Kazi Anwarul Masud

Kazi Anwarul Masud is a retired Bangladeshi diplomat. During his tenure, he worked in several countries as the ambassador of Bangladesh including Thailand, Vietnam, South Korea and Germany

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

Predicting Imran Khan’s Political Future

Published on

Ever since the assassination of Prime Minister Liaqat Ali Khan Pakistan has always been under indirect and later direct rule by the army. Global cricket legend Imran Khan’s removal from the post of Prime Minister through the parliamentary process, albeit with the tacit support of the army, has been an exception.

Imran Khan and Supreme Court Verdict

Imran Khan, hugely popular in Pakistan, has been detained first by the police and then by the Supreme Courtwhich declared his arrest by the police as unconstitutional. Last year the country’s foreign minister came to the United States to explore yet another attempt to repair the U.S.-Pakistan alliance.

Imran Khan’s Accusation of US Conspiracy to Oust Him From Prime Ministership

 Leadersin both U.S. political parties hadlargely written off Pakistan. Yet it is a major non-NATO ally, the world’s fifth-most-populous country, and a nuclear power situated strategically among China, India, Afghanistan, and Iran. After years of mutual distrust between Washington and Islamabad, analysts believe that there are plenty of reasons to be skeptical of the idea that either side is capable — much less willing — to do the hard work of reviving the alliance.  But the basic argument for trying again is sound. And Pakistan’sforeign ministerBilwal Bhutto Zardari, the son of two previous Pakistani leaders, believes that both nations can learn from the mistakes of the past. His father Asif Ali Zardari, head of Pakistan Peoples Party, was President of Pakistan from 2008-2013 while his mother Benazir Bhutto, the first female Prime Minister of Pakistan who led the country twicewas assassinated on December 27 2007 while engaged in the election campaign for a fresh term in Rawalpindi Liaqat Bagh , the place where the first Prime Minister Liaqat Ali Khan was assassinated. Many years have passed by since Benazir Bhutto’s death and the dethroning of global cricket legend Imran Khan’s dismissal, albeit with the tacit support of the army, from the Prime Minister ship, surprisingly without a military coup d’état. 

Huge Popularity of Imran Khan

Despite his dismissal by Parliament Imran Khan remains hugely popular among the masses. His popularity was demonstrated by the provincial election in Punjab, though to be the home ground of the ruling Pakistan People’s Party of Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif and his dethroned brother and former Prime Minister  Nawaz Sharif now living in exile. The recent ruling by the Pakistan Supreme Court ruling his arrest by para-military force as unconstitutional gave further boost to his popularity. Political analysts ( RickNoak and Shaik Hussain-May 11 2023) wrote in an article that Imran Khan’s arrest was unlawful. Consequently, and I quote, “ Imran Khan’s lawyer Babar Awan said the former prime minister “is now directly in the custody of the Supreme Court of Pakistan — not in police custody” — as he awaits another court hearing set to take place Friday. The Pakistani government, which appears to be balking at a separate Supreme Court ruling on elections, could still choose to ignore the court’s decision and continue to hold Khan.

Michael Kugelman on Imran Khan

But the ruling may also give the government a way out amid escalating unrest in the country. “The state may conclude that it is best to pick its battles: fall back, release Khan, lower the political temperature for a bit, and then focus on the next steps,” said Michael Kugelman, director of the South Asia Institute at the Wilson Center.” Noak and Hussain further wrote “ Protesters’ anger is also directed against the military to an extent that has rarely been seen in Pakistan. As prime minister, Khan was widely perceived as having the military’s support, but tensions mounted after his ouster by Parliament. Khan accused the prime minister, interior minister, and an intelligence officer of having been behind an assassination attempt he narrowly survived in November, and he doubled down on those accusations in recent days. Partly as a result of Khan’s criticism, “the army is more on the defensive now than it has been for quite a few years,” said Michael Kugelman, awriter of Foreign Policy ’s weekly South Asia Briefandthe director of the South Asia Institute at the Wilson Center in Washington. The scale of the protests has also been an indication of how popular Khan remains among many voters, even one year after Parliament ousted him as prime minister. Some Khan supporters suspect the government’s and military’s ultimate goal may be to ban their party to prevent it from winning the general elections that are expected to take place later this year.”

Shahbaz Sharif’s Possible Attempts to Bar Imran Khan From Contesting The Coming Election

It is not certain that Shahbaz Sharif’s government will rest without trying to use further ammunition against Imran Khan to the extent of banning Imran Khan’s political party-Tehrik-e-Insaf from contesting the coming elections. The history of Pakistan mainly reflected illiberal trends from its independence from British rule. Hamid Mir, a Pakistani journalist traced the history of Pakistan and mainly the attack by the army against democratic institutions.

History of Army Interference in Pakistani Politics

Four military dictators ruled Pakistan for more than 32 years. Civilian prime ministers — 29 of them — have ruled the country for 43 years. No elected prime minister has completed a full five-year term. Three different constitutions of Pakistan were abrogated or suspended five times in the 75 years since the country achieved statehood.  Hamid Mir further included information onthe World Justice Project, a group that tracks legal systems around the world, ranks Pakistan 130 of 139 countries on the rule of law. A historical pattern of collaboration between dictators and judges has weakened democracy. On one side, Imran Khan is challenging the “neutrality” of the army, and on the other the government of Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif is pushing the courts to disqualify Khan. Both the government and opposition are fighting with state institutions. Media freedom is another casualty of the political war among power players. Pakistan is ranked 157 of 180 in the World Press Freedom Index of 2022. Pakistan fell 18 points in the ranking since 2018, when Khan took power. TV channels were blocked. Journalists were attacked, arrested, and banned. Media freedom is under threat even now that Khan has left power.Given the history of Pakistan’s political road blocs, it is difficult to chart the future of Imran Khan.

You might be interested in

Navigating the Triangular Ties: India, China, and the United States

Published on

HISTORY OF INDO-RUSSIAN RELATIONS

Despite the best efforts by the US to influence India to bring the country within its orbit of influence, it is unlikely that India will forsake its deep-rooted friendship with Russia. India is unlikely to forget repeated vetoes by the Soviet Union during the Bangladesh liberation war. The History of Indo-Russian Friendship is deep and spans many decades. Besides the basis of the relationship suits the strategic needs of both.

BUSH Jr AND BARAK OBAMA’S EFFORTS TO HELP INDIA FROM DOMINATING ASIA

In a recent article in the Foreign Affairs magazine, Ashley Tellis( May 1 2023) pointed out that during the Bush and Obama administrations, U.S. ambitions centered largely on helping build India’s power in order to prevent China from dominating Asia. As U.S.-China relations steadily deteriorated during the Trump administration—when Sino-Indian relations hit rock bottom as well—Washington began to entertain the more expansive notion that its support for New Delhi would gradually induce India to play a greater military role in containing China’s growing power. There are reasons to believe it will not. One must also remember that during the UN-sponsored vote to criticize the Russian invasion of Ukraine India was one of the countries that abstained to criticize the Russian invasion. India took the position that the issue should be settled without further spilling of bloodshed.

INDIA’S TIGHTROPE WALK OVER UN RESOLUTION ON UKRAINE

BBC in its report of 3rd March 2022 stated that India had to walk a diplomatic tightrope over Ukraine as it tried to balance its ties with Moscow and the West. Delhi’s first statement in the UN Security Council (UNSC) did not name any country directly but it said it regretted that calls from the international community to give diplomacy and dialogue a chance had not been heeded.It, however, stopped short of criticizing Russia. And before the UNSC voted on a draft UN resolution to condemn the invasion, Delhi faced calls from Russia, the US, and Ukraine “to do the right thing”. Ukraine and Russia even issued public appeals for Delhi to take a clear stand. India chose to abstain from the vote but a careful reading of its statement suggests that it did go a step further and indirectly asked Moscow to respect international law. India talked about the importance of “the UN Charter, international law, and respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states”, adding that “all member states need to honor these principles in finding a constructive way forward”. Reuter’s on September 28 2022 reported that India was articulating its position against the Ukraine war more robustly to counter criticism that it is soft on Russia, but it still has not held Moscow responsible for the invasion and will not alter its policy on importing cheap Russian oil and coal.

In their first in-person meeting since the Feb. 24 invasion, Prime Minister Narendra Modi told President Vladimir Putin that “today’s era is not an era of war ” – the clearest position New Delhi has taken on the conflict. India’s foreign minister followed up at the U.N. Security Council, describing the trajectory of the Ukraine war as “very concerning” and the risk of a nuclear escalation as of “particular anxiety”.New Delhi’s shift, even though nuanced, reflected concern about the growing economic costs of the conflict and how it would affect India. Russia’s first mobilization of troops since World War Two marks a major escalation of the conflict that has thrown markets into turmoil and threatens a global recession. Moreover, India is worried the war is pushing Russia closer to China, which has fraught relations with New Delhi.   India also hopes its more robust approach would help it meet criticism by Western allies that it is too close to Moscow.

US National Security Advisor and European Commission On Trade Relations With China 

Washington Post(05-01-23)  reported that the US National Security Advisor Jack Sullivan acknowledged the fact that, despite the growing tensions and confrontation with China, trade between the two countries remains robust and reached record levels last year. And he echoed the rhetoric of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, who has spoken of “de-risking” Europe’s supply chains from overexposure to China rather than fully “decoupling” from what, by some indicators, is already the world’s largest economy. The United States’ moves to curb trade with China in goods that could boost Beijing’s artificial intelligence and tech prowess are, in Sullivan’s framing, an exception rather than the norm. The world has to be aware of the Sino-Russian entente versus democracy practised mostly by the Western powers and also by emerging powers like India. The Sino-Russian compact would like to demonstrate that an illiberal system can deliver essential goods to the needy far more quickly than liberal democracies can. China has attracted many developing countries through its Road and Bridge Initiative.

Xi-Jinping and The Belt & Road Initiative Of China

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI, known within China as the One Belt One Road or OBOR for short)is a global infrastructure development strategy adopted by the Chinese government in 2013 to invest in more than 150 countries and international organizations. It is considered a centerpiece of the Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s foreign policy.  The BRI forms a central component of Xi’s “Major Country Diplomacy” strategy, which calls for China to assume a greater leadership role in global affairs in accordance with its rising power and status. It has been compared to the American Marshall Plan. As of January 2023, 151 countries were listed as having signed up to the BRI. The participating countries include almost 75% of the world’s population and account for more than half of the world’s GDP. The Chinese government calls the initiative “a bid to enhance regional connectivity and embrace a brighter future.”The project has a target completion date of 2049, which will coincide with the centennial of the People’s Republic of China (PRC)’s founding. According to British consultants,  BRI is likely to increase the world GDP by $7.1 trillion per annum by 2040, and that benefits will be “widespread” as improved infrastructure reduces “frictions that hold back world trade”.

Supporters praise the BRI for its potential to boost the global GDP, particularly in developing countries. However, there has also been criticism over human rights violations and environmental impact, as well as concerns about debt-trap diplomacy. The Belt and Road Initiative addresses an “infrastructure gap” and thus has the potential to accelerate economic growth across the Asia Pacific, Africa, and Central and Eastern Europe. A report from the World Pension Council estimates that Asia, excluding China, requires up to US$900 billion of infrastructure investments per year over the next decade, mostly in debt instruments, 50% above current infrastructure spending rates. 

The gaping need for long-term capital explains why many Asian and Eastern European heads of state “gladly expressed their interest to join this new international financial institution focusing solely on ‘real assets’ and infrastructure-driven economic growth”.(WIKIPEDIA).  Already, some estimates list the Belt and Road Initiative as one of the largest infrastructures and investment projects in history, covering more than 68 countries, including 65% of the world’s population and 40% of the global gross domestic product as of 2017.  Development of the Renminbi as a currency of international transactions, development of the infrastructures of Asian countries, strengthening diplomatic relations whilst reducing dependency on the US and creating new markets for Chinese products, exporting surplus industrial capacity, and integrating commodities-rich countries more closely into the Chinese economy are all objectives of the BRI.While some countries, especially the United States, view the project critically because of possible Chinese influence, others point to the creation of a new global growth engine by connecting and moving Asia, Europe, and Africa closer together.

In the maritime silk road, which is already the route for more than half of all containers in the world, Deepwater ports are being expanded, logistical hubs are being built and new traffic routes are being created in the hinterland. The maritime silk road runs with its connections from the Chinese coast to the south, linking Hanoi, Kuala Lumpur, Singapore and Jakarta.  All in all, the ship connections for container transports between Asia and Europe will be reorganized. Experts have compared the initiative to the post-World War II Marshall Plan.

Despite the apprehension expressed by e.g. Donald Trump’s Vice President Mike Pence warning developing countries of the debt trap by China many of these countries have embraced Chinese offer mainly because they lack funds for infrastructural development which they need badly. In short, the fear of a debt trap or not many developing countries are expected to sign up with China for the immediate gain they will receive through this alliance. 

You might be interested in

US Outperforms European Countries and The Emergence of a Multi-Polar World

Published on
/

US OUTPERFORMS EUROPE IN THE ECONOMIC SPHERE

The Economist magazine in an article (13 April 2023) has lauded the impressive US economic performance compared to the other rich countries in the West. If GDP is taken as an example The Economist states “In 1990 America accounted for a quarter of the world’s output, at market exchange rates. Thirty years on, that share is almost unchanged, even as China has gained economic clout. America’s dominance of the rich world is startling. Today it accounts for 58% of the g7’s GDP, compared with 40% in 1990”. The magazine adds “For the world as a whole, America’s outperformance says much about how to grow. One lesson is that size matters. America has the benefit of a large consumer market over which to spread the costs of r&d and a deep capital market from which to raise finance. Only China, and perhaps one day India, can boast of purchasing power at such a scale”.

DISAPPEARANCE OF A UNIPOLAR WORLD

The very fact that China and India are cited as examples illustrates that the unipolar world that was accepted since the Second World War no longer exists and the US has to take along NATO and the European Community members to take the challenge posed by China and the non-aligned Movement members of Indian sub-continent and African countries freed from British, Portuguese and other European nations.

MONRO DOCTRINE AND THE IMPORTANCE OF THE US ROLE

In this newly emerging situation, Monroe Doctrine played a crucial role in the US warning the European nations not to interfere in the American continent. Since the Spanish-American War, the United States had a significant hand in various conflicts around the world. The US surrounded by two oceans had the luxury of living in a separate world of its own and impose the Monroe Doctrine as it saw fit. Albeit Monroe Doctrine was a United States policy that opposed European colonialism in the Americas. It argued that any intervention in the politics of the Americas by foreign powers was a potentially hostile act against the United States. The Monroe Doctrine was issued at a time when nearly all Latin American colonies of Spain and Portugal had achieved or were at the point of gaining, independence from the Portuguese and Spanish Empires. The Monroe Doctrine stated that further efforts by various European states to take control of any independent state in the Americas would be viewed as “the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States.” President James Monroe asserted that the New World and the Old World were to remain distinctly separate spheres of influence. A lot of water has flown under London Bridge and today’s world has a completely different shape.

STEPHEN WALT ON THE DISAPPEARANCE OF UNIPOLARITY

Harvard Luminary Stephen Walt in an article observed former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder’s warning of the “undeniable danger” of U.S. unilateralism, and of former French Foreign Minister Hubert Védrine’s statement that “the entire foreign policy of France is aimed at making the world of tomorrow composed of several poles, not just one.” Current French President Emmanuel Macron’s support for European unity and strategic autonomy reveals a similar impulse…Although the Biden administration recognizes that the US is back in a world of several great powers, it seems nostalgic for the brief era when the United States didn’t face peer competitors. Hence its vigorous reassertion of “U.S. leadership,” its desire to inflict a military defeat on Russia that will leave it too weak to cause trouble in the future, and its efforts to stifle China’s rise by restricting Beijing’s access to critical technological inputs”.

SINO-RUSSIAN ENTENTE

Taking into consideration the picture drawn by Stephen Walt recent visit by XI-JINPING to Moscow (the 40th time the two leaders-Vladimir Putin- have met in person) is significant. The two leaders have publicly declared “limitless” solidarity and displayed the efficiency of the Western efforts to reach essential goods to the needy. It was to emphasize that the Communist system is superior to that of the West. As an example, China has launched its Belt and Road Initiative to construct infrastructural needs of the middle and poverty-stricken countries that do not have the resources to finance their needs.

INDO-RUSSIAN RELATIONS

UN vote on the Russian invasion of Ukraine clearly displays that the motion was backed by 141 nations with 32 abstaining and seven, including Russia, voting against it. India reiterated its position on the invasion, saying that peaceful dialogue was the only way out. Delhi has increasingly faced pressure to take a firm stand on Russia. Many countries, including the US and Ukraine, have publicly appealed to Delhi to take a clear stand and “do the right thing”. But India has resisted the pressure and continued with its strategy of not criticizing Russia directly. It has abstained from similar resolutions both at the UNGA and at the UNSC in the past. The two countries have decades-old trusted relationships since the Cold War. Russia is also India’s largest arms supplier even though its share has dropped in recent years largely due to Delhi’s decision to boost domestic defense manufacturing and a widening imports portfolio. The two countries also have a history of diplomatic cooperation — Moscow has vetoed UNSC resolutions over the disputed region of Kashmir. Delhi, however, has talked about the importance of “the UN Charter, international law, and respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states” in its past statements on Ukraine.

BANGLADESH LIBERATION WAR

One must recall the repeated vetoes given by the Soviet Union on efforts by Western nations in total disregard of the genocide perpetrated on unarmed Bengalis by the Pakistani military junta for a political solution with the Pakistani military regime. It was not for nothing that many countries from the East and the West realized, not for the first time, that the Western so-called cry for democracy was a farce. From the US Edward Kennedy visited the refugee camps in Indian West Bengal in millions were welcomed by then-Indian Prime Minister Mrs. Indira Gandhi but for whose untiring efforts liberation of Bangladesh from the clutches of Pakistani hordes could have been indefinitely delayed. If we switch from 1971 when Bangladesh’s liberation was fought to the present time we find an entirely different world. US-European suzerainty is gone, multi-polarity has appeared and a Sino-Russian entente has emerged. As this article had indicated earlier the world would not like to have a saber-rattling contest between the US and Russia with nuclear weapons. The great majority of the people of the world would prefer a peaceful solution of the Ukraine problem that would ensure Russia her territorial integrity with Ukraine not joining either the Russian side or the Western side.

BANGLADESH IS AN EXAMPLE OF POVERTY AND CORRUPTION

According to a report published in Dhaka Tribune(Syed Zakir Hussain and Meraj Mavis-January 22 2023) After Bangladesh’s independence in 1971, 80% of its people initially lived below the poverty line, but now that percentage has reached 20%. However, the actual number of poor people has not decreased in this period, considering the percentage, a report revealed on Saturday. Still, 35 million people in Bangladesh live below the poverty line — a fact that came out in the Bangladesh Poverty Watch Report 2022. During the launching program of the report, experts and economists said that 35 million people remained poor since 1990 despite the poverty rate halving in the last three decades. They also urged the government to take and implement policies required for decentralization to uplift marginalized people above the poverty line, ensuring inclusive growth. The report was jointly compiled by the Institute for Inclusive Finance and Development (InM) and the Centre for Inclusive Development Dialogue (CIDD). Qazi Kholiquzzaman Ahmad, chairman of InM and Palli Karma-Sahayak Foundation (PKSF), in his opening remarks said: “Income-based poverty measurement will not eliminate the actual poverty. We have to find out about multidimensional poverty.” Atiur Rahman, former governor of Bangladesh Bank, said that: “The economy is facing some challenges regarding geopolitical tension, energy shortage, and supply chain disruption, and the government should take steps considering these challenges.” Mustafa K Mujeri, chairman of the CIDD, said: “It’s true that poverty is in constant decline. The government has taken initiatives to solve this problem. But poverty is not only measured by ‘lack of income’, rather it includes the shortage of choice, opportunity, and lack of being heard.” Prof Salma Akhter, trustee of CIDD, in her keynote presentation, said that: “About 94% of the Garo males work as day laborers while the remaining are engaged with informal sectors.” All members of the community consider themselves poor throughout the year as men earn Tk300 a day, while women only Tk100. Around 60,000 people from the Munda community face shortage of food for three to four months every year. The daily income of the Mal Paharia community varies from Tk100 to Tk200. About 92% of 129,000 Santals live below the poverty line. Most women and children in these groups face additional marginalization, and rights violations, and have fewer opportunities to access education, health, economic opportunities, protection and justice, Prof Salma added that the legal, administrative and other social institutions do not usually work equally to protect the rights of ethnic minorities and transgenders. Thus, their voices remain mostly unheard as the marginalized communities in Bangladesh are powerless and less organized than other citizens in claiming their civil rights.

SUGGESTIONS TO ACCELERATE SOCIAL INTEGRATION

The report offered several key activities to accelerate their social integration. The key will be to integrate these policies into the government’s broader inclusive development strategies, which address cross-cutting and national-level issues such as strengthening inclusive growth, ensuring financial inclusion of the marginalized, reducing income and social inequality, accessing quality education, health, nutrition, and other basic services, adopting appropriate macroeconomic policy, addressing the marginal groups or regions, and implementing initiatives at the local level. Apart from the philosophies behind corruption, it would be useful to find out the causes of corruption in countries like Bangladesh. It is easy to give advice from armchairs on the ways to remove corruption from societies like ours. But in countries where millions of people are illiterate and have to depend on so-called literate persons to translate government orders which again would not be done without bribe millions of people remain at the mercy of middlemen to get service which in some cases are free entitlement to the recipients. So the nexus between corruption and receiving government services are clear. Corruption, therefore, has to be eliminated. But it is easier said than done. Corruption has taken such deep roots in our societies that it has become impossible to eliminate corruption. Additionally, when corruption has backers at a high level with powerful connections one has to keep quiet and suffer the indignities of becoming a victim. 35m Bangladeshis still live below the poverty line regular monitoring of progress emphasized in the recent

POVERTY WATCH REPORT 2022

Poverty Watch Report 2022 to assess actual poverty line Bangladesh is among five countries where the world’s extremely poor reside. According to a report published in Dhaka Tribune(Syed Zakir Hussain and Meraj Mavis-January 22 2023) After Bangladesh’s independence in 1971, 80% of its people initially lived below the poverty line, but now that percentage has reached 20%. However, the actual number of poor people has not decreased in this period, considering the percentage, a report revealed on Saturday. Still, 35 million people in Bangladesh live below the poverty line — a fact that came out in the Bangladesh Poverty Watch Report 2022. During the launching program of the report, experts and economists said that 35 million people remained poor since 1990 despite the poverty rate halving in the last three decades. They also urged the government to take and implement policies required for decentralization to uplift marginalized people above the poverty line, ensuring inclusive growth. The report was jointly compiled by the Institute for Inclusive Finance and Development (InM) and the Centre for Inclusive Development Dialogue (CIDD). Qazi Kholiquzzaman Ahmad, chairman of InM and Palli Karma-Sahayak Foundation (PKSF), in his opening remarks said: “Income-based poverty measurement will not eliminate the actual poverty. We have to find out about multidimensional poverty.”

Atiur Rahmnan, former governor of Bangladesh Bank, said that: “The economy is facing some challenges regarding geopolitical tension, energy shortage and supply chain disruption, and the government should take steps considering these challenges.” Mustafa K Mujeri, chairman of the CIDD, said: “It’s true that poverty is in constant decline. The government has taken initiatives to solve this problem. But poverty is not only measured by ‘lack of income’, rather it includes the shortage of choice, opportunity, and lack of being heard.” Prof Salma Akhter, trustee of CIDD, said that: “About 94% of the Garo males work as day laborers while the remaining are engaged with informal sectors.” All members of the community consider themselves poor throughout the year as men earn Tk300 a day, while women only Tk100. Around 60,000 people from the Munda community face shortage of food for three to four months every year. The daily income of the Mal Paharia community varies from Tk100 to Tk200. About 92% of 129,000 Santals live below the poverty line.

Most women and children in these groups face additional marginalization, and rights violations, and have fewer opportunities to access education, health, economic opportunities, protection and justice, Prof Salma added. She further said the legal, administrative, and other social institutions do not usually work equally to protect the rights of ethnic minorities and transgenders. Thus, their voices remain mostly unheard as the marginalized communities in Bangladesh are powerless and less organized than other citizens in claiming their civil rights. The report offered several key activities to accelerate their social integration. The key will be to integrate these policies into the government’s broader inclusive development strategies, which address cross-cutting and national-level issues such as strengthening inclusive growth, ensuring financial inclusion of the marginalized, reducing income and social inequality, accessing quality education, health, nutrition, and other basic services, adopting the appropriate macroeconomic policy, addressing the marginal groups or regions, and implementing initiatives at the local level. Apart from the philosophies behind corruption, it would be useful to find out the causes of corruption in countries like Bangladesh.

It is easy to give advice from armchairs on the ways to remove corruption from societies like ours. But in countries where millions of people are illiterate and have to depend on so-called literate persons to translate government orders which again would not be done without bribe millions of people remain at the mercy of middlemen to get service which in some cases are free entitlement to the recipients. So the nexus between corruption and receiving government services are clear. Corruption, therefore, has to be eliminated. But it is easier said than done. Corruption has taken such deep roots in our societies that it has become impossible to eliminate corruption. Additionally, when corruption has backers at a high level with powerful connections one has to keep quiet and suffer the indignities of becoming a victim.

You might be interested in

Can the US and China go to War Over Taiwan Island?

Published on
//

Joshua Keating is a foreign policy analyst, staff writer, and author of the World blog at Slate, and a former writer and editor at Foreign Policy magazine in an article updated on January 2022 wrote that “war over Taiwan would likely involve the largest and most complex amphibious invasion ever mounted. Were the conflict to drag on, it might well evolve into a building-to-building, mountaintop-to-mountaintop ground war in one of the most densely populated and economically advanced countries on Earth. And that’s just in Taiwan itself”.  Such a venture is unlikely at the moment given the overwhelming desire of the world for peace and the cost involved in the venture for China.

EMERGENCE OF NON-ALIGNMENT

Even if “ no limits” Sino-Russian entente against the US hegemonic policy which has ruled the world since the end of the Second World War, albeit to the advantage of the Western bloc, e.g. US supremacy in the World Bank and European supremacy in European Banks the world has been content with this rule-based arrangement till the British ruled the waves. With the disappearance of British-ruled India and African nations, another strand of policy e.g. non-alignment rose to its head led by Pandit Nehru in India, Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, Sukarno in Indonesia, Joseph Broz Tito of Yugoslavia and  Gamal Abdul Nasser of United Arab Republic. The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) is a forum of 120 countries that are not formally aligned with or against any major power bloc. After the United Nations, it is the largest grouping of states worldwide the movement originated in the aftermath of the Korean War, as an effort by some countries to counterbalance the rapid bi-polarization of the world during the Cold War, whereby two major powers formed blocs and embarked on a policy to pull the rest of the world into their orbits. Indonesian President Sukarno the first Conference of Heads of State or Government of non-aligned countries. The purpose of the organization to ensure “the national independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and security of non-aligned countries” in their “struggle against imperialism, colonialism, neo-colonialism racism, and all forms of foreign aggression, occupation, domination, interference or hegemony as well as against great powers politics.” The countries of the Non-Aligned Movement represent nearly two-thirds of the United Nations’ members and contain 55% of the world population. Membership is particularly concentrated in countries considered to be developing or part of the Third World, although the Non-Aligned Movement also has a number of developed nations. (WIKIPEDIA).

CHINA’S DESIRE TO TAKE BACK TAIWAN

Joshua Keating adds “China’s desire to retake Taiwan goes back decades While still far from inevitable, this nightmare scenario has never seemed more likely. Beijing has sought control of Taiwan, which it considers a wayward province, ever since 1949, when fleeing Chinese nationalist forces set up a government on the island. China unsuccessfully attempted military force against Taiwan in the 1950s and 1990s. For much of that period, Taiwan itself had a superior military to the People’s Republic, and U.S. naval dominance in the region was unquestioned. But in recent years, the balance of power has shifted dramatically, thanks to China’s economic rise and one of the largest and fastest military buildups in history. Until a few years ago, most experts believed China had little chance of successfully taking Taiwan in the face of U.S. opposition. Now, as another analyst has put it, the U.S. regularly “gets its ass handed to it” in Pentagon war games simulating a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Lately, Chinese leaders have shown signs that they are running out of patience.

 XI-JINPING OBSESSION ABOUT TAIWAN  

On more than one occasion, Chinese President Xi Jinping said that the Taiwan issue should not be “passed on from generation to generation.” More recently, he emphasized: “The historical task of the complete reunification of the motherland must be fulfilled and will definitely be fulfilled.”  The outgoing U.S. Indo-Pacific commander, Adm. Phil Davidson, suggested in congressional testimony in March 2021 that China is likely to move on Taiwan “in the next six years.”  Besides a Chinese landing on Taiwan would “be the most complex operation in modern military history,” said Michael Beckley, a professor at Tufts University and fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who studies U.S.-China competition.  

SHOULD XI JINPING’S RECENT UTTERINGS BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY

 Despite Xi-Jinping’s bravado, it is up in the air what his intention is likely to be. Biden administration has not made clear its intention of the mode of support to Taiwan. Taiwan has been one of the invitees to Joe Biden’s Democracy Summit which has enraged Beijing. Adding insult to injury had been visits to Taiwan by past and present Presidents of US Congress.

STEPHEN WALT ON CLOSE CO-OPERATION IN WESTER BLOC

Harvard Luminary Stephen Walt wrote in an article argued that NATO must be sustained because of four major areas in which close cooperation is beneficial to European and American interests. Defeating international terrorism; Walt saw a need for cooperation between Europe and the United States in managing terrorist networks and stopping the flow of money to terror cells. Limiting the spread of weapons of mass destruction; Walt argued that anti-proliferation efforts are most successful when Europe and the U.S. work in concert to bring loose nuclear material into responsible custody. Managing the world economy; lowering barriers to trade and investment particularly between the U.S. and the E.U. would accelerate economic growth. Notable differences in trade policy stem mainly in areas of agricultural policy. Dealing with failed states; failed states are breeding grounds for anti-Western movements. Managing failed states such as Afghanistan, Bosnia, and Somalia require a multinational response since the U.S. has insufficient wealth to modernize and rebuild these alone. In this area, European allies are especially desirable because they have more experience with peacekeeping and “nation-building”.  In 2015, Walt wrote that extending invitations for NATO membership to countries in the former Soviet bloc is a “dangerous and unnecessary goal” and that nations such as Ukraine ought to be “neutral buffer state(s) in perpetuity.”   From that perspective, he believed that arming Ukrainian armed forces after the annexation of the Crimea by Russia “is a recipe for a longer and more destructive conflict.”

 ANALYSTS TAKE A DIFFERENT VIEW

 On the other hand, Alexander Gabuev ( Director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center) has taken serious note of the recent utterings of XI-Jinping when he wrote in April 2023 that ““There are changes happening, the likes of which we haven’t seen for 100 years,” Chinese leader Xi Jinping said to Russian President Vladimir Putin last month at the end of a state visit to Russia. “Let’s drive those changes together.” To this, the Russian leader responded, “I agree.” This seemingly improvised yet carefully choreographed scene captured the outcome of Xi’s trip to Russia and the trajectory on which he and Putin have set Sino-Russian relations. Xi’s visit last month was first and foremost a demonstration of public support for the embattled Russian leader. But the truly significant developments took place during closed-door, in-person discussions, at which Xi and Putin made a number of important decisions about the future of Chinese-Russian defense cooperation and likely came to terms on arms deals that they may or may not make public. The war in Ukraine and ensuing Western sanctions on Russia are reducing the Kremlin’s options and pushing Russia’s economic and technological dependence on China to unprecedented levels. These changes give China a growing amount of leverage over Russia. At the same time, China’s fraying relationship with the United States makes Moscow an indispensable junior partner to Beijing in pushing back against the United States and its allies. China has no other friend that brings as much to the table. And as Xi prepares China for a period of prolonged confrontation with the most powerful country on the planet, he needs all the help he can get.”  Whether these utterings of Xi-Jinping are a preparation for war on Taiwan only time can tell.  Given the global demand for a peaceful resolution of the Ukraine conflict Russia saving its face and keeping its local base of supporters in check would be the best solution for both Taiwan and Ukraine’s problems.

You might be interested in