The Pak-China and USA Algorithm

The USA can do more to put pressure on Pakistan to act on terrorists. One way of doing so is by involving China in the equation.

The news about a certain level of breakdown in the Pakistan-China ties has been in the newspapers for the last couple of days. Despite the excited editorials in every daily about the issue, this crisis, excuse the exaggeration, is far from anything anybody should be excited about. The consequences of deteriorating Pak-China relations, when studied keeping in mind the various geo-political and economic factors, are not positive globally.

One of the most important geo-political factors that needs to be kept in mind is the decision of the United States to showcase a close relationship of sorts with Pakistan to the international media. The prime reason for this is, of course, the continued reluctance on the part of the Pakistani administration to take concrete action against the terrorist havens which still continue to exist in the country resulting in an increase in the number of drone attacks carried out by the USA on Pakistani territory.

A major roadblock to the Pakistan government's resolution to eliminate terrorism is the conservative view of world affairs held by many in the top brass of the Pakistan Army, the de-facto decision-maker at times. However due to this insistence on non-acknowledgement of the existence of terrorist havens in the country, the relations between Pakistan and its once upon a time all weather friends are certainly being tested.

New reports indicate that, along with the many anti-India and anti-West terrorist havens that operate in the south-east Asian country, many Uighur sympathizers have also set up havens for the struggle against the Chinese government in the province of Xinjiang.

The Chinese government has repeatedly made its displeasure over the existence of such anti-China institutions in the country known to the Pakistan government. Yet, due to rampant corruption and sympathizers within the administration, not much has been done in this regard resulting in a continued anti-China resistance in Xinjiag with majority of the support received by the protestors being traced back to Pakistan.

Though this is primarily an area of conflict between Pakistan and China, the US authorities must also keep a keen eye on the developments surrounding these incidences. Despite the inability of many western countries to convince Pakistan to cancel terrorism as a state policy, China has to an extent succeeded or at least performed better than the other western countries, considering the drop in the number of terrorist/freedom struggle incidences now reported in China which can be traced back to Pakistan.

Adopting such an approach of being convinced that there has been a drop in the above mentioned activities appears optimistic considering the lack of information coming out of China. However, when we look at the situation in the context of national security, there has been a slight shift in allied positions from the USA to China under President Zardari's regime. Though the shift is not absolute, it is easily noticeable.

Thus, despite the numerous long term concerns that the White House may have regarding Pakistan's closeness to China, it is only sensible in the short run to encourage greater Pakistan-China engagement on terrorism as that might be the only possible way to deter Pakistan from hosting terrorists on its soil. The fear of being isolated internationally, withdrawal of US and western world's support from major contracts and treaties internationally without adopting sanctions as a means of approach and at the same time portraying China as a reluctant ally of Pakistan would be the most surrealistic of all possible methods to get the Pakistani administration started on its fight against terrorism.

However as surrealistic as the above scenario may sound, it is possible for the United States to manipulate its positions a bit to get a more positive response from Pakistan. An example of such a manipulation would be to stress the importance of banishing terrorism from all forms of practice to the new Chinese Premier and President (both Mr Jiabao and Mr Jintao handing over power to their successors during the year) while at the same time steering clear of the human rights aspect of the situation in Xinjiag. Such a manoeuvre by the USA would ensure that enough pressure is put on Pakistan to curb terrorist activities while at the same time, it won't be seen as the US stepping back on its demand for human rights and their implementation all over the world.

Though idealistic, only such manoeuvres have been known through out time to change the course of history as we know it.

Why India must work on its Foreign Policy

Given the status that India currently enjoys in the diplomatic world, it is only natural that India be required to make tough decisions.

The diplomatic power of a country can be analysed by simply taking together factors that act for and against the state at the international level and the state's ability to work out a plan to balance out the negatives that it may face. United States can be considered to be a country that is more or less able to balance out the negatives at the international level (recent 'stand-off' with Russia and China on the Syria and Iran issue can be considered to be a negative that it hasn't balanced out in the UN). 

If we look at India under the same lens, then a couple of inconsistencies do crop up which are common in countries which are still developing their diplomatic power (i.e focus more on the soft power). One of the major  problems that the current foreign policy of India has is the inability to move out of the neutrality sphere. 

After the end of the Cold War, the diplomatic world underwent a period of 'secondary power vacuum' wherein, the west was able to take major decisions without being challenged in a manner that would threaten its dominance in the diplomatic world. Yet soon countries like Russia, China and India caught up and three together are no able to form a major opposition to the west at the international level.

Thus while the three are able to form a formidable opposition, India's foreign policy still hasn't evolved enough to take a stand with one side and through out the course of the event remain on the same side. One of the major example of this would be the recent decision by the Indian government to send a diplomat to attend the Friends of Syria meet which is considered to be an anti-Assad and a pro-change forum. This decision has certainly raised a few eyebrows towards the effectiveness of the Indian bureaucracy and government in formulating a foreign policy meant for the long term.

While at the same time, this can be considered to a successful practice by India of its principle-based foreign policy. However such a practice cannot be considered to be an exactly ideal path to follow at the international level and thus a certain reworking of the foreign policy is in order as India tries to analyse the pro-cons of its relationship with various countries in this every changing world.

Why India needs to intervene

Despite the anger in Pakistan regarding the NATO strike, it would be a wise decision for India to play the peacemaker between Pakistan and USA.

With the emotions of the populace boiling up, it is rare to see the leaders of a country take the right decision instead of the popular one. The leaders in Pakistan are faced with the same puzzle at the moment. With anger against the NATO and the USA rising, it would be wise for the Pakistani leadership to look at their present situation in a whole some manner and not overlook one aspect just because the pressure on the other aspect to be viewed is greater.

All the warnings, talks and decisions that are being given/taken by the civilian government/army in Pakistan would have tremendous consequences not only for Pakistan but also for the region as a whole. The US-Pakistani relationship has had a lot of bumps ever since the Abottabad raid but since then, this can be said to be the single worst incident in the relations of the two country. 

US presence in Pakistan and Afghanistan is essential for India's national security and also the security of the Indian interests is heavily dependent on the US presence there fore the time being at least, as India starts to play a greater role in Afghanistan and have a greater say in matters. Thus, the removal of the US boots from Pakistan would be a major blow to India and its interests. With the vacating of the Shamsi Airbase (if that happens), the entire incident would be a major strategic victory for the Taliban, which has many sympathizers in the Pakistan Army, which is making attempts to come back to power in Afghanistan.

India would now require to act in order to protect its interests. First of all, the Indian administration must ensure that Pakistan gets the message that India sympathizes with them and then slowly and steadily work would need to be done to ensure that the US do not vacate the Shamsi Airbase. Many in Pakistan have already viewed this 'accidental' attack as a direct attack by USA and India on their sovereignty, which has already been an issue of contention between the once upon a time allies (USA and Pakistan) for quite some time. Any more fuel into this fire would only result in consequences for the entire region including China, who want the US to exit from the region in order for them to achieve a greater level of influence on the struggling Afghan civilian government.

With the exit of the US troops from the region it would be very easy for the Taliban to take back control of the areas near the North-Western border of Pakistan and Afghanistan, which has very limited government presence with majority of the area being tribal in nature guaranteeing a firm base for the Taliban to make a comeback into the region and the regional politics.

India would need to bring the two allies to the table and ensure that both of them engage in a healthy discussion and sort out their differences at the earliest, if India wants to ensure a peaceful and stable neighbourhood. Manmohan Singh could play a major role in bringing the two to the table using the respect and influence that he has earned in the government circles of the both, the US and Pakistan.

Till then it can be expected that with the pressure on the government and the army in Pakistan building up to take a strict action against the US, the relations between the two allies can only expected to go downhill, if there is one. The US would need to play calmly at the moment in order to prevent the situation from worsening. But it sure isn't going to be a easy journey to keep track of unless and until India does not intervene.

The Era of Poker Diplomacy

The world political scenario can at any given point of time be viewed as a game of poker – with a difference. The participants (countries) are playing not for money, but the ability to influence decisions at a regional as well as global level. For long the players have been recurrently changing with each player being replaced by a new one. Thus there is a constant continuity in this whole cycle along with greater participation by different countries which prevents an unrivalled uni-polar system from being established.

Since the Soviet Union’s fall, world diplomacy has been entirely dominated by the Western Hemisphere. As true as this fact may be, an entirely different situation is unfolding right before us. With the US Budget Deficit crisis continuing, it’s expected that Uncle Sam might replace its expensive military programs with a new policy which excludes active US involvement during a crisis.
For starters, US has been giving pro-active assistance to rebel groups in enemy states like Iran. Modern weaponry is being supplied to nations like Saudi Arabia in the middle-east as advance policing fee for the region when USA exits from Iraq. Critics of this theory highlight the increased US involvement in Pakistan as a counter theory but the fact remains that this involvement of the US is not at a proactive level. This role that the US is trying to fit itself into is that of an observer state. To maintain its domination while staying an observer state, it must forge excellent relations with the countries that counter-balance its enemies - and one of the biggest threats at the moment for Uncle Sam is the growing clout of the People’s Republic.

What constitutes the pot?

Accumulating absolute power is often the reason for these ‘international’ poker games. Migration, an international economy that is in danger zone and acquisition of arms by both legal and illegal entities are crises faced by modern nation states. Enhanced awareness of human rights and improvements in the regional as well as the global economy, political and security scenarios are the only remedy to this problem. These collectively determine the path that a country may take for the acquisition of resources to achieve its ends.

China can be quoted as an example of a state that has adopted an active-aggressive approach in order to address its ends. This hypothesis is based on past positions adopted by the Chinese government on various issues like Chinese claims of ‘indisputable sovereignty’ over the South China Sea, treatment of citizens of Jammu and Kashmir and incursions by Chinese troops beyond its borders. All these actions have directed negative attention on China and disturbed policy-makers in distant countries. Of the various solutions devised, none seems as effective as portrayal of India as a counter balance.

In order to counter the Dragon, the Indian Elephant is being portrayed as the future global power. This has led to certain questions that have certainly puzzled the western policy makers and have even started to baffle them (read the Copenhagen scenario). The question that is being repeatedly asked is: Is the West trying to push its luck a bit too far by pitching India against China?

Playing a bluff a little too often?

“The most likely scenario is that of a competitive relationship, unbuffered by extensive economic ties, but without a significant possibility of armed conflict.” (Frankel and Harding, 2004)

Despite being pitched against each other repeatedly, the two Eastern giants have also come together to act as a counter balance against the US. This counter balancing act practiced by India and China is based mainly on issues of development and environment with respect to the developed and developing country differences. Thus as the western hemisphere retreats, the two Asian giants have started following their respective policies in order to generate a clout for themselves.

China has followed a policy of what is known as ‘flexing their might’ which involves showing off the military strength of the country and thereby subduing the opponents. They are doing it in a manner which has caused some brows to sweat in Washington DC, New Delhi and even Tokyo. The rapid Chinese military build up along the borders is seen as an act of aggression. Some neighbours try to counter it, as in India’s case by bolstering the military capabilities while countries like Japan approach Washington for support where they are given the same reassurances of assistance in case of a crisis.

However, “South Asian states are concerned about the fallout of a potential conflict between the Unites States and China if Beijing becomes more assertive or Washington decides to adopt a more aggressive containment policy towards Beijing.” (Cooney and Sato, 2009) The Dragon perceives its aggression only as a precaution against encirclement by the US and its allies. Almost all countries neighbouring China have some form of close ties with NATO (a major US ally). Be it Philippines, Thailand, Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, Australia or India, all share a close relationship with the US with some having a kind of a treaty with the US guaranteeing US assistance during crisis.

Thus it can be said that the Chinese fear of America is not an irrational thought made up by a government which is trying to divert attention from its internal problems. At the same time, the Indian fear is that of a total Chinese controlled South Asia which would be the biggest challenge to achieving a status at par with the US in the future; and India also has its fair share of theories of how the Chinese are expanding their support base.

The present Look East policy of the Indian government seems to lack that excitement which had originally resulted in success. For example, there has been little publicity regarding the work that India is doing in the countries which are a part of the Look East policy. It was only after the Chinese started advancing into Myanmar that the Indian government opened its eyes and stepped up its efforts to reach to the people of Myanmar. However, there’s been very little progress after that. Thus India has been taking a less pro-active stand on how it wants to go about making inroads into other countries except the West and Russia.

Nations close to both India and China have naturally been wary of their ambitions. However, this is more so the case with China as many countries fear the Chinese expansion dream i.e. the Greater China dream and this is where the US comes in. It has given these countries many guarantees regarding their safety.

However, how long will these assurances last?

Which player will call a fold?

As the pot keeps on getting bigger and bigger, the chance of kicking off a row also gets bigger. The important question, however, is: who will be the first to call a fold. A fold in this game has tremendous effects which affect both the political and economic functions of the country. For instance, the demise of the Soviet Union saw many socialist or communist economies shifting to the capitalist fold. Hence, if any shift is to take place, the consequences will be bigger than what they were when the Soviet Era came to an end.

The diplomatic power of a country is vastly affected by the monetary condition of the country. For starters, an increasing budget deficit means that other countries are a little wary of buying its currency bonds which dries up a source of finance to manage unsustainable expense. This results in spending cuts across the board in order to reduce this deficit and regain the confidence of those other countries. Certain departments like Defence are the first to be hit by budget and spending cuts which directly impacts the military might and thereby the arm-twisting strength. Inevitable budget cuts to other areas like Development Aid also reduce the clout of the country as nations shift their allegiance to more generous nations.

The West has been suffering from a self-created economic crisis. The current double-dip recession, for instance, can be attributed to the Bill Clinton Administration. Emerging countries like India and China don’t face such problems. A large amount of sustainable fund will always be easily available to them. Creation of efficient and sustainable infrastructure is the problem they face. Despite credible advances in infrastructure, they still lack sustainability and the problems like the recent China super-fast train crash only add worry.

Another aspect that adds shine to a country at the international level is the respect for human rights shown by the country and the amount of freedom that its citizens have been given. India triumphs over China in this regard, having been recognised by the International Community as a true Democracy. This gives India its fair share of positive light on the International Stage along with the constant pressures of upholding the functioning of democratic institutions in a nation which is becoming home to active participation of citizens in various matters of policy, be it economic or political in nature.

Hence if we were to look at this game of poker in a holistic manner, we can say that the developed countries can still take calls on diplomatic matters only if their internal politics allows them to take significant decisions. At the same time, India and China perform better than their counterparts despite their fair share of problems, provided both are on the same side of the table.

The conclusion of the events down at South China Sea might help us in coming up with an answer to the question India or China but until then, I would as an investor like to invest in both of them equally.

To use Wall Street lingo, one should not expect any gains or losses, but in the long run, as the players revaluate their strategies and come up with the perfect consumer pitch, the sight of the bull and the bear will become common. Till then, let’s allow the speculators to earn their bread.

Thus for the time-being as players work on their strategy and the speculators operate the market, the game stretches on to infinity.

Bibliography

1. Frankel, F.R and Harding, H, (2004), “The India-China relationship: what the United States needs to know”, Columbia University Press.
2. Cooney, J.K and Sato, Y, (2009), “The rise of China and international security: America and Asia respond”, Routledge

Earth in 2011: Humans and Nature

Source

      Disasters. Man-made and natural. None of the two are new, they are age old words but they should now be said with a lot more fear. Everywhere you look there is despair that hangs in the air with humans being the rope and the devil himself being the Hangman. Egypt, Tunisia, Libya are the most recent and the most intense examples of man-made disasters. It was man who created the system of ruler. It is a time tested one but it also has its negatives. These negatives are mostly the result of poor leadership. Unlike the earlier days, now a days the leaders give a lot more importance to their own state of well-being.

      The best example of this sort of leadership is that of the infamous Col. Gaddafi. Every news paper has something to report about his banks accounts which are spread all over the world and which the world powers are doing their desperate best to freeze but then we, civilians, don't know the ground reality. We are simply the infant which is fed by the mother, the government being the mother here. Educated, politically aware and smart though we are but it is only those handful of people in the villages, rural areas or the not so developed regions who are asking the questions. What are we doing then? Isn't it our responsibility too? Being responsible global citizens shouldn't we offer help to our brothers who are struggling to achieve some sense of democracy?

Source

      We aren't doing that but how is it that even with so many educated people in the world, individuals like Gaddafi are able to get away after killing civilians or rebels as he may have labelled them. The US which is the supposed 'Big Brother' of the international community is having trouble in trying to find a quick and efficient solution to the problem. They are trying to get NATO to play a bigger part because they have got their 'own bigger problems' such as the one in Afghanistan. There are about 200 countries in the world and yet only one (read USA) is staking its claim to be a 'Moral Superpower'. Of course it is a claim that is resisted by many.

      US has its own self-interests to take care of first, the most important being OIL. Hence, we can term that claim of theirs as questionable, but who doesn't want to look after their self-interests? China is playing brother to Pakistan to counter India, USA is backing South Korea to counter North Korea. There are many more examples of countries getting involved in the bigger picture to secure their interests. However, what does this lead to? An Afghanistan, if I may say so. It was the US that declared war on Afghanistan with its allies to get the world rid of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. A praise-worthy venture indeed but what happened? Did the dream come true? No. All that remains in Afghanistan is a slightly crippled Taliban getting its money from poppy cultivation opposed by a few warlords here and there.

Source

      Thus it was a failed operation. It was an operation that cost the tax-payers billions of dollars each day that it continued, yet it still continues. Now we hear that the US is going to slowly and steadily pull out of there. What then? The only thing that is stopping the Taliban from overthrowing the decadent government is the presence of the US troops. Thus, we are heading back to the almost similar past scenario. A half-hearted operation won't do the trick and this is what leaders have realized and hence, we can see the rebels surviving the Libyan Civil War.

      The entire middle-east is in turmoil currently. Each day media reports about protests in different countries. The fight for freedoms has spread like a wildfire. What I feel is that the time has come when military or other dictatorship would be shown the door from the entire middle-east and people would prosper in a free middle-east. Yet there is another aspect of human life that we haven't explored yet. And that is the natural aspect. I wrote about power hungry despots but we are still left with Mother Nature, a topic so vast that even if I type a billion blogs, I won't be able to explain it entirely and do it the justice that it deserves.

NATURE

Source

      In the last couple of months, we saw earthquakes, horrendous ones. We saw New Zealand suffer and we also saw Japan in despair, a situation that is hadn't been in since the world war. What is all this that is happening all around us? Revenge by mother earth? Is this the beginning of the end? These are some of the questions that 'pollute' the dreams of many. What I feel is that this is not the end. It is merely the start of a new beginning. The earth is starting the process of cleansing. It is cleansing itself from all the harm that we have done and when it does so we will go back to the golden age.

      The process would be tough on all of us. But it is needed. I don't know what it would be like but it would certainly involve earth releasing colossal amounts of energy lying dormant in its dark interiors. Thus we may see a rise in the number of earthquakes, volcanoes and tsunami but it is all for the good.

      There are many more aspects that need to be analysed but I can't do so in one post so hence I will write another post about this and it will be posted on the next Sunday.

TO BE CONTINUED....