Geopolitical thread

[ramana]

Nightwatch segment

5 Dec 2011


First part can go into Russia thread but its more relevant here.

Russia: Comment. Most assessments of the Russian elections concluded that the outcome was a disaster for Prime Minister Putin and his One, also translated United, Russia Party. Putin's party won 49.7 percent of the vote. In 2007, it won almost 45 million votes. This time it won about 33 million votes.


Vladimir Zhirinovsky's nationalist Liberal Democratic Party of Russia got 11.7 percent and the center-left A Just Russia won 13.2 percent. The only truly democratic party, the liberal Yabloko, won 3.2 percent of the vote, missing the 7 percent threshold for winning seats in the Duma. Putin's party has lost its previous two-thirds majority in parliament.

It would be a grave error of western bias to conclude that Putin now is weaker. His party lost seats in the Duma, but the Duma is not Putin's power base.

Second and more important, parliamentary elections in Russia are not like parliamentary elections in the West. They do not decide the direction of government. That is determined outside the public political charade, according to Russian political authorities.

Russia has a strong presidency or a strong prime ministership, depending on whether Putin holds the office. Putin is set to return to the presidency in March 2012 elections.

Some Russian commentators are putting a positive spin on the elections as a sign of political maturity. One/United Russia will need to work in coalition with other parties, as if government depended on coalitions of elected deputies. That is good camouflage while Putin plans his presidential run.

Putin's party leaders are not describing the vote as a disaster, which some will argue as predictable, but might be accurate in a sinister way. A divided parliament would seem to invite a strong Russian President, next year. It is premature to draw strong conclusions about Putin from the vote outcome.

Europe: For the record. Standard and Poors put 15 of the 17 Eurozone countries on watch for a downgrade of their credit worthiness.

Germany- France: France and Germany want a new European Union (EU) treaty by March 2012 with tougher budgetary rules to deal with the eurozone debt crisis, French President Sarkozy and German Chancellor Merkel said after crisis talks Monday, 5 December.

Sarkozy said, "The goal that we have with the Chancellor is for an agreement to have been negotiated and concluded between the 17 members of the eurozone in March, because we must move quickly." Sarkozy warned of a "forced march to re-establish confidence in the euro and the eurozone."

The Franco-German proposal is to be detailed in a letter to EU president Herman Van Rompuy on Wednesday, the day before the EU summit convenes in Brussels.

New terms in a new agreement. Sarkozy said that the new treaty would be either for all 27 EU members or for the 17 members of the eurozone, with other nations signing on a voluntary basis.

"Germany and France are in complete agreement to say that eurobonds are in no case a solution to the crisis," Sarkozy said after meeting German Chancellor Merkel. "How can we convince others to make the efforts we are making ourselves if we pool our debts as of now? None of this makes any sense."

The two leaders backed automatic sanctions against EU member states whose deficits exceed three percent of GDP and called for a "reinforced and harmonized Golden Rule" on the deficits of eurozone states. The European Court of Justice should be tasked with verifying that national budgets obey deficit rules, but it should not be able to declare budgets "null and void", Merkel said.

Comment: The leaders of the two strongest European economies, Germany and France, have decided that the European debt crisis can only be settled by fundamental political change, reducing national sovereignty and integrating nations as states of Europe. They judge that the EU administration must be given sovereign power over the economic choices of elected national governments. The Germans and the French want the treaty to be modified so that only a majority vote in favor of the new treaty would bind all members.

{Success of Germanification of Europe and de-Romanising! Two millenia of European politics is turning full circle}

This is a watershed development in the post-War history of Europe. If a new treaty of this nature is enacted, it would establish a European condominium dominated by the Germans and the French. It also would exploit economic troubles to advance a broad political agenda for European unification under German and French leadership that exceeds economic exigency.

The resort to political structural changes is an admission that economic policy has failed to fix the European debt crisis. Political structural and authority changes are seldom solutions to primarily economic problems.

But Economics is hand maiden of Politics!}

Another consideration is that politicians seldom have the wisdom to fix economic problems. That is one of the paramount lessons of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Politicians are seldom smart enough to run economies.

Additionally, it is not clear that structural change in the EU with enforcement authority is the remedy for the debt problem and might backfire. In earlier times, Greece, for example, tended to buy off unions and other activist groups in order to maintain internal stability - to stop strikes and riots. The new EU measures would eliminate that practice as an option for European countries prone to violent internal protests.

That suggests that the structural changes Germany and France now demand -- as a one size fits all solution --might make some European countries more unstable in the future by negating arrangements that protected property and persons. Successful businessmen, entrepreneurs and venture capitalists do not appear to be invited to the debt discussions.

of the writers.

What this means is France and Germany recognize that they have to take charge of Europe or lose the economic war with the Anglo-Saxons and are taking steps in the name of reducing debt. If they did otherwise they will be accused of balance of power negation. Where is the UK on this?

[abhishek_sharma]

The EU summit: Will the center hold?

'T' time for the BRICs?

[Philip]

How prescient of you Abishek! There is an excellent article below.David Cameron aboard HMS Gt.Britain has unfurled the Union Jack.Sarko and Merkel aboard the de Gaulle and Bismark rejected his compass bearings and EU "union" is now kaput! By Jove! Merde! Mein Gott!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/debt ... -live.html

EU treaty and debt crisis: live
David Cameron has blocked a crucial EU treaty deal and now faces virtual isolation as 23 of the 27 nations forge ahead to thrash out plans for tougher central control of eurozone tax and spending.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/co ... 72373.html

John Kampfner: In the economic storm a new world order is being born
After decades of being lectured to by the West, the BRIC countries are enjoying their moment

XCpt:

Politicians and central bankers have long since ditched the stricture – don't spook the markets. From Sir Mervyn King to Angela Merkel, from Mario Draghi to George Osborne, they now compete for the most vivid Armageddon rhetoric.

Voters do not know how to react. Should they spend (an activity once described by Gordon Brown as a patriotic duty)? Or should they do as the Germans do and save? Should they eat, drink and be merry (one newspaper colour supplement reported without irony this weekend that central London restaurants have never been so full), or should they hibernate for six years? Nobody knows the answer, and individuals will act according to their mood and their circumstance.

With language being devalued as quickly as economies go under, one quote this weekend struck me as particularly chilling. It came from Australia's Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, as she sought to justify her government's intention to sell uranium to India. The ruling Labor Party had for years stuck to a ban on sales to a nation that refuses to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

Ignore the fact that countries like Germany are scaling back their nuclear commitments; put to one side safety concerns highlighted by the Japanese earthquake. Gillard simply explained: "At this conference we should take a decision in the national interest, a decision about strengthening our strategic partnership with India in this the Asian century."

Why should a country that owns an estimated 40 per cent of the world's uranium be concerned with anything other than national economic and strategic interest? Commodity-rich states, such as Australia, have weathered the financial storms with comparative ease. China, India and other emerging Asian economies are their main markets. There is no merit in antagonising them. Realpolitik never really disappeared. But in these straitened times, it is back with a vengeance.

With its handy $3 trillion in foreign exchange reserves, China holds many of the cards and is playing them with increasing astuteness. At the recent Cannes G20 summit, the Chinese outsmarted the Americans, while at the same time declining the request to bail out indebted European economies. For sure, the Chinese economy is set to perform a little worse next year, but the OECD forecast of growth slowing to 8.5 per cent in 2012 (from 9.3 per cent this year), and rising to 9.5 per cent in 2013 puts it on a different planet to the Europeans or Americans.

For some time now, Western governments have fought shy of challenging China on issues of human rights. Visiting leaders might go through the motions, but it is part of the agreed choreography that the subject is mentioned for the benefit of a few pesky voters back home, and everyone quickly moves on to discuss trade – and, increasingly now, bailouts.

The genuflection towards Chinese-style "managed democracy" and "authoritarian capitalism" goes beyond politics. As the euro crisis unfolds, and as Barack Obama continues to grapple with America's joblessness, a number of economists and commentators enviously eye the economic models of the BRIC countries.

After decades of being lectured to by Western governments and international financial institutions, the emerging economic powers are enjoying the moment. During a meeting with the IMF's managing director, Christine Lagarde, Brazil's finance minister, Guido Mantega, couldn't resist making a dig at her expense: "This time, the IMF did not come here bringing money as in the past," Mantega told reporters. "This time it came to ask Brazil to lend it money and I prefer to be a creditor than a debtor."

Lagarde returned the compliment, praising the "marked resilience" of the Brazilian economy, which she said was based around inflation targeting and flexible exchange rates – and most of all fiscal responsibility, unlike the spendthrift southern Europeans. She pointed out that in the interconnected global economy, no country was protected from Europe's squalls. Everyone is vulnerable, but some are more vulnerable than others.

At the root of the BRICs' perceived success is the combination of low taxation, flexible labour, a lack of welfare provision and limited or no democratic accountability. If only we could be like them, even just for a week, without having to worry about hidebound voters, we could sort out the mess: so some Western politicians lament, only half in jest. In Greece and Italy they already have government by technocracy. The next phase of German-led fiscal integration by the Euro 17 will include the requirement to submit future national budgets to Brussels for approval.

The post-1945 European settlement, with strong and universal welfare provision, is now up for grabs. Specific entitlements may have varied from country to country; they have been challenged from time to time, such as under the Thatcher government. But, in general terms, they have been a source of political, social and economic stability.

As the balance of power shifts eastwards, these assumptions no longer hold sway. Flat taxation is one of the new mantras. Russia was one of the first exponents, with a minuscule 13 per cent marginal rate set in 2001. Many economists now talk of reducing headline tax rates, insisting that this is the best way of kick-starting the economy (alongside grand infrastructure projects – another Chinese speciality).

With no cash in the bank, tax cuts would require even further public spending cuts over and above those planned in order to reduce the deficit. As Lord Hutton, the former Labour cabinet minister, intimated yesterday, far from being unfairly punitive, perhaps the planned cuts in public sector pensions don't go far enough. I say this not to endorse that view, but to point out that the debate has much further to go, as the recession develops.

For the moment, politicians in the old continent are right to focus on the here and now. On the main stage, Merkel and Sarkozy will today try to agree a deal to put to other EU leaders on Friday. Failure will be clear for all to see; success harder to determine. Across the Channel, in his forlorn cameo role, Cameron will talk up the life sciences, as part of his exhortation for the UK to use entrepreneurialism to dig its way out of the mire. Meanwhile, Clegg promises legislation to curb bankers' greed. The Coalition has failed to grapple with the problem seriously after years of the Labour government's slavish adoration of the banks.

Over in the US, expect little of substance as Barack Obama focuses on staving off the challenge from the eccentric assortment of Republican challengers. Which brings us back to China: increasingly we will look to Beijing to help sort out our mess. Eventually, it too will play its part, as the long-term decline of consumption in the US and EU will not be in its interests. That will be just the start. Watch how the two economic and social models, very gradually, coalesce. Gillard's Asian century is already upon us.

John Kampfner is the author of "Freedom For Sale

PS:Jai Hind!

[ramana]

As I wrote earlier the Eurozone debt crisis is a economic war between Anglo-Saxons and the Continentials (Germany and France). Hence UK has to be aloof. They were constant blockers of European integration for it negates their silly Balance of Power strategy played since the early 1700s War of Spanish Succession. BOP works when the opponents are divided. Once they unite they can show the door to the game players.

For the UK its a game while for the Europeans its life or death struggle.

x-post by krisna in Prespectives thread to highlight the UK perfidy. they have lived upto the French description of Perfidious Albion!
polish speech in berlin about EU

This moral significance of money intrigued Immanuel Kant, who wrote that the entire
practice of lending money presupposed at least the honest intention to repay. If this
condition were universally ignored, the very idea of lending and sharing wealth would
be undermined.

For Kant, honesty and responsibility were categorical imperatives: the foundation of any
moral order. For the European Union, likewise, these are the cornerstones. I would
point to the two fundamental values: Responsibility and Solidarity. Our responsibility for
decisions and processes. And Solidarity when it comes to bearing the burdens.

Today, as the first Polish Presidency is drawing to a close, I will tackle basic questions:

How did we get into this crisis?

Where do we go from here?

How to get there?

What does Poland bring?

What do we ask of Germany?

* *

It is of course partly about debt, the need to deleverage our economies from the crazy
heights caused by government overspending, accounting chicanery and irresponsible
financial engineering. And the deleveraging is occurring beyond the Euro zone: look at
the UK with its debt of 80% of GDP and the US, with 100%.

But if it were only a question of debt, you would expect ratings and spreads to be
affecting countries in proportion to their indebtedness. But, very strikingly, this is not
the case. Some countries, such as the UK and Japan, with high debt in proportion to
GDP, pay low premiums. Others, with lower debt – like Spain, pay high ones.

The inevitable conclusion is that this crisis is not only about debt, but primarily about
confidence and, more precisely, credibility. About investor perception where their
funds are safe.

The Euro zone crisis is a more dramatic manifestation of the European malaise because
its founders created a system in which each of its members has the capacity to bring it
down, with appalling costs to themselves and the entire neighborhood.

About Britain--

Which brings me to the issue of whether an important member, Britain, can support
reform. You have given the Union its common language. The Single Market was largely
your brilliant idea. A British commissioner runs our diplomacy. You could lead Europe
on defence. You are an indispensable link across the Atlantic. On the other hand, Euro
zone’s collapse would hugely harm your economy. Also, your total sovereign, corporate
and household debt exceeds 400% of GDP. Are you sure markets will always favour
you? We would prefer you in, but if you can’t join, please allow us to forge ahead. And
please start explaining to your people that European decisions are not Brussels’ diktats
but results of agreements in which you freely participate.

About Germany-

Fifth question: What does Poland ask of Germany?

We ask, first of all, that Germany admits that she is the biggest beneficiary of the
current arrangements and therefore that she has the biggest obligation to make them
sustainable.

Second, as you know best, you are not an innocent victim of others’ profligacy. You, who
should have known better, have also broken the Growth and Stability Pact and your
banks also recklessly bought risky bonds.

Third, because investors have been selling the bonds of exposed countries and flying to
safety, your borrowing costs have been lower than they would have been in normal
times, so you may be benefitting in the short term, but...

Fourth, that if your neighbours’ economies stall or implode, you will suffer greatly, too.

Fifth, that despite your understandable aversion to inflation, you appreciate that the
danger of collapse is now a much bigger threat.

Sixth, that because of your size and your history you have a special responsibility to
preserve peace and democracy on the continent. Jurgen Habermas has wisely said that
"If the European project fails, then there is the question of how long it will take to reach
the status quo again. Remember the German Revolution of 1848: When it failed, it took
us 100 years to regain the same level of democracy as before."

What, as Poland’s foreign minister, do I regard as the biggest threat to the security and
prosperity of Poland today, on 28th November 2011? It’s not terrorism, it’s not the
Taliban, and it’s certainly not German tanks. It’s not even Russian missiles which
President Medvedev has just threatened to deploy on the EU’s border. The biggest
threat to the security and prosperity of Poland would be the collapse of the Euro zone.

And I demand of Germany that, for your own sake and for ours, you help it survive and
prosper. You know full well that nobody else can do it. I will probably be first Polish
foreign minister in history to say so, but here it is: I fear German power less than I am
beginning to fear German inactivity.

You have become Europe’s indispensable nation.
You may not fail to lead. Not dominate, but to lead in reform.
Provided you include us in decision-making, Poland will support you.

conclusion-

But we are standing on the edge of a precipice. This is the scariest moment of my
ministerial life but therefore also the most sublime. Future generations will judge us by
what we do, or fail to do. Whether we lay the foundations for decades of greatness, or
shirk our responsibility and acquiesce in decline.

As a Pole and a European, here in Berlin, I say: the time to act is now.

In Telugu there is a saying "Pilli ki chalagatam, eluka ki prana sankatam!"

"Its a game for the cat, while its a life sturggle for the mouse!"


Lets see if the Europeans can hold their ground and forge ahead.

With US demographic changes coming into play by 2025, the UK will try to get together with the other Commonwealth Anglo Saxons (Aussies, Canada, NZ and SA to some extent) and try to retain relevance.

Here India should step in and create the CW Free Trade Zone and take them over. Those A-S CW states are potential out of country locations for Indians.

[ramana]

X-post by jhujar....

http://www.businessinsider.com/goldman- ... cs-2011-12
Goldman Sachs Reveals 5 Huge Global Themes For The Next 10 Years

Dominic Wilson, chief market economist at the investment house, updated Goldman's view on the four nations. Though he acknowledges their amazing growth over the last ten years, he thinks the BRIC story has only just begun.Goldman estimates that by 2050, Brazil, Russia, India and China will all rank in the top five global economies, with the U.S. the only developed market in the group. But, the bank sees non-BRIC emerging markets including the Next-Eleven, or Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, South Korea, Turkey, and Vietnam, contributing 40% towards GDP growth by 2050, up from 27% over the last decade.This story of the ‘Expanding Middle’ is likely to continue and remains firmly intact in the new projections. As a result of the continued shift in the economic weight of the BRICs and other EM economies, we see a steady rise in the share of income of the middle-income economies," lead analyst Dominic Wilson writes.The next decade will see the fasted global growth rate, so long as demand remains intact. At an average of 4.3%, global GDP will climb at a greater clip than seen over the past two decades. Goldman believes this will continue to pressure commodity prices higher as demand ramps up.We would expect the Chinese economy to surpass the U.S. in 2026, and the BRICs together to surpass the U.S. in 2015 and the G7 in 2032," Wilson writes.

Looks like GS is smoking some hot stuff if it includes TSP in the non BRIC states.

[abhishek_sharma]

The Merkelization of Europe: A European Germany has become a German Europe -- and it's all downhill from here.

[ramana]

The Eurozone war has upended one millenia of European history by making Germany the sole European financial power. Bismarck would be proud of Angela Merkel.

[brihaspati]

The Euro zone appears to have played well, and UK is caught out in its bluff. But more importantly : several disturbing pointers coming together.

(1) A chinese political meltdown within the party - with several internal feuds now taking on wider dimensions. City based nearly autonomous politics appears to be developing. Somewhat like the closing stages of USSR - regional-city party bosses transitioning to satrap status. The economic changes through urbanization-industrialization appears to be accelerating the process.

(2) The Euro will tighten its belt. But it will tide over. More power to Germany and secondly to France. But UK may now take steps to try and see how to thwart this process. It is worthwhile to explore the model that UK serves now as a front for a global financical network [nearly transnational] - and such interests, through its widespread legacy of surviving connections and subnetworks from the imperialist phase throughout the world. In a crisis they are likely to desperately use any compromises to keep their high flying capital safe and grow - including religions such as islamism, limited wars, and other forms of national level subversion.

Cameron's stance is perhaps a subconscious reflection of the pressures of this global perspective - rather than any immediate concern for protecting UK commons.

A combination of Chinese internal crises, and British foxiness can be explosive for the subcontinent. Moreover ex-Paki stalwarts appear to throng to London, while ex-BD stalwarts throng to USA. between these two they appear to be keeping the islamists on the subcontinent well-primed.

Any first attack will not come from China. it will be orchestrated to be coming from Pak.

[abhischekcc]

Yesterday, a letter bomb was posted to the office of the head of Deutsche Bank. It reminds me of the assassination of Deutsche Bank chairman Alfred Herrhausen in 1989, when he was the main force pushing for the creation of a new silk route. The assassination helped the AngloSaxons as a new silk route would have integrated the economies of Eurasia, excluding the Anglo Saxon, who basically are an ocean power.

Currently, Anglo Saxons are again in danger of being excluded out by a rising Germany.

[Philip]

Perfect time for us to leverage Germany and buy more AIP U-boats to continue the tradition of operting German subs which have served us well.Germany has just sold Israel another Dolphin at much reduced costs (agreement between the two nations).Greece is bankrupt and cannot pay for her German orders,perfet time for India to Carpe Diem,"seize the day"

Poor Perfidious Albion.Here are two good reports on the snub by Sarko and co.

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

EU Treaty: bashing the Brits is an old habit in France that still boosts a politician’s popularity
The bust-up follows a tradition of discord and animosity between the two countries.

(Enjoy it in full)

‘David Cameron is not a gentleman.” It is with these words that one close adviser to President Nicolas Sarkozy of France summed up the British Prime Minister after a “muscular” debate over Europe’s future between the two men in the early hours at yesterday’s Brussels summit.

Add that to Sarkozy’s furious remark to Mr Cameron last month that he “lost a good opportunity to shut up” after a row that almost ended in fisticuffs, and the stage is set for one of those choreographed public spats that have long punctuated Franco-British relations.

Such Gallic insults are hardly the first French leaders have sent in the direction of Britain, and we have returned the compliment in style.

Horatio Nelson famously instructed his officers that, ‘‘You must hate a Frenchman as you hate the Devil”; and the Duke of Wellington proclaimed that: ‘‘We always have been, we are, and I hope that we always shall be detested in France.”

The Nelson remark is, of course, jingoistic history. Objectively, France and Britain are old and close allies, with war unthinkable between the two since 1815. Twice, arguably three times, the two nations have even discussed becoming a single state, most recently during the Suez crisis of October 1956. .....

Some historic gems from the above report.

Suez:....Just a month before the offensive began, an Anglophile French premier, Guy Mollet, revived a proposal Churchill and de Gaulle had discussed, in June 1940, for a Franco-British union.

Weeks later, the British unwittingly brought this honeymoon to an abrupt end. Without informing their French ally, they capitulated to a US ultimatum by agreeing to a ceasefire in the Suez Canal zone.

When Britain’s prime minister, Anthony Eden, broke the news to Mollet by telephone, the French foreign minister, Christian Pineau, said he sensed that “for such a convinced partisan of the Franco-British alliance, abandonment in such conditions was a bitter blow”. The West German chancellor, Konrad Adenauer, was also in the room. “Europe”, he reassured Mollet, “will be your revenge”.

His prediction proved entirely accurate. In Britain, Suez is widely seen as a catastrophic miscalculation ending in the realisation that the nation was no longer a stand-alone world power. It sealed the special relationship with America.

The main lesson France drew from the Suez Crisis was that its future lay elsewhere than in a close relationship with America and Britain. Charles de Gaulle summed his position up as: “France must continue to behave like a great power precisely because she no longer is one.”

Those events go some way to explaining why de Gaulle chose to veto Britain’s application to join the Common Market in 1963, and again in 1967, warning France’s five partners in the European Economic Community that if they tried to impose British membership on France it would result in the break-up of the community.

When all five said they would support negotiations towards British membership only France remained opposed, with the French president saying he would only consider British inclusion if it came “naked” – without non-EU allegiances or ties – to the table. This week, France got its way once again, after Cameron refused to strip safeguards for the City.

Since de Gaulle’s veto, France and Britain have lived through a series of theatrical moments that have usually played out to their mutual benefit.

“What more does this housewife want from me? My balls on a plate?” Jacques Chirac famously cried in exasperation after some severe handbagging from Margaret Thatcher.

François Mitterrand maintained that tone when he described Mrs Thatcher as having “the eyes of Caligula and the mouth of Marilyn Monroe”.

Chirac went on to to have a memorable row with Tony Blair in Brussels in 2002 over the Common Agricultural Policy, with the French president shouting: “You have been very rude and I have never been spoken to like this before.”

There were regular rapprochements, but a close friendship has failed to develop with loyalty and trust proving elusive. A thaw, then renewed frosting of ties, has been a constant for decades.

Yet this time, we had been led to believe Sarkozy and Cameron were onto something new – a true “Entente Amicale” to supersede the 1904 Entente Cordiale friendship pact.

We have agreed to pool defence resources, and worked hand in hand in the Franco-British-led Nato campaign in Libya. Samantha Cameron and Carla Bruni, we are told, get on wonderfully. On a personal front, Mr Cameron was deeply touched when Sarkozy opened his Riviera retreat to him after his father died while on holiday in the area.

So how bad is the diplomatic damage this time?

“It’s not so much a row as a divorce, a passing of the ways,” says Charles Grant of the Centre for European Reform. “It’s more fundamental because the survival of the euro is existential for Sarkozy. He, like the Germans, will do everything he can to ensure its longevity and Britain is not part of that.”

“France’s relationship with Germany, which has invaded it three times since the 1860s, has been crucial to its view of the outside world,” adds the Cambridge historian Robert Tombs, who with his French wife Isabelle, wrote That Sweet Enemy – an analysis of Franco-British relations over 300 years.

“The euro was a French idea. It was France’s price for supporting German unification and was seen as a way of preventing it from becoming too powerful. The way they have tried to bring this about is by holding them tight, in a sort of bear hug to link them into whole lot of institutions of which the single currency was the most important. That Sarkozy should make his relationship with Merkel the crucial part of his stance in this crisis is utterly predictable.”

Indeed, many French politicians believe that Britain only joined the EU to spoil the show, to control federalist leanings and dilute the EU into an ever-expanding free trade zone.

“The British only came in because it was the best way for them to control it and prevent it really advancing,” claims Michel Rocard, a former French prime minister.

But there are also suspicions about the extent of the bad feeling between Cameron and Sarkozy, with some observers in France suggesting its dramatisation has been almost stage-managed by both sides.

“The way [the failure to agree with Britain] was announced was pure theatre – like a couple telling the children they’re going to separate but just for show,” says the French political analyst Dominique Reynié.

With Sarkozy hoping for re-election next spring, the French president believes his handling of the euro crisis is key to electoral success. He still trails his Socialist rival, François Hollande, in the polls, but there are signs he is catching up.

“Both leaders stand to gain domestically,” adds Mr Reynié. “It could kickstart Cameron at a time when he needs to affirm himself as head of state, while on Sarko’s side, bashing the Brits is an old habit that still boosts popularity.”

[devesh]

Yesterday, a letter bomb was posted to the office of the head of Deutsche Bank. It reminds me of the assassination of Deutsche Bank chairman Alfred Herrhausen in 1989, when he was the main force pushing for the creation of a new silk route. The assassination helped the AngloSaxons as a new silk route would have integrated the economies of Eurasia, excluding the Anglo Saxon, who basically are an ocean power.

Currently, Anglo Saxons are again in danger of being excluded out by a rising Germany.

if there is a direct route of travel/exchange/transportation from between Germany and Central Asia, via Russia, Anglo-Saxon imperialists will have no choice but to tone down their ambitions drastically. this is why the rising Russo-German cooperation and alliance is a concern for Anglo-American imperialists. most likely, Poland will be propped up to block such direct land routes. even so, there is still another route via Hungary/Austria, etc. it remains to be seen if the Anglo-American imperialists can convince all of these players to be on their side. I personally think it's unlikely. but time will tell.

[RajeshA]

There is a change in Poland how it views Germany and Russia. With Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belarus, Ukraine to the East of Poland, Polish fears of Russia have substantially winded down. Similarly after being incorporated within the EU, Polish fears of Germany have also calmed. Today thousands of Polish people are living and working in Germany and they feel at ease. This is not to say that the old rhetoric is fully gone. That probably never goes. Just see UK and France!

Germany and Russia are now connected through a Gas Pipeline going under the Baltic Sea and are not dependent on other pipelines through Ukraine, etc. For the rest of traffic, transit, logistics, there is no problem in Europe. Nobody is going to stop people from traveling and goods from being transported. There are many land routes, and if they are for some reason blocked, there is always the sea route.

Anglo-Americans have lost the influence they had a decade ago in Eastern Europe. Germany has been able to consolidate the region within the EU.

[Agnimitra]

Interview with Lawrence Wilkerson, former CoS to Colin Powell. Watch the whole thing. One nugget - "US's war with Iran is 3 years away.

[ramana]

Polish are the odd man out in the Slav world and hence fear the bear.

[RajeshA]

Polish are the odd man out in the Slav world and hence fear the bear.

Polish are also Catholics and not Eastern Orthodox! That has got a large effect on the overall perspective.

[ramana]

exactly.

[abhishek_sharma]

From the fall of Ahmadinejad, Assad, Castro, and Chavez to the rise of cyberattacks -- the top 13 stories that could dominate the headlines in 2012.

[abhishek_sharma]

Alone on the Island: Is David Cameron's self-imposed exile from Europe savvy or suicide?

[abhishek_sharma]

From reciprocal nuclear reductions to making nice with Iran, 5 bold moves that could change the world.

[ramana]

BRF called it first.

Nightwatch 14 Dec 2011

Europe: Comment. The European political leaders, led by Germany and France, have used the debt crisis to advance longstanding goals for closer integration, under the mantra that the problems must have a political solution.

The so-called political solution from restructuring will have effects in the future, assuming all the member parliaments promptly approve. The redrawing of the treaty has no effect on a very immediate crisis of paying this and next month's debts. Thus, last week's summit, in hindsight, looks like a diversion to try to raise confidence and it worked for a few days, until investors realized it has no immediate effects on the financial crisis.

[ramana]

Related x-post....

Village Revolts Over Inequities of Chinese Life

I have a CT to make. I am not as elaborative, expressive or lucid like some of our BRFites, as I am a true 16 annas SDRE.

- Up to six months back, US officials shuttled to China to urge it to appreciate Yuan.
- China thought it has become a middle kingdom again and planned to expand rapidly with its reserves, even into Europe. It even talked some warmongering.
- Unable to persuade China, rest of the world decided to devalue their currencies 20-30% against dollar, thus making Chinese exports costlier. (In Indian case there are no significant FII outflows, yet it gone from Rs. 44 to Rs. 54 in a short span of 4-5 months). One year back I had said, its better for the rest of the world to devalue themselves WRT to dollar, if China refuses to appreciate its Yuan.
- To stop European conquest, Euro appreciated 20-30% so that investing in Euro is not that attractive (Yuan->Dollar->Euro).

Next in line:
- Continued unrest in China, due to loss of jobs and economic recession.
- Some sort of protectionism in US and Europe through import quotas.
- Partial collapse of WTO.
- Rupee range bound at 53-57, so that Indian IT companies will give flat 30% discount to US.
- Once Rupee stabilizes around 53-57 range expect huge inflows FDI inflows in India in infrastructure and manufacturing, and there is as geopolitical angle to it (India giving them 20-30% discount at starting by Rupee depreciation).
- FDI in retail will be cleared with backhand understanding that Western countries will move most of low manufacturing jobs from China to India.
- Complete encirclement of China with careful balance of power, so that India or Japan cannot become military powers.
- Pakistan will be defanged and will be used as a low punching bag.
- Continued stalemate in Middle East, thus keeping Turkey, GCC and Iran at bay.

[devesh]

Indian objective will be 2-fold: develop niche areas where Made/Designed in India becomes something like Made in Germany/Japan. IMVHO, precision engineering in industrial materials, etc is the most obvious choice. the traditional Indian mentality is very conservative. when we make something, we want it to last long. this mentality should help us a carve a niche that is known for quality. Indian products in that segment should be synonymized with longevity and durability.

check out the videos below. stuff like this should help us beak the last any remaining racism that the Euros or Amikis have.

http://www.mainionline.com/automotive.html
http://www.mainionline.com/aerospace.html

[abhishek_sharma]

Deep Dive: can Europe be saved?

[ramana]

Facts to ponder:
- Gold now ~$1580/Oz. Used to be ~$1800 a few months ago
- Indian rupee devalued ~17% this year
- Euro/$ peg still there
- Euro market and US market still in doldrums
- PRC cant consume what it makes

Someone got a big haircut.

[Inder Sharma]

1) The question is then, with economies on a downward slope, why is the Oil still high, which logically must also slide (since the demand is slipping)?

[kmkraoind]

West is trying to nullify effective deployment of Chinese dollars, either it is Euro or gold. Since China is big oil importer, to squeeze out dollars from China, oil needs to be high. But with falling stock market, China recently announced 300 billion sovereign fund. If China tries aggressively to monetize its trillion dollars, expect a major trade/currency war, wherein US can announce China as a currency manipulator and can announce a huge haircut of it, but definitely the plea will come from Europe or a big nation of Asia, so that US can play an arbitrator/suitor role, so that it can escape the blame of instigator. Really interesting times ahead. As somebody previously said, 90% of Americans are dumb and easy goers, but 10% are really bloody smart, and even they have learned Sun Tzu Art of War. JMT.

Adder later: Watch the currencies of India, Brazil, Vietnam, Thailand, Mexico and any EM who has resources (natural and human) who are going to replace Chinese workshop, and all of them going to depreciate 20-30%, while Euro will appreciate WRT dollar.

[abhishek_sharma]

The 14 Biggest Lies of 2011

[devesh]

http://www.thelocal.de/opinion/20111208-39385.html

Should more be done to protect German?

A group dedicated to maintaining the German language’s purity is upset that a dictionary maker’s “Youth Word of the Year” is derived from English. Does German deserve a little more respect - or even need protection? Have your say.

Though Germany is not as protective of its language as some countries – such as France, where laws prescribe its use in culture and everyday life – there are those charging that German is being improperly diluted by foreign influence.

Take the Verein Deutsche Sprache, which has previously slammed Deutsche Telekom for using English words and this week took aim at dictionary-maker Langenscheidt for picking the word "Swag" as "Youth Word of the Year."

But what are your thoughts? Do you think Germans should do more to protect their language? Would following the French model ever make sense? Or is German enriched by words and phrases from other languages?

Registered users at The Local may add their comments in the field below. If you haven’t signed up yet, you can do so here – it’s free and only takes a moment.

[RajeshA]

devesh ji,

there are many English words in German. There are many Anglicismen as well. In some places, where there are migrants, the Germans too adopt 'bad German' as being cool.

The English used is often in area of technology, media and business. There are however areas where there is no need of English. Germans are however very particular about the use of good German, including the use of commata when writing. Often despite the use of English words here and there, German written in newspapers if of an extremely high standard. In fact, quite different than the English articles, which try to use easy English, German articles have heavy in Hochdeutsch and complex formulations, and the writer tries to boast of his German, rather than to cater to easy understanding by the reader.

Possibly that is because other than English, which has a world-wide following, and English writers try to make their writings accessible to all, including those whose English is not so good, German writers don't really have to take that into consideration. German is spoken in places like Germany, Austria and Switzerland with high literacy and good language skills.

Just some thoughts!

[Raja Ram]

Kim Jong Il's death is a significant event. It could have ramifications that can pose some fundamental changes to the power equations in North and East Asia. The incumbent Kim Jong Un is not experienced. When the founder president Kim Il Sung died, it was preceded by years of positioning and developing a leadership around Kim Jong Il. This has not been the case this time around.

Also, the era of Kim Jong Il, has been one of a change of guard. The earlier leadership had comrades of Kim Il Sung who had been part of the struggle against Japanese and then the Korean Wars. They did have a level of support from the population on which the cult of the Great Leader was built. The Dear Leader had no such basis and also presided over some of the worst times of North Korea. The Chinese support is now not assured as it was in the times of Mao. The Chinese view of North Korea has been that of a useful vassal state. As a convenient instrument of clandestine proliferation, as a tool for pressure and negotiations using nuclear blackmail against the US and and Japan etc. The economic underwriting of the bankrupt economy of North Korea is something that is done most grudgingly by the Chinese.

This change therefore presents an opportunity for the US to break the stanglehold of the communists in North Korea and push for a unification with the prosperous South. They west will definitely try this. As this will give them a great platform to contain China. Chinese will therefore react to secure the North Korean leadership that comes in. But they will first adopt a wait and watch to see if the new young Kim can get power and hold on to it.

There will be a two different factions in the ruling Workers Party. One of the old guard that will try to reassert and push the young Kim out and keep the China relationship. The other made up of likely younger cadre that will seek to secure a more prosperous future by following a detente with the South and making up with the western powers. Kim the grandson, has to make some tough choices here. He cannot afford to sit on the fence. He has to take some sides. And no matter what side he takes, it is not likely that he is going to have a stable and strong grip on power.

One thing is for sure, the west will not let this opportunity to go by without trying to change the status quo. From an Indian perspective, the North Korean break out from the Chinese camp is going to be beneficial. It will mean that the Chinese support by proliferation to Pakistan will no longer have a deniable cover for starters.

These are interesting times for Korea and China. May they live in even more interesting times.

Just a rambler's note. Take it for what it is worth.

[Christopher Sidor]

^^^^
I doubt China will allow North Korea to defect from its camp that easily. Korea, is like a dagger pointed right at the heart of China. Just have a look at the political map of North East Asia and imagine that there is no border between North and South Korea.

If North Korea becomes neutral or worse defects to west, it will be a nightmare as far as China is concerned. The nearest border to Beijing/Peking is via the Korean border. With South Korea and Japan firmly under the American belt, it will make China's eventual end game as far as Taiwan and Western Pacific is concerned a non-starter.

[RajeshA]

Christopher Sidor ji,

that is exactly the leverage that North Korea has over China. Its defection would not only cause Korea to be united with North and South Korea together but would also cause trouble at home, because there are many Koreans who are citizens of China. China is sitting on Korean land too. The division of Korea helped divert the attention from Chinese occupied Korea, probably just like divided J&K helped divert India's attention from Aksai Chin.

So a Korean integration would be a big problem for China to swallow. There will be a big upswing in Korean nationalism. Unlike Mongolia, Korea is a very significant country and sitting on Korean land would have its price.

[Suraj]

The Chinese have further worsened their position in the Korean peninsula through heir-apparent Xi Jingping's utterances recently characterizing the Korean War as a 'just, defensive' one against western aggression, while the South Koreans are very particular about the North's unprovoked attacks being the reason for the beginning of the war. Now their favorite cats paw is gone. It would very much be in India's interest to have a unified Korea bordering China - their attention will be transfixed on the eastern/northeastern quadrant as opposed to south/southwest in our direction.

[RajeshA]

The Myanmarese junta has some connections with North Korea due to some nuke-tech cooperation efforts and as ostracized countries they were drinking from the same well. India should talk with Myanmar to get a dialogue going with North Koreans. Also Singapore could help with establishing a dialogue. Indian Embassy in North Korea could also arrange for some North Korean Generals to come to India.

The more countries to which North Korea opens up, with each country it would have a multiplier effect.

We should try to support those factions in North Korea who say that it is more beneficial to open to the world. Ultimately it will all help to unite the Koreas and to deflect more of the Chinese attention more closer to home in the East.

[Agnimitra]

India facing trade 'disaster'

A free trade agreement being negotiated between the European Union and India would make a mockery of all World Trade Organization rules and be "disastrous" for the Indian economy, with zero import tariffs threatening the livelihoods of Indian farmers and those working in the retail sector, warn critics. - Isolda Agazzi

[svinayak]

Why this is not coming in the Indian media

[brihaspati]

They can always subsidize and make them electorally dependent on the regime. after all its all about net-profits for the powers. As per the thumb-rule - that everything is determined by "growth" and "profits", from the organizational viewpoint - if getting overall revenues, and third-party deposition of commissions are enough to compensate the affected social classes, and still retain a personal profit - why not?

[abhischekcc]

Atimes is a chinese mouthpiece. This FTA between India and Europe is old news, has been in the works for a long time. Both the Japanese and the Europeans have long tried to emulate US strategy of having a relationship with a country with a large working population, to offset their own aging populations.

For a while, Germany thought it could do the same with East German population. Japan thought that the smaller SEA countries could fit the bill. However, the excess labour in these countries is exhausted, and India (also Africa, but risks there are very high) is the only country that meets the criteria.

The Delhi Mumbai corridor is being developed for the Japanese. And now we have this agreement with the Europeans.

[abhishek_sharma]

The Worst Predictions for 2011

[abhishek_sharma]

It would be great if someone could post these articles: (I don't have full access).

The Future of History: By Francis Fukuyama

Balancing the East, Upgrading the West: By Zbigniew Brzezinski