diplomacy

World Bicycle Day –  A Multi Faceted Solution to Our Problems?

Published on

Nothing compares to the simple pleasures of a bike ride.  John F. Kennedy

The 3rd of June has been designated by the United Nations as World Bicycle Day.  On 12 April 2018 the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 72/272 which recalled that the UN Millennium Development Goals in its  2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development recognize that sport is  an important enabler of sustainable development, and that the potential of the bicycle to contribute to the achievement of the internationally agreed development goals, as well as The UN’s new urban agenda is significant. The Resolution further recognized that  the uniqueness, longevity and versatility of the bicycle, which has been in use for two centuries, coupled with its simple, affordable, reliable, clean and environmentally fit sustainable means of transportation was invaluable, not to mention its role in  fostering environmental stewardship and health.

The Resolution also refers to the synergy between the bicycle and the user which fosters creativity and social engagement and gives the user an immediate awareness of the local environment.  The bicycle can serve as a tool for development and as a means not just of transportation but also of access to education, health care and sport.  Above all, the bicycle is a symbol of sustainable transportation and conveys a positive message to foster sustainable consumption and production and has a positive impact on climate.

It was also recognized that the bicycle  promotes social development through sport and physical education, including cycling, and mentioned its extremely important role of productive public-private partnerships in financing programmes for organizing bicycle rallies to promote peace and development, preservation of the environment, institutional development and physical and social infrastructure.  Therefore, the conclusion reached was that major international and local cycling competitions should be organized in the spirit of peace, mutual understanding, friendship, tolerance and inadmissibility of discrimination of any kind, and that the unifying and conciliative nature of such events should be respected,

The United Nations therefore invited all Member States, organizations of the United Nations system and other relevant international organizations, international, regional and national sports organizations, civil society, including non-governmental organizations and the private sector, and all other relevant stakeholders to cooperate in observing World Bicycle Day, to celebrate the Day and to promote awareness of it.  Resolution 72/272 encourages Member States to devote particular attention to the bicycle in cross-cutting development strategies and to include the bicycle in international, regional, national and subnational development policies and programmes, as appropriate and to improve road safety and integrate it into sustainable mobility and transport infrastructure planning and design. In particular , mention is made to the adoption and implementation of  policies and measures to actively protect and promote pedestrian safety and cycling mobility, with a view to achieving broader health outcomes, particularly the prevention of injuries and non-communicable diseases.

All stakeholders are encouraged by the Resolution to  emphasize and advance the use of the bicycle as a means of fostering sustainable development, strengthening education, including physical education, for children and young people, promoting health, preventing disease, promoting tolerance, mutual understanding and respect and facilitating social inclusion and a culture of peace.  In this context Member States are encouraged to adopt best practices and means to promote the bicycle among all members of society, and in this regard welcomes initiatives to organize bicycle rides at the national and local levels as a means of strengthening physical and mental health and well-being and developing a culture of cycling in Society. The Secretary General is requested to bring the Resolution to the attention of Member States and the Organizations of the United Nations system.

My Take

According to this Resolution, the humble bicycle can be a tool for promoting clean air, physical fitness, peace and friendship, social harmony, education, health care, creativity, and sustainable development within a community. In this context it is difficult to envision any other mode of transport, from SpaceX to rail to road transport, or shipping for that matter, or even air transport contributing to all these outcomes. One wonders what the extended use of the bicycle would do in the most polluted cities in the world: Lahore; Hotan; New Delhi; Bhiwadi and Peshawar. Also, what would the effect of cycling to work instead of travelling by taxi do to an executive in terms of obviating diabetes or cardiovascular disease? 

 Apart from disease avoidance cycling plays an important role in promoting physical fitness as an excellent form of exercise that activates  various muscle groups, including the legs, buttocks, and core. It is also medically recognized that regular cycling can improve cardiovascular fitness, build strength, enhance stamina, and help with weight management. Cycling has a distinct advantage over jogging or running as it is a low-impact activity that puts less stress on joints while serving  as an excellent option for those with joint issues or those recovering from injuries. The physical activity generated by cycling boosts mental health and well being, through the release of  endorphins, which can enhance mood and reduce stress, anxiety, and depression. Cycling can also improve sleep quality and increase overall energy levels.

Another advantage in cycling lies in weight management, as regular  cycling can help burn calories and contribute to weight loss or maintenance. It increases one’s metabolic rate, helping to shed excess body fat and build lean muscle mass. The balance required by cycling increases flexibility and coordination and the agility associated with cycling helps  improve one’s overall motor skills and enhances flexibility, particularly in the hips and lower body.

Cycling is eco-friendly and cost effective.  It reduces carbon emissions and helps preserve the environment. Bicycles have a minimal ecological footprint and contribute to sustainable transportation. There is also the benefit of commuting convenience where a cycle can navigate through traffic congestion, especially in urban areas, bypassing heavy  traffic by using  bike lanes or paths, and easily find parking.

The bicycle personifies determination, perseverance, and the pursuit of freedom. It highlights the theme of overcoming obstacles and embracing independence. Unlike other modes of transport (which are all driven by motor) cycling encourages cyclists to believe in themselves, The marvels of cycling are brought to bear by those who value it. Mark Cavendish, British pro racer  once said: “[T]o me it doesn’t matter whether it’s raining or the sun is shining or whatever: as long as I’m riding a bike, I know I’m the luckiest guy in the world.”  For the women, Susan B. Anthony, US women’s rights activist said: “The bicycle has done more for the emancipation of women than anything else in the world.”

You might be interested in

Unshackling South Asia: Liberating Democracy from Family Politics

Published on

Editorial

In the pursuit of progress and development, numerous Asian countries have long grappled with a persistent and destructive phenomenon: the grip of family politics. This deeply ingrained, yet nihilistic practice has undermined the very essence of democracy and entrenched nepotism as the prevailing norm within governing systems. From the Gandhi dynasty in India to the Bhutto family in Pakistan, and from the Hasina clan in Bangladesh to the Senanayake, Jayewardena, Gunawardhana, Bandaranaike, and Rajapaksa dynasties in Sri Lanka, it becomes evident that the political landscapes of these nations have been hijacked by a sense of entitlement and an insidious belief in the divine right to rule. Many of these countries continue to suffer the dire consequences of family politics, emphasizing the urgent need to eradicate this issue in order to unlock the true potential of the Asian century. While India has taken steps towards countering this trend with the election of leader Modi, the roots of nepotism still persist.

One of the most alarming aspects of family politics is the perpetuation of a sense of entitlement among these ruling dynasties. They often view themselves as inherently destined to govern, treating the land and its people as their personal fiefdom. This misguided belief undermines the principles of meritocracy and inclusivity that are vital for a thriving democracy. By monopolizing power and stifling opportunities for fresh talent and diverse perspectives, these family-centric regimes create an environment where political ambition is limited to a privileged few, leaving the majority of citizens marginalized and disenfranchised.

The prevalence of family politics also nurtures a toxic ecosystem of sycophants and opportunists, eager to exploit their proximity to power for personal gain. These individuals infiltrate the very fabric of the state, adeptly maneuvering through situations using cunning tactics and adaptability. For instance, when foreign investors visit these countries in search of opportunities, they often encounter a disheartening experience. They encounter politicians who exhibit rudeness and indifference, creating an inhospitable environment for investment. The investor is then introduced to intermediaries—solicitors or consultants—who claim to facilitate the deal without seeking payment. However, the truth reveals that these intermediaries are merely conduits for bribery, serving as middlemen who negotiate kickbacks for politicians in exchange for project approvals. This systemic corruption discourages genuine investors, eroding trust and impeding economic progress.

In this environment of nepotism and corruption, entertaining visions of the Asian century becomes futile. Such aspirations are nothing more than delusions that distract us from the pressing need to dismantle this network of germs and parasites. In order for the Asian century to become a reality, it is imperative to break free from the shackles of family politics and establish robust institutions capable of delivering justice and accountability. Meritocracy, transparency, and equal opportunities must replace the culture of entitlement and cronyism.

The eradication of family politics demands a concerted effort from both domestic and international stakeholders. South Asian societies must foster a culture of political engagement and civic education that encourages merit-based competition and a commitment to public service. Strengthening legal frameworks, promoting independent judiciary systems, and ensuring the autonomy of key institutions will help shield against the influence of vested interests. Furthermore, international support and cooperation are crucial in the fight against family politics. Diplomatic pressure, collaboration on anti-corruption initiatives, and the promotion of good governance practices can reinforce efforts to break free from the clutches of nepotism and pave the way for genuine democratic progress.

The dream of the Asian century cannot be realized as long as family politics continue to thrive. The entrenchment of ruling dynasties and the accompanying ecosystem of opportunistic parasites hinder progress, undermine democracy, and perpetuate inequality. It is incumbent upon Asian nations to confront this challenge head-on, dismantling the foundations of family politics and cultivating a political landscape that values meritocracy, inclusivity, and accountability. Only then can the region truly embark on a path toward realizing its immense potential and becoming a beacon of progress in the 21st century.

You might be interested in

Expanding SCO’s Reach: The Rise of the ‘Axis of Seven’

Published on
/

The Russian daily Nezavisimaya Gazeta carried a report on the eve of the China-Central Asia summit at Xi’an titled “China is changing the format of cooperation with Central Asia.” It anticipated that the six heads of state gathering in Xi’an on May 18-19 would be discussing the “creation of a new mechanism for cooperation in various fields and sign important political documents.” 

The report recalled that the Xi’an summit ought to be viewed in the context of a meeting between President Vladimir Putin and the five heads of Central Asian States in Moscow on May 9 (Russia’s Victory Day.) The daily flagged the expert opinion that “a new ‘5+2’ axis is being formed (Central Asia plus China and Russia).” Evidently, although Putin was not present at the event in Xi’an, Russia’s interests have been taken into account. 

The new “5 Plus 2 axis” being formed will have its own mechanisms and projections, which differ from the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) or the Belt and Road Initiative and the Eurasian Economic Union community. The Xi’an summit considered the possibility of institutionalising the Central Asia-China format through a Secretariat “in order to comprehensively promote cooperation… and the functioning of the relevant mechanisms.” Of course, given the top-down decision making characteristic of the Central Asian states, the mechanism of the Consultative Meetings of the Heads of State of the China-Central Asia format (to be held in alternate years) will be a key factor in ensuring security, stability and sustainable development of the region.

It is entirely conceivable that at a time when the SCO has tended to become more and more “abstract” after the induction of India into the grouping, and began meandering aimlessly, it stands to reason that China and the Central Asian states and Russia felt the need to create more effective mechanisms and plans in their common space so as to impart a new quality of cooperation, and supplement the SCO if need arises. 

An element of rivalry has crept into the SCO’s functioning. India, in particular, needs to do some soul-searching here. Certainly, this was not what China and Russia had in mind in 2005 when they put together the Shanghai Five in 2005 (which later morphed into the SCO.) Consensus in decision-making was adopted as a core principle in the SCO’s functioning but lately, a competitive spirit to settle scores stemming out of bilateral differences and disputes crept in. The SCO foreign ministers meeting in Delhi recently witnessed an acrimonious India-Pakistan standoff that vitiated the “Shanghai Spirit,” even as the Central Asian states and Russia and China mutely watched.  

There is the tragic example of SAARC which suffered a similar trauma during the recent decade that eventually rendered it a comatose ready for burial. But Russia and China cannot afford such a tragic fate visiting the SCO. The US’ double containment strategy toward Russia and China and the NATO’s imminent expansion to Asia make it critically important that a cohesive, motivated and well-coordinated regional cooperation process is available in their common space in Inner Asia.  

So far, Russia was engaged in strengthening political integration, while China systematically and powerfully interacted with the governments of Central Asian countries for the development of energy and infrastructure projects within the framework of a full-fledged economic expansion. That division of labour worked rather well, but then, the regional security environment changed dramatically of late.

For example, it has become vital for Moscow in the context of the rupture of Russia’s energy ties with Europe to divert its oil and gas exports to the Chinese market, and that requires Central Asian infrastructure in transit mode — a novel idea altogether. Suffice to say, a high level of harmonisation and synchronisation of the national plans of the Central Asian countries is needed. Currently, there are no agreed common strategies in the Central Asian region, which has a population of 75 million. The Belt and Road project does not adequately take into account the interests of Russia and the interface with the Eurasian Economic Union projects cannot provide a sufficient level of interaction either, due to systemic weaknesses. 

To be sure, in the run-up to the Xi’an summit, the heads of Central Asian countries carefully prepared for the event and have presented a significant package of proposals. Thus, the construction work on the highly strategic China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway, which will connect Xinjiang and Central Asia with Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran is now poised to begin after a delay of some 20 years due to a squabble over the measurement of the width of rail tracks!

Unsurprisingly, aside regional security, the issue of connectivity was the one topic that received the greatest attention at the Xi’an summit, which involves improving the transport infrastructure along the China–Central Asia and China–Europe routes through Central Asia, as well as increasing the capacity of border checkpoints, all of which aim to create conditions for increasing cargo and passenger traffic.

A positive factor is that Kazakhstan’s engagement with the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is deepening. China and Kazakhstan are effectively implementing a list of 52 BRI investment projects with a total amount of more than $21 billion, covering transportation and logistics, industry and agriculture, energy, tourism and other fields. Two of the six BRI corridors pass through Kazakhstan connecting China respectively to Europe and to Iran and West Asia. These BRI corridors are important for most of the Central Asian economies for whom China offers the closest sea port. That in turn makes Kazakhstan a potential hub for accessing Central Asia. 

The summit at Xi’an also noted the importance of launching the Kazakh-Chinese railway Ayaguz – Tacheng and called for the accelerated construction of the fourth line of the Turkmenistan–China gas pipeline. There are many kinds of mineral resources and large reserves in Tacheng area — coal, granite, gold, copper, iron ore and other mineral resources in the area where the railway under construction crosses.

On the sideline of the Xi’an summit, Chinese President Xi Jinping held meetings with each of the five leaders of the Central Asian region. On the eve of the summit in Xi’an, Chinese media called Central Asia the “gateway” for the Belt and Road project, which Xi had originally unveiled from Kazakhstan in 2013. There has been a great deal of scare mongering over Belt and Road by the US and India in the information sphere but that doesn’t seem to have affected the Central Asian states. It is symbolic that Beijing took the initiative to hold the first China-Central Asia Summit on the 10th anniversary of Belt and Road Initiative.

Equally, China hopes to link Pakistan and Afghanistan with the BRI infrastructure projects in Central Asia. As a first step, China and Pakistan recently agreed to extend the China- Pakistan Economic Corridor to Afghanistan. This has been the main achievement of the  Pakistan-Afghanistan-China ministerial held in Islamabad on May 5, a fortnight before the China-Central Asia Summit in Xi’an. Quite obviously, the momentum of the China-Central Asia format will not be optimal unless China also doubles down on its engagement with the Taliban government in Kabul.

You might be interested in

Redefining Modernization: China’s Vision

Published on

China has achieved success on multiple fronts of national development, providing the world with a new path to modernization, a prominent Turkish scholar on international relations has said.

China is making progress “not only in the field of technology or of social development but in almost all fields,” Huseyin Bagci, an academic with the Ankara-based Middle East Technical University and president of the Turkish Foreign Policy Institute, told Xinhua in a recent interview.

Significant progress has been achieved in human rights, poverty alleviation, education, social security, health, and national unity, Bagci said, highlighting China’s outstanding achievements in promoting human rights by eradicating absolute poverty, protecting people’s rights, and expanding education and health services.

Bagci believes China is providing the world with an alternative path to modernization that differs from that of the Western world, which is unprecedented in world history.

The scholar also saluted China’s outstanding contributions to developing countries’ modernization by providing ample funding and credits.

“Many countries, of course, in Africa, Asia and Latin America, they look to China as a dynamic, external factor for modernization, because China provides a lot of credits, infrastructural help,” Bagci said, citing various fields ranging from education to health and agriculture as core areas of cooperation between China and other developing countries.

You might be interested in

Can a nuclear war start with the unease felt by China?

Published on
/

STATUS UNEASE FELT BY CHINA AND THUCYDIDES TRAP

Rohan Mukherji of the London School of Economics and Political Science believes that he writes in an article in Foreign Affairs magazine (China’s status anxiety May 19 2023) of the possibility of China being singled out by the US as its preeminent enemy should not be wished away. He writes and I quote “When the balance of power in geopolitics begins to shift, rising and established powers often find themselves on a collision course known colloquially as the “Thucydides trap.” By this logic, great powers rig the international order for their own benefit; rising powers seek a growing share of those benefits, which great powers are unwilling to provide. This sets the stage for large-scale conflict over the international order itself”. Mukherji adds “The rise of Athens may have provoked fear in Sparta, but Athens’s refusal to back down was driven by status anxiety and the sense of being treated unfairly. It is true that great powers rig the international order in their favour. But their focus is as much on maintaining their privileged position as rule-makers in world politics as it is on securing material benefits. The purpose of the exclusive clubs that great powers have formed throughout history—such as the Concert of Europe, the League of Nations Executive Council, and the UN Security Council—has been to entrench their privileges while regulating the conduct of other states.”

UNTRUE THAT CHINA DOES NOT WANT A RULE-BASED WORLD

It would be untrue that China does not want a rule-based world. China as mentioned earlier wants to sit at the table that makes the rules for the rest of the world as any rising power would want. More so with the disappearance of Western hegemony and the appearance of multipolarity China and the non-aligned nations would like to have their say on how the world should be guided. Harvard Luminary Stephen Walt in his article ( China Wants a ‘Rules-Based International Order,’ Too– March 31 2021) pointed out the difference between the US and Chinese conception of a ‘rules-based” world.

STEPHEN WALT ON THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AMERICAN AND CHINESE PERCEPTION ON WORLD ORDER

According to Stephen Walt, “The differences between the American and Chinese conceptions are relatively straightforward. The United States (generally) prefers a multilateral system (albeit one with special privileges for some states, especially itself) that is at least somewhat mindful of individual rights and certain core liberal values (democratic rule, individual freedom, rule of law, market-based economies, and so on). ..By contrast, China favours a more Westphalian conception of order, one where state sovereignty and noninterference are paramount and liberal notions of individual rights are downplayed if not entirely dismissed. This vision is no less “rules-based” than the United States.   China is also a vocal defender of multilateralism, even if its actual behaviour sometimes violates existing multilateral norms. Nonetheless, a world in which China’s preferences prevailed would be different from one in which the U.S. vision proved to be more influential.”

US ATTEMPT TO SIDELINE RUSSIAN SECURITY CONCERNS

In our calculus, we seemed to have missed out on the most immediate global incendiary issue of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. However much the US may wish to ignore Vladimir Putin’s repeated requests that Ukraine should not join either the Western bloc or the Russian side, an arrangement that would not affect Russian security interests, it would be unwise to forget that Russia remains a nuclear power and the world and that   Russia too, does not want the extermination of humanity.

HENRY KISSINGER WARNED THAT THE WORLD IS ON THE PATH TO GREAT POWER CONFRONTATION

In a long conversation with the British magazine The Economist in April 2023 Henry Kissinger felt that the world is on the path to great power confrontation. And what makes it more worrisome is that both sides have convinced themselves that the other represents a strategic danger. And it is a strategic danger in a world in which the decisions of each can determine the likelihood of conflict. And in such a situation it is natural to attempt to be preeminent, technologically and materially. So a situation can arise in which an issue escalates into a confrontation about the overall relationship. That is the biggest problem, at the moment. And, when there isan issue like Taiwan, in which concessions become very difficult because it involves fundamental principles, the situation becomes even more dangerous. It is believed that US government officials have a dim view of the Chinese desire for a fruitful relationship with Washington. The people loyal to XI-JINPING who crowd the different arms of the Chinese Communist Party are there not for their expertise but for their unquestionable loyalty to the leader. They do not resemble as reminisced by Henry Kissinger in one of his meetings with Mao Tse Tung. According to Kissinger’s remembrance Mao Tse Tung on one occasion called back from the cold several high-ranking military officials whose families he had destroyed and asked for their advice on a particular issue and took their advice to get out of that particular jam. This was possible Kissinger thought because of the Chinese social norms which put loyalty to the country above vengeance. Those military officials had nothing more to lose had they chosen the path of disloyalty. These days Sino-Russian entente has ‘no limits” and Vladimir Putin and Xi-Jinping are determined to prove to the developing countries that their system is better suited to deliver goods to the needy more quickly than the developed countries who accuse  China “unfairly” of debt trap though the case of Sri Lanka and refusal of Mahathir Mohammed of Chinese loan remain as examples for the world to see. As Stephen Walt perceives the issue is not the United States’ preference for a “rules-based” order and China’s alleged lack of interest in it; rather, the issue is who will determine which rules pertain where. Or as the Rand Corp.’s Michael Mazarr recently put it, “At its core, the United States and China are competing to shape the foundational global system—the essential ideas, habits, and expectations that govern international politics. It is ultimately a competition of norms, narratives, and legitimacy.”

RUSIA-CHINA SIGNING ECONOMIC DEALS

DEUTSCHE WELLE reports (25-05-2023) on Russia, and China signing economic deals despite Western criticism. Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin visited China where he met with Chinese President Xi Jinping as well as Premier Li Qiang. Xi-Jinping told the Russian Prime Minister  that China and Russia would continue to offer each other “firm support on issues concerning each other’s core interests and strengthen collaboration in multilateral arenas.”He added that the two countries should “push cooperation in various fields to a higher level” and “raise the level of economic, trade, and investment cooperation.”Mikhail Mishustin said that “relations between Russia and China are at an unprecedented high level.””They are characterized by mutual respect of each other’s interests, the desire to jointly respond to challenges, which is associated with increased turbulence in the international arena and the pattern of sensational pressure from the collective West.”

RUSIA-CHINA DETERMINED TO BLOCK WESTERN SUZERAINTY ETCHED AT YALTA CONFERENCE

It is clear that China and Russia is not going to let the Western world get away with the system the bloc had put in place since the Yalta Conference which had gathered there to decide on the fate of post-war Germany.  President Franklin Roosevelt, Prime Minister Winston Churchill and Joseph Stalin attended the conference. By March 1945, it had become clear that Stalin had no intention of keeping his promises regarding political freedom in Poland. Instead, Soviet troops helped squash any opposition to the provisional government based in Lublin, Poland. When elections were finally held in 1947, they predictably solidified Poland as one of the first Soviet satellite states in Eastern Europe. President Harry Truman, Roosevelt’s successor, was far more suspicious of Stalin when the leaders of the Allied powers met again at the Potsdam Conference in Germany to hash out the final terms for ending World War II in Europe. But with his troops occupying much of Germany and Eastern Europe, Joseph Stalin was able to effectively ratify the concessions he won at Yalta, pressing his advantage over Truman and Churchill who was replaced mid-conference by Prime Minister Clement Atlee.In March 1946, barely a year after the Yalta Conference, Churchill delivered his famous speech declaring that an “iron curtain” had fallen across Eastern Europe, signaling a definitive end to cooperation between the Soviet Union and its Western allies, and the beginning of the Cold War.

CHINA’S CIVIL WAR FROM 1945-1949 AND THE SECOND JAPANESE WAR 1937-45

When all these things were happening China was engaged in a civil war that raged from 1945 to 1949. Then there was the Second Japanese War(1937–45), China was effectively divided into three regions—Nationalist China under the control of the government, Communist China, and the areas occupied by Japan. Each was essentially pitted against the other two, although Chinese military forces were ostensibly allied under the banner of the United Front. By the time Japan accepted the surrender terms of the Potsdam Declaration on August 14, 1945, China had endured decades of Japanese occupation and eight years of brutal warfare. Millions had perished in combat, and many millions more had died as a result of starvation or disease. The end of World War did not mark the end of the conflict in China, however.

US BELIEF OF CHINA AS ITS PREEMINENT ENEMY

This brief tour of history was necessary to highlight the rise of China and the ties that bind today the Sino-Russian friendship under Vladimir Putin and Xi-Jinping and their demonstration of the superiority of an illiberal regime versus democracy preached by the wealthy nations and its attraction to the third world countries. Whether in this conflict with the US believed to be sideling Russia and making China the preeminent enemy will continue to pursue its policy contributing to China’s unease remains to be seen. It would be foolhardy to believe that just because some countries possess nuclear weapons, they have the right to exterminate humanity as it exists today

You might be interested in

Henry Kissinger Turns 100 – And Talks of How to Avoid World War III

Published on
/

On 27 May this year, Dr. Henry Kissinger, Diplomat Extraordinaire and former Secretary of State, known to be the most knowledgeable living expert on foreign relations, turns 100.  He is known for his strategic wisdom and penetrating perspicacity, and his sage advice to leaders across the world  over the past several decades has been chronicled in journalistic tomes around the world. Additionally, Dr. Kissinger’s book Diplomacy has acted as a beacon to the world of contentious international relations.  At his age he is preparing  his next two books – on artificial intelligence (ai) and the nature of alliances.  Although his voice has slowed down, he  remains as bright as a tick.

The latest issue of The Economist carries an excellent article on Dr. Kissinger on the subject of how to avoid a third world war. The Economist reports: “ Mr Kissinger is alarmed by China’s and America’s intensifying competition for technological and economic pre-eminence. Even as Russia tumbles into China’s orbit and war overshadows Europe’s eastern flank, he fears that AI is about to supercharge the Sino-American rivalry. Around the world, the balance of power and the technological basis of warfare are shifting so fast and in so many ways that countries lack any settled principle on which they can establish order. If they cannot find one, they may resort to force. “We’re in the classic pre-world war one situation,” he says, “where neither side has much margin of political concession and in which any disturbance of the equilibrium can lead to catastrophic consequences.”

Dr. Kissinger attempts to clarify perceived inadequacies of analyses of some academics and pundits who posit that China is intent on world domination and says: “They say China wants world domination…The answer is that they [in China] want to be powerful,” he says. “They’re not heading for world domination in a Hitlerian sense,” he says. “That is not how they think or have ever thought of world order.”  To end the quotations from The Economist  I must add “Mr Kissinger sees the Chinese system as more Confucian than Marxist. That teaches Chinese leaders to attain the maximum strength of which their country is capable and to seek to be respected for their accomplishments. Chinese leaders want to be recognised as the international system’s final judges of their own interests. “If they achieved superiority that can genuinely be used, would they drive it to the point of imposing Chinese culture?” he asks. “I don’t know. My instinct is No…[But] I believe it is in our capacity to prevent that situation from arising by a combination of diplomacy and force.”

My Take

Geopolitics in the context of the world powers is polarized and convoluted at best.  China believes that the United States wants to put it down and The United States goes on the basis that China wishes to dominate the world and obviate the global influence of The United States. At the other end of the spectrum lies Russia and its invasion of Ukraine where Russia claims that NATO expansion to the East threatens Russia’s interests and that nothing is off the table, implying the possibility of tactical nuclear attacks which will in all probability escalate into a full-scale war.  To this melting pot are vast technological strides including information technology which act as catalysts to a US-China confrontation and represent, in Dr. Kissinger’s words a “pre-world war situation”.  The world is rife with politics without policy where in the Far East the issue of Taiwan looms, and in the West, the issue of how to reach a solution to the war in Ukraine is getting cloudier by the day.

The first step could be to start with Cicero’s ancient aphorism Inter arma enim silent leges  – a maxim, which translates as “In times of war, the laws are silent”. In the 21st century, this maxim, which was purported to address the growing mob violence and thuggery of Cicero’s time, has taken on a different and more complex dimension, extending from the idealistic synergy between a rules-based international order and its adherence to established law in instances of confrontation to the overall power, called “prerogative” or “discretion” of sovereign States to violate established principles enunciated in the United Nations Charter.

The enduring conflict between misguided strategy, impulsive diplomacy and the rule of law is at the heart of this maxim. In modern usage it has become a watchword for the erosion of civil liberties during internal and external strife. The implication of Cicero’s aphorism is that civil liberties and freedoms are subservient to a nation’s integrity and sovereign right.

What seems to be required now is what Dr. Kissinger calls “hard diplomacy” coupled with coercive hard power that would likely obviate mutual destruction. In this context a hard look at history is essential, garnished with a strong dollop of collective leadership between a somewhat hapless but well meaning United Nations, a determined NATO and the countries concerned.    The history of mankind has proved that it is part of human nature to learn from past experience. That having been said, we have also acted with foresight in situations where we could not build on past experience. When we look at the history of international relations, we see that we have acted with foresight, as a result of which we have brought about major changes to the international legal system by reacting to past disasters.

The United Nations was built on the failure of the League of Nations which was set up as a reaction to World War 1. The failure of the League of Nations was that its Covenant, although intended to prevent the recurrence of atrocities of 1914, failed to outlaw war but merely provided procedures for the peaceful settlement of disputes. Creators of the United Nations learnt from this mistake and wrote into the Charter of the UN the principle of collective security. The UN Security Council, on behalf of the entirety of UN member States, was empowered by the Charter to take decisive action against delinquents. However, this has never worked in practice when it was most needed. For example, the Security Council was literally impotent during the height of the Cold War. The Security Council has not taken or enforced military action against delinquent States nor has it received military assistance from member States to implement the powers ascribed to the Security Council by the UN Charter. The reactions of the Security Council have allegedly been sporadic and reactive, authorizing member States to take action on its behalf, which has prompted one commentator to say that the Council has not acted or functioned as a constitutional framework for a peaceful world but rather as a fire department reacting to emergencies as they rise.

Common ground must be discussed with an aim at compromise.  At the heart of the goal must not be the triumph of hard power but the preservation of the principles of the United Nations Charter. Perhaps a new world order is needed, and we need giants such as Dr. Kissinger to live on and help us achieve it.

You might be interested in

Farewell to a Stalwart of Diplomacy: Jayantha Dhanapala’s Enduring Impact

Published on
/

Editorial

Today, we bid farewell to a remarkable individual whose contributions to the global community have left an indelible mark. Jayantha Dhanapala, a distinguished diplomat, scholar, and advocate for peace, passed away, leaving behind a legacy that transcends borders and continues to inspire us all.

Dhanapala was a true embodiment of diplomacy, known for his unwavering commitment to dialogue, negotiation, and conflict resolution. Throughout his extensive career, he skillfully navigated complex international landscapes, fostering understanding and cooperation among nations. His exceptional talents as a mediator and peacemaker earned him the admiration and respect of colleagues and adversaries alike.

One of Dhanapala’s most notable achievements was his pivotal role as the United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs. In this capacity, he tirelessly promoted arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament initiatives, advocating for a world free from the shadow of nuclear weapons. His resolute dedication to these critical issues has left a lasting impact on global security efforts.

Beyond his diplomatic endeavours, Dhanapala made significant contributions to academia and intellectual discourse. As an esteemed scholar, he delved deep into the complexities of international relations, enriching our understanding of the intricate dynamics that shape our world. His thought-provoking writings and lectures have stimulated countless minds, encouraging dialogue and fostering a more enlightened approach to global challenges.

However, it is perhaps Dhanapala’s compassionate nature and unwavering belief in humanity’s potential for good that truly set him apart. He possessed an innate ability to bridge divides and foster understanding, displaying empathy and respect for all parties involved. His tireless pursuit of peace and justice served as an inspiration, reminding us of the power of compassion and diplomacy in shaping a better world.

As we mourn the loss of this distinguished figure, we must also celebrate his life and the values he championed. Dhanapala’s unwavering commitment to peace, his profound intellect, and his unwavering belief in the inherent goodness of humanity will continue to guide us as we navigate the complexities of our interconnected world.

In honouring Jayantha Dhanapala’s memory, let us redouble our efforts to promote peace, understanding, and cooperation among nations. Let us draw inspiration from his example and work together to build a world where dialogue prevails over conflict and where compassion triumphs over hostility.

Today, we come together to honour the memory of an extraordinary individual who embodied the ideals of diplomacy, scholarship, and peace advocacy. As we bid farewell to Jayantha Dhanapala, let us reflect on the profound impact he made during his time with us. Although he may no longer be with us in body, his spirit persists within the hearts and minds of the countless individuals whose lives he touched. Through his remarkable achievements, Jayantha Dhanapala has forged a lasting legacy that will continue to inspire and guide us in our collective pursuit of a harmonious world.

You might be interested in

LTTE Fronts’ Rising Influence in Canada: A Potential Future Power Shift

Published on
/

When the Prime Minister of Canada proudly identifies as a “feminist,” it raises concerns about the ideology he advocates for the country. We are aware that Canada was taken from the indigenous people who had inhabited the land for centuries, and their history was rewritten. This historical aspect resonates with LTTE fronts, as both are skilled at shaping a new narrative. Presently, Canada is governed by immigrants who significantly contribute to the national economy. If an Indian individual can become the Prime Minister of the UK, there is no reason why a handful of influential Tamil players cannot hold power in Canada. Whether they would rename it to Eelam is a separate matter, but considering the abilities of these Tamil lobbies and their success in persuading the Canadian Prime Minister to issue a “genocide” statement, it is evident that they yield considerable influence. Credit is due to them.

These LTTE fronts, once marginalized groups seeking asylum and refugees, have transformed into powerful entities. Where else would one find a terrorist openly displayed in shop windows, with authorities turning a blind eye? Where else would terrorist flags, symbols, and other paraphernalia be allowed for public display? They deserve acknowledgment for this.

They now operate legal firms, human rights organizations, and actively champion human rights, standing shoulder to shoulder with the highest echelons of Canadian society and politics. It is likely that they have greater access to Canadian leaders than our own High Commissioner in Canada. This is truly remarkable.

They enjoy carte blanche when it comes to fundraising, as Canadian authorities show little concern for the ultimate use of these funds. It is quite absurd to witness Canadian politicians attending LTTE memorials and issuing statements mourning the “dead LTTE.” The LTTE fronts deserve applause for this achievement. They have made fools out of white Canadians, and now some Sikhs are also joining their cause.

Now, let us consider a different perspective.

The LTTE fronts and their children have become well-known figures in Canada. They have established themselves, gained recognition, and achieved stature. Would they want to waste their time on Sri Lanka, a debt-ridden, politically compromised, and geopolitically vulnerable state? Even if they were to declare Eelam, would the neighboring giant allow them to rule freely? Would Western geopolitical alliances allow them to govern without interference or intervention? These questions must surely occupy the minds of those behind the LTTE fronts. Wouldn’t it be preferable for them to rule over Canada, with or without the name Eelam, given their growing influence?

Already, the LTTE fronts are establishing strongholds around key political structures in Canada. They are gradually adopting the same tactics and strategies in other Western countries as well.

It is evident that the white population is declining rapidly due to their own theories, which are now backfiring on them. Every country once ruled by the white man is now governed, controlled, or influenced by non-whites. Therefore, we should appreciate the progress the LTTE fronts have made on the international stage.

Their past involvement in funding armed terrorism is no more. Today, they are pursuing a political path that has allowed them to penetrate the Canadian political system. This serves as a blueprint for others in different parts of the world to follow. Whether they establish Eelam chapters or govern the country like Rishi Sunak is their choice. However, we should be proud of how far they have come.

Whether some perceive this as deceiving the Canadian Prime Minister and other politicians is a matter of debate. If a Prime Minister can be deceived, does he deserve to lead the nation? If politicians can be bought, should Canadian citizens vote for them? In a way, the LTTE fronts have exposed the flaws of these Canadian leaders.

Nevertheless, it is often said that

You might be interested in

Will Indian Government’s Withdrawal of 2000 Note Root Out Corruption?

Published on
/

After demonetisation in 2016, cash circulation in India by value came down significantly . However, subsequently , for whatever reasons , the cash circulation was gradually increased by the Government of India by printing more currency notes of various denominations . As a result, present currency circulation in the country by value is as high as Rs.32 lakh crore.

It is well known that all corrupt dealings take place by cash transactions and black money in cash which is generated by tax evasion. Such cash in the form of black money is used for several corrupt and nefarious practices, ,resulting in development and growth of parallel economy.

Government of India under Prime Minister Modi has been taking special efforts to promote digitalisation and direct transfer of funds through electronic media. It is gratifying that in the last four years or so, the digitalisation of economy have forged ahead at an impressive rate and by and large , people have responded to such digitalisation exercise favourably. These days, it is seen that even small traders and even street vendors accept payment electronically by what is popularly known as google pay or payment by card.

In such conditions, Government of India has done well to take steps to withdraw Rs.2000 currency notes, amounting to more than Rs.3 lakh crore from circulation with the deadline being 30th September,2023. This positive move will certainly bring out the hoarded money by politicians and businessmen or others and dilute the black money circulation in the country to a considerable extent.

What is very important now is that having taken steps to withdraw Rs.2000 notes amounting to the value of more than Rs.3 lakh crore, Government of India should not undo the benefit by replacing the withdrawn Rs.2000 currency by printing lower denomination notes. This will undo the benefit of withdrawing the Rs.2000 currency notes.

India has to move steadily towards cash less economy which is a gradual process and it is showing healthy signs of happening now. The emergence of cashless economy is the ultimate strategy to root out political and administrative corruption in India, which lead to business corruption.

The lesser cash in currency circulation will inevitably force or persuade people to resort to money transaction for business , trade or personal purposes by digital mode.

Of course, with the withdrawal of Rs.2000 currency notes, some critics may find fault with the move ,by stating that there would be shortage of notes of lesser denomination to be exchanged for Rs.2000 currency notes, when submitted by the people to the bank. This complaint would be largely made by the black money holders with concealed cash bundles , as they would not like to use the option of depositing the Rs.2000 currency notes in their bank account.

It is necessary that Government of India should be careful in explaining the merits of the present move to withdraw Rs.2000 currency notes , so that the gullible people would not be misled by false and motivated criticisms. . It is also necessary that enlightened and knowledgeable economists should voice their views in various forums, so that a heathy and forward looking national discussions on the subject can take place, that will contribute to prepare mindset of the people in favour of cashless economy.

You might be interested in

Market Fundamentalism’ Is an Obstacle to Social Progress

Published on
/

A changing world order, a shrinking U.S. empire, migrations and related demographic shifts, and major economic crashes have all enhanced religious fundamentalisms around the world. Beyond religions, other ideological fundamentalisms likewise provide widely welcomed reassurances. One of the latter—market fundamentalism—invites and deserves criticism as a major obstacle to navigating this time of rapid social change. Market fundamentalism attributes to that particular social institution a level of perfection and “optimality” quite parallel to what fundamentalist religions attribute to prophets and divinities.

Yet markets are just one among many social means of rationing. Anything scarce relative to demand for it raises the same question: Who will get it and who must do without it? The market is one institutional way to ration the scarce item. In a market, those who want it bid up its price leading others to drop out because they cannot or will not pay the higher price. When higher prices have eliminated the excess of demand over supply, scarcity is gone, and no more bidding up is required. Those able and willing to pay the higher prices are satisfied by receiving distributions of the available supply.

The market has thus rationed out the scarce supply. It has determined who gets and who does not. Clearly, the richer a buyer is, the more likely that buyer will welcome, endorse, and celebrate “the market system.” Markets favor rich buyers. Such buyers in turn will more likely support teachers, clerics, politicians, and others who promote arguments that markets are “efficient,” “socially positive,” or “best for everyone.”

Yet even the economics profession—which routinely celebrates markets—includes a sizable—if underemphasized—literature about how, why, and when free (i.e., unregulated) markets do not work efficiently or in socially positive ways. That literature has developed concepts like “imperfect competition,” “market distortions,” and “externalities,” to pinpoint markets failing to be efficient or benefit social welfare. Social leaders who have had to deal with actual markets in society have likewise repeatedly intervened in them when and because markets worked in socially unacceptable ways. Thus, we have minimum wage laws, maximum interest-rate laws, price-gouging laws, and tariff and trade wars. Practical people know that “leaving matters to the market” has often yielded disasters (e.g., the crashes of 2000, 2008, and 2020) overcome by massive, sustained governmental regulation of and intervention in markets.

So then why do market fundamentalists celebrate a rationing system—the market—that in both theory and practice is more replete with holes than a block of Swiss cheese? Libertarians go so far as to promote a “pure” market economy as a realizable utopia. Such a pure market system is their policy to fix the massive problems they admit exist in contemporary (impure) capitalism. Libertarians are forever frustrated by their lack of success.

For many reasons, markets ought not claim anyone’s loyalty. Among alternative systems of rationing scarcity, markets are clearly inferior. For example, in many religious, ethical, and moral traditions, basic precepts urge or insist that scarcity be addressed by a rationing system based on their respective concepts of human need. Many other rationing systems—including the U.S. version used in World War II—dispensed with the market system and substituted a needs-based rationing system managed by the government.

Rationing systems could likewise be based on age, type of work performed, employment status, family situation, health conditions, distance between home and workplace, or other criteria. Their importance relative to one another and relative to some composite notion of “need,” could and should be determined democratically. Indeed, a genuinely democratic society would let the people decide which (if any) scarcities should be rationed by the market and which (if any) by alternative rationing systems.

Market fetishists will surely trot out their favorite rationalizations with which to regale students. For example, they argue that when buyers bid up prices for scarce items other entrepreneurs will rush in with more supply to capture those higher prices, thereby ending the scarcity. This simple-minded argument fails to grasp that the entrepreneurs cashing in on the higher prices for scarce items have every incentive and many of the means to prevent, delay, or block altogether the entry of new suppliers. Actual business history shows that they often do so successfully. In other words, glib assurances about reactions to market prices are ideological noise and little else.

We can also catch the market fetishizers in their own contradictions. When justifying the sky-high pay packages of mega-corporate CEOs, we are told their scarcity requires their high prices. The same folks explain to us that to overcome scarcity of wage labor, it was necessary to cut U.S. workers’ pandemic-era unemployment supplement, not to raise their wages. During times of scarcity, markets often reveal to capitalists the possibility of earning higher profits on lower volumes of product and sales. If they prioritize profits and when they can afford to bar others’ entry, they will produce and sell less at higher prices to a richer clientele. We are watching that process unfold in the United States now.

The neoliberal turn in U.S. capitalism since the 1970s yielded big profits from a globalized market system. However, outside the purview of neoliberal ideology, that global market catapulted the Chinese economy forward far faster than the United States and far faster than the United States found acceptable. Thus the United States junked its market celebrations (substituting intense “security” concerns) to justify massive governmental interventions in markets to thwart Chinese development: a trade war, tariff wars, chip subsidies, and sanctions. Awkwardly and unpersuasively, the economic profession keeps teaching about the efficiency of free or pure markets, while students learn from the news all about U.S. protectionism, market management, and the need to turn away from the free market gods previously venerated.

Then too the market-based health care system of the United States challenges market fundamentalism: the United States has 4.3 percent of the world population but accounted for 16.9 percent of the world’s COVID-19 deaths. Might the market system bear a significant share of the blame and fault here? So dangerous is the potential disruption of ideological consensus that it becomes vital to avoid asking the question, let alone pursuing a serious answer.

During the pandemic, millions of workers were told that they were “essential” and “front-line responders.” A grateful society appreciated them. As they often noted, the market had not rewarded them accordingly. They got very low wages. They must not have been scarce enough to command better. That’s how markets work. Markets do not reward what is most valuable and essential. They never did. They reward what is scarce relative to people’s ability to buy, no matter the social importance we give to the actual work and roles people play. Markets pander to where the money is. No wonder the rich subsidize market fundamentalism. The wonder is why the rest of society believes or tolerates it.

This article was produced by Economy for All, a project of the Independent Media Institute.

You might be interested in

1 2 3 … 32