcharyaJi said, Jihadi Lodhi need not worry, the fact that TSP has gotten away with brazen crimes against humanity including aiding and abetting the killing of Americans in Afghanistan means that USA's "balance of power" doctrine between India and TSP is very much alive.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60277
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by ramana »

CRS and Devesh, Never mind Lodhi's hopes what India needs to understand is Zbig's ideas for that drives the US policy as a greybeard.

As I said the counter argument is TSP is menace to the Islamic world by its sheltering radicals and sending them to destabilise the Islamic world. Its hardly an ionic Islmaic state and on the contrary is an example of what can go wrong to an extremist Islamic state.
Besides more Muslims live in India than in the terrorst state.

And one of the primary schools of Islamic thought Deoband, is from India while even the Wahabi school is derivative school.


So Zbig is ill informed and has green blinkers like a banker's aide.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by brihaspati »

The western strategists primary fear of or opposition to Islamic militant manifestations - is because such manifestations expose Islamism and crystallizes non-Muslim mobilization against Islam. Islamism is a most useful tool of western imperialism, hence they would not like the real nature of the theology to be exposed.

West's rhetoric and attempt to control Islamic vehemence is all about control and covering up the real drive within the theology. Therefore, the west is not really interested in supporting or creating conditions for genuine post-Islamic societies.

Pakistan is an essential bastion of western imperialism in an overtly post-colonial framework. Overt forms of colonialism had to be dropped and severely publicly degraded, because emerging powers like Russia could have applied the colonial techniques in reverse on the previous rulers. Hence imperialism was by proxy.

Pakistan and the islamic world in general saw the opportunity through the eyes of their mullahcracy - in putting themselves up as prostitutes on the market [something that Mao too was considering and eventually did with Nixon].

This essentially western, particularly British, imperialist mindset, and Islamism, particularly the more politically astute mullahcracy - each see clearly this prostitution relationship quite clearly. So let us not get fooled by their overt posturings against each other.
Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Agnimitra »

brihaspati wrote:This essentially western, particularly British, imperialist mindset, and Islamism, particularly the more politically astute mullahcracy - each see clearly this prostitution relationship quite clearly. So let us not get fooled by their overt posturings against each other.
Each one thinks it is using the other, but eventually the religious side will establish long-term stable gain, IMHO.

Russian Czarist colonial expansion was similar. They brought in mullahs to convert the Kazakhs of the Central Asian steppes to Islam, in order to tame and control them. It worked, for a while. Russia still is the preponderant influence in the area. But in the long term, a tipping point will be reached. How close is the Anglo West to that tipping point?
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by brihaspati »

The tipping point is dicey. They are keeping a very very close watch on their domestic mullahcracy. Parts of the establishment do already fear the potential outcomes. However, another part thinks it can insulate itself and even dominate the islamic strands.

They are using the soviet-china-communist model as a successful precedent of digesting/breaking up such theocracies. They used the same tricks - keeping representative brains inside where they could do piskological studies or even pretend to lean backwards into red-ism.

The thing is - there is a rare, but still existent line of thought which posits the intra-communist fighting as part of a larger communist block taqyia - which the west swallowed hook, line and sinker. That opposite factions or even nationalistic communist pretensions of independent lines in global politics were part of a wider strategy to deal with anti-communist opposition, by creating impression of progressive/liberal/capitalistic factions among the communist collective.

This line of thought argues that eventually Russia and China splits were pretended splits, and done to gain advantages by engaging with the west selectively. Eventually, the inner core of "Leninism" would converge and carry out their joint globe-domination project.

From this viewpoint, we can substitute the Muslim for the communist. The conclusions would be highly interesting. I did not discover the communist insider argument before I had concluded about the essential unity within the Islamic bloc over the long term common goals on the non-muslim. But this communist line, even if not entirely true as it is usually presented - is uncannily accurate in its general predictions about thw way the communist world turned out.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21234
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Prem »

Merkel Snubs France As Europe's "AAA Club" Meets In Berlin Tomorrow ex-Sarkohttp://www.zerohedge.com/news/merkel-sn ... w-ex-sarko
few days after Germany proposed the stripping of Greek fiscal authority from the insolvent country, in exchange for providing funding for what German FinMin Schauble called today a "bottomless pit" (and Brüderle chimed in saying that "a default of the Greek government would be bitter but manageable), Sarkozy decided to demonstrate his "muscle" if not so much stature, and openly denied Germany, saying "There can be no question of putting any country under tutelage." Sure enough, it was now Germany's turn to reciprocate the favor. According to Bloomberg, "Finance ministers from the four euro- area countries with AAA ratings -- Germany, Finland, Luxembourg and the Netherlands -- will meet in Berlin tomorrow afternoon, a German Finance Ministry spokesman said." And as is well known, FrAAnce no longer a member of this, however meaningless, club. "The gathering is part of a a series of meetings convened by officials from the highest-rated euro states, the spokesman said, speaking on the customary condition of anonymity. Ministers will discuss current issues without briefing reporters after the meeting." And so the gauntlet of public humiliation is now once again back in Sarkozy's court. The good news: if the de minimis Frenchman does not get his act in order, and overturn the massive lead that his challenger in the April presidential elections has garnered, he will need to endure the humiliation for at most 3 more months. In other news, it appears that when it comes to saving political face, the rating agencies are actually quite useful.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60277
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by ramana »

Old ideas of balance of power are dissolving in Europe. Dont know what the Polish FM was thinking. Not much to stop German historic role.
Christopher Sidor
BRFite
Posts: 1435
Joined: 13 Jul 2010 11:02

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Christopher Sidor »

^^^^
Totally agree. The Germans sit at the heart of Europe. Geographically and economically. Its destiny is to lead Europe.

After Euro was introduced, I had hoped to see the Europeans refer to themselves less as Polish/French/Dutch/Germans/Italians and more as Europeans. I am bemused to find that this is not the case.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60277
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by ramana »

CS, Two thousand years of history got erased in a flash. The entire politics from Roman times was to keep the Germanics in check. After sack of Rome, the Pope made them the Holy Roman Emperors. The Brits took over and palyed blance of power playing one power against the other till Bismarck unified the Germans. That led to two world wars fought.
Klaus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Location: Cicero Avenue

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Klaus »

Poland is known to be the inside boy for the AADE in the Continental Club. Something about them not being able to forget Anglo-Saxon favors after the destruction of WW2.

Apart from the Anglo-Saxon countries, they only listen to France and Italy on matters closely related to their national policy, which is why it was ludicrous when Parag Khanna mentioned Poland as a future "swing state" a few years ago.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60277
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by ramana »

Poland is Catholic state in a Slav Eastern Europe.
Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3801
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Paul »

In an offshoot of the oft quoted offshore balancing strategy, Napolean favored the Polish state as a wedge between Prussia and Russia..andare being continued to this day by the englanders.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60277
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by ramana »

Paul, How are you? Yes the French connection dates to Napoleon's time.
The King of Poland John Sobeski defeated the Turks and saved Austria.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_III_Sobieski
abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4277
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by abhischekcc »

Klaus wrote:Poland is known to be the inside boy for the AADE in the Continental Club. Something about them not being able to forget Anglo-Saxon favors after the destruction of WW2.

Apart from the Anglo-Saxon countries, they only listen to France and Italy on matters closely related to their national policy, which is why it was ludicrous when Parag Khanna mentioned Poland as a future "swing state" a few years ago.
Which is funny, because it was really Britain that set up Poland to be devastated by Germany and Russia in WW2.

Poland's dilemma is that it is squeezed out by two large neighbours who keep invading it :lol: Hence they build alliances with other European countries that cannot, in theory, invade them. A kind of mandal strategy - enemy's enemy is my friend.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21234
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Prem »

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/02/09/f ... l-uranium/
Last month we discussed the rather alarming news that Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper was planning a trip to China to discuss possible natural resources deals with the economic superpower. It seemed no coincidence that the trip was announced close on the heels of Barack Obama’s decision to kick the can down the road on the Keystone XL pipeline yet again. But at that time, I retained some hope that perhaps this was just a warning siren to Obama which would remind him that Canada had plenty of other options should we decide not to do business with them.Apparently Harper hasn’t cared much for what he’s been hearing out of Washington and found a very willing ear across the Pacific because it seems that some deals have been struck already
Harper announced Thursday, following meetings with Chinese President Hu Jintao and Vice-Premier Li Keqiang, that the countries have struck an agreement that will allow Canadian uranium companies to “substantially increase exports to China.”“We expect to see similar success stories in Canadian energy exports to China, once infrastructure is in place.”Harper has said building pipelines to the West Coast — such as the proposed Northern Gateway oilsands pipeline and a separate one for liquefied natural gas — is a national priority as Canada looks to ship its vast resources to Asia.
(Dont miss the remarks :shock: )
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21234
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Prem »

Gradual shift in global economic power; emerging markets are coming to the forefront

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/opi ... 817413.cms
One of the themes that often comes up for discussion at regional and global congregations of business leaders, policymakers, academics and civil society representatives is the gradual shift in global economic power. How the economic realities are changing, with emerging market economies coming to the forefront, was highlighted when Goldman Sachs came out with its now-famous BRICs report.
While the focus initially was on Brazil, Russia, India and China, with time more countries such as Turkey, Indonesia, South Africa and Mexico were tipped as having high potential of becoming large economies in the 21st century. As the shift in economic order becomes clearer, businesses across the world are adapting and fine-tuning strategies to align them with this new reality. While businesses are thinking global and acting global, the political class has been somewhat wary to accept this change fully. Governments are thinking global but acting local. Let me take a few cases to exemplify this point.
Consider first the governance structure in institutions such as the IMF. In its present form, this system defies the basic principles of democracy. Some progress has been made in this direction with the Fund's decision to increase the voting rights of developing nations. If, however, IMF has to regain its credibility amongst the developing world then this will have to be a continuous process. Next, take the UN, the central pillar of the post-World War II global architecture. The UN Security Council (UNSC) has not changed since its inception and its present structure poses serious problems of legitimacy. The system of two-tiered membership that gives a veto to the five permanent members is antiquated.
The apex mechanism for ensuring global security must be as representative as the mechanism for managing global economic and financial issues. The UNSC must, therefore, be revamped to reflect the present-day realities. Apart from democratisation of global institutions, we have that of the multilateral trading system. Bringing the Doha Development Round (DDR) to conclusion is proving elusive. There are many who believe the collapse of the DDR is a foregone conclusion. I differ from this view.

Promoting global skills transfer and mobility; providing access to home markets; encouraging convertibility and flexibility of currencies; considering green technologies as global public goods; reducing export bans to the minimum are some of the principles that governments must both endorse and implement. If this happens, a breakthrough in global trade talks can be achieved. If not, then we will see propagation of plurilateral agreement(s) involving a few countries and in select areas as is being talked about today. Such sub-optimal solutions must be avoided. A globalised world seeing a shift in the core of economic power calls for a change in policy thinking. The twin areas of governance of global institutions and multilateral trade and investment negotiations must reflect this change in thinking. Business leaders support this. It is time the governments act accordingly.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21234
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Prem »

Economic balance shifts over Middle East
http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/featur ... 65210.html
Looking at the world economy from the Middle East, one can see economic power shifting from west to east. This is not the first time in history that we see a shift in global economic power, but we have to go back centuries to find something similar.ive hundred years ago, Asia dominated the world. China and India together represented about 50% of world gross domestic product. Western Europe and North America accounted for only 20%. But the industrial revolution changed the balance of power.By 1950, western Europe and North America accounted for 50% of the world's production. China and India combined had fallen to as low as 8%, and Japan was about to take over their role of the Asian economic power. By 1980, the world was dominated by the advanced economies.
But then a transformation started. Population growth had declined in rich economies but remained large in emerging markets. China and India saw their GDP per capita levels grow at very high rates, pushing them closer and closer to the advanced economies. Today, China is the second-largest economy in the world and together with India they already account for 20% of the world's GDP. In a few decades - and if recent trends continue - they will regain the status they had back in the year 1500 and account for half of the world's production. And they will do so at the expense of the economic powers that have dominated the world since the industrial revolution: Europe, the US and Japan.Danny Quah, a professor at the London School of Economics, has calculated the economic centre of gravity of the world by using GDP as a measure of the mass or weight of a country and thinking of a world map as a physical object.In his calculations, the centre of gravity in 1980 was in the Atlantic Ocean. Today the centre of gravity is over the Middle East. But four decades from now, it will be on the border of India and China. From the perspective of countries in the Middle East, it is natural to shift focus from declining advanced economies toward Asia. But how sure are we that this trend will continue over the coming decades? What are the risks? As much as this recent trend is solid - and there are many reasons to believe that it will continue in the decades ahead - there are also reasons to be cautious.This is not the first time in history that we see emerging markets doing well for a good number of years before a serious crisis stops their development.This change involves a substantial transformation of the political and societal institutions of these countries. This second step is harder, and we have seen economies in the past stagnating when they reach this level. A good example is the former Soviet Union, which managed to perform well until it reached a level of development that required that second step of institutional change. At that point, the economy stagnated, and was followed by a collapse of its institutions and even the country as a political entity. Will China and India be able to engineer a smooth transition towards a different set of institutions? Time will tell, but if history is an indicator of what to expect, one should at a minimum be cautious and
( Indian National Insitutions like security, Judiciary,Law Enforcement,Election are constantly undemined by Political class/ present dispensation)
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Philip »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ealed.html

The Pope will die within a year: Vatican 'assassination fears' revealed
The Pope will die within the next 12 months, a senior Vatican figure has reportedly claimed amid fears of an assassination plot.
Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Pranav »

Philip wrote:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ealed.html

The Pope will die within a year: Vatican 'assassination fears' revealed
The Pope will die within the next 12 months, a senior Vatican figure has reportedly claimed amid fears of an assassination plot.
He's not going to get bumped off as long as he obeys his superiors.
Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4153
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Atri »

who are pope's superiors? Gods?
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Philip »

Too much intrigue within (Curia) and without (foreign entities) the Vatican.Anything can happen,remember what happened to John-Paul the 1st?

Reform in Cuba thanks to "Castro the Younger".Visit Cuba fast before it loses its decaying time-capsule attraction.
Great opportunities for Indians.Imagine the market for Nanos,autorickshaws and even Ambys!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 92209.html

Younger Castro steers Cuba to a new revolution
Oil, foreign investment, free enterprise, and golf courses are on their way
Fifty years ago this month, the United States began the embargo on Cuba which continues to this day. But the country against which it was aimed is rapidly becoming a very different one to the alleged communist menace just 90 miles off the coast of Florida. Under Fidel Castro's brother, Raul, it is in the throes of a second Cuban revolution.

For a sign of the change which is turning life on their island on its head, the people of Havana have only to peer into the night at the northern horizon. This month, Repsol, the Spanish energy company started drilling the first oil well from a massive and brightly lit rig, the lumbering Scarabeo 9, built in China for ENI of Italy. This morning it will still be grinding away seeking the billions of barrels of oil and the trillions of cubic feet of gas that the US government, among others, says lie under Cuba's offshore waters.

The Spanish oilmen working on the structure, which has been towed halfway around the world amid US efforts to delay its progress, will be followed aboard by a succession of Norwegians, Russians, Indians and Malaysians.

Optimistic geologists reckon that within a few years the island – long cursed by a lack of oil supplies, half of which it has had to import – will actually be exporting the stuff. And it will be able to do so without the aid of President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela who has kept the island's motors, power and air-conditioning going with his subsidised crude.

Also, at the fine harbour in Mariel, a few miles to the west of the Cuban capital, is another pointer to the future, the big island-changing harbour that Odebrecht, the Brazilian construction giant, is building with a large wodge of money provided by the booming South American nation.

The end of the first national conference of the Cuban Communist Party set the seal last month on changes that President Raul Castro had been building up to. Since he took over from his ailing elder brother, Fidel, in 2006, the new president, himself an octogenarian, has pushed ahead with measures which are turning the traditional Cuban lifestyle upside down by decreeing that the party will henceforward cease micro-managing daily life and confine itself to strategic matters.

Landscapers are working hard on matters of equally urgent national strategy. Fifteen more golf courses and new marinas are being laid out in Cuba and they can't be finished quickly enough: golfers from abroad will even be able to lease chalets and timeshares. The island's hotels are packed. European visitors are pouring in. After decades of US-imposed isolation from high-speed internet, Cubans and their visitors are finally beginning to receive it via a new cable laid from Venezuela.

Yet Raul's strategies are not confined to big infrastructure projects; they reach down deeper into an effort to keep Cuban society together. Senior Cuban figures make no secret of the fact that even more important work has to be done to improve Cubans' ideological outlook and the economic conditions.

"Whole generations have long since grown up with no personal knowledge of the heroic days before and after what we call 'the Triumph of the Revolution'," says one. New Year's Day 1959 was when General Fulgencio Batista, a dictator armed and honoured by the West, fled with suitcases of banknotes and valuables as Castro's forces got their hands on Havana. Few remember the abortive 1961 Bay of Pigs operation, the tragi-comic fiasco of Presidents Dwight Eisenhower and John Kennedy to conquer the country.

The US embargo, introduced on 7 February 1962, is a constant talking point for island authorities, who blame it for shortages of everything from medical equipment to the concrete needed to complete an eight-lane highway running the length of the island. Cuba frequently fulminates against the "blockade" at the United Nations and demands the US end its "genocidal" policy. Every autumn, like clockwork, the vast majority of nations agree, and overwhelmingly back a resolution condemning the embargo. Last November, 186 countries supported the measure, with only Israel joining the US.

Wayne Smith was a young US diplomat in Havana in 1961 when relations were severed. He returned as the chief American diplomat after they were partially re-established under President Jimmy Carter. "We talk to the Russians, we talk to the Chinese, we have normal relations even with Vietnam. We trade with all of them," Smith said. "So why not with Cuba?"

The United States actually does have significant trade with Cuba under a clause allowing the sale of food products and some pharmaceuticals. According to the most recent information available from Cuba's National Statistics Office, the US was the island's seventh-largest trading partner in 2010, selling $410m (£260m) in mostly food products. However, that was down from nearly $1bn in 2008, as the island increasingly turned to other countries that don't force it to pay cash up front.

As Raul gave his closing speech at the party's first national congress, it was announced that new laws would allow people to sell their crumbling houses and wheezing cars. With the lonely support of only one ally, Israel, Washington has insisted on continuing six decades of crippling boycott on trade with Cuba despite overwhelming condemnation of it in the UN for the past 19 years.

But no longer will Cubans be obliged to leave their homes or their vehicles to their children, or do dodgy swaps with strangers. More than one million of the 4.3 million state employees will be encouraged to form co-operatives or start private businesses in a mass of trades and professions up to now reserved to the state.

"China is an example. No other country has lifted so many people out of poverty. This is something of which the Chinese people and government should be proud, and which the rest of the world admires," official daily Granma said in October 2009, echoing Fidel's words. Like China, or more likely Vietnam, the island will remain a one-party state.

"To renounce the principle of only one party would simply mean legalising the party or parties of imperialism on Cuban soil and sacrifice the strategic weapon of one party," Raul declared last Sunday. The president added that he would be merciless in punishing corruption, especially if the culprits were party members.

Next month the Pope, Benedict XVI, arrives on the island at the end of an unprecedented religious act. In 2010 Raul allowed the public veneration of a statue of the Virgin of Charity, the island's patroness, which was driven for 425 days from one end of Cuba to the other on top of a van.

Oil, mass tourism, private enterprise, broadband internet, organised religion – the brakes are coming off a society which today looks less towards Marx and Lenin and more toward its native-born 19th century hero, José Martí, who died in the battle for Cuban independence from Spain in 1895. God alone knows what's coming next.

Hugh O'Shaughnessy is writing a biography of Fidel Castro for Signal Books and Macmillan Caribbean
Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Pranav »

Atri wrote:who are pope's superiors? Gods?
In a sense :)

Post the mid-1960's, the Pope has been part of the same system that includes entities as diverse as Greenpeace, BBC, CIA and Goldman Sachs.
gunjur
BRFite
Posts: 602
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by gunjur »

Since I could not find any thread like ‘Non-Indian history’ hence posting here. I request the admins to move it to appropriate place if deemed necessary.
Has there been any discussion as to why did Europe (especially western Europe) did not rally together and drive out ottomans (muslims) from europe (south east Europe to be precise). Was it because as science progressed due to renaissance and various other reformations, this allowed them to explore, plunder & colonise other parts of globe and hence really did not bother about co-europeans (or were slavs not considered == to roman/germans). Was the church also not interested. Since ottomans came as far as Vienna, surely there might have been some thinking to drive off the ottomans?
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60277
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by ramana »

Ottomons were very powerful. Even though the were defeated at Vienna in 1684 it took 250 years for final defeat in WWI.

Also Europe was itself riven by Protesant and Catholic wars, balance of pwer wars and Napoleonic wars and Franco-Prussian war till 1870s.
Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7900
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Anujan »

ramana wrote:X-posted from TSP thread....

Navigating a complex world: Maleeha Lodhi

Navigating a complex world

Dr Maleeha Lodhi
Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Wise counsel for the next occupant 8) :mrgreen: of the White House especially as the present incumbent like his predecessor has had no strategic thinker in his team. Its consequence for US policy has been all too telling.
Vashishtha
BRFite
Posts: 269
Joined: 12 Jun 2010 23:06
Location: look behind you

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Vashishtha »

A very good article in the pioneer:
http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/ ... again.html
Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3513
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Rony »

Vashishtha wrote:A very good article in the pioneer:
http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/ ... again.html
That article needs to be quoted in full.
As External Affairs Minister, Mr Jaswant Singh once recounted a conversation with Mr Henry Kissinger, former United States Secretary of State. Pointing out India’s strategic precariousness, Mr Kissinger asked Mr Singh to name one country that would completely trust India and stand by it whatever the circumstances, and would be willing to go to war for it. “And don’t say Bhutan,” the American rounded off.

As Mr Singh described it, he kept quiet, feigning to ponder over the issue. Then he pretended to be hospitable and asked Mr Kissinger if he wanted tea, gently changing the subject.

The story is telling and its lessons are perennial. This is especially so at a time when India has found itself sucked into the Iran-Israel conflict and has suffered the diminution of its influence in the Maldives, a part of the world that should logically fall under its strategic umbrella.

Reams have been written about how New Delhi can in effect do nothing in terms of the clash between Teheran on the one side, and Tel Aviv and Washington, DC, on the other. It is said India is genuinely torn between different (sets of) friends, is concerned about the impact of conflict in West Asia on its diaspora, oil imports and economy — and therefore has little autonomy for action even if it was probably Iran-backed terrorists who tried assassinating a diplomat in the heart of New Delhi.

All of this is true, as is the truism that India is trapped between competing choices — doing business with Iran, becoming at least for a while its biggest oil customer; or backing Israel in preventing a nuclear-arms race among adversarial Muslim countries in its near-neighbourhood. However, at a fundamental level a plethora of choices of this nature also indicates the absence of a choice. Far from flexibility, it gives India’s strategic space a certain vulnerability.

The upshot of this is when it comes to the crunch, at the absolute essence, few countries implicitly trust India. This is not because they dislike India or believe it to be inherently evil. It is just that the process of decision-making in terms of foreign policy and strategic choices is so unpredictable, so susceptible to pressures — personal and political, media and electoral — that India comes across not as a resolute power but a fickle actor. In the Iran-Israel case, for instance, India is trying to balance things and please both. It is likely it will please none.

The mess in Male offers another window to the same predicament. It is now obvious India misjudged the timing and smoothness of the transition from President Mohamed Nasheed to the successor regime. The Indian Prime Minister was too quick to send a congratulatory letter to the new Government in Male, according it legitimacy with astonishing speed and without holding out for any benefits. That aside, India doggedly refused to term the displacement of Mr Nasheed as a coup without quite explaining how the overthrow of a democratically-elected leader could be anything but that.


Perhaps this was an error of judgement. Fair enough, even diplomats and Foreign Offices make mistakes. What compounded India’s folly was the flurry of news stories and media plants that followed. The Ministry of External Affairs claimed to have organised the transition in Male. Then it began a process of disparaging Mr Nasheed — saying he was unpredictable, authoritarian, anyway in bed with the Islamists, even if the Islamists were emerging even stronger with his departure.

Again all of this may be true, but the post facto rationalisation from South Block was rather perplexing. It created the impression that India was eager to curry favour with the new regime in Male, whatever the cost. It was diplomacy at its most clumsy.

A week ago, on Saturday, February 11, the Indian Express published a long report on Mr Nasheed’s relationship with India. The report was fairly detailed and obviously based on top-level briefings. One paragraph was astounding: “It’s learnt that Nasheed would regularly send lists of Maldivian students studying in India, who were suspected radicals. In fact, it was this effort which led to the discovery that many fundamentalist Maldivian groups were sending terror recruits in the garb of students to India, who would later smuggle themselves into Pakistan for training. He had also agreed to far-reaching defence arrangements with India after 26/11.”

However hard one tries, it is difficult to see the utility of this briefing. Indeed, the official who gave away this information is guilty of almost treason. In a couple of throwaway sentences, he revealed the President of another country was sending India names of dubious students. This has completely compromised Mr Nasheed in the Maldives, where his opponents will accuse him of prioritising Indian security over safety of and loyalty to his fellow citizens.


Is this how India treats a high-ranking intelligence asset, one at the level of head of state? After this, would any future political leader in the Maldives offer support and cooperation to India? Unable or unwilling to keep its mouth shut, what is the message the Indian establishment is sending?

A stolid, solid strategic and foreign policy establishment needs to have some key attributes — reticence, consistency, dependability and maturity. New Delhi often falters against these benchmarks. If at the end of the day it is left with weakened political leverage in Male, it will have only itself to blame. In the case of the attack on the Israeli diplomat, if India cannot convey a simple, unambiguous and public message to Iran that it will not tolerate its territory being used to launch a terror strike, how can it be expected to be taken seriously?

India has gone through this before. It blundered its way through the ‘revolution’ in Nepal without optimising its best interests. Today, it matters less in Kathmandu than it did a decade ago. In 1990, India was quite okay with Kuwait being gobbled up by Iraq. After the Americans and their allies went to war and liberated Kuwait, India looked mighty silly. Far from protecting its diaspora, New Delhi ended up hurting it. Indians were punished and denied jobs and contracts in reconstruction-era Kuwait.

Taking a cautious and calibrated approach in times of crisis is all very well, but this cannot become an excuse for following the line of least resistance. It ends up presenting India as a country that can live with and accept anything — a democratic Maldives, an Islamist Maldives, a nuclear Iran, a non-nuclear Iran, just anything. It leaves the world, and even stakeholders at home, wondering whether there is anything ideologically or strategically non-negotiable for India.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by Philip »

When you have a "plasticene" PM in charge of India,what other result do you expect? This buffoon in times of crisis behaves like the proverbial ostrich ,burying his head in the sand,or like a tortoise when sensing danger retreats into its shell or turban in this case.

Further disgracng rhe good name of India is the MEA.The Ministry of Eunuchs and Asses.The current FM cannot even distinguish his speech (written for him) from that of the Portugese FM! China can nibble away Indian territory in Ar.Pr.,the MEA denies it.Emboldened by our eunuch's silence,they have now planted themselves in POK,the MEA denies it,taking the view that they are just "visiting"! Visas are stapled,the MEA mandarins run around like headless chickens,not wanting to upset the Chinese by retaliating in kind.
These parasites do not want to be posted to certain countries,viewing them as "punishment postings" and lobby politicos to get their lum posts in the fleshpots of Europe or America.Compare them with our loyal jawans serving in below zero temperatures at Siachen and elsewhere,at altitudes where no living creatures live ? A fish rots from the head and India's PM is sadly rotten from turban to toe.

Some astonishing news,that reignites the conspiracy theories about Saudi imolvement in 9/11 and the Bush family's cover-up of it due to their long-standing business connections with Saudi royalty.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ckers.html

London-based oil executive linked to 9/11 hijackers
A Saudi Arabian accused of associating with several of the September 11 hijackers and who disappeared from his home in the United States a few weeks before the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, is in London working for his country’s state oil company.

Xcpts:[quote]Abdulaziz al-Hijji and his wife Anoud left three cars at their luxurious home in a gated community in Sarasota, Florida — one of them new — and flew to Saudi Arabia in August 2001. The refrigerator was full of food; furniture and clothing were left behind; and the swimming pool water was still circulating.

Security records of cars passing through a checkpoint at the Prestancia gated community indicated that Mr al-Hijji’s home, 4224 Escondito Circle, had been visited a number of times by Mohamed Atta, the leader of the

19-strong hijack team, who piloted American Airlines Flight 11 into the North Tower of the World Trade Centre in 2001.

The logs also indicated that Marwan Al-Shehhi, who crashed United Airlines Flight 175 into the South Tower, and Ziad Jarrah, who was at the controls of United Airlines Flight 93 when it crashed in a field in Pennsylvania, had visited the house.

All three men had trained to fly at Venice Airport, which is 19 miles from Sarasota.


A US counter-terrorist agent told The Daily Telegraph: “The registration numbers of vehicles that had passed through the Prestancia community’s north gate in the months before 9/11, coupled with the identification documents shown by incoming drivers on request, showed that Mohamed Atta and several of his fellow hijackers, and another Saudi suspect still at large, had visited 4224 Escondito Circle.”

The suspect was Adnan Shukrijumah, an al-Qaeda operative who is on the FBI’s Most Wanted list, with a $5 million bounty on his head.A decade after the world’s worst terrorist attack, which claimed the lives of 3,000 people, Mr al-Hijji is resident in London, working for the European subsidiary of Saudi Aramco, Saudi Arabia’s state oil company. Described as a career counsellor, he is based in the offices of Aramco Overseas Company UK Limited and lives in an expensive flat in central London.

In email correspondence with the Telegraph, Mr al-Hijji strongly denied any involvement in the plot, writing: “I have neither relation nor association with any of those bad people/criminals and the awful crime they did. 9/11 is a crime against the USA and all humankind and I’m very saddened and oppressed by these false allegations.

“I love the USA. My kids were born there, I went to college and university there, I spent a good portion of my life there and I love it.”

Mr al-Hijji’s account is supported by the FBI, which has stated: “At no time did the FBI develop evidence that connected the family members to any of the 9/11 hijackers … and there was no connection found to the 9/11 plot.’’

Bob Graham, a former US senator who, in addition to co-chairing the congressional inquiry into 9/11, was chairman of the US senate intelligence committee at the time, disputes the FBI denials. He has long believed that there was Saudi support for the 19 terrorists, 15 of whom were subjects of the kingdom. He cites two secret documents to which he has recently had access.

The first document, Graham says, is “not consistent with the public statements of the FBI that there was no connection between the 9/11 hijackers and the Saudis at the Sarasota home. Both documents indicate that the investigation was not the robust inquiry claimed by the FBI.”

Mr al-Hijji, 38, moved with his family to Britain in 2003, setting up home in a rented four-bedroom detached house in the Southampton suburb of Totton. His stay there appears to have been uneventful.

The al-Hijjis’ abrupt departure from Sarasota aroused the suspicion of their next-door neighbour, Patrick Gallagher. He emailed the FBI within two days of 9/11 to report the disappearance of the couple and their young children.

Reports released recently by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement refer to the “suspicious manner and timing” of the family’s departure.

One document states: “In mid-August 2001 the above subjects purchased a new vehicle and renewed the registration on several other vehicles. On Aug 27 2001 a moving truck appeared and moved the subjects out of the house. Left behind were the vehicles and numerous personal belongings, including food, medicine, bills, baby clothing etc.”

The document goes on to state that Mr al-Hijji and Esam Ghazzawi, his father-in-law and the owner of the Escondito Circle house, had been “on the FBI watch list” prior to 9/11.

Mr al-Hijji described the allegations against him as “just cheap talk” and denied having abandoned his home in undue haste, explaining: “No, no, no. Absolutely not true. We were trying to secure the [Aramco] job. It was a good opportunity.”

He said his wife and children followed him out to Saudi Arabia a few weeks after he left. She and his American-born mother-in-law had been questioned by the FBI when they returned to the United States to settle the family’s affairs.

But he was not questioned when he returned to America for a two-month period in 2005.
devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: Geopolitical thread

Post by devesh »

the pioneer article aptly summarizes why this is a disaster. it rightly points that all these happenings give an image of India being an indecisive joker without any will.
Post Reply