Kimchi and dim sums

In the new global world order, it’s hard not to deny that USA is the only superpower. Blame it on financial crisis or manufacturing and services reforms, China has given US a run for its money. With stockpiles of forex to invest, China is being wooed by old and new countries and powers. Though there are signs that costs in China are rising which might lead others to be similarly competitive but no one agrees that the supply chains created are very hard to bypass China. China is ofcourse on a global buying spree as well. It has even started to throw its weight around and it has not got unnoticed world over. China’s neighbours, who didn’t mind using China’s cash have started to be very cautious of the strings attached to them. This has led to new alliances in Indian Ocean and South China Sea. Suddenly US has become a very welcome guest with permissions to even conduct naval exercises. It certainly has caused exchange of words between China and US and some of China’s neighbours. America has stuck to its old rhetoric of freedom and respect to woo these nations. In the wake of this, I believe the issue of North Korea becomes very interesting. North Korea has always troubled US since the days of Korean War, when UN forces led by US failed to unify Korea under capitalist government (similarly China & Soviets failed to win South Korea and bring it communist fold). The biggest reason that China got involved in the war was the risk of having capitalists at its own border separated by Yalu river. China still holds that chip. It supports North Korea and can’t allow it to be a new bastion of US. If it falls in line with US, there is a great risk of having Americans sitting at their door. To not allow this, China has being very close and has controlled the policies of North Korea. It might continue to do so, especially with US becoming more active than ever before in Indian Ocean. The N. Korea issue perhaps needs to be resolved through China’s angle. There might be some assurances that need to be made. Perhaps, never station any American or South Korean troops on their soil. Also no military or naval exercises in that region might be helpful. Lets see how it pans out in the future.

Etching new lines

People expected with globalisation and integration of economies, the regional and religious difference would dissolve forever. Little they knew, it would make the clashes more prominent. It has started to come out in the open, as part of elections and vilification campaigns across the world. The latest example being US elections. The oldest and most mature democracy has seen strong exceptions taken by republican candidates to Obama's apologies for Quran burning. Their argument- they killed or people in response. Last year there was a rally in UK, covered by major British news channels as well, where the masked men declared they waned to establish Sharia in UK an make it a Sharia based society with women behind the veils. The excursions of Geert Wilders, the Dutch politician, around Europe are all too famous of the views in Europe. A bastionof tolerance and religious freedom since WW2, it is waking up to the dangers of overaccommodation and probably of colonial guilt ridden actions. I have ha a chance to talk to a lot of people from different countries of Europe on this topic and though they cherish ideals of freedom, they are generally concerned about these values being destroyed and infiltrate by the people whom they have given the opportunities in their countries. In some of the regions in these countries, they have become such a sizeable population that the local politicians have to bend to them to win elections. Coming from some of the leaders and liberal thought leaders, it seems these concerns are from the fringes but as you travel and talk, theses are pretty popular notions. Certainly the younger generation is not as tolerant as the earlier ones. The prosecution of Breivik, the Norwegian mass-shooter was very interesting. He said that his actions were necessary to wake the governments and esp of his country to rein in other religion. Of course his methods are unjustified and he is a part of insanely right-wing mindset. But its yet another proofof the lines getting drawn. This wave seems to be getting stronger all over the world and iscertainly one of the trends to watch out for. The strong opinion has started to shape policies like ban of hijab in France and will continue to do so In my opinion, these are very interesting times to see how the leaders around the world react to this. The opinions of different sides are increasingly becoming very strong. The communities nee to talk to each other. Maybe they need to look into uniform civil codes in their countries and see whether it has not changed with globalisation. Maybe the Arabic countries also need to shed their traditional views and allow other religions to be practices freely (this certainly looks very improbable). All in all, very interesting, keep a close watch

Old wine New bottle

It might all sound very cynical when you read this post. But that's what I feel about certain developments that have happened in the last year or two. Though, as indicated in my earlier posts, I have made it clear that the future energy wars are going to waged over nuclear power, presently the oil obsession runs deep. But what I think might be happening is more than securing energy deals. It's about prevailing and control. The rise of ashes of Russia has attracted realms and realms of paper already. Mr. Putin centralized all the oil and natural gas resources to form a Goliath Gazprom and coerce its neighbors and much of energy starved and cold Europe to further its geopolitical aims. It aims to reclaim its glorious past. China, which has rattled all the economists the way it has grown and progressed, has been looking for energy security for the largest population of the world. It has been following the methods deployed by US, Britain, France and other countries. It has been forging allies with the dangerous Iran. What the dynamic export oriented growth of China has also done is find markets for its companies. And that's where the conflict is rising. It has been quick to recognise the power of its forex reserves and Africa. It was soon to realise the potential of some of the oil producing countries of these parts and the need of the resources that these countries need to go India or China way. China has been happily investing in their energy and mineral resources to secure chap raw materials for its industries and pumping its goods and manpower in these countries. These policies have lately caused conflict in some of the African nations esp when it came to manpower issues. with Russia asserting its influence on Europe, Central Asia and its neighbors and China increasing its influence in Africa, Eastern and Far Eastern Asia, American power is threatened. But sure America has found ways. It has recognised India as its proxy against China in China's very own backyard. It offered Europe with a missile shield which it had to back off from given the threat from Russia. But it certainly has agreed to arm Poland. The development of alternate pipelines to Gazprom is the way in which it's trying to quell Europe's anxieties against Russia's moves. It recently declared Kosovo independent very swiftly. Though the colored revolutions have been squashed and NGOs banned in Russia, Kosovo won independence. US has been repeatedly trying to get these countries Scot-free of Russia's stranglehold. One of the ways was response to 9/11, wherein US forged alliances and setup military bases in Kazakhstan (very good energy source), Uzbekistan. But the plan seems to control Russia's further advances. On the other hand, US has been quick to identify the 'threats from insurgents' in Africa. It is now getting more and more immersed in affairs of Sudan, Somalia, Algeria, Lebanon and some more African nations. Mr. Bush had formed a group of 30 members (Board members of top American firms) to look into development and aid of some of the African nations. It has now realised the new corporate battleground is Africa and it has started to lineup its military and economic resources to cut short what China's growth. Mrs. Clinton recently visited Vietnam and did a tour of Far East Asia, certainly an area where China has had success. She has made statements that America is supporting these countries and will invest.
All these developments are very interesting for the new world order, where the Superman of last century fights to maintain its dominance in the new century as well. Well, as always time will be the best one to answer these questions. But we certainly have got a game on our hands!

The New Battleground

In one of the earlier posts, I had discussed how nuclear politics is overtaking oil politics. I had given the example of Iran. A lot of water has flown under the bridge in the short time and the situation has become very interesting. With China and Russia have acknowledged US and Western Europe on the fact that the world can't afford another nation with nuclear arms, they are still backing Iran as a counter to US presence in Middle East, for the ever increasing momentous energy requirements of China and utilization of Iranian ports by Russia.

US has committed and is continuing to do so for fighting a nuclear armed Iran. It is even armtwisting China, Russia and many other countries to pass the UNSC bill, post which inspectors can check Iranian ships entering the ports of the countries for any nuclear material. Iran is trying to do some backdoor negotiations with Turkey and Brazil to ship half of its nuclear stockpile to them. But for sure US wants more. it wants Iran to declare all its sites and allow full inspection by IAEA (though US might not wants this exactly given the frosty relations between the two). The support given to US by China must have surely not been unconditional (given the gas guzzler China is fast becoming). Russia is still jittery about leaving its old time friend and business partner. But the US is dedicating its best people to ensure regulation of nuclear trade all around the world.

All this make me believe the power of nuclear energy that is being rediscovered by the world as a whole- both as a destructor and a constructor. The new cornerstone in US' geopolitical instance in last few years (esp after AQ Khan episode) is becoming nuclear issues. WIll Oil continue to hole the same geopolitical significance? Time will tell

Revisting Maslow

Maslow's Theory was the introduction to Management studies for me. It was taught as the basic concept of my choicest subjects clubbed as 'marketing'. As the days have passed and I have taken a liking to reading about some aspects of strifes in Central Asian region, I have found a reason to revisit 'maslow's hierarchy of Needs'.
Central Asian region has been a part of the 'Great Game' for centuries now. Initially, a part of the silk route, it has been famous for its battle hardened fighters, horses, the rugged and inhospitable terrains and the fertile Fergana Valley which has been teh cradle of civilastaions. After the WW2, when Stalin redrew the map of Central Asia dividing the region into Kazakhstan, Kyrgystan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan adn Uzbekistan, the people perhaps sensed what laid in store for them. The next decades saw the populations dwindle by millions owing to tortures and mass imigrations. Banning the practice of Islam by USSR, there resulted in an undercurrent flow of the staunch religious sentiments in a region known for its Sufism and secular credentials. Once independent after the prestroika and eventual brakup of in Russia in 1991, the repression by the new dictators only increased. The economic crises crippled the economies and inflation soared to more than a thousand in some of these nations. Religious extremism grew as the religion continued to be suppressed and people became poorer. This phenomena has only continued with terrrorist organisations like IMU, Taliban, HT etc coming into existence.
Maslow states at the base of the pyramid exists the physiological needs- breathing, food, water, sleep, sex, homeostasis and excretion. The people in the region where deprived of some of the basic needs like food and peaceful sleep for the way the economy suffered. deficiency of such basic need obviously led them to revolt. But this was compounded with the lack of basic religious freedom. This need to teh people of the region was not very different from the basic physiological needs. For them their normal life was tied to their basic religious and traditional rights which were being crushed. This discontent didn't only exemplify the state but also made people lay their lives for it. Did Maslow miss a point here? Did his research on exemplary people such as Alber Enistein, Jane Addams, Eleanor and Frederick Douglass and healthiest 1% of the college student population failed to rake in the sensitivities of the basic fundamental rights? Right to freedom is perhaps the way a man survives. With the basic freedom, he can chose when to sleep, what to eat and drink, where to move to. Freedom is the fundamental concept for existence of the human being. For the sake of this freedom, millions have bled and died, literature has been written and our heroes have existed. Perhaps, Maslow's theory needs to be revised with 'Freedom' at its base.

The Privilege Fee and Obama

Obama gave a moving speech on 27th january 2009, his debut Union of State address. He carrie dhis usual emphatic style of speaking which has charmed millions of the years and made him popular outside the US than inside (a good enough proof of his effectiveness). One of the major points he has raised in recent times has been of levying a privilege fees on banks that have been rescued by the American public. The public is particularly indignant of the fact that the banks who asked for oxygen during the crisis have gone to reward their CXOs and employees with mind boggling bonuses. Importantly, these financial companies have generated these incomes from trading rather than feees.
The biggest problem with this recovery in US (with respect to financial institutions) is that they are continuing to operate the same way as they were doing before- flirting dangerously with people's money. There have been very few structural changes except for possible repealing of Glass-Steagall Act. This doesn't bode for a safer future. But politically speaking, do these speeches make any difference to an entity (global money or hot money) which is much bigger than GDPs combined of the world. That's the biggest question. Is America, the champion of capitalism too late in reigning in the money, which has a mind of its own. If Obama is interested in controlling it in USA, it flows to China, India, Russia, Brazil, Indonesia and some of the middle east countries who are too happy to lap it up and increase it much faster than US can think of. When people are living in the age of 'supersonic' the investors also need the returns quick. Though the risk apetite in China is much hoger, still tehre have been huge investments there as compared to USA. China might be the future but you always have the case of Google to signify the risks that even big businesses migth run into.
I love Obama's speeches and much needs to be seen whether is this all mid term election gimmick or he is in reality a visionary