Saturday, December 18, 2010

Who get India?

Both United States and Chinese leaders visited India recently, actions by the two world economic giants which clarify the relentless competition between the two nations. Strategically, India's rising economic power, dubbed the world fastest growing industrial economy, is not taken for granted. It now depends on what goals these two super powers are aiming to achieve by winning India's trust. One question we must ask ourselves is why India? Why should the US and China slogged it out with the intent of identifying with India prospect, making promises of support in terms of share in trade relations.
Common among Yoruba saying is; "people make facial gestures on pretense of portraying sincerity but within them is element of selfishness". It is glaring that the so called 'gestures of friendship' by the US and China have different core objectives. Demystifying these objectives must start with analyzing economic problems existing between these two powers.
The current economic status of china is threatening to the US. It is no big news that China, presently at her peak, is to overtake the US economy statistically in the near future. Also, open among Uncle Tom foreign policies is focus on changing China approaches in respect to International Trade. US claimed that China failed to follow international rule through her currency and export regulations since opening up her market to WTO countries. Her subsidy on exports and devalued currency in international market is harming US export trades. Co-incidentally, China's foreign investment had overtaken that of US and Germany (manufacturing based economy giant).
The effect of the last economic recession that crippled major investment companies most especially insurance and mortgages, still formed a torn on US and European countries where bankrupts is high. Chinese investors made incursion, securing ownership of affected companies. US companies were also not spared. During their last Economy Summit in Beijing, 25 May 2010, US delegation led by Timothy Geithner and Hilary Clinton accused China of purposely undervaluing the Yen in prospect of making her export cheaper.
In simple term, US demanded that China, operating within WTO mandate, must follow its rules. Putting government control undermines other countries export market. With her recent successes in manufacturing based export, China still holds the ayes (so it seems). Not subjecting to US demands and playing large export role in the Euro zone made China indisputable.
The above reasons is potent enough to arose discontent between the US and China. it is not surprising however, new method of economic combat is appearing so soon. First China intensive incursion into Europe is to break US hold but rather than crush US, a drop in the value of Euro made Yen more valued thereby increasing her export prices. Bad for China; export price rise means a drop Europe customer rates.
The latest is India coming into the fray. Obama economic summit visit to India is to give the later a nudge in breaking china dominance. The saying now is; even India has the prospect of over taken China and also carving a niche for herself in the Asian Market. Forget the political problems that bedevil India and Pakistan, important US ally, critical to the war in Afghanistan. US slogan is to give India more access to her market and also open up her domain for employment opportunities for her buoyant human resource; one area where India is now respected strategically.
China had also put up a fight; Hu Jintao visit to India recently is to counter American hold on India. Her slogan is Friendship. The Chinese deny any competition with India and propagate more collaboration between the two Asian giants. Despite the past problems of border dispute which saw China military confrontation in 1962, India seems to be the new darling of two powerful nations.

To be continue

Saturday, December 11, 2010

A New Turn

United States diplomacy in the Middle East has recently taken yet another turn of negotiations between the Palestinian and the Israelis. The Obama administration resumption of peace talks which started early 2009, had failed in its objectives. The so called 'Public Diplomacy' had proved less effective in resolving conflicts which had taken a new dimension in respect with national interest of the two parties involved.
The scope of these interest could first be ascertain within the ambiance of non cooperation of the Netanyahu administration in its freezing of new settlement constructions against resolution of the US, international community, the Arab nations and the UN to stop construction. Avigdor Lieberman, the Israeli foreign minister vividly made it known to the world that construction inside the disputed area of Jerusalem is within the sovereign right of Israel and no nation, including the US, cannot dictate, nor interfere with Israel internal policies.
However, the spate of events and agreements had taken over the whole scenario. Israel had adopted positions which was damaging the US and her mediatory position by tactically using game theory of not conceding enough ground to the Palestinian positions. Firstly, the time frame Israel agreed to halt construction expired while expanding partition line to isolate the Palestinians. Also within these was the blockade of Gaza which further made peace talk more negative. Over two million inhabitants of Gaza were under blockade which was dubbed the world biggest concentration refuge after the Polish Closure event in early 1940s by the German Nazis. Israel refusal of aid into Gaza made conditions direr. Dubbed the worst humanitarian compared with that of Sudan.
Though, Israel claimed that activities of Hamas should be stopped before negotiations could move on, uncertainty of ever achieving peace became more glaring with boycott of peace talk led by Erakkat. Mahmud Abbas also voiced his displeasures. The last straw was an outright incursion which resulted into lost of lives. An attempt by SOS groups from other nations also resulted into the Flotilla attack by the Israeli army on the Turkish groups bringing medical reliefs to the Gaza inhabitants. The diplomatic confrontation between Turkey and Israel is still on to this day.
The United States Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton's recent announcement however shows the depth at which the Obama administration has fallen in terms of calling the two groups back to the drawing table. Her statement of instituting another indirect peace talk leave one to wonder whether this administration is capable of finding a way out before the expiration of its tenure. Critically analyzed, lesson for student of international studies is that;
1, Policy projections from its inceptions had been faulted. Instead of condemning out rightly on construction of new settlement, the Obama administration rather, was rhetorical in faulting Israel. The statement to the then Lieberman threats was that; 'It’s a positive response from the Israelis, at least communication was brokered'.
To be continued

Thursday, December 9, 2010

Wikileaks Erred

Diplomatic exchanges between nations can be both secret and open. Most importantly, those that bothers on internal security. However, we can't set aside communication based on perception. Determining her foreign policies, US based most policy decisions on the information communicated through her embassies throughout the world. Though we cannot also rule out the activities of the CIA, PENTAGON and FBI, all these activities are acceptable based on the crucible structure of the international system which is 'power politics'.
Wikileaks is not helping the West in their quest against terrorism. Treated in the same manner are the MNCs whose activities throughout the world is now under scrutiny. Looking at many of its recent release, wikileaks revealed US reports on poorer nations ( i think using Third World seems negative and obsolete within this analysis) and openly also, revealed the activities of many of her allies around the world significantly, Saudi Arabia and Britain; two influential nations among controllers of world resources and oil. If assuming Wikileak's intentions is to better the world, releasing US confidential reports had rather put many jobs and lives on the line of jeopardy. MNCs and nations supporting the west, many NGOs and Governmental Organizations will henceforth either suspend activities or create bureaucratic structures that will not help.
Emphasizing the magnanimity of Wikileak's revelation is like not paying adequate attention to damages therein. Their expertise would have been beneficial if aimed at  infiltrating terrorist activities on larger scale. The success of  terrorist organizations like Al-Qaeda had also been cyber based. It is quite disheartening that recent rise in cyber attacks due to Julian Assange arrest and recent incarceration were directed at many international credit organizations like PayPal, VISA, AMAZON and so on. If these portend another beginning of new events in this millennia that have the magnitude of 911, we shall wait and see.