Indo-UK News and Discussion - April 2013

[vinod]

I don't think a nasty divorce is not in good interest of both EU and UK.
- The fact is the main issue around immigration. UK doesn't want it, but EU wants free movement of people. What I don't understand, there are free trade agreements all over the world without free movement of people. So, EU being adamant about it is nothing but pushing their pet political agenda. So, who will give way is going to be interesting.
- UK can prolong the uncertainty till EU comes around. I don't think the EU nations can withstand that prolonged uncertainty. They will bicker amongst themselves and crumble. UK is better placed to handle the uncertainty than them.
- A couple of islamist attacks and we can hear a lot of cries for referendum from within EU. No politician will have the guts to make a call. Cameron thought he would get a remain but things changed. Nothing is guaranteed. If they don't call, there could be riots on streets depending on the support for that. Instability is the future for EU.
If UK plays its cards well, they can fully exploit this whole conundrum to their benefit.

I think with the help of US, UK-EU will come to an amicable agreement. But the hot heads on both sides needs to cool down a lot.

[Yagnasri]

I do not see any logical reason for the EU to be stupid. But a lot of super babu egos were hurt with this vote. Hence they are trying to act hard in the UK. Even we can think of a reasonable trade treaty which does not infringe on the national sovereignty of the member states. But I think the internationalists will never allow any reasonable trade treaty now.

Further if the UK gets a good deal, the lot of others will also like to go out and have a good deal.

[vinod]

May be a federal Europe is better fit than a centralised govt which is dictated by unelected members and pampered bureaucrats. Being adamant about an unworkable solution is not the way forward either.

Probably, they will go for more centralisation... more powers to Brussels!

[IndraD]

But why is UK avoiding invoking article 50 now? It seems Suraj saar was right that no one has balls to push the article and it may be re election time.

[JTull]

and yes the irony is that the working language of the EU is... english!

English will not be an official EU language after Brexit, says senior MEP

http://www.politico.eu/article/english- ... enior-mep/

World will slowly realise that Britain was the most open minded of all countries in the EU and what sort of a cartel EU is. It is nothing better than a European Soviet Socialist empire made of disparate cultures and languages not much different from USSR, imposing a centralised ideology and ruled by bureaucrats who do not have to answer to an electorate. So many of my European friends and colleagues are jealous of Britain's decision. It is the European elites who're happy because they have less opposition now.

[Singha]

British n sub base is in faslane Scotland and I believe so is Admiralty home fleet Anchorage in Orkney islands and air bases to intercept Russian bombers.

They might need to pay bit more for these.scots will be looking to raise cash.

[Singha]

As my book Treasure Islands describes in detail, the Bank of England, lodged in the heart of the City (but not, it has to be said, regulated by it), in effect encouraged tax havenry in British outposts of the Caribbean and elsewhere. By the 1980s, the City was at the centre of a great, secretive financial web cast across the globe, each of whose sections - the individual havens - trapped passing money and business from nearby jurisdictions and fed them up to the City: just as a spider catches insects. So, a complex cross-border merger involving a US multinational might, say, route a lot of the transaction through Caribbean havens, whose British firms will then send much of the heavy lifting work, and profits, up to the City.

The Crown dependencies of Jersey, Guern­sey and the Isle of Man, which focus heavily on European business, form the web's inner ring. In the second quarter of 2009, Jersey alone provided £135bn in bank deposits upstreamed to the City. Jersey Finance, the tax haven's promotional body, puts the relationship plainly: "Jersey is an extension of the City of London."

The next ring of the web contains the British overseas territories, such as the Cayman Islands and Bermuda. Like the Crown dependencies, they have governors appointed by the Queen and are controlled by Britain in myriad ways, but with enough distance to allow Britain to say "There is nothing we can do" when it suits.


The web's outer ring contains an assortment of havens, such as Mauritius in the Indian Ocean, Hong Kong and the Bahamas, which Britain does not control but which still feed billions in business to the City from around the world.

So, the corporation has two main claims to being a tax haven: first, as a semi-alien entity, floating partly free from Britain (just as the Cayman Islands are), and second, as the hub of a global network of tax havens sucking up offshore trillions from around the world and sending it, or the business of handling it, to London. These are possibly the biggest reasons for the City's wealth and power - yet how many Britons understand this?

“Don't tax or regulate us or we'll move to Switzerland," the bankers and hedgies cry; and all too often the politicians quail and cut taxes on the wealthy, deregulate finance further, and hand yet more freedoms to the City.

Nearly every multinational corporation has offshore subsidiaries (not counting those in Lon­don) - and the biggest users of offshore finance are banks. Financial Mail recently counted over 550 offshore subsidiaries just for Barclays, RBS and Lloyds - each of which far outstrips any other multinational. This isn't just about tax: banks go offshore to escape certain financial regulations, and can grow faster as a result. So, offshore is a big part of the Too Big To Fail story - another element strengthening the City's power through the grip these banks have on our elected leaders and boosting the breathtaking chutzpah of the Barclays chief executive, Bob Diamond, who told the UK Treasury select committee on 11 January that he didn't know how many offshore subsidiaries his bank had, and that the "period of remorse and apology" for banks should now end.

The corporation loves financial deregulation - globally. Deregulation is a bit like shaking (or, perhaps more accurately, removing a net from) a tree full of insects: the more you do it, the more business floats around, ready to be caught in the nearby web. As such, it is hardly surprising that the Lord Mayor of London is evan­gelical about it. In fact, his role is officially, as the City explains, to "expound the values of liberalisation" and provide "support for innovation, proportionate taxation and regulation". (On his 20-odd foreign trips a year, he makes clear that "proportionate" means "limited".) Not only that, but the Lord Mayor and colleagues promise to "take up cudgels on behalf of the City anywhere in the world on any subject which is of concern to the City".

Thus, the role of the City of London Corporation as a municipal authority is its least important attribute. This is a hugely resourced international offshore lobbying group pushing for international financial deregulation, tax-cutting and tax havenry around the world.

Divided capital

In the end, the bill on extending the corporate vote passed, carried on a Labour majority. Glasman's and Campbell-Taylor's challenge failed, although they won a small victory - that the process for choosing business electors be "open and clear". Campbell-Taylor now works in a small parish in north London; Glasman has risen from relative obscurity to become a leading thinker for the Labour Party - and was recently ennobled for this by Ed Miliband.

It is easy to be daunted by the City and the offshore system. Some reviewers of Treasure Islands were so disturbed by the scale of it - Peter Preston's defeatist review in the Guardian is a case in point - that they advocated, in effect, capitulation. Given that the financial services sector has just been exposed as having provided over half of the Conservative Party's funding last year, and that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, has just urged Britain to move from "retribution to recovery" over the banks, reform looks distant.

But the doubters are wrong. Yes, we still need a vision of how to confront the corporation and its offshore satellites. Few people in Britain can see the corporation, let alone understand its importance. However, widespread public education, a precursor to reform, can now begin. One of the biggest, most silent players behind so much offshore activity has been identified: a Teflon-like, medieval institution, wrapped around the neck of Britain and dedicated to keeping finance strong and free.

Already I see efforts around the world to constrain the offshore system that feeds the City. UK Uncut, the spontaneous protest movement opposing offshore tax avoidance by multinationals, has had an impact and now pledges to move against the banks. A big "One London" campaign to merge a divided capital into a single democratic entity may seem far off, but groups such as London Citizens are now thinking about the fairer division of London. The Tax Justice Network, and others, are helping build an intellectual edifice for understanding tax havens. Some of their goals - such as country-by-country reporting by multinationals - are already being partly met. The unions, too, and big NGOs, especially those working in international development, are engaging with the matter. An anti-haven mobilisation is under way in France; something similar may be starting in the US. The IMF, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the EU and other agencies are now at least debating issues they ignored before. Around the world, legislators, regulators and ordinary people are starting to see the toxicity of Britain's role in protecting offshore business that drains billions out of developing countries each year.

The City of London Corporation - this heart cut out from the body of our vibrant, multicultural metropolis - is no longer so invisible. Now we must figure out what to do about it.

Nicholas Shaxson's book "Treasure Islands" is published by Bodley Head (£14.99)

[chetak]

British n sub base is in faslane Scotland and I believe so is Admiralty home fleet Anchorage in Orkney islands and air bases to intercept Russian bombers.

They might need to pay bit more for these.scots will be looking to raise cash.

Don't the scots have oil in "their" north sea??

The scots are notoriously tight with their money and will surely extract every last penny from the former UK, if push comes to shove.

[Philip]

The UK divided or undivided,will not renege on its NATO commitments even if Scotland gains independence. Faslane has problems ,economic in running the base let alone enviro concerns.It is the elephant in the room if the Scots go free.The grand idea of a "Eurocorps" is now as dead as the dodo,at least Britain's participation in it! The celebrations must still be going on in the Kremlin.

The nasty manner in which some Euro MPs scorned and trashed the Brits for exiting today in the EU parliament,doesn't augur well for relations in the immediate future. It will further convince those who voted "Leave" that they were right all along and that the covert plan of the EU Brussels bandits was to create a Euro Super-state without the members realizing it.As I've often said,the EU is the "Fourth Reich" led by "Fraurer" Merkel and co.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/201 ... ts-crumbl/

England's ultimate humiliation: a country where governments crumble, markets collapse and the nation's football team loses to Iceland

By
Paul Hayward
Chief Sports Writer, in Nice
27 June 2016

Match Summary
England 1 - 2 Iceland
European Championship Finals27/06/2016
Referee: Damir Skomina|Venue: Allianz Riviera|Attendance: 33,901

England: a country where governments crumble, markets collapse and the nation’s football team loses a European Championship game to Iceland.

In the event of England’s exit from Euro 2016, an obvious headline had been laid out: ‘Go in the name of cod, go’ – aimed at Roy Hodgson. But there is no need to run it. Hodgson’s reign as England manager was beyond untenable from the moment Iceland erupted in celebration and he quit without taking questions.

Iceland deserved every second, every laugh and kiss of the post-match cavorting. But their amazing achievement in earning a quarter-final against France cannot disguise the reality that this was England’s most humiliating night in international football: far worse than the 1950 World Cup defeat to the USA in Belo Horizonte.

England fans
A young England fan can't hold back his tears Credit: AP

The contagion from England’s week of political hell has spread across the channel and down through France to destroy England as a credible football nation. Again, this takes nothing away from Iceland, who were rugged and ruthless. At the same time, though, money, fame and resources were all spectacularly over-turned.

England, who went out at the group stage in Brazil – eight days into the 2014 World Cup – cannot be said to have made progress. Forget ‘youth’ and ‘development.’ England won one of their four games here in France. They drew with Russia and Slovakia and beat Wales only in the dying seconds after making a hash of team selection. At no stage did Hodgson seem clear about his best starting XI. Bringing on the eager and lively Marcus Rashford for five minutes at the end against Iceland was his final questionable act on a very long list.

England v Iceland: key match stats England v Iceland: key match stats Play! 01:02

They say one night in Paris is like a year in any other place. Well, an evening in Nice can be pretty eventful too, if you end up chasing a game against tournament debutants with a population of just 330,000 but a mighty spirit.

This game, in which England should have been able to assert their Premier League pedigree (however much Iceland’s progress is lauded), turned into an embarrassing battle. The prize of a quarter-final tie against France in Paris slipped out of England’s grasp and into the hands of Iceland, leaving Hodgson’s men with a lifetime of painful memories.

The stand-out upset in England’s 66-year international story is the USA’s 1-0 win in 1950. But defeat here in Nice was always going to be a deeper trauma. This one came in the era of the Premier League as global industry.

Here, a £49m left-sider, Raheem Sterling, went toe-to-toe with Birkir Saevarsson, 31, who plays for Hammarby in Sweden. Before that it was Valur and Brann. In England’s midfield, Wayne Rooney made his 115th appearance, joining David Beckham as England’s most capped outfield player, 10 short of goalkeeper Peter Shilton. Rooney’s counterpart as captain was Aron Gunnarsson of Cardiff City.

By this stage, international tournaments are meant to strike down romantic tales. Thus we saw Germany smash Slovakia and Belgium wipe Hungary off the chart. The last 16 is the stage when the rich countries ought to be taking over.

If fatigue was a possible hindrance for the darlings of this tournament, it was hardly visible in an 18-minute opening spell that showed why England’s defending had been their big pre-tournament worry. The game started with a smooth affirmation of England’s higher status: a Rooney penalty after Iceland’s goalkeeper had tripped Sterling.

Iceland celebrate at the final whistle Credit: AFP

So England were ahead inside two minutes. Finally, they were pressing on early with the job of dispatching a lesser name. But then the volcano blew. A long throw by Aron Gunnarsson – hardly a secret weapon – found the head of Kari Arnason, who flicked it on for Ragnar Sigurdsson to equalise.

England’s lead lasted less than four minutes and soon they were behind. While Gylfi Sigurdsson slipped the ball to Kolbeinn Sigthorsson, England’s centre-backs watched with all the rapt detachment of theatregoers. Joe Hart, in England’s goal, could manage only a weak push at the ball and watched it trundle across his goal-line.

So much of the pre-tournament talk had been about England’s vulnerability at the back. But Hart’s poor goalkeeping was a shock. His inability to keep out Gareth Bale’s free-kick in the Wales game was marked down as an aberration. For him to repeat the mistake two games later suggests a deeper loss of form, of strength and timing. Equally Sigthorsson should never have been allowed so much time to shape his shot.

Roy Hodgson looks disconsolate Credit: EPA
After the interval Eric Dier gave way to Jack Wilshere, who was off the pace against Slovakia and could find no rhythm in his passing. Once again in this game we saw England’s all time leading scorer (Rooney) taking corners and the Premier League’s No 1, Kane, curling in free-kicks. Too much of what England did here in France defied logic.

Vardy’s arrival in place of Sterling on 59 minutes confirmed Hodgson’s inability to see that England’s most expensive footballer (Sterling) is shot to bits, in his confidence and his touch. It was shame Hodgson refused to show similar faith in Vardy, who runs behind defences rather than shuttling the ball around in front of them, which too many of these England players do.

Roy Hodgson: 'I hope you can still see an England team in a final of a major tournament very soon' Hodgson: 'I hope you can see England in the final of a tournament soon'

Kane, Rooney and Hart also had dreadful games. England lacked composure and precision as they seemed to sense that calamity was closing in. The old fatalism returned. We should pause a moment to say again: well done Iceland. If only England had their qualities.

[vinod]

But why is UK avoiding invoking article 50 now?

Why should she? Uncertainty messes up EU more and sobers them up from their grandiose position. UK is not in good position either, but better than EU. So, who will give way....

[Lalmohan]

there are grand political games in play right now, article 50 is the soosai vest with the ticking clock - anything could happen!

intra conservative party fight
intra labour party fight
leavers vs EU machine
remains + EU machine
uk establishment + german/french establishment
etc. - its not a black and white game

the eagle and bear are eagerly watching of course... circling...

[SaraLax]

Nigel Farage laughed at in EU parliament, where he was asked what is he doing there (rather than mobilising support for article 50 back in his country)?

The EU can laugh as much as they want to at Nigel Farage - but this incorruptible guy has just done what he had promised in the floor of EU parliament. He has successfully weakened the highly centralized, essentially un-democratic political union that is the 'EU' by leading Britain out of it. He has blasted the first big hole in the EU's foundations and the EU is ripe for further weakening to a more embattled state (with no return back to any semblance of previously seen health & all the countries who take part in EU - their common citizens will be pushed to further levels of frustration & hopelessness). The citizens in all of western europe seem to be very patient , too politically correct (probably because of their continuing excessive remembrance of the WWII) & still somehow expecting the incompetent, tardy EU to work out fine. I guess the idea of EU's free movement of EU people with in EU dominion & to partake of health facilities/school facilities/pensions offered by the host nation - is to erase the existing cultural uniqueness of the various european countries in the long term and create a true United States of Europe. No wonder Eastern Europe people are flooding into countries where the health facilities, education facilities are relatively cheaper & better. But any set of people who take pride in their traditions, culture & language will revolt after some time when they sense that they are going to be erased by the foreign people and that is what is Brexit. EU is better off being a pure economic & trading union sans the Euro $ & sans attempts to create a political union but that is basically a huge step back from the current state of existence.

Look at Spain ... 2 consecutive national elections have been held with in the last year & both times the results have ended up in a deadlock - with political parties too caustic & too divided to come together to form a government for the sake of their own country. How many more elections can Spain have - before it gets a semblance of a ruling government ?. This is a direct effect of EU's entanglement with Spain and the resulting spanish economic hardships. The unregulated Spanish use of large Euro $ loans at cheap interest rates to build mega infra projects that are now either mostly lying unused or caught in bankruptcy proceedings (spanking new airports built using more than 1 billion Euro $s that have filed for bankruptcies after some fully constructed airports never saw even one flight using them !!!!, high speed railway systems filing for bankruptcies, spanking new highway projects filing for bankruptcies, half-finished mega housing projects, many newly built towns that are nothing but ghost towns now). I cannot understand why there are no Nigel-Farage-equivalents being seen in Spain ?.

But at the end of the day, when observing the current EU in a cold analytical manner - it is a weak, tardy, incompetently functioning entity. For the short & medium term - this Brexit induced discontent between EU & UK as well as the commotion between Scotland, Ireland & England - will make UK economically weak. All this suits the competitors of EU & UK like us in more ways than one. Even an EU based MNC will not want to invest & build new manufacturing plants with in the EU - when this project continues to misfire more & more.

[ramana]

Markets are up today. Looks like BREXIT panic has turned the corner?

[rahulm]

Farage, whatever one may think of him, had a single point agenda. focus and determination. He saw it through to the end successfully.

[IndraD]

Corbyn loses no confidence motion but refuses to resign.

[ramana]

Corbyn loses no confidence motion but refuses to resign.

Westminster system, Roberts rules, Chatham House rules all are falling by wayside in BREXIT.

[Lilo]

Sunday, January 1, 2012
Balancing the East, Upgrading the West
U.S. Grand Strategy in an Age of Upheaval
Zbigniew Brzezinski

ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI was U.S. National Security Adviser from 1977 to 1981. His book Strategic Vision: America and the Crisis of Global Power, from which this essay is adapted, will be published this winter by Basic Books.

The United States' central challenge over the next several decades is to revitalize itself, while promoting a larger West and buttressing a complex balance in the East that can accommodate China's rising global status. A successful U.S. effort to enlarge the West, making it the world's most stable and democratic zone, would seek to combine power with principle. A cooperative{I.e every one in this "West" is supposed be cooperative as a poodle including EU and Russia} larger West -- extending from North America and Europe through Eurasia (by eventually embracing Russia and Turkey), all the way to Japan and South Korea -- would enhance the appeal of the West's core principles{i.e domination and subjugation for loot and violence} for other cultures, thus encouraging the gradual emergence of a universal democratic political culture.

At the same time, the United States should continue to engage cooperatively in the economically dynamic but also potentially conflicted East. If the United States and China can accommodate each other on a broad range of issues, the prospects for stability in Asia will be greatly increased. That is especially likely if the United States can encourage a genuine reconciliation between China and Japan while mitigating the growing rivalry between China and India.

To respond effectively in both the western and eastern parts of Eurasia, the world's central and most critical continent,{The prime imperative for Massa since end of coldwar has been to enmesh itself between the natural integration of Eurasia - via an unnatural "leadership" role in the dealings of EU with Russia and between Russia and China and finally between India and China ultimately scuttling at every step any prospect of tight integration by playing a balancing role} the United States must play a dual role. It must be the promoter and guarantor of greater and broader unity in the West, and it must be the balancer and conciliator between the major powers in the East. Both roles are essential, and each is needed to reinforce the other. But to have the credibility and the capacity to pursue both successfully, the United States must show the world that it has the will to renovate itself at home. Americans must place greater emphasis on the more subtle dimensions of national power, such as innovation, education, the balance of force and diplomacy, and the quality of political leadership.

A LARGER WEST

For the United States to succeed as the promoter and guarantor of a renewed West, it will need to maintain close ties with Europe, continue its commitment to NATO, and manage, along with Europe, a step-by-step process of welcoming both Turkey and a truly democratizing Russia into the West. To guarantee the West's geopolitical relevance, Washington must remain active in European security. It must also encourage the deeper unification of the European Union: the close cooperation among France, Germany, and the United Kingdom -- Europe's central political, economic, and military alignment -- should continue and broaden.{obviously it should happen only under massa's leadership not EU led}

To engage Russia while safeguarding Western unity, the French-German-Polish consultative triangle could play a constructive role in advancing the ongoing but still tenuous reconciliation between Poland and Russia. The EU's backing would help make Russian-Polish reconciliation more comprehensive, much as the German-Polish one has already become, with both reconciliations contributing to greater stability in Europe. But in order for Russian-Polish reconciliation to endure, it has to move from the governmental level to the social level, through extensive people-to-people contacts and joint educational initiatives. Expedient accommodations made by governments that are not grounded in basic changes in popular attitudes will not last. The model should be the French-German friendship after World War II, which was initiated at the highest political levels by Paris and Bonn and successfully promoted on the social and cultural level, as well.

As the United States and Europe seek to enlarge the West, Russia itself will have to evolve in order to become more closely linked with the EU. Its leadership will have to face the fact that Russia's future will be uncertain if it remains a relatively empty and underdeveloped space between the rich West and the dynamic East. This will not change even if Russia entices some Central Asian states to join Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's quaint idea of a Eurasian Union. Also, although a significant portion of the Russian public is ahead of its government in favoring EU membership, most Russians are unaware of how exacting many of the qualifying standards for membership are, especially with regard to democratic reform.

The process of the EU and Russia coming closer is likely to stall occasionally and then lurch forward again, progressing in stages and including transitional arrangements. To the extent possible, it should proceed simultaneously on the social, economic, political, and security levels. One can envisage more and more opportunities for social interactions, increasingly similar legal and constitutional arrangements, joint security exercises between NATO and the Russian military, and new institutions for coordinating policy within a continually expanding West, all resulting in Russia's increasing readiness for eventual membership in the EU.

It is not unrealistic to imagine a larger configuration of the West emerging after 2025. In the course of the next several decades, Russia could embark on a comprehensive law-based democratic transformation compatible with both EU and NATO standards, and Turkey could become a full member of the EU, putting both countries on their way to integration with the transatlantic community. But even before that occurs, a deepening geopolitical community of interest could arise among the United States, Europe (including Turkey), and Russia. Since any westward gravitation by Russia would likely be preceded and encouraged by closer ties between Ukraine and the EU , the institutional seat for a collective consultative organ (or perhaps initially for an expanded Council of Europe) could be located in Kiev, the ancient capital of Kievan Rus, whose location would be symbolic of the West's renewed vitality and enlarging scope.

If the United States does not promote the emergence of an enlarged West, dire{for massa obviously} consequences could follow: historical resentments could come back to life, new conflicts of interest could arise, and shortsighted competitive partnerships could take shape. Russia could exploit its energy assets and, emboldened by Western disunity, seek to quickly absorb Ukraine, reawakening its own imperial ambitions and contributing to greater international disarray. With the EU passive, individual European states, in search of greater commercial opportunities, could then seek their own accommodations with Russia. One can envisage a scenario in which economic self-interest leads Germany or Italy, for example, to develop a special relationship with Russia. France and the United Kingdom could then draw closer while viewing Germany askance, with Poland and the Baltic states desperately pleading for additional U.S. security guarantees. The result would be not a new and more vital West but rather a progressively splintering and increasingly pessimistic West.

THE COMPLEX EAST

Such a disunited West would not be able to compete with China for global relevance. So far, China has not articulated an ideological dogma that would make its recent performance appear universally applicable, and the United States has been careful not to make ideology the central focus of its relations with China. Wisely, both Washington and Beijing have embraced the concept of a "constructive partnership" in global affairs, and the United States, although critical of China's violations of human rights, has been careful not to stigmatize the Chinese socioeconomic system as a whole.

But if an anxious United States and an overconfident China were to slide into increasing political hostility, it is more than likely that both countries would face off in a mutually destructive ideological conflict. Washington would argue that Beijing's success is based on tyranny and is damaging to the United States' economic well-being; Beijing, meanwhile, would interpret that U.S. message as an attempt to undermine and possibly even fragment the Chinese system. At the same time, China would stress its successful rejection of Western supremacy, appealing to those in the developing world who already subscribe to a historical narrative highly hostile to the West in general and to the United States in particular. Such a scenario would be damaging and counterproductive for both countries. Hence, intelligent self-interest should prompt the United States and China to exercise ideological self-restraint, resisting the temptation to universalize the distinctive features of their respective socioeconomic systems and to demonize each other.

The U.S. role in Asia should be that of regional balancer, replicating the role played by the United Kingdom in intra-European politics during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The United States can and should help Asian states avoid a struggle for regional domination by mediating conflicts and offsetting power imbalances among potential rivals. In doing so, it should respect China's special historic and geopolitical role in maintaining stability on the Far Eastern mainland. Engaging with China in a dialogue regarding regional stability would not only help reduce the possibility of U.S.-Chinese conflicts but also diminish the probability of miscalculation between China and Japan, or China and India, and even at some point between China and Russia over the resources and independent status of the Central Asian states. Thus, the United States' balancing engagement in Asia is ultimately in China's interest, as well.

At the same time, the United States must recognize that stability in Asia can no longer be imposed by a non-Asian power, least of all by the direct application of U.S. military power. Indeed, U.S. efforts to buttress Asian stability could prove self-defeating, propelling Washington into a costly repeat of its recent wars, potentially even resulting in a replay of the tragic events of Europe in the twentieth century. If the United States fashioned an anti-Chinese alliance with India (or, less likely, with Vietnam) or promoted an anti-Chinese militarization in Japan, it could generate dangerous mutual resentment. In the twenty-first century, geopolitical equilibrium on the Asian mainland cannot depend on external military alliances with non-Asian powers.

The guiding principle of the United States' foreign policy in Asia should be to uphold U.S. obligations to Japan and South Korea while not allowing itself to be drawn into a war between Asian powers on the mainland. The United States has been entrenched in Japan and South Korea for more than 50 years, and the independence and the self-confidence of these countries would be shattered -- along with the U.S. role in the Pacific -- if any doubts were to arise regarding the durability of long-standing U.S. treaty commitments.

The U.S.-Japanese relationship is particularly vital and should be the springboard for a concerted effort to develop a U.S.-Japanese-Chinese cooperative triangle. Such a triangle would provide a structure that could deal with strategic concerns resulting from China's increased regional presence. Just as political stability in Europe after World War II would not have developed without the progressive expansion of French-German reconciliation to German-Polish reconciliation, so, too, the deliberate nurturing of a deepening Chinese-Japanese relationship could serve as the point of departure for greater stability in the Far East.

In the context of this triangular relationship, Chinese-Japanese reconciliation would help enhance and solidify more comprehensive U.S.-Chinese cooperation. China knows that the United States' commitment to Japan is steadfast, that the bond between the two countries is deep and genuine, and that Japan's security is directly dependent on the United States. And knowing that a conflict with China would be mutually destructive, Tokyo understands that U.S. engagement with China is indirectly a contribution to Japan's own security. In that context, China should not view U.S. support for Japan's security as a threat, nor should Japan view the pursuit of a closer and more extensive U.S.-Chinese partnership as a danger to its own interests. A deepening triangular relationship could also diminish Japanese concerns over the yuan's eventually becoming the world's third reserve currency, thereby further consolidating China's stake in the existing international system and mitigating U.S. anxieties over China's future role.

Given such a setting of enhanced regional accommodation and assuming the expansion of the bilateral U.S.-Chinese relationship, three sensitive U.S.-Chinese issues will have to be peacefully resolved: the first in the near future, the second over the course of the next several years, and the third probably within a decade or so. First, the United States should reassess its reconnaissance operations on the edges of Chinese territorial waters, as well as the periodic U.S. naval patrols within international waters that are also part of the Chinese economic zone. They are as provocative to Beijing as the reverse situation would be to Washington. Moreover, the U.S. military's air reconnaissance missions pose serious risks of unintentional collisions, since the Chinese air force usually responds to such missions by sending up fighter planes for up-close inspection and sometimes harassment of the U.S. planes.

Second, given that the continuing modernization of China's military capabilities could eventually give rise to legitimate U.S. security concerns, including over U.S. commitments to Japan and South Korea, the United States and China should engage in regular consultations regarding their long-term military planning and seek to craft measures of reciprocal reassurance.

Third, the future status of Taiwan could become the most contentious issue between the two countries. Washington no longer recognizes Taiwan as a sovereign state and acknowledges Beijing's view that China and Taiwan are part of a single nation. But at the same time, the United States sells weapons to Taiwan. Thus, any long-term U.S.-Chinese accommodation will have to address the fact that a separate Taiwan, protected indefinitely by U.S. arms sales, will provoke intensifying Chinese hostility. An eventual resolution along the lines of former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping's well-known formula for Hong Kong of "one country, two systems," but redefined as "one country, several systems," may provide the basis for Taipei's eventual reassociation with China, while still allowing Taiwan and China to maintain distinctive political, social, and military arrangements {Taiwan is being groomed to bethe future trojan horse in China for massa}(in particular, excluding the deployment of People's Liberation Army troops on the island). Regardless of the exact formula, given China's growing power and the greatly expanding social links between Taiwan and the mainland, it is doubtful that Taiwan can indefinitely avoid a more formal connection with China.

TOWARD RECIPROCAL COOPERATION

More than 1,500 years ago, during the first half of the first millennium, the politics of the relatively civilized parts of Europe were largely dominated by the coexistence of the two distinct western and eastern halves of the Roman Empire. The Western Empire, with its capital most of the time in Rome, was beset by conflicts with marauding barbarians. With its troops permanently stationed abroad in extensive and expensive fortifications, Rome was politically overextended and came close to bankruptcy midway through the fifth century. Meanwhile, divisive conflicts between Christians and pagans sapped Rome's social cohesion, and heavy taxation and corruption crippled its economic vitality. In 476, with the killing of Romulus Augustulus by the barbarians, the by then moribund Western Roman Empire officially collapsed.

During the same period, the Eastern Roman Empire -- soon to become known as Byzantium -- exhibited more dynamic urban and economic growth and proved more successful in its diplomatic and security policies. After the fall of Rome, Byzantium continued to thrive for centuries. It reconquered parts of the old Western Empire and lived on (although later through much conflict) until the rise of the Ottoman Turks in the fifteenth century.

Rome's dire travails in the middle of the fifth century did not damage Byzantium's more hopeful prospects, because in those days, the world was compartmentalized into distinct segments that were geographically isolated and politically and economically insulated from one another. The fate of one did not directly and immediately affect the prospects of the other. But that is no longer the case. Today, with distance made irrelevant by the immediacy of communications and the near-instant speed of financial transactions, the well-being of the most advanced parts of the world is becoming increasingly interdependent. In our time, unlike 1,500 years ago, the West and the East cannot keep aloof from each other: their relationship can only be either reciprocally cooperative or mutually damaging.

To be critically read , lot of intent indirectly telescoped often in lines which literally convey the opposite.
Brexit's impact on Massa+poodle vs EUrAsia will be positive for India in the longterm.

[rgosain]

In view of this I wonder if India's pseudo secularists and faux intellectuals who pander to the West are planning on returning their Booker, Pulitzer, Nobel prizes and Knighthoods accorded to them by the UK establishment.

someone should tweet that and specifically send to Roy and her ilk...

Please feel free to retweet and distribute as I don't have a twitter account.

Roy, Patwardhan and their ilk have been conspicuous by their silence over the past year as a rising tide of xenophobia and intolerance washes over Europe, let alone the USA. One would have expected them to have commented following the brutal slaying of a female MP during the Brexit campaign last week, but silence reigns. Like dogs they only bark when thrown a bone.
The referendum has been followed by reports in The Guardian and others of rising intolerance, but we still await candle vigils eg
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... obic-abuse

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ave-brexit

[Lalmohan]

the reason there are no obvious farrages in spain is because they still have franco in their memory
the spanish civil war was brutal and the once great empire did not gain any semblance of prosperity until the 1990's and that too with the EU's blank chequebook and a king that pushed democracy against the expectations of the far right

[g.sarkar]

http://forbesindia.com/article/special/ ... 57/44163/1
Brexit forex impact pulls Tata Motors's Q1 profit by 57%
Sharp fall in the value of British pound following the Brexit vote has prevented Tata Motors from posting a strong performance despite higher volumes across most of its businesses.
The company for the first quarter of the 2016-17 fiscal posted a consolidated profit of Rs 2,260 crore, which is 57 percent lower than what it managed in the same period last year (Rs 5,254 crore).
Revenues, however, grew by 10 percent to Rs 66,101 crore (Rs 60,094 crore) on the back of strong volumes, both at Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) operations and in India. The impact of the foreign exchange fluctuation was severe – Rs 2,296 crore.
Standalone, JLR business saw a revenue of Rs 5,461 pounds in the first quarter compared to 5002 million pounds in the corresponding period of the previous fiscal thanks to better volumes. But the 207 million pound forex charge pulled the profits down by 38 percent to 304 million pound as against 492 million pound that the luxury car maker posted in the Q1 of the previous year.....
Gautam

[panduranghari]

The British establishment still believes Corbyn is unelectable as a PM. I think they will be proven wrong. The old labour is making a big comeback in the poorer parts of the country. An article in spectator said there will be a split in labour party if that happens.

[Lalmohan]

so basically there is a return to the far left and far right all over the western world, sort of like it was in the 70's-mid 80's

[panduranghari]

Yes. But it's going to be worse.

2 reasons mainly:
1. West gets poor
2. East gets rich.

Xenophobia is going to worsen. Islam gives the far right the justification to undertake reprisals.

I fear it and I guess the time to leave these shores draws near.

[Lisa]

Who would have thunk it, Keith Vaz gets his comeuppance,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37269919

[chetak]

Who would have thunk it, Keith Vaz gets his comeuppance,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37269919

Please don't malign this great man.

He believes in immigration and foreplay err fairplay, not like the rest of the brexit morons who wouldn't recognize an Eastern European cucumber, if they ever saw one.

The Vaz 90 minutes sandwich is an Eastern European variation on a world famous british invention first tried by the Earl of Sandwich. Mayo, anyone??

It is alleged the MP had two meetings with Eastern European origin escorts, including a 90-minute meeting on August 27.

[Lalmohan]

Keith had nawaabi pasand, who knew!

[IndraD]

Merkel party lagging behind in exit polls by far right in own place https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ ... vorpommern
writing on the wall

[chanakyaa]

The dark side of life for refugees in the pUKe.

Hundreds of child refugees have vanished since arriving in the UK, prompting trafficking and abuse fears

[Arjun]

X-post from Western Universalism thread:

Some enlightening stats relating to the Air China screwup...

"London is generally a safe place to travel, however precautions are needed when entering areas mainly populated by Indians,Pakistanis and black people."

What Air China meant to say was precautions are needed when entering "deprived neighborhoods" which are generally associated with high rate of crime and poverty. And what do the latest stats say as to which UK communities are more likely to live in such "deprived neighborhoods" ? : How likely are ethnic minorities to live in deprived neighbourhoods?

Surprise, surprise - Chinese figure above the Indians in living in these hellholes !

So it would be more correct to say "precautions are needed when entering areas mainly populated by Chinese, Pakistanis and blacks"...of course it would still not make the statement politically correct, which is a whole different story.

The article was probably written up by some ignorant & jobless British Chinese....and based on official stats, Chinese in the UK do rank higher in joblessness than the Indians there

[rgosain]

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j ... 9545,d.d24

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home ... ef=rl&lp=2

Haven't heard much about the appeal recently but it appears that the UK government did issue these guys with permits and licences to import arms from the UK for their anti-piracay work in the Indian Ocean. The families are angry at India and the Uk for abandoning the ex-miltary guys.

[eklavya]

...and based on official stats, Chinese in the UK do rank higher in joblessness than the Indians there

As far as I can tell, Indians are the most economically successful ethnic group in the UK:

http://www.integrationhub.net/module/wo ... job-market

[Arjun]

As far as I can tell, Indians are the most economically successful ethnic group in the UK:

http://www.integrationhub.net/module/wo ... job-market

As they are in the US and rest of the Anglosphere...Only place where the Chinese diaspora is successful is SE Asia.

Oops, spoke too soon....Indians kicking Chinese butt even in Singapore where Indians are now the ethnic group with highest household income: https://www.singstat.gov.sg/docs/defaul ... ndings.pdf (see page 10)

[svinayak]

Oops, spoke too soon....Indians kicking Chinese butt even in Singapore where Indians are now the ethnic group with highest household income: https://www.singstat.gov.sg/docs/defaul ... ndings.pdf (see page 10)

Met a Singapore govt delegation recently. Their real estate agency is trying to attract companies from all over the world.

The person was saying that the entire financial sector was dominated by Indian origin Singaporeans.

[Neshant]

Singapore by and large was built by Chinese-origin folks with free trade with America as a gift since the early Cold War days.

It was meant to showcase the South East Asian city as a capitalist paradise to would-be communist minded South East Asian countries after the Vietnam war.

But full credit to the Chinese for the sheer level of organization in building the city state into one of the highest standards of living in the world.

Its something China aspires to and one day they will achieve it.

[Karthik S]

Met a Singapore govt delegation recently. Their real estate agency is trying to attract companies from all over the world.

The person was saying that the entire financial sector was dominated by Indian origin Singaporeans.

Can't say dominate, but sizable Indian population exists in Manhattan too. Unfortunately, finance sector in India hasn't been up to speed compared with IT sector.

[IndraD]

Armed police arrest 55 sikhs trying to disrupt interfaith marriage at Birmingham Gurudwara http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09 ... um=twitter

[IndraD]

https://www.rt.com/uk/358994-muslim-pol ... extremism/
London’s police ignore Muslim officers ‘extremist views’ for fear of being labeled ‘Islamophobic’

[JTull]

Singapore by and large was built by Chinese-origin folks with free trade with America as a gift since the early Cold War days.

It was meant to showcase the South East Asian city as a capitalist paradise to would-be communist minded South East Asian countries after the Vietnam war.

But full credit to the Chinese for the sheer level of organization in building the city state into one of the highest standards of living in the world.

Its something China aspires to and one day they will achieve it.

Replace 'Chinese' by 'Malay' in above text.

[Gerard]

Meanwhile.. In the Islamic Emirate of England, held Scotland, Wales and English Administered Ireland... Paki Officer Culture taking over the Coldstream Guards
Queen’s guards major filmed sniffing powder-like substance off sword while ON DUTY protecting Royals

Captain Alex Ritchie hunched over the sword as he chops up a line of the substance with a plastic card.

Capt Ritchie, 27, then asks Major Coleby, 41: “How much? Two inches? You want two inches of that? If you get rid of that I’ll be mightily impressed.”

Coldstream Guard Lance Sergeant accused of raping another male soldier in barracks found not guilty

[Philip]

Tony B.Liar's secret relationship with Lupert Murdoch's ex-wife,Wendi of Dung.
What ever BLiar denies,would "Lupert" ,the Dirty Digger" of Oz fame,have ditched the mother of his 2 kids if the relationship was just platonic? BLIar's fortune is now estimated to be around GBP 100M ,all made from his post PM engagements,directorships,etc.showered upon him for lying to the world and invading Iraq as Dubya Bush's deputy.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/ ... or-reveals

Rupert Murdoch hurt by 'closeness' of Wendi Deng and Tony Blair, editor reveals
Chris Mitchell, former editor of the Australian, tells of Murdoch ‘lonely and struggling to sleep at night’ after breakup with Deng and accuses rival media of treating tycoon ‘vindictively’

Rupert Murdoch with Wendi Deng in 2012, after his appearance at the Leveson inquiry into press standards in the UK. Murdoch is ‘a loving patriarch and husband, not at all the caricature so beloved of the leftwing media’ says former News Corp editor Chris Mitchell. Photograph: Facundo Arrizabalaga/EPA
Amanda Meade
Tuesday 13 September 2016
Rupert Murdoch was devastated by the “closeness” between his then-wife Wendi Deng and Tony Blair, News Corp’s longest-serving editor has revealed in a new book.

The alleged closeness between the mother of his two youngest children and Blair, a man Murdoch had been “financially and politically generous” to, was reported to the family by domestic staff, according to Chris Mitchell, the former editor-in-chief of the Australian newspaper.

“He was clearly lonely and struggling to sleep at night for the first few months after the separation,” Mitchell writes about his employer in Making Headlines. “He rang much more often than he had previously. And he was frank about his sleep problems, sore back and the hurt he was feeling about what had happened between Wendi and Tony Blair.

“It was clear that my boss had been devastated by the closeness he found between his wife and his former friend. I never asked what that was, but it is clear that his Australian family, alerted by domestic staff, rang the bell on whatever was going on when Rupert was out of town.”

Marrying Rupert Murdoch is ‘absolutely wonderful’, says Jerry Hall

Murdoch himself said something similar in an interview with Fortune magazine in 2014. But Blair has always forcefully denied suggestions of an affair with Deng and says he will not speak about the allegations. Deng has declined to comment. Friends of both Deng and Blair have said they were friends and no more and that Blair was a sympathetic intermediary and confidant in a troubled marriage.

Mitchell wrote: “It seemed to me at the time that, in the post-phone-hacking media world, Rupert’s marriage breakdown was treated vindictively and that a man well in to his 80s losing a wife with whom he had fathered two children was given no room to grieve for his loss.”

But, Mitchell says, Murdoch is much happier now in his fourth marriage to model Jerry Hall, “a wonderfully grounded Texan woman with a big heart and big personality”.

Mitchell describes Murdoch as “a loving patriarch and husband, not at all the caricature so beloved of the leftwing media. And of course there was an added benefit to marrying his new bride in Fleet Street. He could yet again thumb his nose at the Guardian luvvies who had tried so hard to bring him down with the phone-hacking story.”

After 42 years in journalism, most of it working for News Corp Australia, Mitchell explains he wanted to provide some balance to the “often hysterical discussion” about the Murdoch family and their media empire, which he says are often denigrated by the Guardian, ABC and Fairfax Media in Australia.

The Queensland journalist, who edited Brisbane’s Courier Mail and the Australian newspaper for 24 years and now writes a media column in the Australian, describes his relationship with the media proprietor as not close but “friendly and trusting” and says they are of a like mind. “The unvarnished truth is that I did not need Rupert directing me,” he says. “All my campaigns were my own and they were usually my own ideas. And of course because our world views are similar I never ran any of those ideas past Rupert.”

The 59-year-old who retired at the end of 2015 writes very warmly about Murdoch, saying his passion for journalism is undiminished well into his 80s and his grasp of accounting is unrivalled in the company. “As he left – this then 83-year-old who still had the world at his feet – I felt great admiration for him and the deft touch with which he had carried 60 years of publishing genius,” he writes of a characteristic visit to his office by Murdoch.

The book, published by Melbourne University Press on Thursday, provides an insight into the political leanings of his sons Lachlan and James. Lachlan worked with Mitchell at Queensland Newspapers when he was 22 and later in Sydney as publisher of the Australian.

Mitchell writes that while James is “very progressive”, in particular on the issue of climate change, Lachlan is very conservative politically and “distinctly sceptical” about the science of global warming.

He recalls a private function at which the former prime minister Tony Abbott impressed him by being passionately committed to saving the lives of Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran, who he believed had been reformed in jail in Bali. The two men, members of the so-called Bali Nine, were executed in Indonesia for drug offences. Lachlan “argued against Tony’s compassion, saying that Chan and Sukumaran deserved exactly what they were about to get”, Mitchell writes.

“As with his views on gun control in the United States, Lachlan’s conservatism is more vigorous than that of any Australian politician, Abbott included, and usually to the right of his father’s views,” he said.

Mitchell reveals the often close relationship between editors, politicians and media proprietors, detailing private parties and dinners at which the political and media elite discuss politics and editors are asked for their opinion on policy.

He says Rupert Murdoch was keen to find out all about Labor leader Kevin Rudd before the 2007 election even though he was a fan of John Howard’s. Mitchell relates how he even managed to convince Murdoch to allow the Australian to back Rudd in the final editorial of the 2007 election campaign. He says he later regretted that decision.

“You know, Chris, despite what all the lefties say about me, I have helped elect more than my fair share of Labor governments, and I have often lived to regret it,” Murdoch is quoted as saying.

Mitchell takes some time to debunk a claim by historian Robert Manne and others that “Rupert Murdoch decided to use his Australian newspapers to destroy the government of Julia Gillard” at a conference in the US in 2010.

Mitchell says the Carmel conference with Australian editors and Wall Street Journal editor Robert Thomson, New York Post editor Col Allan and former Sun editor Rebekah Brooks was focused on how to maintain the business in the face of digital disruption not on a campaign to destroy Gillard.

“Julia Gillard had been persuaded by her more paranoid ministers, treasurer Wayne Swan and minister for communications Stephen Conroy, that a perfectly innocent gathering of Australian editors at a golf resort outside Carmel, near Rupert’s northern California ranch, was the beginning of a carefully orchestrated campaign to overthrow the government.

“One session concerned newspaper campaigns, but this was somehow construed by the Labor party as a session to discuss a possible campaign against the government.”

Unsurprisingly, Mitchell is scathing about Fairfax, saying the only great editor was John Alexander who left the Sydney Morning Herald in the 1990s, and unfavourably compares it with the culture of News Corp. “Rupert’s subjective judgment, clearly the best in the print media world, now holds sway over an editor’s fate,” he writes.