|
Main
South Asia: rags and riches in the lands of extremes
Sorry Brazil, in this analysis the 'big four' are the contender states, Eurasian military-economic powers Russia, India and China plus the rival-cum-ally, the US.
Interesting that coinciding with a Condi trip to Beijing comes a possible US military deal with New Delhi that might undermine Russia's virtual monopoly over its defence equipment. Russia continues to supply China, of course, no big.
If India were to become dependent on the US both for nuclear power, Gulf-related energy security and military hardware, that truly would seal it into Washington's orbit as anti-American social forces in Pakistan begin to spin away and thus towards China instead.
Also interesting to note that China's defence budget took another leap last year, as revealed in the annual Pentagon estimate. Part of the 18% hike is probably down to rising oil and food prices, but there can be no doubt that China is building up its capability while hardly making a major contribution to UN peacekeeping (as does India).
All things being considered, it looks like simple geopolitics to me.
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news, business and economy from India and Pakistan
Gates' talking points in Delhi related primarily to defense trade. India's procurement of 126 multi-role combat aircraft in a deal estimated at $10 billion - and possibly, as high as $ 16 billion - was number one priority for him and for the American defense contractors accompanying him. The principal bidders include Lockheed Martin's F-16 and Boeing's F/A-18 Super Hornet.
The importance of the deal is not only commercial, but that the new generation aircraft will be in use with the Indian Air Force for the next 40-year period and, therefore, clinching the deal becomes absolutely vital for the US if it is to aim at "inter-operability" with India. Gates knows it is the sort of deal that will ensure US-India military-to-military cooperation becomes irreversible and pin India down as the US's strategic ally in the region...
Gates expressed satisfaction over the entry that the US has made in the Indian market, which is traditionally dominated by Russia. He said, "We have tried for some years now to get a seat at the table, and we're finally there." Washington is determined to throw Russia out of the Indian defense market in the coming years. The assertiveness of the US sales pitch is evident from the remark by a US official in Gates's entourage, "When you go into joint production [and] cooperative development [with the US], you're getting not only the best product in the world, but you have the best support system, the best maintenance package over the life of the product. You also have companies that operate with integrity, which is different than what India has seen with other partners in the world. We're very transparent."
Interesting to see US intelligence crawl out of the shadows again, this time making strong comments about Afghanistan. Like the Iran report back in December, this seems to be a sign of a growing political movement within the intelligence community, perhaps a reaction to the misunderstandings of the role of intelligence that led to the failure in Iraq.
Afghanistan mission close to failing - US | World news | The Guardian
After six years of US-led military support and billions of pounds in aid, security in Afghanistan is "deteriorating" and President Hamid Karzai's government controls less than a third of the country, America's top intelligence official has admitted.
Mike McConnell testified in Washington that Karzai controls about 30% of Afghanistan and the Taliban 10%, and the remainder is under tribal control...
But the gloomy comments echoed even more strongly worded recent reports by thinktanks, including one headed by the former Nato commander General James Jones, which concluded that "urgent changes" were required now to "prevent Afghanistan becoming a failed state".
General Jones's comment requires a little deconstruction: Afghanistan is not going to "become a failed state" - it has pretty much always been one. I would argue that it is not even a state at all, dominated as it is by tribal factions.
McConnell mentions that "Karzai controls about 30% of Afghanistan and the Taliban 10%, and the remainder is under tribal control." There's your key. Rather than 'Afghanisation', it may be better to recognise that the 60% under tribal control is the key ground. Just as with Pakistan's NWFP, it's impossible to rule over these chaps in a conventional manner - so why try?
The way to bring stability is to support local governance networks and hope that security and development will mean that they in turn don't support the Taliban. Unfortunately that means massive amounts of troops and cash, not the paltry 30,000 troops or so under ISAF and the other 30,000 separately-led and counter-productive US contingent.
Force multipliers such as PNGs and AH-64s help, but do not solve the problem of space. To cover an area as large as Afghanistan you need a lot more than that. Can't find the stats but I'm sure that there was ten times that number in the initial occupation of Germany post-WW2. Boots on the ground.
Here's the thing, right? There are two clear underlying causes to all the major problems on earth. The first is overpopulation. Overpopulation means that there are too many people chasing after too many resources - energy, water, land etc. which inevitably leads to conflict. Enough has been written about that to sink a battleship.
Second, there's subjectivity. What's that? It's a lack of objectivity in our approaches to these problems. It's a natural trait of humanity to form into groups, but every group defines itself by a subjective outlook on the world around it. It's thus these groups that enter into conflicts.
Some examples. No objective discussion of the Middle East is possible due to Israel's emotional outlook: thanks to the Holocaust, any criticism or compromise is decried as 'anti-Semitic'. Likewise, Arab nations and Islamic terrorist groups cannot see past the Palestinian question.
The same is true wherever you look. Such is China's emotional attachment to Taiwan and Tibet that any questioning of the situation is condemned as "interference in our internal affairs". Same goes for Serbia, Russia and Kosovo. The dysfunctional tendencies of the UN and EU are all down to questions of national interest. Even the US defines itself these days with reference to 9/11 and any attempt to rationally tackle the greater issues are met with the same response.
So states and other actors are not rational - they are indeed irrational. International relations theory has it exactly wrong.
The only answer is to find a unifying threat or goal, a way to bring all the conflicting groups together into one. And, ironically, overpopulation provides us with that. We are faced with a significant common problem, that of climate change, for which overpopulation is a major cause. Too many people needing too many products, burning too much fuel and cutting down too many trees... you get the picture.
So work together to solve the population crisis and you have an answer to the irrationality that causes conflict and environmental degradation. It's so simple.
 Contrary to my expectations, Pakistan appeared to have behaved very sensibly in this critical election. Despite the violence preceding the ballot, with the eyes of the world upon him, Musharraf neither imposed damaging restrictions on the process of democracy nor attempted to rig the poll.
The people themselves chose as wisely as they could under the circumstances, and the Islamist MMA was routed - illustrating a laudable commitment to secularist politics.
Furthermore, Bhutto's tainted widower, Asif Zardari, will not stand for prime minister which is quite a relief. That does leave us, however, with a major question: is there anyone out there with the strength and popular support to lead the country?
Reinstating Nawaz Sharif would be a major mistake: an Islamist appeaser in the mould of General Zia, he is demonstrably not a safe pair of hands. Musharraf's initial coup in 1999 was something of a deliverance.
But no name springs to mind that could hold together a PPP/PML(N) coalition for long, even if the bombers don't strike first. If the civilian leadership proves weak, and begins to crack under pressure from the US to take more decisive action on the militants, would the army or ISI effect another coup?
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Pakistan parties agree coalition
"We will work together to form the government in the centre and in the provinces," Mr Sharif, head of the Pakistan Muslim League - Nawaz (PML-N), said at a joint news conference with Mr Zardari.
He said the two parties had agreed that the country's chief justice, sacked by President Musharraf in November, should be immediately reinstated.
Mr Zardari said there was "a lot of ground to cover" between the two parties, but "in principle, we have agreed to stay together".
Doubts remain about who will emerge as a possible prime minister.
Can Musharaff, the PPP and Nawaz Sharif's PML(N) forge a workable coalition? If not, which will be the first to go?
Musharraf's party admits defeat | World news | guardian.co.uk
As president, Musharraf, a former army chief, did not contest the elections, aimed at completing a transition to civilian rule, but the outcome could hasten his political demise.
"It's the moment of truth for the president," Abbas Nasir, the editor of the Dawn newspaper told Reuters. "There will be thoughts swirling in his mind, whether he can forge a working relationship with two parties whose leadership he kept out of the country."
And something else to consider:
The results could hold important implications for the US-led "war on terror", especially Pakistani military operations against al-Qaida and Taliban-style militants in the border areas with Afghanistan.
Sharif and others have called for dialogue with the extremists and have criticised military operations in the area because of heavy civilian casualties.
What would that mean for Afghanistan and US policy in the region? Can the US accept the result?
Suppose that would make it the IPC. Need to source this article, but it's potentially significant. All of course rests on the outcome of Pakistan's election on 18 February.
It comes against the backdrop of an Indian admiral's concerns about Gwadar and its "serious strategic implications for India".
China ready to join gas pipeline project if India stays away - International Business-News-The Economic Times
ISLAMABAD: China is ready to join Pakistan and Iran to build a pipeline to transport Iranian gas if India does not participate in the project, the media reported on Monday.
Pakistan plans to import 2.2 billion cubic feet of gas a day from Iran through the pipeline and has said it is willing to consume an additional 1.05 billion cubic feet of gas if India does not join the project.
China has told Pakistan that it is interested in importing the additional gas if India does not join the project, sources. The sources also said Iran has no objection to exporting gas to China.
Pakistan and Iran have finalised a gas purchase agreement. However, Pakistan and India have been unable to narrow their differences over the transit fee to be charged by Islamabad for the Iranian gas.
Reports from India have suggested that it will hold discussions with Pakistan on the pipeline once a new government is formed in the country after the February 18 general election.
In case China joins the project, the pipeline might pass through Gilgit in Pakistan's Northern Area, the sources said. Pakistan has already approved a project in the same area to widen the Karakoram Highway that links it to China.
Pakistan also plans to extend a railway track to China to connect the neighbouring country to the Gwadar port on the Balochistan coast. Chinese experts will visit Pakistan to finalise the route of the pipeline if Beijing joins the project, the sources said.
Iran and Pakistan might sign the gas purchase agreement on February 24, the sources said.
If there's one thing that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq - and arguably, sad to say, Vietnam - have proved is that in order to bring peace and stability to a country you need a lot of troops, a lot of money and a lot of time. All of them must be spent wisely.
That was the essence of Donald Rumsfeld's disastrous failure of vision, the deeply misguided belief that the so-called Revolution in Military Affairs was the be all and end all. But he eventually found out that once the high-tempo warfighting phase is over, then the force multipliers of US technology count for nothing.
Incredibly, the US Army has only just redrafted its manual to suggest that "stabilising countries and winning over locals required more than just military skills... and knowledge of foreign languages and local cultures are also important." Duh. That says it all.
That's why developments in NATO are alarming. The SecGen attempts to gloss over the problem, but it's certainly the case that many of the old European nations are still cashing in on the post-Cold War peace dividend. Times have changed, however. At least France under Sarkozy is beginning to pull its weight.
What NATO has to do is create a virtuous circle in Pakistan: contain the Taliban long enough for development and prosperity to flourish, which in turn will provide people with an alternative to fighting for scarce resources and political control. For that there need to be boots on the ground, because one thing's for sure - there's plenty more where the Taliban came from.
Nato crisis grows over Afghan troops | The Guardian | Guardian Unlimited
In Washington on Wednesday Gates told the House of Representatives' armed services committee that the alliance could split into countries that were "willing to fight and die to protect people's security and those who were not". He added: "My view is you can't have some allies whose sons and daughters die in combat and other allies who are shielded from that kind of a sacrifice."
Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, Nato's secretary-general, said more forces were needed to combat Taliban and al-Qaida violence but dismissed Gates' suggestion that Nato could become a "two-tiered alliance" based on a country's willingness to fight. "I do not see a two-tier alliance, there is one alliance," he said as he arrived for the Vilnius meeting.
The pertinent point in the analysis below is perhaps overlooked. The problem with American democracy, from a non-American point of view, is that it is almost wholly concerned with issues of domestic policy. Iraq maybe, but that's because it has a direct and visible effect on the voting population.
However, as the writer points out, the responsibility of the Presidential office more often than not turns to foreign policy, like it or not. Yet it's not something the candidates are judged upon until their baptism of fire - as we saw with Bush and his pet goat.
Super Tuesday neglects Pakistan at America’s peril
Heading towards Super Tuesday, Pakistan has dropped off the radar of the primaries although it is the most likely place for the next civil war between Islamic terrorists and civilians. It might even become a cause of war with India and near total loss of American influence in the entire region.
Terrorism by Islamic fundamentalists supported by the Taliban and Al Qaeda has spread almost all across Pakistan. Terrorists killed former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and have attacked Air Force and Army personnel near military bases. Nearly half of Pakistani territory from Baluchistan to the North West Frontier is unstable and extremists seem to fear the army less.
Yet, none of the Presidential candidates seem to be aware of the dangers inherent in this situation for America, which is deeply engaged in the Pakistan and Afghanistan conflicts while trying to win over India as a strategic counterweight to China.
 Next Thursday, 7 February, sees the beginning of the Chinese Year of the Rat, the first in the Chinese Zodiac cycle. No, this isn't some cod astrological analysis: but it does put a little bit of mystical context in. Just look at all the international factors that are just about to converge and you'll see what I mean.
Basically, the next weeks and months could see some rather serious developments in the global political picture.
Kosovo might soon be declaring independence, and despite dissent it looks like most of the international community is going to recognise it. What few realise is that, for Serbia, the secession of Kosovo would be a disaster of monumental proportions. And they're holding an election this weekend in which a hard-right president could be selected.
Already locking horns with the UK, Russia is probably going to stand by Serbia - which means increasing antagonism with the rest of Europe. I can certainly foresee the gas spigot getting turned off for a couple of days, which given the present frigid economic (let alone meteorological) climate could have a severe impact.
Speaking of elections, it's Super Tuesday this week, another moment that's going to define the course of things to come. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Mitt Romney or John McCain: the field of four will probably narrow down to two candidates for the top job in the world.
Not long after that, Monday 18 February is finally going to see elections in Pakistan. Whether rigged or not, there will inevitably be implications for regional stability.
Furthermore, set that against the context of Afghanistan. President Karzai has just shot his nation in the foot by turning away one of Britain's most competent statesmen, Lord Ashdown, as a potential UN envoy.
Moreover, NATO is lumbering towards a crisis with Germany refusing to pull its weight and Canada getting very cold feet in the face of what looks like sheer petulance from its allies. Thus, the NATO conference set for next week could well define the future of the mission, and general stability in Afghanistan. Condi is already jetting in do do her firewoman act.
We don't want to see either Pakistan or Afghanistan go down; both of them falling apart at the same time would be disastrous.
And finally, look at China.
Anyone who's queued for rail tickets at Spring Festival - even in a good year - will tell you what a nightmare it is. This year has seen the worst weather in half a century and chances are that the world's largest internal migration is not going to go ahead as planned. That means some unhappy chappies down Chinatown.
Add to that the very real danger of a food crisis - a failed crop could tip China over the edge - compounded by the general economic malaise and you have a recipe for civil unrest in Olympic year.
And finally, add to that a touch of spice in the form of an upcoming referendum in Taiwan (set for 22 March) and you have a fiery plate of noodles indeed.
In summary, there are various crises impending in Eastern Europe, South Asia and East Asia. The year 2008 could well be going for a bag of rats.
Pak's new port has strategic implications for India: Navy chief-India-The Times of India
The Gwadar port being built by Pakistan with Chinese assistance in its Baluchistan coast has "serious strategic implications for India", Naval Chief, Admiral Sureesh Mehta has said.
"Being only 180 nautical miles from the exit of the Straits of Hormuz, Gwadar, being bulit in Baluchistan coast, would enable Pakistan take control over the world energy jugular and interdiction of Indian tankers," he said delivering T S Narayanaswamy Memorial lecture in Chennai on Monday night.
Well, it's that time again - as the year 2007 draws to a close, we look to the future. And one thing is for sure: the primary foci of this weblog, Pakistan and China, were hardly out of the news this year and won't be in 2008 either.
 For China especially, 2008 is the crunch year. The Olympics have acquired a kind of existential significance, and their success or failure have become intertwined with China's contemporary sense of its national identity.
Unfortunately, I can't see the games being the resounding success that the CCP hopes for. Chinese athletes will probably haul in the most medals, but with the enormous pressures upon them there will inevitably be doping scandals. Other athletes will scorn the terrible pollution; tourists will be messed about, pushed, shoved and spat around (most Beijingers will behave admirably, but it'll still be the negatives that get remembered); and journalists will lament the restrictions on free reporting. Few Chinese yet realise how things will be perceived, and it will come as a shock.
Most of all, this most political of sporting events will inevitably be deeply politicised. There will be incidents: medal-winners standing up for Tibet, Taiwanese declarations, perhaps even Uyghur violence. Expect 888 to be a very interesting moment in the definition of the new China.
Turning to Russia, there Putin will remain in control, despite the appointment of a new president in Medvedev - little more than a deputy, really, But I have confidence in Putin: he is not stupid, and will not wish relations with the EU and NATO to deteriorate further. Things were getting silly, what with all this missile defence rubbish, not to mention Litvinenko and Lugovoi, and in 2008 Russia will attempt to repair some of the damage - though not with Britain, who will be the main losers.
Meanwhile, it will be a period of reflection for the EU itself, as the member states attempt to digest the implications of the Lisbon Treaty. Expect at least one ratification to fail.
 There is at least reason to positive about the Middle East. Iraq has calmed in 2007, though of course it's not the end by any stretch of the imagination. We are also thankfully unlikely to see action against Iran either. Bush desperately needs a positive legacy to speak of, so with elections in full swing at home he and his cronies may attempt at least to broker a compromise solution. Does he have what it takes? We shall see.
But there are clearly going to be fireworks in Pakistan. Far too early to tell how things will pan out, but it probably won't be good. This writer is already predicting a Balkanisation of the country: that may be going too far, but with the conflicts in NWFP and Balochistan likely to gain pace as society fractures after the elections then the prospects for stability are low. Great map too - worth examining to see what it suggests about Iran and Iraq and all
It is almost certainly the end of the road for Musharraf, and with Bhutto gone there will be a power vacuum. Power vacuums mean conflict, as we have seen in Iraq. But the West and India have meddled enough in Pakistan - it is up to them.
With Pakistan so desperate for the Chinese Yuan, could it be that Musharraf's recent consolidation of his power is in answer to Chinese demands for security and stability? Or would that be "interference in its internal affairs"?
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news, business and economy from India and Pakistan
The countries are seeking to triple bilateral trade to US$15 billion in the next five years from $4.2 billion in 2006 under a free-trade agreement signed just over 12 months ago. They recently signed agreements worth around $300 million under which Pakistani products would be exported to China, involving 15 Pakistani companies and covering goods such as cotton, chrome ore, leather and rapeseed meal.
The PCIC, established in July with paid-up capital of 4.25 billion rupees ($69 million) with the government in Islamabad a direct shareholder, will help Pakistan to secure Chinese investment in various sectors and help Pakistani exporters target openings in China, according to officials. The company will perform investment banking business on a commercial basis.
Asia Times reports on the $2bn China-Iran Yadaravan oil deal in the wake of the NIE estimate, and analyses the broader implications.
With China's opinion being that the US is now waking up to Iran as a regional power, it seems that India has been put in an awkward position - having already lost out on its dealings with Tehran in order to appease Washington.
Meanwhile, China has seized a massive mining deal in Afghanistan despite all India's efforts in the country (to the chagrin of pakistan). It would appear that New Delhi has made some geopolitical miscalculations.
...by the beginning of June, Chinese regional experts had already assessed, "Iran, with no geopolitical competitors, has become the 'boss' within the Persian Gulf region. Since the US has fallen into the Iraqi quagmire, Iran concludes that the United States dare not use force against Iran. Therefore, it maintains strong strategic determination and refuses to make concessions on the nuclear issue.
"This favorable environment, coupled with a strategic resolve, has earned Iran a certain status of equilibrium with the United States in the contest within the Persian Gulf region. It is this balance of power that has forced the United States to sit down and talk with Iran. Iran, hence, has won the battle for survival and the status of a regional power."
 It seems that there is a realisation now (as probably there always was) in Whitehall that there is no direct military solution to Afghanistan. The problem, however, is something of a chicken-and-egg situation: development will give the people the prosperity and stability they need to rid themselves of extremism, but without security there can be no development.
That's why some of the thinking outlined below is slightly worrying. Rushing things - as occurred under 'Vietnamisation' - will not improve the situation. At worst, it's merely a cover for an undignified retreat.
The battle of Musa Qula also has some uncomfortable analogies. Great that the town has been retaken - but why was it lost in the first place? That's just what went wrong in Vietnam: military victory on the ground was not backed up with long-term support. The Vietcong simply moved back in after the Americans left, as per Mao's doctrine of guerilla warfare.
The problem is that there are simply not enough NATO troops to do the job and the Afghan Army is not up to the job.
BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | Dismantling the Taleban is the aim
The concept is that there are three tiers in the Taleban. The top tier is made up of the irreconcilable leadership. The second tier consists of locally based commanders and the bottom tier are the ordinary foot soldiers.
It is the second tier that is being targeted and the hope is that middle level commanders will bring a lot of the third tier with them. Some 5,000 ex-Taleban fighters are said to have come over before...
The buzzwords being used about Afghanistan right now are - Afghanistan, localisation, reconciliation, and (an old one) reconstruction.
The Guardian picks up and spins a recent pronouncement by Frederick Kagan of AEI. The operative paragraph and conclusion are below, and deserve a bit of picking apart.
A complete collapse of Pakistani government rule that allows an extreme Islamist movement to fill the vacuum? Highly unlikely. Kagan may say he is not "fear-mongering", but this statement is over the top. Whatever its problems, the moderate mainstream in Pakistan's civil society and the military is more than powerful enough to prevent that eventuality.
There again, it did happen in Iran, but circumstances now are not the same. It is correct, therefore, to make contingency plans, but not to push forward what is not yet an inevitable self-fulfilling prophecy.
A struggle within the Pakistani military? Also not likely. Undoubtedly there remain radicals in the ISI, but if nothing else Musharraf has probably purged the army of the extremist tendencies seen under General Zia, who was himself somewhat discredited by the end of his rule.
However, there is a distinct possibility of Islamabad losing control of the outer regions - some might say it has already done so. This does have implications for both Afghanistan and Pakistan and thus must be taken seriously.
The basic point is that Pakistan needs well-planned aid and support if its WMD are not to fall into the wrong hands. It's the kind of thinking that should have been deployed prior to the Iraq invasion, which after all was about the same thing - preventing access of the wrong people to WMD.
Finally, two things Kagan fails to mention are the China and India factors. He treats the subject as if it's entirely a US issue, which it is not. The two Asian powers have deep-set interests too, and must be part of the solution rather than allowed to become part of the problem.
Pakistan’s Collapse, Our Problem - New York Times
The most likely possible dangers are these: a complete collapse of Pakistani government rule that allows an extreme Islamist movement to fill the vacuum; a total loss of federal control over outlying provinces, which splinter along ethnic and tribal lines; or a struggle within the Pakistani military in which the minority sympathetic to the Taliban and Al Qaeda try to establish Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism...
The great paradox of the post-cold war world is that we are both safer, day to day, and in greater peril than before. There was a time when volatility in places like Pakistan was mostly a humanitarian worry; today it is as much a threat to our basic security as Soviet tanks once were. We must be militarily and diplomatically prepared to keep ourselves safe in such a world. Pakistan may be the next big test.
Much has been written on Benazir Bhutto but less on Nawaz Sharif, the man who the then General Musharraf ousted in 1999. In many ways, Sharif is the worst option for the West which would like to broker some kind of artificial and inherently unstable alliance between Bhutto and Musharraf. But the Pakistani people may see it otherwise.
PINR - Intelligence Brief: Musharraf Gains an Edge and Increases Chances for Survival
Unlike Bhutto, Sharif is popular in nationalist and religious circles, in addition to military and intelligence ones. This support derives from his previous rule as a religious conservative, which was demonstrated by his support for the Taliban in the 1990s, and for his popular decision to test a nuclear weapon and declare Pakistan as a nuclear power despite U.S. protestations.
These very factors which make him popular among Pakistanis make him somewhat of a wild card to the United States. For instance, his return to Pakistan was orchestrated by Saudi Arabia, which has been a strong force behind Pakistan's Salafi/Wahhabi religious radicalism. Furthermore, one day after his return to Pakistan, Sharif said that the country should reassess its approach in the war on terrorism and consider meeting with militants in the North-West Frontier Province and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas.
 So it would appear that Musharraf is a General no longer, though undoubtedly his protege General Ashfaq Kiyani will closely follow his demands for the time being. Kyani is a former head of the ISI and this is also significant. Presumably he himself is already a man with great influence.
Amit Pandya reports from Pakistan, and his findings are a little surprising. But it is a good point that by her perceived closeness to Musharraf and the US, Bhutto has put herself in a tricky position in future elections.
Pandya also points out that for democracy to flourish, the opposition needs to unite, Islamists and the political mainstream alike, but at the time being this does not seem to be the case. Musharraf's gamble with the state of emergency may well have fractured any alliance against him but his doffing of his military role today and promise to end emergency rule once he is sworn in a civilian president will go a long way towards appeasing his US sponsors. He is perhaps more wily than we previously imagined.
Stimson - Pakistan’s Brighter Future: The View from the Ground
While not unimportant to Pakistanis, the principal demands of the US government are less important than the longer term political developments in the society. The elections to be held in a little over a month are not considered significant. Whether the General retires as Army Chief and serves as a civilian President has also become entirely unimportant. The key issue is whether he leads the country, and the actual role of the Army in the government.
The army remains indispensable to any future political order because of the tenacious hold that it has now established in the national economy, and because Pakistan, under any government however democratic, will face armed challenges from within or without. However, there has also been a widespread and growing sense that its long and repeated interference in politics has harmed both the political development of Pakistan and the integrity of its principal mission of national defense against the country’s enemies.
The main political parties, those with sufficient support to be political players in their own right, offered a poor alternative. Widely discredited by their tenures in government in the 1990s, both the PPP and the Pakistan Muslim League of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif (PML(N)), were viewed askance by many Pakistanis of democratic conviction. Indeed, many considered the Musharraf regime’s survival a result of the public’s distrust of the large political parties.
Neat summary of Iran's political and commercial relationships with other nascent Asian powers. Includes some details on the IPI and Chinese economic influence.
PINR - Iran Looks for Allies through Asian and Latin American Partnerships
On the Asian continent, the Iranian strategic realignment seems to rely on organizational and bilateral cooperation, extending beyond existing relations with other "rogue states" such as North Korea. On the contrary, Iran aims at reaching out to U.S. allies or "friendly" countries, such as India and Pakistan, as well as to emerging global powers, especially to China.
OK, so Pakistan has been dismissed from the Commonwealth. Again. Mobilisation of shame, as our international law professor called it (to much derision from the small but vocal right wing of the classroom).
But it appears that Musharraf's gamble may be paying off after all. The State of Emergency looks like effectively bending the democratic process, not by eliminating the elections, but by provoking the opposition to withdraw in protest. This way, Musharraf wins without even having to rig the poll, which works very nicely for him.
And he can also hold his hands up and say that he's shedding his uniform too, with the judgement of his hand-picked supreme court all he needs to cloak himself in semi-legitimacy. Ms Bhutto might just have to return to the devil's bargain she was already making in order to gain any kind of influence at all. Which would suit the General (retd.) very nicely indeed.
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Court opens options for Musharraf
Will the Supreme Court rulings serve as a trigger to restore the process of reconciliation between Gen Musharraf and Ms Bhutto?
The outcome appears to depend on two things; whether Gen Musharraf actually quits the army and whether he restores the constitution and the judiciary.
In the first case, the general view is that he will probably quit his army post as soon as the Election Commission has formally declared him winner of the October vote.
This is because Gen Musharraf badly needs to offer up something to the Western powers that have been pressuring him to end emergency rule.
Analysts say he may even lift emergency rule ahead of elections, due in the second week of January.
This would score points with Western powers. But it could also influence the domestic environment by dividing the opposition which is now threatening an election boycott and a united front if the constitution is not restored.
"It is a sad indictment of the current state of Afghanistan that the question now appears to be not if the Taliban will return to Kabul, but when ... and in what form. The oft-stated aim of reaching the city in 2008 appears more viable than ever and it is incumbent upon the international community to implement a new strategic paradigm before time runs out."
So says some hitherto unheard of thinktank, somewhat pessimistically perhaps, but they do have eyes and ears on the ground. The point is that without strength in depth and in numbers, NATO is not going to be able to hold ground it takes.
That's just what happened in Vietnam. US forces won most battles but lost the war due to bad politics and bad strategy.
Afghanistan 'falling into hands of Taliban' | Special reports | Guardian Unlimited
The insurgency is divided into a largely poverty-driven "grassroots" component and a concentrated group of "hard-core militant Islamists", says the Senlis Council, which has an office in Kabul and field researchers based in Helmand and Kandahar provinces in southern Afghanistan.
It says that the Nato-led International Security Force of some 40,000 troops should be at least doubled and include forces from Muslim countries as well as Nato states which have refused to send troops to the country.
Brief profile of the guy responsible for the Islamist takeover in Swat.
Revolt in Pakistan’s NWFP: A Profile of Maulana Fazlullah of Swat
Maulana Fazlullah, who is now leading an extremist Islam-oriented insurgency in the valley of Swat in the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) of Pakistan, is the son-in-law of Maulana Sufi Mohammad, founder of the Tehreek-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi (TNSM - Movement for the Enforcement of Islamic Laws), which he established in 1989 (see Terrorism Monitor, November 30, 2005). In early 2002, TNSM was banned by the Pakistani government and Maulana Sufi Mohammad was sentenced to a prison term of seven years following a crackdown on jihadi organizations in the aftermath of 9/11 and President Musharraf’s collaboration with the U.S. global war on terrorism.
Fazlullah, born in 1975, was raised in a simple farmer’s family in Mam Dheray...
There had to be one, and note how this author neatly ties up all the conflicting elements in the current drama: internal opposition to Musharraf; the Balochistan rebellion; Afghanistan, America and the GWOT; China and Gwadar; India and Kashmir.
The essence of the article is that the current situation is all the result of an American plan to instigate regime change in Pakistan to advance its own interests. Of course much of the report is to be roundly dismissed. I particularly enjoyed this paragraph (I used to work at Jane's):
This was the perfect timing for the launch of Military, Inc.: Inside Pakistan’s Military Economy, a book authored by Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa Agha, a columnist for a Pakistani English-language paper and a correspondent for ‘Jane’s Defence Weekly’, a private intelligence service founded by experts close to the British intelligence.
But the point is that the Pakistan situation is not clear-cut in that all Pakistanis favour democracy and Benazir Bhutto, as the Western powers would have us believe. There are still deep veins of paranoia at work, and it's these that enable the continuing dominance of the military and security forces.
Ahmed Quraishi.com
“We have indications of Indian involvement with anti-state elements in Pakistan,” declared the spokesman of the Pakistan Foreign Office in a regular briefing in October. The statement was terse and direct and the spokesman, Ms. Tasnim Aslam, quickly moved on to other issues.
This is how a Pakistani official explained Ms. Aslam’s statement: “What she was really saying is this: We know what the Indians are doing. They’ve sold the Americans on the idea that [the Indians] are an authority on Pakistan and can be helpful in Afghanistan. The Americans have bought the idea and are in on the plan, giving the Indians a free hand in Afghanistan. What the Americans don’t know is that we, too, know the Indians very well. Better still, we know Afghanistan very well. You can’t beat us at our own game.”
Mr. Bugti’s armed rebellion coincided with the Gwadar project entering its final stages. No coincidence here. Mr. Bugti’s real job was to scare the Chinese away and scuttle Chinese President Hu Jintao’s planned visit to Gwadar a few months later to formally launch the port city.
Gwadar is the pinnacle of Sino-Pakistani strategic cooperation. It’s a modern port city that is supposed to link Central Asia, western China, and Pakistan with markets in Mideast and Africa. It’s supposed to have roads stretching all the way to China. It’s no coincidence either that China has also earmarked millions of dollars to renovate the Karakoram Highway linking northern Pakistan to western China.
This bears out exactly what I said in my thesis. Guess I'm not that stupid after all. Perhaps under pressure from the US, India has already lost out to China with regard to Burmese energy: a pattern is emerging.
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - Iran, Pakistan dump India on pipeline
Last week, Iran's deputy minister in charge of the pipeline, Hojatollah Ganimifard, was quoted by the Iranian Oil Ministry's news service Shana as saying, "The content of the peace pipeline contract has been finalized and all the points prepared by the two sides' legal experts have been re-read and agreed by the two sides [Iran and Pakistan]." He said the two sides would ink the contract in December "without a third partner".
And this week, Mokhtar Ahmad, advisor to Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, was quoted as saying, "As we expected, the text of the peace pipeline has been made ready for the signing by the two states' heads." Pakistan said that any excess gas that would have been destined for India could be transferred to China.
Exactly as I suggested in my thesis, Indian intransigence over the IPI may well be opening the door to China. Moreover, it's more than likely that the current state of emergency in Pakistan will wipe out the IPI deal once and for all. What the article doesn't make explicit, however, is exactly how Iranian gas would transit from Gwadar to China other than by rail, which is not the most efficient method. Note also that an Abu Dhabi company is investing $5bn in Gwadar.
Press TV
In a major development, Pakistan and Iran have crossed the last stumbling block in the way of a piped gas deal by agreeing on a pricing formula.
Both sides would review the gas pricing mechanism when there is a change in the co-relation between Japan's LNG and crude oil mix.
A high level delegation, headed by Secretary Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Resources Furrukh Qayyum dashed to Tehran to seal the gas sales purchase agreement (GSPA) with the Iranian authorities.
The technical and legal experts are to hammer out the landmark gas deal and both sides will technically finalize the deal after decisive talks by November 9 (today) in Tehran.
According to the officials, under the new scenario in the wake of India's evasive attitude as Indian experts did not participate in the recently held meeting in Tehran and the ongoing meeting in Islamabad, both Iran and Pakistan have decided to materialize the project.
"We have also asked Iranian authorities that the gas to be imported from Iran can also be exported to China as LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) as the western part of that country has a shortage of energy", said the Pakistani official.
If it happens, then the project's economic viability would be enhanced.
The LNG terminal would be constructed in Gwadar and the piped gas would be converted into LNG for export to China through a proposed rail link from Gwadar to Xianjiang Province, China.
The Pakistan Ministry of Railways is studying the feasibility of laying the railways line from Gwadar to China.
The official concluded that Pakistan had also extended an offer to Iran to establish its own terminal in Pakistan.
Pervez Musharraf really isn't doing himself any favours. Take, for example, this editorial in The Telegraph in which an allusion is made to Roosevelt's (alleged) comment exemplifying the ultimate realpolitik: "He may be a son of a bitch, but he's our son of a bitch."
The response? Three Telegraph journalists are kicked out of Pakistan. This can only go to show that the regime has now become utterly self-indulgent. Even if Musharraf is saying - only saying, mind - elections will be held in January; even if the clampdown on Bhutto has been lifted; it still goes to show the direction the emergency is taking.
Bankrupt relationship - Telegraph
Despite George W Bush's rhetoric about freedom, the struggle against terrorism is provoking a reaction familiar from the Cold War and nowhere is that clearer than over Pakistan.
In the old parlance, General Pervez Musharraf is "our sonofabitch". He has failed to stamp out extremist groups and close the madrassas that inspire them. He has allowed the tribal areas bordering Afghanistan to fall into the hands of assorted jihadis. And he has sacked independent-minded judges for fear that the Supreme Court declare illegal his re-election as president last month.
Yet, despite this combination of incompetence and brutality, America and Britain continue to back him as head of what has a strong claim to be the most dangerous country in the world.
 Kindly understand the criticality of the situation in Pakistan and around Pakistan. Pakistan is on the verge of destabilisation. Inaction at this moment is suicide for Pakistan and I cannot allow this country to commit suicide.
It's kind of sad. In many ways, General Musharraf has been one of the best leaders Pakistan has had for generations. He has more or less turned around the economic incompetence of Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, as well as ensuring that General Zia's Islamist agenda was superseded by a more secular outlook.
That's why Musharraf's actions are so deeply disappointing. Probably it's a case of second-term delusion. It's commonly the fact that once leaders have been around for seven or eight years, surrounded by cronies and sycophants they begin to believe in their own infallibility and omnipotence. It even happened to Thatcher and Blair. That's why the US two-term limit on presidents is such a good idea.
Whatever the case, Musharraf has revealed himself for what he always really was: a tinpot military dictator of a teetering banana republic.
I'm not one to support democracy for democracy's sake, and of course it's easy to criticize from the safety and comfort of the West. Ali Eteraz at Comment is Free makes a fair point:
There is a segment of Pakistan - which includes the judges, lawyers, and journalists - which wants to take to the streets. They have dominated the news over the past year and they want to make a democratic push, with some people casting the lawyers in the same role as the Burmese monks. However, Musharraf's shrewd move of setting forth a limited PCO - targeting only the judiciary and leaving the assemblies intact - has neutralised this segment of the population. The illusion of popular participation is retained, while Musharraf's most vexing political opponents - the judges - get sidelined. If he had gone further and cancelled elections, it would have ignited a firestorm, but in his talk to Pakistani public (discussed below), he assured that he would do no such thing.
Disengaged western audiences, pumped full of the current pro-democracy intoxicants, will almost universally decry Musharraf's behaviour. I decry it too, precisely because I am a disengaged westerner and I have that luxury. However, the story in Pakistan is not so straightforward.
What I am being told by bazari merchants, some young professionals, and some industrialists in Karachi and Lahore is that they merely care for stability, whether it comes in the form of the military, or in the form of democracy. Incidentally, many of them believe that it is Musharraf who is more likely to assure that stability. A couple of people, with middle class businesses, suggested to me that Musharraf should behave more like a dictator; a secular version of the previous Islamist dictator, Zia ul Haq, in order to assure stability for business and economic growth. However, that is a minority view.
Yet that being said, history will probably see the state of emergency as Musharraf's biggest mistake. He has almost certainly grossly underestimated the ill-will against him within Pakistan itself. He has in fact strengthened the case against him, which can only help Bhutto, the lawyers and the militants.
In the greater geopolitical scale of things, Musharraf has also effectively chosen sides in the New Great Game too. America is incensed that their puppet president is turning away from even the veneer of legitimacy. Musharraf also mentioned in his address today his embarrassment at the kidnapping of Chinese workers prior to the Lal Masjid siege. Today's effective re-coup shows that Pakistan is now more likely than ever to align with China, which will not interfere in its internal affairs.
The worst case scenario is accelerated destabilisation as the US withdraws support, Bhutto's supporters rise up and in the ensuing unrest the militants seize their chance. Musharraf is committing rather than preventing the suicide of the state.
Heartthrob cricketer-cum-politician, Imran Khan, had a good point today during an interview with the BBC. Dictators always say they're acting for the good of the country; but really the outcome of suppressing the democratic process is to invite change by violent means instead.
"When you stop all legal and constitutional ways of people challenging [the president], then the only ones who challenge him are people with a gun.That's what happened to the Shah of Iran," said Khan, ominously.
 Thought he might. This is not yet checkmate in the Pakistan endgame, there's a way to go yet, but this move - while long-expected - is highly significant. Musharraf has waited for Bhutto to leave the country for the weekend, and has reportedly surrounded the supreme court, home of his new enemies the legal fraternity. And - crucially - TV and radio are off the air.
Thus this incident has all the characteristics of a coup, though one held by the military already in charge. Musharraf came to power in what he called a 'counter-coup' against Nawaz Sharif's 'coup', though it's the winners that tend to write history. So I'd call this the beginnings of a coup to the power of three.
Musharraf is clearly using the steeply rising Islamist-inspired violence in the north-west as his inspiration, and indeed there is some traction to the concept of Pakistan really being in a state of emergency. The attack on Bhutto's homecoming convoy proved that. But it's above all a political move. The question is: how will it be used? With Bhutto and the lawyers closed down for the time being, can Musharraf use the opportunity to quash the militants once and for all - or will they bite him back? And in either case, what are the prospects for Pakistan sliding deeper into the morass rather than out of it?
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Musharraf imposes emergency rule
Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf has declared emergency rule, state-run TV has said, amid reports that police have surrounded the Supreme Court.
Judges are believed to be inside the building in Islamabad, reports say.
Troops have been deployed inside state-run TV and radio stations, while independent channels have gone off air.
Gen Musharraf is awaiting a Supreme Court ruling on whether he was eligible to run for re-election last month while remaining army chief.
 When I started this blog two years ago, crude was priced at $60 per barrel. Now it's $96. The dollar was $1.21 to the Euro then: now it's $1.44.
So go the figures. Something is up. There is a big picture to this, and - shock and awe - after spending the best part of the last two years studying International Relations, I have a theory.
The basic idea is this: there are too many people chasing too few resources. Breaking down this simple statement brings us to two key players - the US and China. And the hidden factor is the instability of a multipolar world that is evolving into a bipolar structure: the 'West', led by Washington, and the 'Rest', very loosely led by China, competing for dominance over those resources, particularly energy.
 The thing is that, unlike the Cold War where two political ideologies were in competition, current US hegemony is still based on military and political power projection, whereas China's ace of spades is economic soft power.
The misuse of firepower is adding to rather than reducing the global instability that came to our notice on 9/11 (but had existed well before then). The World Trade Center attacks were as much a protest against US foreign policy than a statement about political Islam, and since then Islamist terrorism has increased exponentially.
The instability caused by terrorism is adding to the energy crisis by contributing to high prices if not yet directly threatening supply. Meanwhile, China's economic leverage means that the only way that US industry can compete is with a weak dollar. However, both things mean that oil producers such as Russia and manufacturers such as China are building enormous reserves of dollars, shifting the centre of the world economy away from the West. Thanks to events such as the subprime crisis, an economic meltdown is probably imminent.
China and Russia themselves are involved in abetting instability. While they do not directly support terrorism, they sponsor states such as Iran, the key outside player in Iraq and probably Afghanistan. Pakistan is also a pivotal state in all this, since if Pakistan goes down Afghanistan goes with it.
If Iran is bombed too, as looks increasingly likely, there will be a black hole of chaos slap bang in the middle of Eurasia - from Iraq through to Pakistan - creating a massive geographical chokepoint that most of the world's energy needs to get past.
The more terrorists that are bred in the black hole, the more the West has to spend on security, thus diminishing economies and general confidence. The US is already spewing vast quantities of blood and treasure on Iraq, a situation that can only be helping China's peaceful rise and Iran and Russia's leverage over the energy market.
Add to this the threat of WMD. After the Cold War ended in 1989, only the US had the capability to launch a decisive military blow. Now anyone, terrorist groups included, with a bomb (probably with uranium sourced from Russia and technology from Pakistan, itself donated by China) and a suitcase can hold any other entity to ransom - just as energy suppliers like OPEC and Russia can cut off dependent economies overnight.
Iran and Pakistan are both the key proxy players and the key potential battlegrounds. China and the US are vying for control of both, since whoever calls the shots in Tehran and Islamabad calls the shots over Gulf oil and the terrorist training grounds in Iraq, Afghanistan and the lawless badlands of Pakistan.
 Russia sits in the middle, ostensibly neutral but leaning towards China and away from the US. It got burnt in Afghanistan in the '80s, but isn't shy of lending a helping hand to Iran. Conversely, India is also on the fence, but looks to Washington rather than Beijing. It needs stability in Pakistan above all else, since the threat of a nuclear standoff could suddenly become very real.
Thus it's all connected. That's what this blog is about - making the connections. It's not a dissimilar situation to the Cold War with its proxy conflicts in Vietnam and Afghanistan, but it is a more complex one. Instead of two or three, there are now four horsemen of the apocalypse - the West, meaning America and its rather powerless allies (notably Europe and probably India), versus the Rest's nexus of counter-hegemony - China and its partners-in-crime Russia and Iran.
The prospects for war? Unlikely at the time being, since Beijing and Washington are still playing different games. Should they ever go head-to-head, however, over Taiwan for example, then all hell will break loose.
Wide ranging article covering the history of India's relations with its East Asian neighbours along with current concerns such as energy and security threats such as the Taiwan straits.
PINR - India Rediscovering East Asia
China has been increasing its engagement with South Asia to the quiet consternation of India. China's free trade agreement with Pakistan went into effect in July this year and China has also emerged as Bangladesh's leading trade partner and arms supplier. Beijing's support for the regime of Nepal's King Gyanendra following his suspension of democracy from February 2005 until April 2006 has been a source of irritation to India.
China's efforts to develop alternative overland routes to transport oil and gas imports by extending the existing Karakoram Highway linking Pakistan and China and developing port facilities at Gwadar in Pakistan's Baluchistan province, as well as through Bangladesh and Myanmar, have been viewed by India as part of a "string of pearls" strategy of economic and military encroachment into South and Central Asia.
India's rapprochement with East Asia is also tied to a number of India's broader strategic interests, including rapprochement with the United States, ensuring stability along India's periphery, meeting its energy security needs, and fueling economic integration in South Asia.
Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan - Gwadar Oil City: Pakistan, China to sign agreements in early 2008
During the forthcoming visit of Chinese president in early 2008, Pakistan and China are set to sign agreements on Chinese investments in Gwadar Oil City, incentives for setting-up of Special Economic Zones (SEZs), Gwadar seaport development programme for expansion of bilateral trade and strengthening of investment relations.
All these initiatives are considered to be essential for the success of Trade Energy, Transport and Industrial Corridor between Pakistan and China, a senior government official told Daily Times on Tuesday.
One to bookmark for later - but interesting how ICG sees connections between Balochistan and the other key elements in the Pakistan story - military versus democracy, Talibanisation and the GWOT.
International Crisis Group - B69 Pakistan: The Forgotten Conflict in Balochista
Violence continues unabated in Pakistan’s strategically important and resource-rich province of Balochistan, where the military government is fighting Baloch militants demanding political and economic autonomy. President Pervez Musharraf’s government insists the insurgency is an attempt to seize power by a handful of tribal chiefs bent on resisting economic development. Baloch nationalists maintain it is fuelled by the military’s attempts to subdue dissent by force and the alienation caused by the absence of real democracy. Whether or not free and fair national and provincial elections are held later this year or in early 2008 will determine whether the conflict worsens.
Instead of redressing Baloch political and economic grievances, the military is determined to impose state control through force. The killing of the Baloch leader Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti by the army in August 2006 was followed by the incarceration of another, Sardar Akhtar Jan Mengal, who has been held on terrorism-related charges without due process since December. Law enforcement agencies have detained thousands of Baloch nationalists or those believed to be sympathetic to the cause; many have simply disappeared. With the nationalist parties under siege, many young activists are losing faith in the political process and now see armed resistance as the only viable way to secure their rights.
Relying also on divide-and-rule policies, the military still supports Pashtun Islamist parties such as Maulana Fazlur Rehman’s Deobandi Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI-F) in a bid to counter secular Baloch and moderate Pashtun forces. The JUI-F is the dominant member of the six-party Islamist alliance, the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), Musharraf’s coalition partner in the provincial government since October 2002. It is also a key patron of the Afghan Taliban. Using Balochistan as a base of operation and sanctuary and recruiting from JUI-F’s extensive madrasa network, the Taliban and its Pakistani allies are undermining the state-building effort in Afghanistan. At the same time, U.S. and other Western support for Musharraf is alienating the Baloch, who otherwise could be natural partners in countering extremism in Pakistan.
 Carnage in Karachi as suicide bombers attack Benazir Bhutto's homecoming parade - Reuters is now putting the death toll at 133. Sad to say, but it's a safe bet that just as many died in the panicked stampede and crush as were killed by the explosions.
It's happened: now attention must turn to the implications. First, let's take a look at the likely culprits and motivations. First among them is the Islamist movement and 'Al Qaeda', the Taliban and 'related groups' such as Jamaat-e-Islami. There's already been heavy fighting in Waziristan this month, and there have apparently been threats to Bhutto from extremist elements in response to her promise to crack down on them. The sensible fingers will be pointing at them first.
On the other hand, many - including Ms. Bhutto's rather indiscreet husband Asif Ali Zardari - will have conspiracy theories of their own. The ISI, once a sponsor of the Taliban, is foremost among the other possible instigators of the bombings. In fact, the ISI would have been in a good position to create a security loophole for the bombers to get through. And also worth noting that the blasts occurred at the right moment for prime-time UK TV and the US evening news, though not for the Pakistani newspapers. It was about international impact as much as anything.
Elements within the ISI - perhaps not under President Musharraf's control - will fear losing their grip on the country should 'democracy' prevail, though it hardly did badly in the '90s last time Bhutto was in charge. But the General himself or his uniformed cronies could also have a hand in things, since a dead Benazir would solve their short-term angst about handing over the reins and declaration of a state of emergency would certainly hold up the 'elections'.
One figure commentators seem to forget about is the current prime minister, Shaukut Aziz. It has to be said that he's done a reasonable job since 2004 and may well resent being demoted back to finance minister. Could he be raising a faction within the government to further his interests?
In effect, it doesn't matter who really perpetrated the outrage, since Pakistani public opinion - volatile at the best of times - is likely to become highly polarized now. What's for sure is that there will be a reaction.
All of the above - Bhutto, Musharraf and Aziz - are seen by many in the country as US puppets. The blasts are therefore not so much about pro-Islam or pro-PML(Q) [ie. pro-Musharraf] but also anti-American. Thus there's a couple of ways the camps could divide.
It's likely that Bhutto's PPP supporters will be enraged and will seek to vent their anger somehow, but whether this will be against the Islamists or the more obvious target of the military regime remains to be seen. Civil society in the shape of the strengthening lawyers' movement may be their key allies in this - but could there be a Devil's deal with the Islamists too in a union against the army? Alternatively, could the army and ISI be in cahoots with the Islamists, as they were in the last elections?
On the other hand, since Bhutto has effectively sold out to Musharraf anyway, it could be that the army sees this another excuse to crack down on militants, as occurred during the siege of the Lal Masjid a couple of months back. For this it will need the PPP's support. Asia Times sees the current fight against militants in Waziristan as "but a precursor of the bloodiest battle that is coming". And that could have wider implications:
A qualified estimate by intelligence officials is that Pakistani military pacification of the Waziristans would slash the capability of the Afghan resistance by 85% as well as deliver a serious setback to the Iraqi resistance.
Back to Karachi. If anything, Bhutto herself is indirectly responsible. Her showmanlike return - complete with a riotous reception on board the flight, swarms of supporters at the airport and rally and all kinds of thetrical gestures like wearing a sloganized baseball hat above her trademark white headscarf and the intended homage to Jinnah's tomb - was engineered to elicit an extreme mass reaction.
Now she's got it. Pakistani politics was galvanised enough as it was, and the bombs will have intensified the situation even further. What will transpire over the next days and weeks remains to be seen.
India's spectacular growth is only matched by its spectacular poverty, runs the trailer for a recent BBC World debate. Very true, and ultimately (as always with India) it's the very policies designed to protect the poor that damage them most.
Shockingly free-market liberal statement coming up: in order to bring people out of poverty, as has occurred in China, India needs to create the right conditions for business. Unfortunately, the very fact that India is a liberal democracy stands in the way of this, with so many interest groups protecting their own interests. The communists may do well in land reforms in West Bengal, but fail miserably when it comes to the next step in Friedrich List's stages of economic development - creating a manufacturing base.
Same goes for caste reservations (also dealt with by The Economist this month). You can't break the cycle by positive discrimination, that just makes things worse: only universal primary education is the answer.
India's economy | A Himalayan challenge | Economist.com
India has by far the most restrictive employment-protection laws for collective dismissals, scoring much worse than China and Brazil as well as all the rich countries. Manufacturing firms need to obtain government permission to lay off a worker from factories with more than 100 staff. This partly explains why most firms are so small: 87% of employment in Indian manufacturing is in firms with less than ten employees, compared with only 5% in China. Small firms cannot reap economies of scale or exploit the latest technology, and so suffer from lower productivity than big firms...
There is compelling evidence that further reforms would boost India’s growth. Industries in which the government has eased regulation and encouraged competition, such as telecommunications and IT services, have grown fast. State-owned firms still account for 38% of output in the formal non-farm business sector, yet the OECD estimates that private firms are on average one-third more productive than public-sector ones. States with looser labour-and product-market regulations enjoy higher labour productivity.
Sadly, further bold reform is currently blocked by the communist parties on which the coalition government depends for its majority. In an economy where income per head used to rise by barely 1% a year, current growth rates feel like a miracle. But to eliminate India’s vast poverty the country must try harder.
I'll never forget a rather unconsidered remark made to me by a Pentagon official shortly after 9/11. I was writing about the sales of Apache gunships to Pakistan, to which the officer replied: "As long as they're helping us against terrorism, they can have whatever they want."
More evidence here of America's continuing military commitment to Pakistan - yet the US is even more unpopular there than India (the second largest third-world buyer of arms behind Pakistan). And in India too, misgiving about the US are high, mainly due to its criticism of New Delhi's energy-based relationship with Tehran.
Meanwhile, China's investment in Pakistani infrastructure is only increasing - and that seems to be buying more love than US weapons ever will. Because roads and railways benefit the people, whereas guns are just used an an instrument of US foreign policy. Indeed, they are often turned on Pakistani people themselves. Reports that 50 civilians were killed in clashes in Waziristan this week are of course to be considered carefully, but the bad blood generated is the real effect of the US arms trade.
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - Arms sales: How the US is not winning friends
Since September 11, 2001, the United States has given over $10 billion to Pakistan to buy or reward President General Pervez Musharraf’s support for its newest war, the “war on terror”. Pakistan has spent over $1.5 billion of this amount on buying new weapons. To understand the scale of this aid, consider Pakistan’s total military budget in 2006, estimated at about $4.5 billion. The United States is now giving Pakistan aid to pay for the new deal for F-16s, bombs, and missiles. It is likely to win few friends.
There is little doubt today about how unpopular the United States is in Pakistan. A Pew poll released in September 2006 found that in Pakistan, the United States is viewed less favorably even than India (with which Pakistan has fought four wars). Just over 25% were favorable toward the United States, compared to one-third who felt that way toward India.
Not much analysis on the political situation, but interesting to note that talks are ongoing regarding an electricity line from Iran to Gwadar. Though Pakistan has gas resources of its own, its power situation is currently rather bleak and so in the short term it may well need to import electricity direct.
Also worth posing the question: what significance does control over the transmission grid have on Pakistani politics? If the army were to shut down the already-parlous energy sector (much of it run by retired officers), it could hold the other parties to ransom.
United Press International - International Security - Energy - Analysis
The approval of a $60 million electric line between Iran and Pakistan reflects a regional trend toward electrical grid interconnection, but its path through the unstable Baluchistan region of Iran and Pakistan also highlights the troubles facing energy cooperation between the two countries, as well as the difficulty in protecting a proposed $7.5 billion scheme to send natural gas from Iran to India via Pakistan.
In late September, Tehran and Islamabad made another step toward building a 220 volt power line between Iran and Gwadar in Pakistan. The estimated $60 million cost of building the transmission line will be borne by both countries and will supply Pakistan with 100 megawatts of electricity from Iran.
More on Sino-Indian strategic rivalry. Despite an apparent cooling of tension in the last few years, the author notes that Hu Jintao's rise to power comes partly on the back of a hardline attitude towards Tibet, always a bone of contention between the two Asian giants.
I disagree slightly with some of the points: for example, the territorial dispute does seem to be under control, mainly due to economic linkages. But the point that India forms part of a nexus of powers on China's borders - Australia, Japan and the US Pacific presence is interesting. Also worth noting that the newly-completed Qinghai-Tibet railway and refurbishments to the Indian road infrastructure near the border would allow both China and India to swiftly step up their military presences. And finally, Chinese plans for Tibetan water resources could also have a devastating effect on the subcontinent.
PINR - India-China Competition Revealed in Ongoing Border Disputes
Apparently, the strategic consequences of India's economic resurgence coupled with U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's offer in March 2005 to "help make India a major world power in the 21st century" have greatly bothered the Chinese. This offer, and the long-term India-U.S. defense cooperation framework and the July 2005 U.S.-India nuclear energy deal that followed soon after, have been compared by Chinese strategic analysts to "the strategic tilt" toward China executed by former U.S. President Richard Nixon in 1971 to contain the common Soviet threat. Claiming that these developments have "destabilizing" and "negative implications" for their country's future, China's India-watchers have started warning their government that Beijing "should not take India lightly any longer."
Chinese leaders were led to believe that China's growing economic and military might would eventually enable Beijing to re-establish the Sino-centric hierarchy of Asia's past as the U.S. saps its energies in fighting small wars in the Islamic world, Japan shrinks economically and demographically while India remains subdued by virtue of Beijing's "special relationships" with its South Asian neighbors. However, a number of "negative developments," from Beijing's perspective, since early 2005 -- the Indian and Japanese bids for permanent seats on the U.N. Security Council, the formation of the East Asia Summit that includes India, Australia and New Zealand, the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal, India's ability to sustain a high economic growth rate of eight to nine percent and the strategic implications of India's "Look East" policy -- have apparently upset Chinese calculations.
Therefore, after a hiatus of a few years, Chinese media commentaries have resumed their criticism of Washington's "hegemonic ideas" and for drawing "India in as a tool for its global strategic pattern." Some Chinese analysts express serious reservations about U.S. efforts to draw "India in as a tool for its global strategic pattern," arguing that "India's DNA doesn't allow itself to become an ally subordinate to the U.S., like Japan or Britain." Nonetheless, most see India as a "future strategic competitor" that would be an active member of an anti-China grouping due to the structural power shifts in the international system and advocate putting together a comprehensive "contain India" strategy based on both economic tools (aid, trade, infrastructural development) and enhanced military cooperation with "pro-China" countries.
As both China and India "rise and shine" economically, so geopolitical questions begin to assume greater importance. Whatever the rhetoric from Beijing, China's neighbours are clearly less comfortable about it than ever. That's good for India, which (aside from Pakistan, of course) is generally viewed as fairly benign.
However, India's growing strategic relationship with the US is opening this to debate. Apparently, talks are in progress regarding a closer partnership with NATO, and the US ambassador to NATO is interestingly quoted as lumping China in with concerns such as North Korea, Iran and Iraq. But surely a NATO (read US) - India partnership can only aggravate tensions with China, rather than 'balance' the SCO as noted in the article. Lasting peace in the region needs NATO to engage with the PRC rather than India, in order to pull it into a security structure. Attempting to counteract the SCO via NATO might only lead to an arms race that brings in Russia too.
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news, business and economy from India and Pakistan
Any pronounced gravitation toward an "Asian NATO" form of collective security will inevitably affect India's relations with China. (India shares Australia's predicament on this score.) Therefore, India has to perform some very tricky rope acts in the period ahead. In a major speech during a visit to Thailand on September 14, Mukherjee stressed, "The India-China partnership is an important determinant for regional and global peace and development, and for Asia's emergence as the political and economic center of the new international order."
Three days later, addressing the strategic community in Seoul, the minister underlined the importance of a "truly integrated Asian economy that will draw on the economic potential of India and China". Expressing confidence that India's "strategic and cooperative partnership [with China] will mature and steadily develop", he added, "Sensitivity to mutual aspirations is the underpinning for building confidence and trust. There is enough space and opportunity for both of us to grow and develop."
The challenge for Indian diplomacy will be to convincingly interpret the implications of its "strategic partnership" with the US. The perception is growing, and is incrementally gaining credibility, that India is aligning with a US-led security system in Asia. Clearly, the request by the NATO secretary general to call on the Indian foreign minister wouldn't have been made without Washington's nod.
Sanctions. The answer to everything. Impose sanctions on Burma, the international community says, and everything will be fine.
Wrong. One only has to look at the plight of Iraq in the 1990s to confirm that, under some circumstances, economic sanctions actually hurt the people you are trying to help.
Yes, one could say that sanctions had an effect on South Africa, but the regime at the time had links to the global economy that it couldn't afford to lose. That's not the case in Burma, and in fact sanctions would only increase the desire to rebel. After all, the current crisis was triggered by a doubling of fuel prices, which would surely occur again under sanctions.
It's well known that, with their energy interests, China and India are the key players here. But neither would really benefit from the sustained rule of the junta. No successor government, presumably led by Aung San Suu Kyi, is going to back out of the energy deals already made with China and India - indeed, they'll be vital in rebuilding Burma as a nation again. So why support the dictatorship?
Just for a moment, let's think the unthinkable. If China fails to act, then the revolution has little hope. But there is one thing that the West can do - supply arms. The jungles of Burma are filled with guerilla groups itching for a fight, and were the ordinary people be able to contribute too then the military would topple rapidly. Yes, a lot of people will die, but no more than will die anyway under sanctions and repression.
There is a danger of Burma becoming a proxy war between China and India - because India would have to be the major supplier, as it was back in the 1950s when it support the Tibetan independence movement - but with the Beijing Olympics approaching China probably wouldn't want to get too involved.
There would also be potential for Burma to descend into inter-ethnic confrontation too, and thus the supply of weapons may exacerbate tensions. But with a leader of the symbolic strength and legitimacy of Aung San Suu Kyi in place, that prospect would be unlikely and a disciplined UN mission from the very start would hold things together during the reconstruction period.
Most of the revolutions of 1989 were, thankfully, bloodless. Not so in Romania, but the students fought back and Ceausescu fell. In Tiananmen Square, however, there was little the students could do. Moreover, the Bosnian conflict dragged on for ages due to Western reluctance to help the Muslims fight back.
So much for my arch geopolitics. War is a terrible thing, but if it can be over swiftly then it may be the lesser of two evils.
Comment is free: Let's get serious
Beijing wants the killing to stop, not in the name of human rights but for the sake of stability. But China and Russia do not want to see any regime change - either the eventual toppling of the Burmese generals or an implosion of the junta. A triumph of Buddhist-inspired people power might encourage Buddhists in Tibet and Falungong militants in China to defy the communist party control and Beijing's repression.
Still, China is in a bind as Burma conjures up memories of the Tiananmen Square killings just Beijing is preparing to host the Olympics. A repeat of the 1988 massacre in Rangoon when at least 3,000 pro-democracy activists were gunned down in the street, would cast a dark shadow over China's desire to be treated as a responsible global power.
While China will not back any sanctions, it is open to increasing diplomatic pressure to stop the killings, and the junta can ill afford to ignore the anxieties of its number one benefactor.
The US and the EU have many avenues to pressure both China and Asean, even up to the point of threatening a boycott of the Beijing Olympics. A simple threat by Beijing to suspend all arms supplies to Rangoon would deliver the only kind of message that the generals might finally understand.
The time of western countries and Asean paying polite lip-service to human rights and release of national heroine Aung san Suu kyi, still languishing under house arrest, is over. The coming weeks will soon demonstrate how many governments will put human rights and the plight of the Burmese before commercial advantage, trading priorities and comfort zone diplomacy.
 It's not just the moment of truth for Burma. It's a moment of truth for China, and that by implication affects all of us.
The question is: is China now a responsible stakeholder in the international community, or simply a nation concerned only with self-interest at the expense of human rights - both within its own territory and elsewhere?
It is no longer acceptable to trot out that tired old phrase: "We do not interfere in other countries' internal affairs". With the Olympics approaching, if Beijing really wants to be seen as an equal partner then it cannot let its coming-out party be overshadowed by its negligence of well-established international norms.
A former Burmese student leader just appeared on the BBC, insisting that the UN has "failed" his people and that it is no longer time for sanctions. He is right. Sanctions are slow and ultimately will only hurt the Burmese people, not the military elite. So, in a sense, it's a moment of truth for the UN and its ineffectual new chief, Ban Ki-Moon too.
But only China, with its massive investment in Burma's economy via the logging trade and various energy deals can make a real difference. India, I'm afraid to say, is impotent on the matter and is disappointingly reflecting the Chinese sovereignty line.
The CCP is in a difficult position. If it condemns the impending crackdown and acts on Burma, whether in the UNSC or bilaterally, then it opens itself up to a round of internal re-examination of the events of Tiananmen square - which themselves occurred just after a brutally repressed democracy movement in Burma in 1988. Though news of events of Burma is restricted in China, via the Internet, unlike in 1989 people will get to know about them.
In the next 48 hours, there are only two things that can happen. Either the junta relaxes control, frees Aung San Suu Kyi and enters negotiations with the UN. Or the guns begin to fire while the UN, as always, stands by. The world is watching. It's up to China.
International Crisis Group - Myanmar: Time for Urgent Action
Only China, India, and, to a lesser degree, ASEAN have any influence on the military regime. China has very close economic and political links with Myanmar, while India has developed strong military ties. Both would suffer from worsening instability there, as they did after the violent August 1988 military crackdown. In the past, the military junta has fired on peaceful protestors or used vigilante groups to attack them. Demonstrations in recent days have reached a country-wide scale where such action could cause massive loss of life.
China, India and ASEAN should communicate to the military that a repeat of the 1998 violence would be unacceptable and would lead to serious consequences, including action by the UN Security Council. China and Russia should warn Myanmar that they would support full consideration of the situation there by the Security Council, as well as a possible adoption of a Security Council Resolution, if the military use force against protestors.
 Even the US is stepping up support for the current protests in Burma (Myanmar), with a call for added sanctions in the hope of buckling the already-pressured Junta. But like in Sudan, notes Isabel Hilton in The Guardian's Comment is Free, the country that really matters is China:
China has sustained the Burmese military with generous support; Chinese aid has built transport infrastructure and dams; Chinese investment gives Beijing a stake in key sectors of Burma's economy; Chinese immigration has produced large Chinese populations in Burma's cities; and Chinese support has rendered US sanctions against the regime ineffectual. Why, then, is China now being cited as a restraining influence?
China's default diplomatic position is that it does not "interfere" in the domestic politics of other countries - one might add, especially where supplies of energy and natural resources or strategic issues are involved. Beijing is averse to lectures on human rights and democracy at home, so naturally disinclined to deliver them abroad.
But China is now faced with the fact that the high diplomatic profile that goes with greater global power exposes it to new pressures to uphold international standards, and that if the country is to continue to sell her ascent to global superpower status as unthreatening, close partnerships with unsavoury regimes can produce undesirable blowback. China's previous intransigence on Darfur melted when campaigners married the Beijing Olympic games to China's support for the Sudanese regime to produce the slogan "Genocide Olympics". China suddenly found it convenient to send an envoy to Sudan and to play a more constructive role in multilateral efforts to resolve the crisis. A similar pressure is building over Burma.
And inevitably, fears of another Tiananmen square crop uo too. But this author is correct to note that 18 years on from 6/4, the PRC's position is very different. It is now supposed to be a responsible stakeholder in the international community, and cannot be seen to be supporting the Myanmar regime at this moment.
On the other hand, should Beijing encourage a transition to democracy and the return of Aung San Suu Kyi, what kind of message would they be sending to their own people? There's no doubt that, state censorship aside, the Chinese have more access to outside media than ever and many of them must be watching this closely:
For Beijing, the sight of tens of thousands of citizens in peaceful street protests led by Buddhist monks is little short of a nightmare, since China has its own potentially explosive combinations of religious and civil dissent: Buddhist monks in Tibet, Muslims in Xinjiang, even Falun Gong practitioners at home - all lay claim to the moral authority to challenge a corrupt and self-seeking autocracy. The sight of mass civic demonstrations in pursuit of political reform recalls both 1989's Tiananmen Square and 1979's Democracy Wall.
A bloodbath in Burma, given China's close identification with the dictatorship, would resonate like a Tiananmen Square massacre by proxy, just as Beijing is polishing the silver for next year's Olympics. For China negotiation is infinitely preferable to bloodshed and the instability that could result.
Finally, it's worth considering the implications for India too. Like Pakistan, Burma is a state pivotal to both regional powers' political and economic interests. India must be concerned about potential movements of refugees should things get violent, and along with China it has energy interests vested in the current Myanmar regime.
In fact, The Times of India points out, at times New Delhi's line sounds eerily reminiscent of Beijing's:
India's interests in Myanmar are rooted in energy, security, keeping insurgents in check and countering China's overpowering influence on India's doorstep.
Myanmar is also important to an India seeking to extend its power into southeast Asia, politically and militarily, standing as it does at the mouth of the Malacca Straits. These interests have kept India and China engaged with the unpopular military regime in Yangon. As recently as 10 days ago, foreign minister Pranab Mukherjee was subjected to public questioning by British and American diplomats in Bangkok on India's Myanmar policy. Mukherjee stuck to India's line that it did not interfere in internal developments in any country.
Days later at the APEC summit in Australia, member countries decided Myanmar could only be tackled through India and China. Neither country responded.
So much for democracy's domino effect. But what happens over the next few days will indirectly prove where China and India really do stand in the modern world.
 As if Musharraf didn't have enough problems already, what with Bhutto and Sharif snapping at his heels and the lawyers conspiring against the legality of his rule, now there's this bloke too:
Bin Laden to declare war on Musharraf, al-Qaida says | Special reports | Guardian Unlimited
In what was the third message from Bin Laden this month, he described Gen Musharraf as an infidel, condemning the president's closeness to the US.
He said the decision to send the military into the Red mosque in Islamabad in July had "demonstrated Musharraf's insistence on continuing his loyalty, submissiveness and aid to America against the Muslims ... and makes armed rebellion against him and removing him obligatory".
The message added: "So when the capability is there, it is obligatory to rebel against the apostate ruler, as is the case now."
We learn two facts from this. One, OBL (if indeed it is he) is alive and well and gets the Pakistani papers. Secondly, Al Qaeda recognises the pivotal position of Pakistan in the geopolitical map and wants a piece of the action. Here we go.
Some bland comments from the Indian external affairs minister. But in the long run, can India really balance the tensions in its relationships with the US and the PRC? The problem for New Delhi is that (aside from Russia, perhaps) it's the only major power that has to live under both US global hegemony and Chinese regional hegemony. And India doesn't wield the economic and political power that Moscow can now boast due to its energy resources. Non aligned movement aside, one day it may just have to make the call.
The Hindu : Front Page : Strategic partnership with China will mature: Pranab Mukherjee
Asked about the possible impact of the emerging U.S.-India equation on China’s ties with New Delhi, Mr. Mukherjee said: “There is no question of cooperation between India and the U.S. to act as some sort of containment of any country, including China.”
Trade and investment “are the great drivers of the new relationship” between India and China.
“The leaders of both countries recognise that co-existence and cooperation is the wise course of action; and sensitivity to mutual aspirations is the underpinning for building confidence and trust. There is enough space and opportunity for both of us to grow and develop and to bring benefit not only to us but also for other partners in Asia.”
Differences, including those over the border question, “did not stand in the way of investment and trade.”
So it would appear that General Musharraf will hang up his boots on 15 November and maintain his position as a civilian president. So he says, at least, and today's discovery of 18 dead Pakistani soldiers highlights the dangers ahead.
Whether or not the US is pleased or unnerved is uncertain: the BBC's sources seem to think that Washington would have preferred Musharraf to have remained army head. From Musharraf's own point of view, however, the surrender of his uniform is the last gambit in a bid to hold onto power in the face of rising domestic opposition. There does need to be a very strong structure in place, however, to keep Musharraf and Bhutto from fighting among themselves, while the Isamists look on. If it doesn't work out, what are the chances of a another military coup - perhaps secretly engineered by Musharraf and his cronies - in the mid-term so as to maintain a grip on stability?
BBC NEWS | South Asia | US struggles with Pakistan policy
There's a growing realisation that the US must not only have a partnership with Gen Musharraf and the army but also have a partnership with the people of Pakistan.
The aim now in Washington, many observers believe, is to treat not just Gen Musharraf but also the Pakistani nation as an irreplaceable ally and to bolster the perception that US would prefer to deal with a popular civilian government.
Every now and again, Asia Times Online turns up an absolute tour de force of an analysis: this is one of them. It pulls together every thread in the Afghanistan war, from the significance of events on Pakistan to the options available to the local powers China, India and Russia.
The one major beef I have with it is, as before, whether it is truly possible to negotiate with the Taliban. Sure, you can talk to the heads of major Taliban groups, but what are the guarantees that one agreement is going to quell the whole bunch of them? Isn't it likely that large splinter groups that oppose any settlement will break off and carry on doing their own thing? Still, the author seems to think that talks are on the cards.
Below, I attempt a rough summary of all the points, in an actor-by-actor format.
- The Taliban: As NATO and the US tire, the chances of a settlement grow, especially in the light of potential instability in Pakistan too.
-
The UN: Growing acceptance of the idea of talking with the Taliban. -
The US: Should seek intra-Afghan and intra-Pakistan dialogue with the aid of China, Russia and India. -
Iran: The US quagmire in Afghanistan is succour to their ambitions for regional dominance. -
Russia: Fears of 'Talibanization' will draw the Central Asian states closer into seurity frameworks such as the SCO. -
China: Stay out of it, and leave the Taliban to the US. -
India: Stick with the US, and hope that Pakistan doesn't regain influence in Afghanistan.
And here's the key:
Clearly, the continued disintegration of the Pakistani state widens al-Qaeda's support base among the Taliban. If US-Iran tensions escalate, the war in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan become intertwined. That means the Afghan war may take a new form rather than lead to peace.
The whole article is reprinted below: check out also Ahmed Rashid's sobering analysis in The Telegraph in which he describes his own land as "a failing state hovering over the abyss".
Continue reading "'Stan - The Big Picture" »
A week is a long time in politics, and eight years is even longer. At least, however,we now have the date to watch for. Benazir Bhutto is behaving in an eminently sensible manner here; she has mitigated the risk of being instantly deported and making a shambolic and undignified exit as did Nawaz Sharif: she also gives Musharraf a chance to save face and be 're-elected' (the cut-off for that is 15 October).
Most importantly, she buys time for everyone: though on the other had, that also means that opponents will also have four weeks to get their acts together too. Something to be aware of is that Bhutto is still wanted for corruption charges, well detailed in Musharraf's autobiography (he accuses her, among other things, of having a penchant for expensive jewellery and keeping a private menagerie). It'll be important for Musharraf not to let this go - but with the legal fraternity now very much his enemies, I can see them achieving some kind of knockdown on the charges.
It'll be a date to mark in the diary, and will certainly have significant ramifactions for Pakistan's short-term future.
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Bhutto announces Pakistan return
 What few commentators have noted is that today's ejection of Nawaz Sharif is thick with symbolic overtones. Not only did Sharif choose the anniversary of 9/11 to stage his attempted comeback, but the debacle at the airport today was strangely reminiscent of the coup and counter-coup that saw Musharraf sweep to power in 1999 and Sharif packed off to exile.
So far so good for the General, since there has been no immediate civil unrest.
Pakistan's political crisis | Shove off Sharif | Economist.com
Mr Sharif’s arrest sparked a few protests in Rawalpindi but was more notable for the failure of his Pakistan Muslim League-N party to organise almost any gathering in Punjab, the country’s most populous province and the party’s stronghold. It did not help that General Musharraf’s agents had arrested most of the party’s leaders and, reportedly, 2,000 of its activists in recent days. Nonetheless, Mr Sharif has not yet raised enough of a clamour to trouble a military dictator.
What will happen once Benazir Bhutto comes in, however, is anyone's guess. And what will the Americans, Indians and Chinese think - after all, they all have major stakes in Pakistan's fragile polity. America and China will probably be secretly happy with a stronger Musharraf who can counter the resurgence of Islamism, while India may feel obliged to back Bhutto. That would set things up for a tense situation.
The last lines of the article are also well worth reprinting:
For his part, if there are no serious protests in next few days, General Musharraf might think he does not need Ms Bhutto. His supporters can muster the simple majority in Parliament that he needs to get himself re-elected president, while also retaining his job as army chief. If he is happy to defy the orders of the Supreme Court—which would probably take exception to this action—he would not need to rewrite the constitution in his favour, a step requiring a two-thirds majority in Parliament. Then he would not need the support that Ms Bhutto has all but promised.
In the short term, this draconian drift might just put a lid on Pakistan’s latest troubles. After all, Pakistanis are accustomed to the bit and bridle of military rule. But a solution that sustains an army dictatorship by smashing faltering institutions and democratic politicians, in a country where supremely undemocratic Islamist forces are seething, does not augur much stability.
Just as with Pakistan, India looks like it will lose out to China in the effort to find secure energy transit routes.
PINR - Pipeline Politics: India and Myanmar
India has clearly lost an important diplomatic initiative in the attempt to counter Chinese influence in Myanmar. Even after the deal was sweetened with US$20 million in "soft credit" and the proposed construction of a power plant in Myanmar, it would appear that Indian influence was quietly denied by the inevitability of China's international support for Myanmar. Beijing's use of its veto to keep Myanmar's human rights record off of the U.N. Security Council agenda turned out to be more important to the Myanmar junta than the economic incentives.
Amid reports that former Deputy Secretary of State, Richard Armitage, is criticising the Bush regime for its neglect of Asia comes this report. It is difficult to see India and China forming anything more than a perfunctory strategic relationship - their rivalries over the Indian Ocean region remain strong, especially where Tibet, Pakistan and Myanmar are concerned, but the point is that China is the nascent power these days.
India has to recognise this, and perform a careful balancing act with the US. Its longer term interests, however, may be better served by accepting a role as a partner to China's rise. At present India's fear is that it will be little more than a junior partner, but I suspect that Chinese officials would wish to downplay this and concentrate on economics and trade rather than security. The statement is also a clear rebuff to the American nuclear plan, so some planners in Washington must be reeling.
The Hindu News Update Service
Beijing, Sept. 4 (PTI): China will "vigorously" implement a bilateral agreement to upgrade Sino-Indian relations to strategic levels, Chinese Foreign Minister, Yang Jiechi, said while hinting that Beijing is open to civilian nuclear energy cooperation with all countries under the IAEA safeguards, sources said here on Monday.
Yang who met a joint delegation of members of the Eminent Persons Group (EPG) here on Friday told them that he had been instructed by the Chinese leadership that Beijing would vigorously implement the strategic and cooperative partnership for peace and cooperation agreed upon by the two countries.
Reading the timeline below really joins the dots about what's been going on in Pakistan this year. Today the plot unravelled further, with signs that as well as Benazir Bhutto, Nawaz Sharif is also planning a comeback. It's clear that the whole debacle over the sacking of Iftikhar Chaudhry, the chief justice, is linked to this point.
However, for all Musharraf's faults, he has done at least one thing - he has held Pakistan together under immense pressure from the Islamists on one side and the US on the other. The entry of both the 'democrats', not just Bhutto alone, will fracture the political scene even further. Neither Bhutto not Sharif have much to be proud of, other than being civilians, and indeed it was they that oversaw Pakistan's steady slide. Democract alone is not going to solve Pakistan's problems, and if the populace goes to the streets in favour of either Musharraf, Bhutto, Sharif, Chaudhry or Shar'ia, it'll set the scene for some bloody four-way clashes.
What it could mean for Afghanistan is anyone's guess.
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Exiled Pakistani PM 'to go home'
9 March: Musharraf suspends chief justice for "abuse of power". Lawyers protest
April: Protests grow, amid clashes with police
12 May: 34 people die as rival political groups clash in Karachi
11 July: 102 people die when army storms radical Red Mosque in Islamabad
July-Aug: Sharp rise in suicide attacks by pro-Taleban militants
20 July: Supreme Court reinstates chief justice
9 Aug: Musharraf rejects emergency rule
23 Aug: Supreme Court says exiled ex-PM Nawaz Sharif can return
A lengthy but useful summary of everything that's important in the world right now pertaining to the linkages between geopolitics and energy. Must look out for this Dilip Hiro guy's book.
We can now probably add to this list of Bush's errors America's disruption of the world financial system via subprime loans, not to mention high oil prices and a feeble dollar but hey.
Asia Times Online :: Middle East News - US in their sights: The rising powers
...with not even a decade of this century behind us, we are already witnessing the rise of a multipolar world in which new powers are challenging different aspects of US supremacy - Russia and China in the forefront, with regional powers Venezuela and Iran forming the second rank. These emergent powers are primed to erode US hegemony, not confront it, singly or jointly.
How and why has the world evolved in this way so soon? The George W Bush administration's debacle in Iraq is certainly a major factor in this transformation, a classic example of an imperialist power, brimming with hubris, overextending itself...
Yet there are other explanations - unrelated to Washington's glaring misadventures - for the current transformation in international affairs. These include, above all, the tightening market in oil and natural gas, which has enhanced the power of hydrocarbon-rich nations as never before; the rapid economic expansion of the mega-nations China and India; the transformation of China into the globe's leading manufacturing base; and the end of the Anglo-American duopoly in international television news.
I'm not sure how much I trust Pakistan's APP news agency, so this is to be taken with a pinch of salt. I can also find no reference to a US "International Oil Company" - unless indeed it is an anonymous one for now. I can, however, find the "Indian Oil Corporation Limited" (IOCL) and the "International Oil Company Limited", based in Hong Kong and thus perhaps a Chinese front. I did discover "Interoil", which is stockmarket listed as IOC, but its main drive is Papua New Guinea.
So the plot thickens. Who, if anyone, is pulling the strings here?
Associated Press of Pakistan - IOC to construct Turkmenistan-Pakistan oil, gas pipeline
The US International Oil Company (IOC) would construct 2,200 km long Turkmenistan-Pakistan oil and gas pipeline project in a period of three years. Geo News quoting the details released from IOC liaison office reported that the government has awarded the estimated $10 billion project to the IOC.
Two oil refineries and four thermal powerhouses of 1,000 megawatt each would also be set up under the project.
The pipeline with a capacity of supplying 2 million barrel of oil and 4 billion cubic feet of gas would be constructed up to Gawadar, where one refinery would also be constructed at a cost of $3.5 billion, IOC said.
The project also envisages construction of hydro-cracker for the production of JP 1 and JP 4, for the first time in Pakistan.
IOC said that the matters relating to the security in Afghanistan and insurance guarantee have been finalized and the ceremony of the mega-project agreement inking would soon be held.
In July 2007, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation agreed on the foundation of an 'energy club'. In August it will hold its annual summit, and this author considers whether that means another step towards an Asian NATO.
PINR - S.C.O. Summit Demonstrates its Growing Cohesion
...the last couple of years the S.C.O. has taken steps in intensified cooperation in a wide scope of security dimensions. This has occurred to such an extent that development toward a genuine security organization can no longer be excluded, although this still might take a considerable number of years. Although the West at present does not have anything to fear from the S.C.O., current developments might encourage the West to closely observe further activities of the grouping. In any case, the time has gone that Western security experts could depict the S.C.O. as simply one of many insignificant organizations in the Asia-Pacific region.
As China's commitment in Pakistan, especially through Gwadar increases, so too does their interest in the nation's internal security.
Protection of Chinese national
ISLAMABAD: Secretary Interior Syed Kamal Shah and Chinese Ambassador to Pakistan Luo Zhaohi signed an MoU to form a joint task force for the safety and security of Chinese nationals in Pakistan at a ceremony held here on Monday.
The MoU is the first of its kind signed against the backdrop of the rising number of kidnapping incidents and attacks on the Chinese people who are engaged on various development projects in the country. A number of Chinese nationals have also lost their lives in these attacks.
Well, Canada is doing a good job too but the Yanks are basically making things worse for ISAF. Below the BBC's Paul Wood summarises the commons defence committee's report on operations in Afghanistan. They can be summarised even further into one point - lack of resources.
Basically, in an age when deaths overseas have a direct impact on the ballot box, Afghanistan is proving the inefficacy of our NATO allies. Every military death is tragic, but the unwillingness of the other European nations to allow their troops to do the jobs they are supposed to do simply makes life more difficult and dangerous for the Brits and Canucks. There is no point deploying the military if you are not going to put them in harm's way with all the kit they need to support them.
Secondly, the reason ISAF is there is to establish security so as to create the conditions for development - and thus general happiness and well-being in Afghanistan. That's the greatest obstacle to Talibanisation, not armed action. Unfortunately, the prevailing attitude seems to be that development should be left to the NGOs. In fact there are few worse people to do the job. NGOs exist simply to fulfil narrow and often irrelevant single issues eg. introducing women's theatre groups to towns where there's no running water. What Afghanistan really needs is big money and big business with the backing of Western governments.
Do the job properly or not at all. Put the cash in, put the kit in and put the people in. And this is a defining moment for Europe. Does it really have a role in the wider world, or is it content to let the 'Stan slip back into total anarchy? It would probably take Pakistan with it, and now that the GWOT has kicked off, the existence of a revived black hole full of terror training camps would have grave consequences for Europe's own domestic security.
If the battle in Afghanistan is lost, the war will be fought in the streets of Londonistan instead.
BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | Afghanistan warning decoded
1. There are too few troops on the ground to win.
If the mission is to succeed, says the committee, it will require a commitment of size and strength greater than the international community is "willing to acknowledge, let alone to make."
2. If we are not exactly losing, we are not winning either.
The committee said: "Violence is increasing and spreading to the relatively peaceful Kabul and the northern provinces."
3. Too many Afghan civilians are being killed.
The committee said: "Civilian casualties undermine support for (the Nato force) Isaf and the Afghan government and fuel the insurgency, further endangering our troops."
4. There are still not enough British helicopters to do the job.
"UK helicopter operations in Afghanistan are not sustainable at the present intensity."
5. Some of our Nato allies are leaving us in the lurch.
"The reluctance of some Nato countries to provide troops for the Isaf mission in Afghanistan is undermining Nato's credibility and also Isaf operations."
6. You can't fight the Taleban and opium at the same time.
The coalition's strategy lacks "clarity and coherence". "Uncertainty among Afghans about Isaf's role in poppy eradication puts UK forces at risk."
7. The Afghan security forces are a disappointment - some useless, some corrupt, some actually working against us.
"Police failure and corruption alienate support for the government of Afghanistan and add to grievances which fuel the insurgency." Even the Afghan army "are some way off operating independently".
8. So the exit strategy has problems, as in Iraq.
"We recommend that the government clarify its planning assumptions for the UK deployment to Afghanistan and state the likely length of the deployment beyond the summer of 2009."
9. The media war isn't going well, either.
"The Taleban is ahead in the information campaign. The government (must)...co-ordinate more effectively the presentation of Isaf's objectives and the way in which developments in Afghanistan are reported."
I think it's a little tenuous to suggest that the sole reason for Musharraf's crackdown on the Lal Masjid was the abduction of seven Chinese brothel workers. However, this author takes a close look at China's strategic relationship with Pakistan and considers how much Beijing's influence contributes to the conflict with Islamist extremism.
Foreign Policy In Focus | China, Pakistan, and Terrorism
U.S. pressure on Pakistan to clear the region of the Taliban and al-Qaeda has forced Pakistan into an ever-tighter embrace of China. Musharraf's crackdown on the Lal Masjid, a potent symbol of this strategic Sino-Pakistani alignment, also sent a blood-soaked message to religious militants that Chinese interests will remain off-limits. Musharraf is not apologetic about defending Chinese interests in Pakistan and punishing those who dared to harm them.
Authoritative figures such as Lords Inge and Ashdown have reiterated the fact that Britain is in the 'Stan for the long haul. Their foreboding does smack of the 'domino effect', but the danger in Pakistan is more real than it was in Southeast Asia back in the '60s. The battle of Las Masjid is testament to that. And if both Afghanistan and Pakistan succomb to Islamism, then the potential for a stream of trained-up bombers heading for the Piccadilly line multiplies fivefold.
The Lords are also correct to identify a double problem - NATO's lack of coordination with the US forces in country and lack of long-term development. Development can only come with security in place, goes the theory, though I wonder if anyone has ever tried promoting development and waiting for the security situation to calm down as progress is made.
Lastly, Iraq. The Brits look like pulling out of Iraq and leaving it to the Americans: the other side of the deal should be an American withdrawal from Afghanistan. That way, NATO can attempt to deal with Afghanistan - which is certainly not a hopeless case - without American impediments, and America can be left to its deserved fate in Iraq.
Generals' warning on Afghanistan | World | The Observer
Ashdown told The Observer that Afghanistan presented a graver threat than Iraq.
'The consequences of failure in Afghanistan are far greater than in Iraq,' he said. 'If we fail in Afghanistan then Pakistan goes down. The security problems for Britain would be massively multiplied. I think you could not then stop a widening regional war that would start off in warlordism but it would become essentially a war in the end between Sunni and Shia right across the Middle East.'
Update: Things just went from bad to worse. The fates of Afghanistan and Pakistan are inextricably linked, and one could even go so far to say that the Durand Line is no real border - they are one and the same problem.
Events in Islamabad over the last few weeks have now provoked the Taliban sympathisers in Waziristan to relinquish their tenuous truce - an added headache for both Musharraf and NATO. What chance is there of a NATO intervention within Pakistan proper?
A report speculating that the possible delivery of Pakistan's long-owed F-16s is part of a geopolitical strategy on the US's part to undermine the SCO's (and therefore China and Russia's) influence. America also worries about a popular uprising against Musharraf's government - a government that it is increasingly losing the power to manipulate.
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - Pakistan heading for a crackdown
From the proceedings of the meeting of the SCO's Council of Foreign Ministers (CFM) held in Bishkek on Monday in preparation of the summit on August 16, trends are available that must definitely be annoying Washington. There is no mistaking that the SCO is slouching toward Afghanistan and Pakistan with an irresistible offer of mutual engagement in terms of shared interests of regional security and stability...
For the first time, the SCO is likely to pose a challenge to the United States' monopoly of conflict resolution in Afghanistan. The CFM has taken the view that the existing pattern of involvement by the international community is restricted to specific sectoral problems in Afghanistan. It concluded that such a narrow issue-based approach on the part of the international community will not serve the purpose of stabilizing the country.
The article continues:
Plainly speaking, the SCO is unambiguously proclaiming its intention to work closely with Kabul and Islamabad - a turf that has hitherto been tacitly accepted by the regional powers as more or less the exclusive playpen of the US and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). This runs counter to the consistent US approach based on keeping Russia out of Afghanistan, and disrupting any Russian-Chinese coordinated policies in Afghanistan.
 The siege of the Lal Masjid is over, but in what looks like an increasingly critical juncture for General Musharraf, the repercussions will now begin.
In the next few days, weeks and months, the following questions may be answered. How will the 'martyrdom' of the hardliners and madrassa students who chose to remain at the mosque be perceived in Pakistan and the wider region? Will they inspire a larger movement, or only fuel the growing crisis of Talibanisation in the border regions? How will the aftermath of the siege react with existing political issues such as the sacking of the Chief Justice and the forthcoming elections?
It is also interesting to note that part of the Islamist's agenda relates to Chinese influence in Pakistan. The incidents are comparitively minor, but it appears that one of the extremists' grievances in Islamabad was a Chinese-run brothel: meanwhile, three Chinese workers were shot near Peshawar during the weekend. If this continues, Beijing may have to say a few private but stern words.
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Pakistani soldiers storm mosque
Security forces began a full-scale siege of the mosque last week, not long after mosque students abducted seven Chinese workers they accused of running a brothel.
The BBC's M Ilyas Khan in Islamabad says the military operation is a gamble for President Pervez Musharraf who risks a backlash from supporters of those inside the mosque.
In recent days the army has redeployed thousands of troops in north-western Pakistan where pro-Taleban militants opposed to President Musharraf have been carrying out a string of attacks said to be linked to the mosque siege.
 Pakistan has enough problems with Taliban and Al-Qaeda-inspired militants in its border areas. Once the fighting spreads to the cities and the urban middle classes, there really will be trouble.
This is not a massive incident, but with several dead it will undoubtedly provoke something else - maybe a protest, maybe a political move, maybe rioting. It is telling that the ceasefire was negotiated by the MMA, not the military government - which is a further indication that the Islamist parties are strengthening their foothold within the country's fragile political structure.
Add to this the controversy over the sacked judge, Iftikhar Chaudhry, and Musharraf may have a recipe for distaster. All eyes in India, the US and the rest of the world need to be on South Asia in the next days in case this blows up out of control.
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Clashes erupt at Pakistan mosque
Fighting around the Lal Masjid raged throughout much of Tuesday.
Deputy interior minister Zafar Warriach told a news conference: "The deaths of nine people have been confirmed so far and more than 140 wounded."
Other reports have put the number killed higher.
Speaking to the BBC, Information Minister Muhammad Ali Durrani said the government was still discussing how to handle the situation.
The BBC's Syed Shoaib Hasan who is outside the mosque says the ceasefire was negotiated by a politician from the MMA, a coalition of Islamic parties.
Beyond its place in the GWOT, could Pakistan become a staging post for the anti-Iran campaign? The author calls it a new Cold War, alluding to Iraq and Afghanistan's growing proxy war status - but don't forget who sponsors both Iran and Pakistan... China. So if there is a Cold War, it's the ultimate big daddy in the whole deal.
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - All roads leading to Pakistan
The fact is Pakistan is uniquely placed - geographically and politically - to affect the outcome of Anglo-American strategy toward Iran and Central Asia. Zia was extremely prescient about such a geopolitical setting.
In recent months, the US media have reported on the role of Pakistani security agencies in enabling covert US operations aimed at destabilizing Iran. If US Vice President Dick Cheney has his way and a US-Iran military confrontation indeed takes place, Pakistan's role becomes of vital importance to Washington.
Rising China, Shining India; the quagmire in the Persian Gulf and America’s Global War on Terror. These are some of the focal points of international politics in 2007, and none of them exist in isolation.
For the giant populations of Asia to continue their slow grind out of poverty requires economic growth; industrialisation and development must be fuelled. Both China and India are increasingly dependent on oil and gas imports, and in order to safeguard their futures energy security is vital. So each needs to command new sources and new ways of bringing in fossil fuels.
There are some vital strategic areas that can serve as transit routes in both China and India’s energy security policies. Thus geopolitics return to the historical heartland of Kipling’s Kim – the territory now known as Pakistan. It is as if the original Great Game has gone back to square one, only with some fresh rules and new players.
This thesis aims to examine the geopolitical implications of developing Pakistan as an ‘energy hub’, and to analyse the impediments to its fruition and the interested parties’ strategies for seeing it through. And, whereas other studies tend to focus on individual factors at work, it aims instead to critically observe them in the context of the situation as a whole.
Bound copies are available at lulu.com for around $10 plus P&P; downloadable PDF files are free of charge. Click here to access the virtual storefront.
This work is made available on the understanding that it will not be copied, plagiarised or otherwise reproduced without the explicit consent of the author.
India will soon be the world’s fifth largest consumer of energy. And there is probably one major reason for this: aircon.
Unless you have visited India in the summer months, you won’t appreciate the significance of aircon, but I certainly do. Despite its responsibility for the enormous energy deficit, aircon is perhaps now the ultimate giver of health and life to the rising middle classes.
The other night the electricity failed again, for around four hours, and the invertor didn’t hold enough charge to get through the night. It was miserable. Such is the power of aircon – once you have it, you can’t live without it. The contrast between my father’s non-aircon house and my cousin’s more expensive and modern dwelling couldn’t be greater.
Much as I hate MacDonalds, aside from the clean toilets and the absurdly smart security guards in their jat-moustaches and white spats, the saviour of Connaught Place is MacDonalds and its aircon. Ironic in a country where beef is not available.
So as the economy continues to boom, so the god of aircon will continue to ascend through the pantheon. Borne on his conveyance, the sacred refrigerated soft drink, his influence will only grow stronger as time passes.
I used to have an unshakeable faith in karma and the laws of the dao. For evey action, I once thought, there must be an equal and opposite reaction. As long as you do the right thing, you’ll be fine; but every moral outrage will come back to haunt you.
I’m not sure I believe in that anymore. Having circumnavigated the Dalai Lama’s residence not once but three times – an act that is supposed to gain one’s soul immeasurable merit – plus spun all the prayer wheels and donated to beggars all around, I still missed the bus tonight, leaving me stranded for another day.
It was an easy mistake to make. I arrived before time at the bus stand where I was dropped off on Sunday, only to discover too late that the bus picks up 200 metres down the road, out of the line of sight. I then compounded this error by trying to catch up with the bus in Dharmasala itself, but missed it again leaving me stuck at the town’s chaos station until nightfall.
Then again, there are worse places to be stuck. McCleod Ganj itself has nothing much to offer beyond the Tibetan temples and curio shops, but the true value of the trip has been to escape the oppressive heat and boredom of Delhi in a landscape far, far removed from the depressingly clinical flatness of Holland. The only thing to do here is to put on your shoes and walk, and that’s what I’ve done.
I’ve missed the hills, and I’m glad to be here.
“How can you govern a country that has 500 types of cheese?” Charles de Gaulle once lamented. But if France is hard to rule, then imagine a subcontinent that has 300 million gods. De Gaulle didn’t have an answer to that one.
I’ve never really believed in what must be an apocryphal figure, but out of that pantheon there must be a divinity for almost everything. For example, there has to be a god of diarrhoea. There must be. I’ve worshipped at his temple often enough on my visits here in the past, and have spoken to him on the porcelain telephone on many an occasion.
It’s a source of some disappointment, therefore, that so far on this trip I have hardly suffered at all. But for a couple of minor bouts of no more than a morning or so there’s been nothing. I’ve been avoiding meat, I must admit, and the shits do seem to be tied up with ‘non-veg’ food.
But in any case it’s so damn hot I’m hardly eating anything at all. I’ve currently resorted to fulfilling my nutritional needs via fizzy drinks, of which I’m now consuming an unpardonable litre to a litre-and-a-half per day. There must be a god of Coke, Thums Up and Limca too, I reckon – they’re certainly earning their keep.
'Travellers' never fail to amuse me. They loaf around in their dreadlocks, tattoos and baggy pants in a desperate effort to be different and just end up blending right into their own little crowd. Nowhere more so than here in India, the hippie capital of the known universe.
But when push comes to shove, say when a bus is a couple of hours late as tend to happen in Asia once in a while, this bunch will kick up a fuss like ther's no tomorrow. "Chill out, man," I feel like saying, "It's all good, don't mean nothin'." There's more of them than me though, so I keep my trap shut in case all that peace and love turns into an angry punch-up.
Anyway, made it in the end. The bus came, the flies went away, and despite more rupturous dissent when a group of Tibetans from a refugee colony outside Delhi boarded and took all the best seats we got here earlyish this morning. I promptly disappeared and found a decent hotel at half-rate, which makes up for having been done over for the price of my bus ticket on Janpath back in ND.
Home of the Tibetan Government-in-Exile, McLeod Ganj sits among the hills near Dharamsala at 1,750m above sea-level. Here you'll find a Little-Tibet without-Tibet, somehow more engaging yet altogether false compared to the real thing. I'll stay here a couple of days, though - it'll do me good.
Right. I'm sick of sitting in my father's dusty flat on the outskirts of Delhi, where there aren't even any shops, let alone things to do. No TV, no radio, and I've nearly read my 700-page novel. Interviews went well, but more on that later once the telephone gets reconnected and I have Internet again. Apart from that I am climbing the walls in serious need of therapy.
Off to Dharamsala for a few days it is then. See you later...
In Europe you are so used to the electricity coming on at the flick of a switch and water flowing at the turn of a tap you don’t even think about it. Even in Shanghai I had utilities 24/7. No worries. But here it’s different. Here you have to work.
The day begins at 6.30am, like or not, since the mains water only operates during limited periods of the day. Since it’s been 30 degrees all night and there’s no aircon as promised, (in fact not even an aircon brochure anywhere to be seen, despite my father’s assurances) you haven’t slept anyway, so it’s no big deal.
Turn on the motor via the switch in the bathroom, assuming electricity is functioning. Run downstairs to the bottom water tank, where there are three valves which must all be turned in the correct direction for the tank to fill with water. Once the mains shuts off, you can then pump water up to the top tank on the roof, which provides the majority of day-to-day water use.
This is assuming that you have even half a clue about how the system works. If you don’t, and it hasn’t been demonstrated to you, there is nothing for it but experimentation of the all the different combinations of the valves and motor, none of which work leaving you without water for washing up, showering or flushing the toilet for the rest of the day. Discover at a later date that one of the valves was bust anyway, making all of the above academic.
This is not impoverished rural Bihar; this is a middle-class suburb of New Delhi, the national capital.
At least there is a solution to the three-to-four times daily power cuts: each household possesses an invertor, basically a battery that charges up if the electricity is working and runs the lights and fans if it is not.
However, this invertor is not strong enough to keep the fridge going, so anything within is in a permanent flux of thaw and cool which in 40 degrees of heat can’t be good for sanitation.
I can’t live here. There’s a difference between being a whinging softie and just failing to accept that things need to be this way. I don’t accept that it needs to be this way, not here, not now in 2007. It was like this in the 80s and nothing has changed at all.
The images of India you see on TV are false. The only way to live comfortably here is to be incredibly filthy rich. The rest suffer in uneasy silence – and that’s not even including the billion poor for whom conditions are infinitely worse. If this is shining India, then there is no hope.
6.12 am. Ding Dong!
Me, Phil: (Opening door) Namaste…
Lakshmi, Housemaid: Namaste. (goes about business)
L: Something something something panee something something?
P: Er… panee? (go to turn on water)
L: Something something something kanna hayng?
P: Haa, kuch kanna….
L: Something something something…
P: (shrug pathetically)
L: Something something something something something
P: (shrug)
L: (getting frustrated) Something something something something something something something something something kanna hayng?
P: Haa, kuch kanna…
L: Something something something…
P: I’m terribly sorry, you see I don’t speak any Hindi. Mayng Hindi ne hee balta hoong.
L: Something something something something something something something something something (shrug, goes off to prepare breakfast)
Continue for two days.
 India. How can you romanticise a place do relentlessly romanticised by so many others before oneself? Yet the temptation remains, and even as I write the cries of the muezzin drift in their eerie song over the city as it prepares again for rest. But I am in no mood for romance tonight, because in the midst of a billion people and their loves and lives there is no room for anything but lonely contemplation of what India is and what it will never become.
I arrive minutes before the stroke of the midnight hour, dumped unceremoniously into the night by KLM’s sterile efficiency of in-flight movies and boxed-up dinners. Eight hours of Germany’s geometric order and Uzbekistan’s barren expansiveness before the darkness creeps up; and in between them more clouds than one can see beyond, as viewed from the sky behind the aircraft’s wing. My cousin and father are there to receive me, patiently waiting for the airport to disgorge its new arrivals from its bowels, and we ride in near silence through the still-bustling streets, each quiet for his own reasons of fatigue.
I try to sleep, but in the heat and unfamiliarity sleep does not come because she is not there and because I know now that she cannot be again.
In the morning, I awake to countless instructions. This is how the water works, an obscure contraption that needs careful control of the system of pumps; here is the refrigerator, the bathroom, the cupboards, locks and bolts. My father wears again the army shirt and slacks he wore last night in anticipation of his trip to Calcutta this afternoon; he thinks they are practical, but they don’t suit him.
It had rained the last day, and it offers some respite as the heat begins to build again. The expected rickshaw wallah is not there, and must we persuade another to take us to the office which he does in a half-resentful flood of sweat. At one point the ground is so bumpy I must get out and push. But eventually my father’s business in the office is done and we return for a moment, only for him to turn straight around and head for Calcutta.
So having come all this way to where I belong and am yet so alien, I am alone again. My cousin takes me for lunch, though work delays him by a couple of hours, and we eat quickly outside in a flurry of somnolent flies. A ride around the locality orients me to the neighbourhood’s landscape of idenikit tenement houses and shining new developments, all of which seem only half complete. And then again I am alone in the dusty apartment on the edge of the city, with the Yamuna river curling alongside redolent with the stink of a million other lunches and dinners and loves and lives. This is India; I am back.
‘Baloch passing most critical period after Bugti’s death’
The people of Balochistan are passing through the most critical period after the death of Nawab Akbar Bugti...
He said there is no negative impact of the situation on the ongoing resistance movement, which is getting organised again. It is a clear proof of the reorganisation of the movement that seven to eight helicopters regularly bombard hideouts of resistance activists.
China, Pakistan team up on energy | csmonitor.com
"I think most security experts are looking at this very closely because this is the closest access point China has to the Persian Gulf," says Gal Luft, executive director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security in Washington. "I don't know that this is something the US particularly likes."
The article concentrates mainly on the US perspective:
Given the energy game's high stakes, some wonder if Gwadar will set off alarm bells in Washington. Last April, while hosting the China-Pakistan Energy Forum in Pakistan, President Pervez Musharraf was asked as much by a visiting delegate. But to a roar of applause, he quickly deflected the question: "I do not care about pressure from major powers. If Pakistan suffers pressure from certain major powers, I believe China will come forward to help us apply pressure on the other side."
Still, the opening of Gwadar is indicative of how China's largesse in Pakistan is coming into open competition with the US – and how that could alter the region's political landscape.
Apparently, it's all about the money - China has promised $12bn to Pakistan, while the US offers only a paltry $6bn. Who's your daddy, especially in the energy game?
Meetings set for later in April augur well - and China's observer status of the SAARC could be set to make it complement the SCO?
Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan - Pak, China to sign 3 accords during PM’s visit: Kasuri
Islamabad and Beijing are set to sign at least three agreements during Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz’s visit to China, scheduled from April 16 to April 22, said Foreign Minster Khurshid Mahmood Kasuri here on Sunday while talking to reporters after a meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing at the foreign office.
Kasuri said that there was a complete unanimity of views between the two countries on bilateral, regional and international issues. He said the two countries would sign agreements to establish the Joint Investment Company, University of Engineering and Science and Technology, and the Media University in Pakistan when Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz would visit China in the second week of April.
“We welcome China’s entry in SAARC as an observer,” said Kasuri, and it has heightened the importance of the organisation. “We are confident that China will play an important role in the association,” he added.
Nothing new here, but worth a quick look.
China's footprint in Pakistan - Los Angeles Times
Gwadar would provide a more secure corridor for China's fuel and energy supplies in the face of instability in the Persian Gulf and also down in the pirate-infested Strait of Malacca, by Indonesia, through which 80% of China's oil imports now pass. From Gwadar, imports could travel overland up through Pakistan and into China.
Trade out of China's own restive western region of Xinjiang would also be easier and faster. The distance from Kashgar, on the edge of Xinjiang, to Gwadar is 1,250 miles, versus twice that distance to reach Shanghai.
Some analysts see a more strategic interest in Gwadar. They say it could play host to Chinese vessels, listening stations or an outpost from which Beijing could monitor the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean, including the U.S. Navy base on the remote island of Diego Garcia, a key launching pad for operations in the Persian Gulf.
But a beefed-up Chinese military presence in Gwadar probably is years away, if it happens at all.
...but in battalions.
A brace of articles on the Pakistan-Afghanistan al-Qaeda-Taliban nexus from Asia Times. Prospects of a 'united front' against Musharraf are particularly disturbing, since if Pakistan falls to a Taliban-style revolution or civil war, then the US, India and China may come to blows over what to do about it. And scary things are happening, such as a plague of child bombers. (Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - Suicide attackers with nothing to lose)
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - Another stiff test for Musharraf
KARACHI - From the mountains of Pakistan's tribal areas to the capital Islamabad and up to the insurgent coastal belt of Balochistan province bordering Iran and Afghanistan, pan-Islamists are developing a united front ultimately to take on the West and its allies in the region.
The immediate target, though, is the administration of West-leaning President General Pervez Musharraf. Islamists of all hues are coming together. These include those believing in tribal traditions (the Islamic Emirates of the Waziristans and the Taliban of Afghanistan); global jihadis (al-Qaeda), proponents of Islamic democracy (the Jamaat-i-Islami Pakistan and the newly organized United Islamic Front of Afghanistan), and madrassas (seminaries) led by the Lal Masjid (mosque) in Islamabad).
These groups plan to join hands next Tuesday in a mass sit-in protest in Islamabad against Musharraf.
Here is the author's assessment on Musharraf's options:
Musharraf has few choices. He can continue the impossible fight against Islamists, at the behest of Western forces, all the way from the mountains of the Waziristans to the southern port city of Karachi and the deep seas of Gwadar, or switch sides and make a major compromise that could eventually support the emergence of a green crescent in Southwest Asia.
The wily Musharraf, though, has survived many challenges to his rule since taking power in a coup in 1999.
The final article deals with the newly-joined battle in NWFP. Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - Pakistan crosses a dangerous boundary
Comprehensive analysis of Gwadar from Pakistani point of view.
The News - International
 Just when I thought I had the most terribly original thesis topic, The Economist goes and hijacks it - even the title. At least it shows I'm onto something.
It's impossible to disconnect the whole India-Pakistan-Afghanistan nexus, partly because Pakistan is a very artificially-constructed nation and Afghanistan has never really been a natural state at all. It's all very complex, with India close to Afghanistan and meddling in Pakistan's internal conflicts, yet needing Pakistan on side for the pipeline projects. And with China and the US thrown into the mix, the geopolitical implications could be immense.
Game on.
India and Afghanistan | The Great Game revisited | Economist.com
India has an obvious interest in a stable Afghanistan. It hopes the country will one day accommodate transmission lines bringing electricity from Central Asia, as well as a pipeline for oil and gas from the region. There are two competing gas-pipeline projects: “TAPI”, running from Turkmenistan via Afghanistan to Pakistan and on to India; and another from Iran through Pakistan to India. Instability in Afghanistan is a big impediment to the first, but America opposes the second. For now, Pakistan refuses to allow Indian goods to cross its territory. But India also hankers after direct trade routes with Central Asia.
A Chinese-Pakistani joint-venture port at Gwadar in Baluchistan, which had its ceremonial opening this week, is matched by an Iranian-Indian venture to develop the “free port” at Chabahar in the Gulf of Oman. Both would require road links across Afghan territory. Indian engineers are currently connecting Afghanistan's ring road to the Iranian border. The Indian press blamed the abduction and killing in 2006 of an Indian engineer working on the project on Pakistani intelligence, after the Taliban denied involvement.
Pakistan would also benefit from Afghanistan's becoming the land bridge between India and Central Asia. But until a final resolution of its dispute with India, its calculations will be more cynical. Afghanistan is no longer, as it was under Taliban rule, a client of Pakistan. But “an unstable Afghanistan is the second-best option to a stable one ruled by your friends,” says Mr Rubin. “Both are certainly preferable to an Afghanistan ruled by your enemies.”
Iran's nuclear shenanigans have wider repercussions for near neighbours such as India, which may find itself in a diplomatic confrontation with the US.
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - India grapples with energy issues
A prominent US legislator, Congressman Tom Lantos, who is head of the House of Representatives' Committee on International Relations, has introduced a bill that, if passed, will ensure that India and Pakistan are not able to proceed with their gas pipeline connecting to Iran.
The legislation, the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act of 2007, seeks to target companies investing in Iran's energy sector by ensuring that deals with Iran worth more than $20 million will bring the investors under US sanctions.
According to reports, the US government has been quietly warning foreign energy companies, including Europe's Shell and Repsol and Malaysia's SKS, as well as the governments of China, India, Pakistan and Malaysia, that penalties are possible if they pursue energy deals with Iran.
Also worth noting is the concept of a 'South Asian Energy Ring':
The SAARC, for which energy is a very high priority for cooperation, comprises Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka.
Key SAARC nation Pakistan has welcomed the energy-ring concept. Amanullah Khan Jadoon, minister for petroleum and natural resources, said Pakistan is a strong advocate of energy cooperation in South Asia.
All you need to know.
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - Pakistan port opens new possibilities
Some analysts see an operational Gwadar port as China's first foothold in the oil-rich Middle East, as well as providing road and rail links to the economic powerhouse. Beijing wants Gwadar to be the gateway port for its western region, as its eastern seaboard is 3,500km from Kashgar, the main city in the far west of China's Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, whereas the distance from Kashgar to Gwadar is only 1,500km. This makes it feasible and cost-effective for China's interior regions to carry out trade through this port. That is why China expressed interest in helping Pakistan to develop Gwadar into a full-fledged deepwater commercial port, capable of handling cargo ships of up to 50,000 tons or more.
Energy-hungry China is eyeing Central Asia's oil and gas reserves and is increasingly looking to Pakistan for oil and gas supplies. Beijing plans to run at least five oil and gas pipelines to Gwadar from the Central Asian republics and wants to turn the facility into a transit terminal for Iranian and African crude-oil imports.
Gwadar is expected to play a key role in China's energy security, as its strategic location gives it greater scope as a free oil port in the region, and it will be the endpoint of all gas pipelines from Central Asian states, Iran and Qatar. Pakistan and China have also held talks on the construction of the strategic pipeline from Gwadar to China's borders, enabling it to import oil from Saudi Arabia.
What to do? Protestors on the streets, Taliban and al-Qaeda fighting it out, not to mention America's Afghanistan war and a possible attack on Iran. Not a happy opening for Gwadar, was it?
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - Shaky Musharraf holds only the military card
Musharraf has dismissed the idea of declaring an emergency or deploying the army, despite the fact that all armed-forces intelligence agencies have reported the failure of the civilian administration and the police to handle the protests. The agencies say that probably the only way to contain the protests would be the deployment in sizable numbers of paramilitary forces such as the Pakistan Rangers.
The crisis is being compounded by other developments. According to latest reports, the Pakistani Taliban have seized control of settled areas such as Tank in North West Frontier Province, and the leader of the Awami National Party, Isfandyar Wali, revealed on television that the Taliban now control Frontier Region (FR) Kohat, just 15 kilometers from the provincial capital, Peshawar. "I am constantly saying that Taliban are very rapidly getting powerful in the North West Frontier Province, but nobody is listening to me," said Wali...
The crisis has thus severely eroded the credibility of the Musharraf government, and when the dust settles, both he and the military will find themselves on shaky ground.
Compounding the situation are regional developments. The Taliban are about to launch an offensive in Afghanistan, and a US attack on Iran is not out of the question. These events could propel stronger Iraqi resistance to the US-led occupation there, and set shock waves in motion from Pakistan to Israel. As a major US ally in a region where anti-US forces are calling the shots, any weakening of the Pakistani leadership would have far-reaching ramifications.
It would seem that the military card is the only one Musharraf has left to play. He is truly between the proverbial rock and hard place.
Pervez Musharraf's sincere thanks to the Chinese FM.
Associated Press of Pakistan - Chinese assistance helped realize dream of Gwadar Port: President
General Pervez Musharraf on Tuesday said the dream of the Gwadar Port was realized with China’s assistance and said its continued involvement will help in further improvement of the facilities and infrastructure at the country’s first deep-sea port.Talking to Chinese Minister for Communication Li Shen, the President said the two countries enjoy an all weather and strategic partnership that will continue to grow for the mutual benefit of the two people.
He said there was a need for greater long term involvement between the two countries to make the Port an important Container and Energy hub for the region.
The Chinese Minister said that with the completion of the second phase, the Gwadar Port will be able to handle the world’s biggest ships and more infrastructure can be added to enable it to serve as an energy hub for the region.
Today would be a good day to attack Gwadar, and the authorities know it.
Reuters AlertNet - Pakistan steps up security ahead of port opening
GWADAR, Pakistan, March 19 (Reuters) - Pakistan tightened security around a coastal town in Baluchistan province on Monday, a day before the opening of a port authorities hope will bring prosperity to the remote and troubled region.
Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf is due to open the Gwadar deep-sea port on the Arabian Sea on Tuesday along with Chinese Minister of Communications Li Shenglin.
China financed 80 percent of the initial development costs of the $248 million project in Baluchistan province, 70 km (45 miles) east of the Iranian border and on the doorstep of Gulf shipping lanes.
Thousands of soldiers and policemen guarded the coast and roads to the port on Monday while fishermen were told to stay well clear.
It could well be a slip of the pen, but note the writer's words here. Pakistan's FM is pushing for the Karakoram pipeline as a "contingency plan". Contingency for what, exactly? And it shows the pipeline is still very much on the table.
Pak bends over backwards for Beijing, offers oil backup-Rest of World-World-NEWS-The Times of India
BEIJING: Pakistan's foreign minister, Khurshid Kasuri, on Monday offered to build oil reservoirs and lay gas pipelines in his country's territory across the Chinese border to help Beijing prepare a contingency plan.
Kasuri, who is here on a four-day trip, is pushing Beijing to set up an energy corridor linking the Chinese-built Gwadar port in Pakistan to western China.
The Gwadar port in Baluchistan, located at the entrance of the Gulf and about 460 km west of Karachi, is due to be opened on Tuesday.
It will be operated by the Port of Singapore Authority, which has obtained a 40-year contract to run it.
"The most important thing is the trust that exists between China and Pakistan. The energy corridor will pass through a friendly country, which will be a big advantage for China,"Kasuri said in an interview to the official media in Beijing.
Probably too early to pass judgment on the current situation, but many commentators are calling the protests about the sacking of a prominent judge the biggest challenge yet to Musharraf's authority. It looks like he has made a serious miscalculation here, which is not a terribly good idea in what is supposed to be an 'election year'.
On the other hand, at least the anti-government protest groups appear to represent elements of civil society, a far more positive sign than bands of Islamists on the streets.
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Blood and batons spur Pakistan row
A simple constitutional matter of referring the country's most senior judge to be investigated by the appropriate judicial body is getting bigger, nastier, and potentially more dangerous for the present government by the day. And it would appear that it is a problem of the government's own making.
Essentially, a few hundred lawyers in half a dozen cities was all the opposition amounted to in the beginning.
If they had been allowed to shout slogans and wave their fists in front of courts, that would probably have been the end of the matter.
But local administrations chose to pit their police forces against the protesting lawyers. Bloody scenes in Lahore last Monday unified the lawyers like never before and hardened their stance.
They have taken to the streets again on Saturday. And the police have got their batons out. Result? More blood being spilt, more publicity.
Anyone would think China has a policy of encirclement...
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - China moves into India's back yard
China is all set to drop anchor at India's southern doorstep. An agreement has been finalized between Sri Lanka and China under which the latter will participate in the development of a port project at Hambantota on the island's south coast.
An agreement on the Hambantota project was among eight that were signed during Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapakse's recent visit to China. Even as the Sri Lankans were finalizing the deal with the Chinese, they clinched an agreement with the Americans. In Colombo, officials reached agreement on an Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreement (ACSA) with the US.
The agreements come at a time when India is already watching with concern the growing Pakistani influence in Sri Lanka.
The Hambantota Development Zone, which the Chinese will help build, will include a container port, a bunkering system, an oil refinery, an airport and other facilities. It is expected to cost about US$1 billion and the Chinese are said to be financing more than 85% of the project.
 Not one but two articles in today's Asia Times highlight the difficult geopolitical position of Pakistan, sandwiched as it is between both Iran and Afghanistan.
In the first, the author notes that the Balochistan issue is a common problem for Iran and Pakistan, while not forgetting that Iran is in truth a more fractured society than it would appear. Morover, the IPI pipeline gets into it too. How the US will deal with this is anyone's guess:
The moot point is to what extent Musharraf is willingly cooperating with US regional policy against Iran. He is skating on thin ice. He may endear himself to Washington as a brave leader in the Muslim world, but Pakistani public opinion is averse to serving the US agenda over Iran. This contradiction is fraught with dangers. It can only further accentuate Musharraf's isolation within Pakistan and add to the country's overall political uncertainties.
Washington could be miscalculating that only the Shi'ites in Sunni-dominated Pakistan will feel alienated by Musharraf's unfriendly attitude toward Tehran. The fact is, in emotive terms, the average Pakistani citizen is bound to view US hostility toward Iran as yet another instance of Washington's "crusade" against the Islamic world.
But Washington, on its part, can draw satisfaction that it is killing two birds with one stone. It may become difficult to advance the Iran-Pakistan-India gas-pipeline project when a thick cloud of distrust threatens to engulf Pakistan-Iran relations.
Musharraf's problems do not end there, with the US and NATO now threatening to extend the war in Afghanistan to Pakistan's NWFP:
"It was not an option for Pakistan to carry out any operations on its own, as Washington has completely shown its mistrust in Pakistan's ability to conduct any credible military operations against militant hideouts," a top security official told Asia Times Online on condition of anonymity. "There was only one demand: that Pakistan allow NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization] troops the right of hot pursuit of al-Qaeda in Pakistani territory, or NATO would force its own way in."
Will they really go in 'hot pursuit' of al-Qaeda and the Taliban across the Durand Line? To do so could well further destabilise an already shaky Islamabad. It just goes to show that the GWOT, energy and the nexus of world instability (what I may begin to call the Iran-Pakistan-Afghanistan or IPA triangle) are intimately connected.
Ironic. To all intents and purposes, the Pakistani government and ISI created and armed the Taliban in the 1990s. Now the beast is biting the hand that fed it.
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Taleban spread wings in Pakistan
Some in NWFP say the Pakistani military establishment has deliberately allowed the Taleban to expand their area of influence.
This, they say, provides the government with the argument that the Taleban phenomenon is a spontaneous development which is difficult to control in Pakistan as well as in Afghanistan.
NWFP Governor Ali Mohammad Jan Orakzai seemed to be arguing this way when he told journalists last month that the Taleban movement was "developing into some sort of a nationalist movement, a sort of liberation war against coalition forces".
But senior administration officials in Peshawar say the government is not colluding with Taleban.
Instead, they say, the government simply lacks the capacity to counter an increasingly aggressive Taleban force both on the border with Afghanistan, and in the provincially-administered Frontier Regions (FRs), those areas that separate the border tribal regions from NWFP.
Could it get any more geopolitical? In the space of two paragraphs, we basically drag in everything that's going on in the region and join the dots. All we need now is some Kiplingesque figure with a peg leg and a name that rhymes...
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - Pakistan makes a deal with the Taliban
One-legged Mullah Dadullah will be Pakistan's strongman in a corridor running from the Afghan provinces of Zabul, Urzgan, Kandahar and Helmand across the border into Pakistan's Balochistan province, according to both Taliban and al-Qaeda contacts Asia Times Online spoke to. Using Pakistani territory and with Islamabad's support, the Taliban will be able safely to move men, weapons and supplies into southwestern Afghanistan.
The deal with Mullah Dadullah will serve Pakistan's interests in re- establishing a strong foothold in Afghanistan (the government in Kabul leans much more toward India), and it has resulted in a cooling of the Taliban's relations with al-Qaeda.
Not quite as catchy as the 'Silk Road'
Asia Times Online :: China News, China Business News, Taiwan and Hong Kong News and Business.
China's ever expanding pipeline network has the potential to bring about a significant strategic realignment of Xinjiang and the adjacent region. Central Asia, with its huge reserves of oil, gas and minerals, has already seen some sharp rivalry among the United States, Europe and Japan. All of the major powers, in conjunction with multinational corporations, are seeking to secure alliances, concessions and possible pipeline routes in the area.
Oil and gas pipelines to China from Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan could easily be extended to link into the pipeline networks of both Russia and Iran. This model has been dubbed the "Pan Asian Global Energy Bridge" - a Eurasian network of pipelines linking energy resources in the Middle East, Central Asia and Russia through to China's Pacific coast. A major part of the old Silk Route is inexorably turning into the "Black Gold Route" of the new millennium.
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news : China-Pakistan rail link on horizon
Beijing's involvement in several rail projects in Pakistan is motivated primarily by commercial considerations, but it also sees distinct advantages for its improved transportation and access to Central Asia and the Persian Gulf states. A reliable network of road and rail links can only ensure China's access to energy-rich central Asia, serving it both commercially and strategically.
Terrorism, as always, has a political motivation and today's attack was obviously intended to derail peace talks between India and Pakistan. Thus the leaders should be applauded for their restraint and unity in condemning it on the one hand without jumping to conclusions on the other.
If the two countries can get an agreement on Kashmir together, it would be a landmark achievement - but there are many vested interests who would rather see them fail. Expect attacks like this to increase over the next months, especially as Pakistan heads towards a watershed election.
Terrorism in India | Murder on the Friendship Express | Economist.com
After three days of talks, they are likely to sign several agreements, including one to reduce the risk of an accidental nuclear war. They will also continue negotiations to resolve two smaller territorial disputes: Sir Creek, a briny stream that should set the two countries’ maritime border; and the Siachen glacier, on the eastern edge of Kashmir. The peace process, says Commodore Uday Bhaskar, of the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses in Delhi, is “becoming blast-proof”.
Given the rivals’ history of war and slaughter, that is no trifle. Yet it is one thing for the process to survive under fire, and another for it actually to succeed. Dolefully, with every blast, peace looks more distant.
Two incidents last week, both relatively minor, but perhaps evidence that the militants in Greater Balochistan (both Baloch nationalists and Islamic extremists) are on the move.
First in Iran, then in Quetta.
Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Burma - not to mention Pakistan. Countries can choose their friends―but not, as Manmohan Singh, India’s prime minister, has noted, their neighbours.
Asia.view | Trouble with the neighbours | Economist.com
In its present buoyant mood, India may think that it can cope readily enough with living in a low-rent, violent district. Fine―until something big goes wrong. India's rising international prestige and economic allure could both be put in jeopardy if the country is sucked into some headline-grabbing regional conflict. The best way to reduce that risk will be to find ways of helping the neighbours with a bit of gentrification here and there whenever the opportunity arises, however grudging they may be in their response.
The author does make a bit of a leap in his logic, but his assessment does sound plausible at least.
Militarising Balochistan : outlookindia.com
The following details of this project have since become available from an article titled Militarisation of Balochistan" written by columnist Mir Mohammad Ali Talpur in the Post of February 1, 2007:
* The Chinese will be building the airport 26 km away to the north-east of the existing airport towards Pasni.
* Disregarding the normal procedure, a sum of Rs.1.05 billion for the acquisition of 6,500 acres of land has been released to the Military Estate Officer in Quetta instead of to the Civil Aviation Authority. The land for the airport has already been acquired by the Military Land and Cantonments Department. The JFK airport in New York, one of the largest in the world, covers an area of only 4,930 acres. The land on which the proposed new Gwadar airport will be located is much more than the land on which the JFK airport is located and twice the size of the land on which London's Heathrow airport is located (2,965 acres). In Heathrow, one plane lands or takes off every 46 seconds. Such heavy commercial traffic is never visualied in any airport of Pakistan even in the medium and long terms. Such a huge airport near Gwadar would, therefore, have other objectives. It will serve as a mammoth airbase.
It's all about supply, demand and transit. At best the IPI is a potential solution to the Kashmir issue. But at worst it's yet another point of friction.
Asia Times Online :: Middle East News - Gas: Iran turns up the heat
Putin paid special attention to cooperation "in building facilities for gas production and transportation in India and the adjacent region" (emphasis added). This is a reference to the highly politicized US$7 billion project for a 2,100-kilometer Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline.
Putin's visit to Delhi came closely on the heels of the latest round of negotiations over the price of gas for the Iran pipeline project. According to a new formula proposed by Iran, the cost of gas will translate at the Pakistan-India border as $4.93 per million British thermal units (mBtu), plus $1.5 per mBtu that India would have to pay to Pakistan as a transit fee. Indian officials have since expressed optimism that the signing of India's $145 billion gas mega-deal with Iran might take place by June.
In geopolitical terms, it could be the focal point of a new power-sharing axis, perhaps under the auspices of the SCO:
In other words, we're talking seriously for the first time about the prospect of a gas market uniting Turkmenistan, Iran, Pakistan, India and China. This is where a breakthrough in the protracted negotiations over the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline project could become a defining moment for energy politics in Eurasia.
Russia is not in competition with Iran in tapping the South Asian market for gas. It is expedient for Russia if Iran gets deeply engaged in the Asian market (which includes two energy guzzlers - China and India) and, that, too, with Russian equity participation in the actual construction of Iran's pipeline to South Asia. That could lead to Gazprom's participation in the highly lucrative distribution and retailing of Iranian gas in Pakistan, India and China.
The grand opening swiftly aproaches, and writers are beginning to consider the deeper geostrategic significance of Gwadar. yet we still don't really know that much about it.
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news, business and economy from India and Pakistan
It is expected that with Gwadar port operational, Pakistan will become a key player in the Persian Gulf region and serve as an energy corridor for Central Asia, South Asia and western China. With the exception of Chahbahar port in Iran, Gwadar will be the only free port between Dubai and Colombo providing container storage and warehousing facilities...
Pakistan plans to spend $7 billion in the next eight years to improve the country's road infrastructure, completing a network linking China and South Asia through Gwadar by 2014.
Because of its geo-strategic location, Gwadar has the potential to become a regional maritime hub. The 14.5-meter draft of the port will be able to accommodate up to "fifth-generation" ships, including Panamax and mother vessels.
Islamabad firmly believes that the Gwadar port is a key entry point for energy supplies for Central and South Asia, as well as western China. It will allow the expansion of oil trade in the region, as it provides the shortest possible route to landlocked, oil-rich Central Asian states.
You don't say, India. About time too.
IndianExpress.com :: We don’t envy China, will rather emulate it, says FM
Recognising China’s prowess in attracting and implementing infrastructure projects, finance minister P. Chidambaram today said India needs to “emulate” China in infrastructure development.
Despite having a different political environment, he said India can learn from China about execution of projects on time. This according to the FM includes enforcing a disciplined on those leading project execution, along with a reward-punishment incentive structure.
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - India takes a slow road
India's involvement with road-building is bitterly opposed by both the Taliban and its sponsors in Pakistan, as the highway under construction not only will boost Afghanistan's connectivity and trade ties with the outside world, it will also enhance the trade and influence of Iran and India - countries whose relations with Islamabad and the Taliban are hardly friendly. Pakistan fears that with the completion of the highway, India's presence and influence in its neighborhood to the north, ie Central Asia, will increase manifold...
The land route through Pakistan is the simplest way of moving goods between India and Afghanistan. Unfortunately, Pakistan is reluctant to allow India access to Afghanistan via its territory, although such a move would earn it considerable revenue in the form of transit fees. This Pakistani stance has made the land route via Iran into Afghanistan all the more crucial for India. India hopes that the road link through Iran and Afghanistan will open up markets for its goods in Afghanistan and beyond in Central Asia. Hence the Indian interest in completing the Delaram-Zaranj highway...
Since 2003, India and Iran have been cooperating in developing the Chabahar port complex. Chabahar is closer to India than the existing port at Bandar Abbas. Iran has extended huge concessions to Afghanistan to attract it to use Chabahar port rather than the port that Pakistan is developing with Chinese help at Gwadar in Balochistan province.
Since the fall of the Taliban in 2001, Pakistan's influence in Afghanistan has fallen dramatically and that of India's has grown. None of the projects that India is involved with in Afghanistan undermines Pakistan's influence as much as the Zaranj-Delaram road link. This explains why Indians working on this project are particularly vulnerable to Taliban attacks.
Here, the author suggests that the US and NATO are so keen to keep Pakistan and Musharraf on side that they are even considering making the Taliban "part of the solution". Part of the solution to what exactly? It's complicated... but the long-term problem appears to be Iran. Yet appeasing the Taliban would surely contradict the entire purpose of the War on Terror. What a balls-up.
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news, business and economy from India and Pakistan
...will the cozy US-Pakistan condominium that has been at the steering wheel in the "war on terror" in Afghanistan allow regional powers like Russia (or Iran and India) to mess around in the Hindu Kush? The exclusivity of that condominium has been an integral part of the war through the past five years.
The geopolitics of the Afghan war are seldom talked about, but they have figured throughout at the center of the closely guarded US-Pakistan agenda. For the same reason, very little is heard nowadays about the idea mooted by French President Jacques Chirac at NATO's Riga summit in late November regarding the formation if a "contact group" on Afghanistan comprising countries in the region that have an interest in Afghanistan's stability. The proposed group would have made the conduct of the war more transparent and regional powers would have found such a forum useful.
But Washington has all but smothered the French proposal. Both the US and Pakistan would be horrified if any such contact group took shape and then proceeded to demystify the hunt for the elusive Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.
But there are other nuances, too. It appears that the US has broached with Pakistan the issue of "help and assistance" in respect of its standoff with Iran.
International Relations is an immensely complex subject, and in order to stay focus everyone has pare away a few factors now and again. The southern hemisphere is completely off my radar, and I am also frequently guilty of ignoring the 'R' in 'BRIC' too - Russia.
But Russia is definately part of the equation even in these post-Cold War days. Historically a partner of India, while China and the US uneasily applied themselves to Pakistan for geostrategic reasons, Russia is now edging back into India's sphere due to its energy wealth.
The article predicts that by 2020 or so, India's energy needs will treble. So it is competing with traditional rival China for Russian hydrocarbons. The US would also like to court India in order to ensure a regional balance, and is doing so in the shape of nuclear technology. Britain's Gordon Brown also just made a visit, though it was overshadowed by the facile Big Brother controversy.
Ironically, therefore, India is now in a great bargaining position, with suitors on all sides. Bizarre as it may sound, India is the new Pakistan.
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Russia and India's complex friendship
Before leaving Moscow President Putin was keen to point out "the very specific feature of our interaction has to do with the fact that we have moved from the simple paradigm of seller-buyer relationship to jointly work on products".
Russia is trying to tie in India's lucrative arms and energy contracts.
Moscow has reason to act. India has just begun building a new strategic partnership with the United States.
The spur for this was President Bush's landmark deal offering co-operation in civilian nuclear energy programmes. Washington wants to make common cause with India as the world's biggest democracy and a counterweight to rising China. It wants to sell its own nuclear reactors to India and weapons too.
So India's rise means it is being courted on both sides.
Delhi's ultimate aim is probably to secure what it calls "strategic balance" to avoid becoming too closely tied to either Moscow or Washington.
That will mean some hard-nosed bargaining. But it is India that is buying, whether it is energy or arms, and so it finds itself in an unaccustomed but increasingly powerful role as a major economic player, with both Moscow and Washington vying for its business.
A likely successor to President Niyazov of Turkmenistan has emerged in the shape of a former dentist and health minister, the deliciously unpronouncable Gurbanguly Berdymukhammedov. By the sounds of it, he is going to be very much a puppet of the security services: we shall see.
However, what is more certain is that the parlous state of Turkmenistan is still a likely spark for tension and instability. Agriculture and the energy industry are in meltdown, and various vultures - not just Russia, but China and India too, are hovering. 'Elections' will be held on 11 February, but whether or not Turkmenistan can be turned around without disintegration and intervention is open to debate.
Turkmenistan's new father | Economist.com
One possible scenario would be for the new president to take Turkmenistan some way along the path followed by Kazakhstan, and make the country more welcoming to foreign investment. Turkmenistan has what are believed to be among the largest reserves of natural gas in the world. BP’s conservative official estimate is 2.9trn cubic metres, but the Turkmen authorities claim gas the true figure is up to 20bn cu metres. Even if reserves are only half this level, Turkmenistan would rank above major gas producers such as Algeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Nigeria.
In recent years, Turkmenistan’s gas output has been around 63bn cu metres per year, the majority of which is exported to Russia and Ukraine. The sanctity of long-term deals was always open to question, as Mr Niyazov tended to renege on agreements once a more lucrative offer was on the table. If the gas sector is to be opened up, Russian capital could face serious competition from Western and Chinese companies, as well as Indian. This in turn would open the question of export routes—whether to the West via the Caspian Sea (from where Turkmen gas could conceivably utilise existing pipelines) or to the East to China (perhaps via Kazakhstan, which is due to complete a pipeline to China around 2009). Any redirection of Turkmenistan’s gas exports could have potentially severe repercussions; for it would deprive Russian monopoly Gazprom of sizeable volumes of gas that it is counting on to meet its domestic supply and export commitments.
Iraq's sectarian strife haunts Pakistan|International News|Reuters.com
As if he didn't have enough to worry about with al Qaeda, the Taliban, jihadi groups fighting the Indian army in Kashmir, and Baluch separatist rebels, Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf shudders at the spectre of sectarian strife.
"The Islamic world is heading toward a crisis," Musharraf told university students earlier this month, at a time when the world was aghast over Shi'ite guards taunting Iraq's Sunni former ruler, Saddam Hussein, at the gallows.
"If we don't get our act together, there will be a sectarian catastrophe in the Islamic world," said Musharraf.
Could Pakistan also descend into Iraq-style anarchy? The conditions appear to be there:
Pakistani intelligence channelled funds, covertly supplied by the United States and Saudi Arabia, to hardline Sunni groups to recruit and arm fighters for a jihad, or holy war, against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.
Simultaneously, the success of the Islamic Revolution in neighboring Iran led to a wave of Shi'ite radicalism in Pakistan that set the scene for a feud with the Deobandi groups that has dragged on for the past quarter century.
I don't believe in Al Qaeda: that is I don't think there is some kind of unified Islamic terrorist group that can be stopped by any means at the West's disposal. But I do believe that there is such a thing as terrorism inspired by Islamic as well as political objectives, and I do believe that current foreign policy is doing them more favours than anything else.
The problem is that the West is now fighting on two fronts, Iraq and Afghanistan, both of which are bordered by Iran (which can supply oil and weapons). Pakistan is also a grand source of personnel.
Sooner or later, if the West is to 'win', it will have to join these dots - but of course that will only create more of them.
Global terrorism | On the march | Economist.com
Western security officials say the revitalisation of al-Qaeda is partly due to the fact that “the pressure is off” in North Waziristan, a Pakistani tribal region where the army agreed a ceasefire with militants last September. Afghan and NATO commanders complain that the truce has also provided cross-border safe havens for the Taliban. Mr Negroponte called Pakistan an important ally, but also “a major source of Islamic extremism”.
Western officials also worry about what they call “blowback” from Iraq: instead of sucking in would-be suicide bombers on one-way tickets, it could pump out battle-hardened fighters to wage violent campaigns elsewhere. Mr Negroponte said an American pull-out would allow Iraq to replace Afghanistan as an al-Qaeda sanctuary.
If I had the collaterol, I'd set up a Chinese restaurant and a chain of KTV parlours. Or invest in a few security companies.
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - Chinese eye Pakistan's real estate
Gwadar is another area where China's stake in real estate will prove strategic. After the completion of the deepsea port project, Gwadar is likely to emerge as a South Asian business hub and modern investment center. Property in Gwadar is considered a good investment and the speculative trade in real estate is booming there.
Islamabad has plans to establish hotels, motels, playgrounds, boating clubs, theme parks, marinas and other recreation projects in Gwadar. The future port city will be connected to the rest of the country by land, sea and air links. The government has decided to set up a tax-free industrial zone of international standard in Gwadar and it has acquired about 4,050 hectares of land for this purpose. Housing schemes and highrise construction on commercial plots are planned and will be up to international standards.
Officials in Islamabad claim that leading international investors have shown keen interest in Gwadar because of its strategic location and potential for becoming a major transshipment trade center in the region. Chinese companies are likely to invest in real-estate projects in the second phase of the Gwadar seaport project.
Cheers, Muhammed Hanif. Still, this is going to shake up relations between the US and Pakistan even further - not to mention within Pakistan where divisions between the ISI and the army are already a potential source of political tension. Who will be running Pakistan this time next year? Musharraf and the army - or the Taliban-sympathising ISI?
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Mullah Omar 'hiding in Pakistan'
Taleban leader Mullah Omar is living in Pakistan under the protection of its ISI intelligence agency, a captured Taleban spokesman has said...
Asked about Mullah Omar, he says: "He lives in Quetta."
"He is protected by the ISI," Mr Hanif adds, referring to Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai made similar allegations last year.
Mr Hanif also alleges that former ISI head Hamid Gul is supporting the Taleban against Afghan and foreign troops.
The ISI was instrumental in backing the Taleban after civil war swept Afghanistan following the withdrawal of Soviet troops in 1989.
Fantastic. Of course it could all be part of Pakistan-Afghanistan governmental-level tensions, but still, it doesn't help.
Gwadar and oil politics -DAWN - Business; January 15, 2007
China needs Gwadar port facilities for future oil and gas imports. While there is a suggestion in Pakistan that Gwadar should be declared a free oil port, Beijing is reportedly negotiating with Islamabad for around five oil and gas pipelines from Central Asian Republics (CARs).
China has shown interest in a trans-Himalayan pipeline to carry the Middle Eastern crude to western China. It would allow Beijing to reduce the portion of its oil shipped through the narrow and unsafe strait of Malacca carrying up to 80pc of its oil imports. The proposed pipeline would link Gwadar port with China's remote western regions, and it would be partly financed by Beijing.
Energy and emissions are bursting onto the mainstream political agenda in a big way already in 2007. First there was the announcement of an EU common energy policy initiative, and now 16 Asian and Pacific states, including Japan, China and India, are bundling on board.
Of course, both are too little too late, but still, it's better than nothing. It is only through the realisation that energy and the enviornment are common problems that need common solutions that conflict can be avoided, and that has to be a good thing.
BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | Asian states sign key energy deal
It could be, though the election will of course be rigged. Yet a quick review of Pakistan's 60-year history will turn up no other leader who has remained in power for seven years, and it has to be said of Musharraf that he has kept a grip on things during an unusually turbulent period. Neverthless, the chances of South Asia's volatility being turned up to the boil this year are pretty high.
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Pakistan's uncertain year ahead
After seven years of Gen Musharraf and the military, people are tired of the army and looking for change.
Moreover only a genuine civilian government could begin the attempt to start a reconciliation process with all the alienated, angry elements of society such as the Baloch nationalists and the Pashtun extremists in the tribal agencies bordering Afghanistan.
Is such a transformative election likely?
Not really.
Gen Musharraf has repeatedly said in the past few months that that Pakistan would fall apart if he was not there to guide it, that a strong hand is needed and there can be only one centre of power - and by that he means the army.
So 2007 will be full of political noise and thunder, talk of deals and conspiracies, but when people do actually go to the polls, many will not be expecting anything much to change.
Won't be able to post again this year, so I'll leave you with a nice little festive roundup of this year's flashpoints.
Predictions for next year? On top of the usual, Somalia, Syria, Zimbabwe and of course Pakistan - watch this space.
The problem with the Afghan-Pakistan conflict is that many of those involved belong to neither. The Pushtun are not in league with the post-Westphalian nation-state system, nor are they entrapped by militant Islam. But how long can that continue? An absorbing article.
Pushtunwali | Honour among them | Economist.com
If history is any guide, many Pushtuns in northern Pakistan and southern Afghanistan will continue their drift to Islamist militancy until they are defeated, which looks impossible, or the Pakistani and Western forces are withdrawn. They are then likely to return to their simmeringly murderous tribal ways. That would be better than the current mess. But it would also leave millions of people outside the writ of Pakistan and Afghanistan. If either state is to succeed, the alternative writs of Pushtunwali and jihadist Islam will have to wither. But that will not be soon.
The PLA is not known for its frequent overseas sojourns and joint exercises, so it's significant that the partner this time around is Pakistan. Also worth noting is the rhetoric on the evils of 'terrorism' and 'separatism' - one man's terrorist etc. etc...
Xinhua - English
"For many years Pakistan and China have focused on economic development and regional stability. At the same time, we are confronting the three evil forces, terrorism, extremism and separatism. China is ready to conduct anti-terrorism with Pakistan to construct the area of lasting peace and mutual prosperity," said Lieutenant General Lu Dengming, Chief of Staff of the Chengdu military region of the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA).
Apparently available in The Dawn newspaper - need to keep searching.
Abstract follows below.
A devastating crisis is unfolding around the Suleiman Range in Balochistan bordering two volatile countries: Afghanistan and Iran. Simmering since the very annexation of Balochistan with Pakistan, this is the fifth uprising and military action supported by air force.
Since December 2005, the conflict has resulted in major loss of life and collateral. The Government of Pakistan has confessed to having used air force and the death toll of 188 lives including 42 security personnel, 88 militants and 62 civilians including women and children and 400 injuries. They have arrested 4,000 persons. Out of these, only 200 have been produced before the courts.
On the other hand, nationalists claim that in more than 12 air raids, over 300 people have died, more than 600 arrested, about 1,000 are missing and about 280,000 have been displaced. They report that in the recent phase, 37 women have been killed and more than 80 injured.
Although the Government declared in December 2005 that the insurgency will be quelled in one month, it practically appears to have failed even after over seven months. On the contrary, militant activities appear to be on the rise in frequency and magnitude.
Time and again, the Government has claimed instigation and support from the bordering countries. Balochs being spread across the borders in Seistan in Iran and Helmand in Afghanistan, this conflict may spread across the borders. In addition the speculation is that India, China and the USA in Afghanistan competing for the Central Asian trade routes may get involved in this conflict.
The paper will take into account the various unfolding events in the region and on the basis of field studies will suggest measures to avoid potential disaster for sustainable development in the region.
* Nizamuddin Nizamani is a trainer, writer and researcher. He has worked with the National Bank of Pakistan (NBP) and the NBP Staff College, Karachi, Pakistan.
Tensions there may be between Afghanistan and Pakistan, but this bizarre episode of the blame game will hardly help them. One can only wonder what Karzai was on when he made his comments.
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Pakistan 'out to enslave Afghans'
Mr Karzai's latest verbal attack on Pakistan came while he was visiting a school in Kandahar.
"Pakistan has not given up hope of making us slaves. But they cannot," he said.
"This tyranny against our people is not by the nation of Pakistan, it is by the government of Pakistan."
You don't need a degree in development economics to see who the winners and losers will be. Despite China's economy relying on manufactured exports to the West, it still invests nearly twice as much in R&D as India; I dread to think what levels it spends on infrastructure.
In fact, according to the OECD, China will soon be the world's second-biggest R&D spender in dollar terms - $136bn this year as opposed to Japan's $130bn and America's impressive $330bn. You have to hand it to the PRC though - they are full of good sense on a lot of things (shame about the environment).
Europe, on the other hand, would do well to up its spending and encourage the things that it is good at - technology and services - rather than buckling to domestic pressures from trade unions and farmers. I know who the smart money is on.
India’s R&D spend lower than China’s
India’s expenditure on research and development is 0.7% of its gross domestic product (GDP) as compared with China’s 1.2%.
Minister of state for HRD D Purandeswari told the Upper House in a reply that North America spends 2.7%, Japan 3.1% and the European Union 1.8% of their GDP in R&D.
The authorities evidently take these things seriously.
Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan - Roads blocked in Balochistan in protest at Mengal’s arrest
Nationalist parties called the wheel-jam strike to protest at the arrest of Sardar Akhtar Mengal, the Mengal tribal chief and president of the Balochistan National Party, and hundreds of other Baloch activists over the last 10 days.
A BNP spokesman termed Sunday’s strike a “grand success”. He claimed that police had detained 300 Baloch workers, including the 70-year-old father of a party leader, in Quetta alone and injured 60 protestors during the last three days.
China is investing ever more in Pakistan, particularly with regard to Gwadar in Balochistan. What the benefits for Pakistan are unclear, other than the general boost to the local economy, since most of the cash is going towards Chinese self-interest.
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - China's growing stake in Pakistan
Under the FTA signed last week, Pakistan will gain access to the vast Chinese market, while China will sell Pakistan more and more goods, as well as get cheap raw materials and the use of Pakistani ports for the onward export of its goods to world destinations at reduced freight rates.
The biggest chunk of Chinese investment in Pakistan is being spent on development projects in the country's largest province, strategically located Balochistan. The most important projects being launched with Chinese assistance in Pakistan include construction of the Gwadar deepsea port in Mekran, the Saindak copper and gold project in Chaghm, and the lead-zinc-mining project in Balochistan's Lasbela district.
The Chinese have invested about $230 million in the Gwadar port and the Saindak copper project, which is more than 50% of their total investment in the country.
Can't see it happening - it would be too much of a loss of face for Musharraf, not to mention a potentially destabilising force for Pakistan's fragile sovereignty.
The News - International
WASHINGTON: UN inspectors, including weapons specialists, scientists, engineers and analysts, are ready to be despatched to Balochistan, if President Musharraf allows them to monitor the Pakistan-Afghanistan border areas, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) said in a commentary.
Referring to the conflicting claims by Pakistan and Afghanistan regarding presence and support to Taliban, the WSJ said an independent evaluation of the facts was necessary. “The only system in the world that can do this is the UN’s Monitoring, Verification, and Inspection Committee (Unmovic). With over 300 experts, it can conduct a comprehensive fact-finding mission in Balochistan immediately.”
Written by Miss Ashley Bommer, who worked at the US Mission to the UN during the Clinton administration, it said the UN inspectors can determine if the Taliban command hubs do exist. They will report back to the international community truthfully. Unmovic’s record of independence speaks for itself.
The article said: “Hamid Karzai and Pervez Musharraf are arguing about the Pakistani province of Balochistan. Intelligence sources — and President Karzai — say that the Taliban’s kingpin, Mulla Omar, is operating out of Quetta, Balochistan’s capital. And he is sending arms and fighters into south-west Afghanistan. No wonder President Karzai is upset. The frontline of the Taliban and al Qaeda insurgency has a backline in Pakistan. But US troops cannot go into Pakistan — precisely where al-Qaeda and the Taliban are. So there is a simple next step: Gen Musharraf should agree to UN inspectors.
Hu Jintao's visit to India and Pakistan raises interesting questions. The much-vaunted Pakistan-China nuclear deal has so far failed to materialise, presumably either due to pressure from manmohan Singh, or a realisation by Beijing that to encourage Pakistan too much would create an uneasy balance of power along nuclear superpower axes (US-India and China-Pakistan).
Even trickier for China is the fact that its growing economic and political strength means that it can no longer sit back and mumble its non-intervention mantra. It has to play a part in global affairs, like it or not, and it's in South Asia that it perhaps faces its sternest test. Undoubtedly, China is becoming ever more locked in to the world environment it for so long sought to avoid.
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Pakistan - China: Is it really all smiles?
According to Dr Rizvi, China has realised that if it is to play a dominant role in the region, it must first establish its credentials as an "ambassador of peace" in the region.
This could be the toughest bit for Pakistan to swallow.
In essence, it means China may no longer be prepared to be a silent spectator to the many conflicts that Pakistan is involved in.
Nor can it be seen to be lending Pakistan any form of moral, political or material support for its policy of maintaining "low-intensity conflict" with its troubled neighbours.
China may also become more sensitive towards local insurgencies such as the one in Balochistan where it is helping Pakistan build an alternative port that is billed as the gateway to Central Asia.
 If the world were a democracy, 'Chindia' would have the casting vote for sure. But it's not, and the relationship between the Asian giants is a complex one, without doubt.
The Economist is swift to point out the theory:
The appealing notion here is that India and China have complementary economies. China, through its burgeoning factories, is the world’s workshop. India, with its fast-growing IT and outsourcing firms, is becoming the world's back office. With Chinese hardware providing the orchestra and Indian software writing the score, surely they can make beautiful music together?
But it does not gloss over the reality:
The current complementarity in Chindian economic ties, such as it is, looks rather old-fashioned, even colonial. India exports raw materials to China, especially iron ore, and imports cheap Chinese manufactures in exchange.
In future, fierce competition is more likely than closer co-operation. Efforts to join forces in a global search for energy security are unlikely to overcome deeply ingrained Indian suspicions of China. The mistrust dates back to India’s humiliating defeat in the India-China war of 1962, and is fed by China's ties to Pakistan. It still impedes trade and investment. Chinese firms find it hard to secure visas for their staff in India, and are excluded from some projects, such as running ports.
 In IR terms, India is the periphery to China's semi-peripheral zone, and the core remains, as always, the West.
Liberalization or no liberalization, so many poor people ain't going to get rich that quick, especially in India where the insane economic policies of the 'license Raj' have never fully dissipated. And in realist thinking, the balance of power - both strategic and economic - remains at the forefront of minds in New Delhi and Beijing.
But in summary, despite the differences, their destinies may becoming ever more intertwined. So easy to lump them together; but so hard to pull them apart. Sooner or later, the chumminess will fade.
Article reproduced below.
Continue reading "The Myth of Chindia" »
Almost everything you needed to know about Balochistan, but were afraid to ask, neatly summed up here. The only aspect which is not dealt with is the presence of the US in Afghanistan and its uneasy influence over Pakistan, and also India. One couldn't ask for a situation where so many rival powers were so interdependent and intermeshed.
Note also that India is building a rival port in Iran at Chabahar - that I did not know, and it only makes the situation more volatile.
The Geostrategic Implications of the Baloch Insurgency
Balochistan's strategic significance and natural endowment makes it a critical province for Pakistan. Strategically, Balochistan bridges Central, South, Southeast and East Asia on one end, and Central Asia, the Persian Gulf and the Middle East on the other. Regional states, especially India, cannot reach the energy and trade markets of the Caspian Sea region without transit through Balochistan, which Pakistan denies to India despite repeated pleas on New Delhi's behalf by Washington. India absorbs punitive freight costs by routing its trade goods through the Persian Gulf and the Middle East, even for shipments to Afghanistan. Since 2001, New Delhi has made great strides in reaching out to Baloch leaders, whose National Jirga has now made it a party to the arbitration of their "Accession to Pakistan Pact" in the ICJ (The Nation, November 13).
India is also wary of the Sino-Pakistan naval port on the Arabian Sea, which has raised Beijing's profile in the Indian Ocean. India is even more concerned over Taliban-inspired "militant groups" who operate in Indian-administered Kashmir. As the Taliban are widely believed to have their operational bases in Balochistan, they equally worry India's allies in the region, especially Afghanistan and Iran. Afghanistan resents Pakistan's patronage of the Taliban, which have become the largest threat to its stability since their regrouping in 2003. Iran is also unhappy with Islamabad's policy toward the Taliban due to the group's anti-Shiite theology and the subversive operations of the Taliban's allies, such as Jandallah, in Iran's Sunni-dominated province of Sistan-Balochistan.
No, not Tiananmen, Tiawan, Tibet and torture (hope that doesn't get this website blocked). Now we're talking about the traingular relationships of China, India, Pakistan and the US. I might add Iran in there as well - see below.
Asia Times Online :: China News - The geometry of Sino-Indian ties
Hu's visit will be the crowning event to mark a decade of steady improvement in bilateral relations and serve as an impetus for further strengthening ties between Asia's two emerging powers. However, the substance and consolidation of the improving bilateral relationship will have to overcome what I term the four Ts - threat perceptions; territorial disputes; and the two triangulars, ie, China-India-US and China-India-Pakistan.
Despite progress in bilateral relations over the past few years, mutual suspicions remain. Partly this is due to the dynamics of security dilemma and structural conflicts between the two Asian giants. India has watched China's phenomenal growth in economic and military areas with both envy and alarm. The very fact that China continues to lead India on many indicators of power poses a greater threat than its military defeat 40 years ago.
Likewise, China is paying close attention to India's growing military power and its nuclear and missile developments. Beijing is wary of New Delhi's eastward strategy of developing greater economic and military ties with Japan and the countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.
Just to really complicate matters, let's stick oil and and gas into the equation too. Then you have the Iran-US-China triangle over Iran's nuclear ambitions, and the Iran-Pakistan-India triangle relating to gas pipelines. No-one said this would be simple...
As always, it come down to economics in the end. But at the end of the day, 'One China' has to stop somewhere. Beijing cannot keep on claiming all areas on the edges of its current borders to be Chinese territory, for if it wins concessions on these, then it will only stake more claims elsewhere.
Last vestige of old Tibetan culture clings on in remote Indian state | The Guardian | Guardian Unlimited
Although many in Tawang have heard of breathtaking advances taking place in Tibet, symbolised by the world's highest railway connecting the Himalayan plateau with the rest of China, there are few takers for that kind of pell-mell rush to modernity.
"I do not understand this race to be modern. We have to be careful to strike a balance between economic growth and cultural erosion. We have to limit outside influences and control to some extent," said Tsona Gontse Rinpoche, a high-ranking lama who is also an elected local politician. "Our society can easily fall apart otherwise. In Tibet these things are happening. Buddhism is dying there."
Despite these concerns India is pressing ahead with its own plans to build dams in Arunachal Pradesh to generate hydropower for energy-starved India and blast tunnels through the Himalayas for a motorway network. This would be a step change for Arunachal Pradesh, which does not even have an airport.
Experts say that China covets the Tawang region not just for the picturesque monastery but for economic and strategic reasons. Many point out that China has plans to divert the Brahmaputra river, which begins in Tibet but passes through Arunachal Pradesh, to feed its arid northern and western regions and generate power.
It's been ten years since the last visit of a Chinese leader to India, and border disputes and trade will be high on the agenda. It'll be interesting to see the outcome of the discussions, if indeed such becomes public knowledge. China has some major issues over India's trade protectionism, not to mention the disputed territories. In fact, the most interesting question will be: "What has India got to gain?"
My guess would be that in retrun for a concession on Aksai Chin or the North Eastern border, India will make some concessions for Chinese companies. That'd be a win-win situation for both - but with China winning considerably more.
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Chinese leader begins India visit
Delhi is also suspicious of China's relationship with its long-time rival Pakistan.
And China is concerned about Delhi's growing ties with Washington, especially the landmark nuclear agreement between the two allowing India access to civilian nuclear technology.
The Tibetan government-in-exile, led by the Dalai Lama, is hosted by India and is based in Dharamsala in the country's north-western state of Himachal Pradesh.
The last few weeks - which have seen China tighten its grip over Africa and Asia, and the Republicans lose their grip in the Capitol and rethink their whole strategy - has generated a slew of articles over at Asia Times Online.
One author speaks of a new East-West Cold War style conflict developing, though I'm not so sure how stable or even feasible a China-Russia-India alliance would be:
It isn't yet fashionable to speak openly of a world subdividing itself again into two camps - those aligned with the US and those aligned with the Russia-China axis at the core of a new rising, multifarious yet coherent pole of the East - with the dividing line between the two camps consisting of the contest for control over global strategic resources.
Despite all the relevant signs pointing precisely in that direction:
# The deepening accord in all key spheres between Russia, China, India, the other rising powers of the East and the key resource-rich regimes of the world.
# Steadily rising East-West tensions, the ever-more divergent interests between East and West.
# The increasingly incompatible approaches to global issues and problems resulting in an ever-widening chasm between East and West.
Far too long to analyse in full, but worth looking at at a later date.
Another writer re-examines the China-India relationship:
Professor Ma Jiali, a veteran South Asia expert at the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations (CICIR), says India's recent economic performance combined with its growing importance in international affairs has led to a rethink in Beijing of India as zhong he guoli, a Mandarin term that translates roughly as a "comprehensive national power".
For Beijing, relations with India are now considered the highest priority, according to Professor Ma, given that India is what he calls a "four-in-one" country. "India falls into each of the four major categories of countries that China wants to focus its diplomatic energies on," he explained. The four categories are: Developing countries, neighboring countries, rising powers, and influential actors on the international stage.
Another still looks at China and Russia, and finally we have the four horsemen of America, Pakistan, Iran and North Korea.
There's really far too much to read here, but the implication is clear - the world is shaking into what looks like being its new order for quite a while. I personally will suggest that the US will remain one major pole, with China its key rival and Europe, Russia, India and Iran as second-tier powers that either ally with the gig pair or stand their distance. Both a multipolar and a bipolar environment at the same time - twice as nasty, twice as unpredictable.
Which implies that there are considerations and unpleasant things going on to ignore.
PakRealEstate.com :: News Details
The Chinese envoy, who flew to Gwadar for attending the conference, said that with the passage of time economic and business relations between Pakistan and China would assume new heights and his country would extend maximum help and cooperation to Balochistan for making it an important strategic business and trade hub in the region. He was optimistic about the high-profile economic potential of Gwadar.
Speaking about the future of the new port city, he said that ignoring all security apprehensions the Chinese companies were improving their commercial investment in Balochistan.
However, what this report fails to note is pointed out on an Indian website:
Chinese engineers and workers at the port have been attacked and some killed by Baloch separatists when work on the port was underway.
Analysts say Gwadar's location has great strategic value - both from the military and energy stand points. The gas pipeline from Central Asia would pass from Gwadar and there is competition from many countries including Iran that is also offering facilities to Central Asian states from Chah Bahar in Iran.
Separatist Baloch organisations have opposed the port's development and have targeted 'settlers' from Punjab who have purchased land cheap in Gwadar in anticipation of investment and fast-paced development, causing a spurt in land prices.
Can't see it happening just yet - both China and India still have a long way to go before their economies are truly liberalised, though the PRC is perhaps a bit ahead. But at least the idea is out there, and aid'n'trade may be better than the niggly conflicts of the last 50 years.
China pushes India for free-trade pact- The Times of India
"Following reopening of the trade post on the Indian-Chinese border, our government is considering FTA talks with India," Chinese assistant minister of commerce Fu Ziying said at a recent meeting of the 2007 China Industrial Development Forum in Beijing. The two countries recently reopened cross-border trade at the Himalayan Nathu La Pass last July, 44 years after the trade ended in the wake of a short border war between them.
India has filed the largest number of patent violation cases against Chinese companies at the World Trade Organisation. Chinese leaders feel that the main reason for this is that New Delhi refuses to recognise China as a free market economy. However, most western countries have taken the same stand saying that China highly subsidies its exportable products and cannot be regarded as free market economy.
 In a few easy steps. First, either assassinate an opposition leader or bomb a training camp. Then sit back and allow angry protests to get out of control:
At Bajaur 10,000 men sporting beards and guns gathered to listen to the firebrand mullah Faqir Mohammad, who had reportedly left the madrassa shortly before the attacks. He exhorted them to join a jihad to “oust American and British forces” from Afghanistan. The tribal agency is believed to be a refuge for al-Qaeda and anti-coalition forces that cross over to fight in the neighbouring Afghan province of Kunar.
Brew for a few more weeks and then serve back upon your neighbours and allies.
More later, and check out also the Asia Times report that suggests the perpetrators were not Pakistani armed forces but NATO.
Economist report
Asia Times report
Continue reading "How to Foment Rebellion" »
 Well, we all woke up to a slightly different world. With even Pakistan condemning the tests (there's an element of hypocrisy there, but still, it's the thought that counts) we are perhaps seeing a sudden wave of unity against Kim Jong-Il. All eyes are now on Northeast Asia.
There's also about to be a significant management handover, and for Ban Ki-Moon (who now looks almost certain to take over the reins at the UN) this is going to be a baptism of fire if ever there was one.
The question is, of course, what happens next? There's three main possibilities I can see.
Firstly, should North Korea pull another similar stunt in the near future, things are going to escalate further. The military solution is of course the nightmare scenario, but there is the chance that the US Army and the PLA would actually join forces and attack North Korea from both north and south. Under such a rapid attack, it's likely that the regime will fold within hours, but this will of course leave the PRC and ROK with an immense headache that they won't have immediate solutions for.
More likely is the turning of the economic screws. But this would also be calling Kim's bluff, since he has previously stated that sanctions will be seen as an act of war. Beijing will also be reluctant to implement this option, since once the DPRK begins to buckle then hordes of refugees will swarm across the Chinese border and create huge social problems in its northern provinces.
The last option is to do nothing - perhaps keep the intelligence work going but little more - and hope that the regime collapses by itself. This could take a long time. And Japan and South Korea will be tempted to develop their own nuclear defences in response, which will ratchet up regional tensions even further. China especially will find it hard to accept a nuclear-armed Tokyo, and Japan itself will convulse with disputes about its pacificist constitution, its role in world affairs and the legacy of Hiroshima.
Ban Ki-Moon, though ostensibly an international figure, is going to be inextricably bound up with the fate of what is after all his home country. Shinzo Abe too is faced with a huge crisis in his first weeks in office. Now is not a good time to be changing the staff; Kim probably knew that all along.
Hamed Karzai is proposing a Pashtun Loya Jirga involving elements from Afghanistan and Pakistan, both state and non-state actors. It sounds like an attempt to reach some kind of rapprochement with Pakistan and the rebels at the same time; perhaps too ambitious an ideal.
It is in some ways an admission of the illegitimacy of the border, the so-called Durand Line, clumsily drawn up by the British in 1893. The plan also sounds like an ideal arena for a couple of assasination attempts.
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Karzai for jirga to crush Taleban
"I am thinking of a meeting between Afghan civil society, Afghan elders, tribal chiefs, clergy and Afghan spiritual leadership plus the intellectuals. From the Pakistan side I am hoping for the same thing," Mr Karzai told this correspondent in an exclusive interview.
"It should be a gathering of the people from one end of the Afghan border with Pakistan to the other end."
Mr Karzai said the jirga would attempt to revive Pashtun civil society on both sides of the border in order to combat what he called the growing Talebanisation of the region.
Asia Times Online says that foreign-sponsored 'Taliban', who are operating outside the 'Old School' Taliban defeated in 2001, are working to establish Pakistani interests in the Pashtun heartlands.
Think about the wheels within wheels here. If Tehran is sponsoring the Taliban, then NATO and US forces are fighting a proxy battle with Iran. If Islamabad is sponsoring the Taliban, then the fight is against Pakistan - and its sponsors, China, whereas the US and NATO could find allies in India. Even more complex, are the CIA and ISI in cahoots to inflitrate the Taliban to break Mullah Omar (if indeed he is alive or even matters any more?) Or are the CIA and ISI working at cross purposes?
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - Pakistan reaches into Afghanistan
Afghanistan is at the point now that, apart from the Taliban, independent commanders have emerged. Nearly two centuries ago, they were sufficiently organized to drive out the Soviets.
Now, in their new struggle against foreign forces, they could evolve into a separate movement fueled by Iran or Pakistan, or both, or turn into an independent movement. Alternatively, as in the recent past, they could melt into the Taliban.
Whichever way it develops, this force will have an important bearing on Afghanistan's future - and, as important, its neighboring countries.
More interesting paragraphs, detailing the formation of various groups, below.
Continue reading "Who is Backing the Taliban?" »
 There's been no doubt this last week over who's been generating the most column inches: his publishers must be ecstatic. However, the wisdom of what may have been intended to be Pervez Musharraf's book launch tour is in grave doubt.
It can't be easy for General Musharraf - who is, after all, an unelected dictator - to take part in so many unrehearsed media interviews, and his temper was clearly fraying. (He was in good company, with Bill Clinton publicly losing it too).
As if facing uncomfortable questions on both CNN's mainstream interview show Late Edition and the satirical Daily Show weren't enough, he also took considerable flak from the BBC's Newsnight which unearthed an MoD-sponsored analysis accusing Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence agency (ISI) of supporting the Taliban.
With his enmity with Afghanistan's Hamed Karzai now in the open, and doubts over the seriousness of his relationship with the US and UK surfacing by the minute, Musharaff was already looking isolated. Then came the blunt announcement by Indian police that the ISI may have been directly involved in the Mumbai bombings.
It's looking like Musharaff's time for retirement is drawing closer: he should go now, before somebody decides for him - perhaps with a bullet. (Is it possible to overthrow a military dictatorship with a coup d'etat? Anything's possible in that part of the world.)
But whether a regime will contribute to Pakistan's stability or decrease it further remains to be seen. Like Tito in the former Yugoslavia, Musharraf has at least been successful in holding together the potential pit of vipers.
A power vacuum could unleash tragic forces, as we have seen in Iraq. The Taliban resurgence would receive a massive boost, with grave consequences for NATO; potential for war with India over Kasmir would increase; Balochs, Pashtuns, Punjabis and other groups would fight it out; and Iran, China and the US would be unable to stand back and watch.
Not forgetting that Pakistan has nuclear weapons. Fantastic. Wolf Blitzer I can understand, but what possessed him to appear on the Daily Show? I ask you.
Though there are prospects for co-operation, it may just be a short term measure in a more permanent pattern of conflict.
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - India-China work out new energy synergies
While China has been accommodating to India in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, most agree that it is just some leeway to keep burgeoning Chinese trade exports to India well oiled. New Delhi knows that the battle for Central Asian energy resources will be bitter. Delhi has been developing independent links with Central Asian countries, with India's first military base to be operational in Tajikistan soon.
Some observers have drawn a parallel between US-China policy and Beijing's engagement of India. Washington has looked at China as a potential rival whose growth momentum cannot be contained and hence must be engaged in a constructive way that is good for business.
 "We are used to thinking in terms of conventional warfare between nations, but energy is becoming a weapon of choice for those who possess it." Such is the assesment of Senator Richard Lugar, and it is not a bad one at all.
There's a long piece about energy security in Asia Times, coming from an unusual angle. Should the US ally with the big four Asian economies - China, Japan, South Korea and India - rather than Europe?
Here's the most interesting paragraphs, paraphrased from an expert from China's Institute of Contemporary International Relations, Su Jingxiang:
...if only Washington were savvy enough to "revalue the tremendous market potential" in China and "abate unnecessary doubts toward China", closer cooperation between Beijing and Washington on international energy issues could be realized...
He pointed out that gunboat diplomacy was no longer workable either in the Middle East or Latin America as it produced only terrorism and resistance. At the same time, Su acknowledged that growing dependence of energy imports "weakened the competitiveness and injured the economic security of the US"...
Su advised that the US should "steer away to more cooperation" with other major oil consumers (such as China and India). "The new type of strategic partnership will consolidate the negotiating capacity of oil consumers in their talks with the oil producers, thus helping boost the economic boom and national security of the US," he wrote.
It's not a bad idea, but it does overlook that essential strategic reality - China and the US are competing for the same limited supply. That, after all, is why Russia and the the Middle East have them over a barrel.
But the author does note that the recent visit to China by US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has resulted in some concessions by either side (another minor Yuan devaluation, and increased voting power for the PRC in the IMF) that must improve the relationship.
In a sense, then, China has jumped at the chance to manoeuvre the US, weakened as it is by Iraq, into a bargaining position.
Meanwhile, Putin is taking the opportunity to buy back some control over the former Eastern Bloc via gas pipelines. You need to read the article to get the full details, but basically Russia is playing a clever political hand in its negotiations over routes for Kazakh oil. Unencumbered with concerns about democracy and human rights, it's also sorted out its difficulties with Turkmenistan too.
The wheeler-dealings have implications for both Asia and Europe:
Curiously, Gazprom struck the deal with Turkmenistan soon after the US assistant secretary of state for South and Central Asia, Steven Mann, visited Ashgabat to lobby for progress on the moribund Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAP) gas-pipeline project, which was supposed to be an integral part of the new grand US strategy of creating a "Greater Central Asia" with a unified energy structure for the countries of Central and South Asia. It was hoped to draw Central Asia into the US sphere of influence and pit Indian interests against Russian influence in the region.
But the TAP and the United States' "Greater Central Asia" strategy are not the only casualties of Gazprom's Turkmen deal. The ramifications of the deal run in far-flung directions deep into the European continent. The deal arguably frustrates the US attempt to reduce the European Union's dependence on Russian energy supplies.
Since Russia looks like it has clinched the stranglehold over Europe's gas supply, a remaining factor is Iran. Europe has to get access to Iranian gas somehow, in order to give itself an alternative to Russian gas:
And this is undoubtedly a critical factor of divergence in the respective approaches of Russia, the EU and the US toward the Iran nuclear issue. Though Russia is certainly interested in a solution to the Iran crisis, Moscow will have reason to worry about an EU-Iran agreement that may lead to an improved energy dialogue between the two protagonists, as that would make Iran a rival to Russia on the European gas market. As for Tehran, it, too, perfectly well understands that its preference should be to settle with Western Europe rather than with Russia. That is why Tehran has opted for independence in its gas policy and has scrupulously kept Gazprom out of its Southern Pars gas fields.
Yet there is another chance - China. China is a key competitor for Central Asian gas and has bought up large holdings of it.
In summary:
Russia is in control of Central Asian gas routes to the EU
The EU's only alternative is Iran
The US is constraining Iran over the nuclear issue, so that's off the agenda for the time being, which suits Russia fine
Only China can compete with Russia for control of Central Asian energy
Can the US really broker a deal with China and India, or will national interests win through?
Fascinating stuff. Full article below.
Continue reading "Axis of Oil" »
 What did Richard Armitage mean by "bomb Pakistan back to the Stone Age?" Surely no-one would notice the difference?
Joking aside, the recently-published remarks reveal a lot about both regimes.
First, let's examine Musharraf's motivation in letting them spill. He may well be trying to attract sales for his forthcoming autobiography, which I wouldn't put past him (and doesn't the publication of memoirs signal impending retirement too?) But more likely, he's using them as a bargaining chip in a relationship that's looking increasingly strained over Pakistan's wishy-washiness over Al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
Fact is that most of the populace in Pakistan are pro-militants and anti-West, and that's scary for both Musharraf and his erstwhile ally Bush. The Pakistani President may well be trying to win back a little popular support.
The remarks also speak volumes about the naivety of the Bush administration. The original "back to the Stone Age" bombing campaign over North Vietnam merely strengthened resolve there, leading to America's ultimate defeat. And to think that high-altitude strikes alone can change a regime or even a policy is also wrong - look at the various post-1991 operations against Saddam Hussein's Iraq before the 2003 invasion.
Finally, for a senior member of the US administration to even entertain such thoughts is clearly a sign of how dangerous it had become. You have to feel a little for Musharraf being put under that kind of threat.
Not to say Armitage's was the only view. There must have been some real infighting over Pakistan at the time. I personally remember speaking to a Pentagon spokesperson who told me that, as far as the DoD was concerned, as long as Pakistan helped in the War on Terror it could buy as many weapons as it liked. That in itself is an equally perilous attitude.
Either destroy a nation or arm it to the teeth. Such seem to be the limitations of US foreign policy. Facilitating development and offering economic, industrial and technological assistance in order to promote a transition to legitimacy? Not even part of the equation.
Guardian story below.
Continue reading "Rolling Thunder Phase II" »
BBC NEWS | Have Your Say | Peace Day: Balochistan
Even as I write, I am afraid of that knock on my door.
I am afraid that I may be picked up and lost to the world forever. Since 1945, the people of Balochistan have been waiting for the day when the world will finally wake up to their suffering.
 I confess to having thought that the Non-Aligned Movement died a quiet death sometime around the 1980s, but this week's summit in Havana tends to disprove that, even if the best picture I could find was of Nasser, Tito and Nehru in 1956.
But what is the movement's relevance in the post-Cold War context of globalization and the War on Terror?
Even the BBC's coverage of this 'rogue's gallery' is a little tongue-in-cheek:
In the corridors behind the meeting halls, I found wry smiles and uneasy reassurance from diplomats who looked as though they were guests who had somehow turned up at the wrong party.
But the reporter does identify the fact that this is a forum where, in the absence of the US and Europe and without the framework of the UN or WTO, these countries can talk about their own agendas.
It appears to be paying positive dividends already in the shape of the resumption of India-Pakistan peace talks over Kasmir - Musharraf has been quite the international diplomat this month (I note he is scheduled to speak at the Oxford Union in two weeks too).
Any deal in the subcontinent has to be positive. Let's not knock it any further.
BBC article below.
Continue reading "Non-Aligned Against the World" »
International Crisis Group - Pakistan: the Worsening Conflict in Balochistan
With the federal government refusing to compromise with its Baloch opponents, intent on a military solution to a political problem and ignoring local stakeholders in framing political and economic policies, the directions of the conflict are clear. The military can retain control over Balochistan’s territory through sheer force, but it cannot defeat an insurgency that has local support.
Still, the conflict could be resolved easily. Free and fair elections in 2007 would restore participatory representative institutions, reducing tensions between the centre and the province, empowering moderate forces and marginalising extremists in Balochistan. In the absence of a democratic transition, however, the militancy is unlikely to subside. The longer the conflict continues, the higher the costs – political, social and economic for a fragile polity.
In rupee terms at least, though perhaps not in dollars. However, to whom the benefits will accrue is not stated.
Pakistan News Network article below.
Continue reading "Balochistan 'Mega Projects'" »
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - Pakistan: Hello al-Qaeda, goodbye America
Pakistan, the leading light in the United States' "war on terror" and a "most important" non-North Atlantic Treaty Organization ally, is returning to the heady times of before September 11 when it could dabble without restraint in regional affairs, and this at a time when Afghanistan is boiling.
"The post-September 11 situation [in Pakistan] was draconian," a prominent militant told Asia Times Online on condition of anonymity. "All jihadi organizations were informed in advance how they would be [severely] dealt with in the future and that they had better carve out an alternative low-profile strategy. But some people could not stop themselves from unnecessary adventures and created problems for the establishment. This gave the US the chance to intervene in Pakistan, and over 700 al-Qaeda mujahideen were arrested.
"Now the situation changed again ... we know the state of Pakistan is important for the Pakistan army, but certainly we know that the army would never completely compromise on Islam."
Reflecting its increasingly proactive stance in international affairs, China has called for the WTO to re-open the Doha round.
BBC NEWS | Business | China urges trade talks revival
After meeting Mr Lamy, the WTO's director general, Chinese commerce minister Bo Xilai said Beijing hoped to play a "constructive" role in getting the talks back on track.
But he said the onus was on the US and the EU to revive the talks.
"At present, we need the developed members to take the lead in making substantial concessions in order to create conditions for the quick resumption of the negotiations," he said.
"Only by changing the unbalanced situation between the developed and developing members can we advance the sustained and healthy development of global trade."
Meanwhile, David Cameron has ideas of his own:
"We must try to restart the Doha round," he told business leaders in Mumbai.
"But if we cannot get a breakthrough, we should consider the possibility of an EU/India free trade agreement."
 Tory leader David Cameron, as always endearingly fluffy, has drafted an editorial on his policy towards India. He's even blogging his current trip (oh how modern of you, David, well done) complete with YouTube-style videos. Of course it's a barefaced swipe for the ''ethnic vote'', but note the flipside of the coin that Cameron is handing us here:
Our special relationship with America has been forged through a shared past and a shared understanding of the world. And now, in the 21st century, as the world's centre of gravity moves from Europe and the Atlantic to the south and the east, I believe it is time for Britain and India to forge a new special relationship, to meet our shared challenges in this new era of international affairs.
All well and good, but India isn't going to protect our security or economies in the way that the US has for the last 60 years - it's a badly underdeveloped country with vast problems of its own. Yes, we must recognise the shift in power from the West to the East - India and China - but we must also acknowledge the practicalities.
Otherwise, Cameron is nicely on message:
For most of the past half century we in the west have assumed that we set the pace and we set the global agenda. Well now we must wake up to a new reality. We have to share global leadership with India, and with China. And we must recognise that India has established beyond argument, through its economic and political success, its right to a seat at the top table. India, one of the great civilisations of the world, is truly great again.
India must be greatly enjoying the wave of sycophancy that's headed its way this year, but the fact remains that in terms of international leadership it's China we have to look to. India has far less influence over the region than the PRC; if anything, it has effectively been encircled by it.
In his rhetoric on the environment and globalisation, the man does have a lot of platitudes up his sleeve, but his conclusion is dead-on:
In an ever more connected world, we cannot afford to ignore the forces that are shaping it.
Reprinted below.
Continue reading "Cuddly Cameron in India" »
 The news that Pakistan has signed a deal with pro-Taliban militants in Waziristan may indicate to some a process of realpolitik; if you can't beat them, which the authorities couldn't, then find a compromise.
However, contrast this with the killing last week of anti-Taliban separatist leader Nawab Akbar Khan Baloch and the situtaion is thrown into relief.
The question that would be on my lips if I walked into my office in the Pentagon this morning would be: "So whose side are they on? Are they anti-Taliban or pro-Taliban? How are they going to enforce this anyway?"
The answer to the third question is probably: "They can't":
Under the accord, the Pakistani military promises to end major operations in the area...
Local Taleban supporters, in turn, have pledged not to harbour foreign militants, launch cross-border raids or attack Pakistani government troops or facilities.
Observers say meeting these conditions could be difficult, as the Taleban has support on both sides of the Pakistan-Afghan border.
It's all the stranger when one considers that it's a good bet that Osama bin Ladin and Mullah Omar are both holed up somewhere in Waziristan, harboured by Taliban sympathisers.
As one of the US's key allies in the 'War on Terror' it appears to be something of a paradoxical policy which may only make things more difficult for embattled NATO troops in Helmand, who are taking casualties by the day.
Continue reading "Whose Side Are They On?" »
Pakistan | A quick death | Economist.com
The government calculated that by eliminating Mr Bugti it would undermine the insurgency. This logic underpinned its counter-insurgency strategy, with Mr Musharraf often blaming the war on the rebellious Bugti and Marri chiefs and another aged chieftain, of the smaller Mengal tribe. It reckoned that few Baluchis, nationalist or not, would shed tears for Mr Bugti, who was arrogant and reckless, terrorised dissident kinsmen and political opponents, and betrayed his allies.
It should have reckoned differently. Antediluvian though he was, Mr Bugti was quite successful in casting himself as the champion of every angry Baluch. More progressive Baluch nationalist groups, furiously opposed to the feudal system that enriched Mr Bugti and his dissolute relatives, gave tacit support to his campaign. And indeed, another Baluch insurgent group, the Baluchistan Liberation Army (BLA), is believed to include well-educated, city-raised youths as well as bearded tribesmen.
Full Economist article below.
Continue reading "Balochistan Backfire" »
 With the body of Nawab Akbar Bugti seemingly safely interred, Pakistan's leader Musharraf must now be taking stock of the situation. It would appear that what initially seemed like a victory for him may well have been badly mismanaged.
Rather than putting out the fires of Baloch nationalism, the killing of Bugti may well have fanned them further. The aim of the Pakistani military appears to have been to subdue and humiliate the Balochs, and this has backfired. Firstly by concealing the body, and then by refusing to meet the wishes of the family to have him buried in Quetta, the authorities have angered the Baloch further.
In a sense this is the propaganda opportunity the Balochs needed to bring their cause into the international limelight. The killing has featured prominently on mainstream media such as BBC World, and activist groups such as the Government of Balochistan website have seized the opportunity to make a call to arms:
The Government of Balochistan (GOB) in Exile declares the “Baloch War of Independence” in Pakistan. The goal of this war is to secure the freedom of the Baloch people by liberating Pakistani-occupied Balochistan. Every nation in the world that supports the aspirations of the Baloch people for freedom must come forward and assist. Self-determination is a basic part of human rights, and various charters of the United Nations recognize it. Hence, it is the right of the Baloch people to liberate Balochistan that was forcibly occupied by Pakistan.
Just like the KLA back in the late 1990s, the Baloch appears to be utilising media technology to mobilise support; note also their professions to avoid terrorist tactics and the sheer propagandistic tone of the post.
It appears that Musharraf has, for the time being, unwittingly handed his enemies the upper hand. How China, the US and India will react remains to be seen - and will probably stay out of the public eye.
BBC report below.
Continue reading "Bugti Buried: Musharraf on Edge" »
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Rebel killing raises stakes in Pakistan
By killing Bugti, the president has now earned the permanent enmity of not just the Baloch rebels but the wider Baloch population who may not believe in taking up arms, but are still frustrated with Islamabad for its failure to develop the province.
He may have seriously underestimated the power of Baloch nationalism which has led to four wars with the Pakistan army in the past.
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Pakistan rebel death sparks riots
In one of his last interviews - with the BBC's Urdu Service in July this year - Mr Bugti was asked why a peace deal between his tribes and the government had not been implemented.
"They say that I am intransigent, I don't listen to them, I don't bow before them," he said.
"They say that I should bow before them and salute them, and give up my weapons, and then everything will be all right."
His vision for Balochistan has never been achieved but the insurgency he led has been one of the biggest headaches for President Pervez Musharraf in recent years, our reporter writes.
The main question now is whether or not his death will provoke more violence from the separatists, he adds.
BBC NEWS | Business | India to put $1bn in African oil
China is involved in Sudan, Nigeria, Zimbabwe... now India gets in on the act.
"India and China - because of their population demands, economic growth and increasing prosperity - need energy security, plus they have money to invest now," said Mr Khatua, India's ambassador to Ivory Coast.
However, India's desire to invest comes as Ivory Coast remains unstable following a civil war that ended in 2003.
"India has identified this market and it believes this crisis will be resolved soon and that it will then be able to penetrate deeper into the market," said Mr Khatua.
 Just when I thought I was done with my essay on faith and the state, a paper which concentrates on the relationship between terrorism and the political alienation of European Muslims - especially Pakistani-origin young men in Britain - along comes this:
The most disconcerting aspect of the foiled terror plot is that British-born Muslims are its chief suspects. At least that was what initial reports have suggested. If true, it underscores the reality that British Muslims - especially the young generation that is as British as fish and chips or the game of cricket - should be integrated into British society, not just economically, but also politically and culturally. This is something that the government of Prime Minister Tony Blair has failed to accomplish. A plan of action in that direction is sorely needed.
Writing in Asia Times Online the defence consultant Ehsan Ahrari is almost bang on the same wavelength as me when it comes to this. The key to preventing similar attempts of this nature is to get these guys into the political mainstream in some way that will let them be heard without taking recourse to violence.
He notes that the spin about delinking the pursuit of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars is pure bunk; it's these two factors that make young Muslims so angry. He also points out that alienation from the mainstream, both cultural and political, is a major source of dissent.
However, the author then begins to drift off track:
There is little doubt that all three themes explaining Muslim alienation, frustration and even anger are valid and generally accurate. However, the root cause of their alienation may be directly related to their continued economic marginalization - especially related to a general absence of upward economic mobility among Muslims in most Western societies, with the United States being an exception - as well as the unwillingness of Muslims to come out of their self-created cultural cocoons.
While some Muslims in Britain are undoubtedly economically marginalised, this is partly down to them. If the Indians and Chinese can make it then why can't they? There is an element of choice in there - it's not just racism and victimisation.
Ahrari does go on to focus upon this, and lays the blame squarely at the feet of foreign Islamic instructors who have no concept of the societies in which the young men have to live:
When Muslim youngsters are exposed to such sources of religious education, no wonder they evolve frameworks of reference of their own that are characterized by rigidity, cultural chauvinism and a lack of tolerance for deviation from strict Islamic precepts. What also reinforces that frame of reference is the fact that those youth see their parents remaining culturally separate from Western society. This may have nothing to do with any feelings of alienation or contempt. More often than not, immigrants are too busy making ends meet and have little time for anything else.
Thus there's a combination of factors; the external geopolitical ones; the uneasy contrast between East and West; and the rigidity of some interpretations of Islam. It's a recipe for disaster:
Add to these frames of reference of alienation and religious intolerance the highly contentious political issues of the era after the September 11, 2001, attacks on the US, when Islam is under constant scrutiny and criticism and is frequently a target of derisive verbal assault, and you have the making of a person who, if he is not a potential recruit for al-Qaeda, has ample sympathy for it.
The author's solution, however, smacks of 're-education' and all the Orwellian undertones that brings with it. I fear that that won't work, and for many of Britain's young Muslims the damage has already been done.
Continue reading "Faith in the State" »
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - India's foray into Central Asia
It is Tajikistan's geographic location that has drawn India to this former Soviet republic. Tajikistan shares borders with China, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. A narrow stretch of Afghan territory separates Tajikistan from Pakistan-administered Kashmir.
The significance of this region for India's security is immense. It is close to areas where scores of camps for jihadist and anti-India terrorist groups are based, and it is in the proximity of territory where Pakistan and China are engaged in massive military cooperation. Besides, Tajikistan is in Central Asia, a gas-rich region in which India has growing interests.
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Pakistan arrests in 'bomb plot'
Pakistan has made a number of arrests in connection with an alleged UK plot to blow up planes flying to the US.
"There were some arrests in Pakistan which were co-ordinated with arrests in the UK," said Tasnim Aslam, spokeswoman for Pakistan's foreign ministry.
Pakistan had played a very important role in the investigation, she added.
 Elizabeth Mills at Asia Times Online seems to think that the whole $200bn Gwadar port project could end up a massive disaster due to the security situation in Balochistan.
This could well be correct, but let's stand back for a moment and consider it from a strategic point of view. Gwadar is of great significance to the Pakistan-China-India nexus for a number of reasons:
The Pakistani government is positioning Gwadar as "an energy port and hub for storage and refining".
No country knows the strategic value of the port more than India, which is unsettled at the prospect of having at the very least a possible Chinese listening post so close to home and at worst a possible Chinese naval presence on the Indian Ocean.
And bear in mind the following:
Consider also the possibility that the security situation is now so poor in the area surrounding the port - and more widely in the surrounding province of Balochistan - that even the port's authorities are reportedly questioning whether the facility can become operational in the near term.
Couldn't Gwadar and Balochistan thus become the scene of a proxy conflict between China-Pakistan and India? It may already be so, with the Pakistani regime mainly propped up by the Chinese and its military supplied with Chinese weapons, while there have been accusations of India supplying arms to the Baloch.
Continue reading "The White Elephant of Gwadar?" »
Reports of the Baloch insurgency's demise appear to have been greatly exaggerrated.
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Balochistan gas pipeline blown up
A spokesman for the Sui Southern Gas company said the pipeline was located some 350km (218 miles) south of the regional capital, Quetta.
Pipelines are targeted regularly in this gas-rich province where tribal groups are pushing for greater autonomy.
The attack will affect supplies to Karachi and areas of Balochistan.
The director of the gas company, Naeem Akhwand, told the BBC that major infrastructure consumers, like the Water and Power Development Authority, Karachi Electricity Supply Company and Pakistan Steel Mills would be affected by the attack.
Security Watchtower
Useful summary of links and information on the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline project.
Battleground Balochistan - HindustanTimes.com
Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting Tariq Azeem levelled this charge at a joint press conference with Major General Shaukat Sultan, the director-general of Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR).
"The weapons recovered from miscreants in Balochistan are sophisticated, expensive and modern, which is a strong indication of involvement of a foreign hand," The News quoted him as telling the media.
He did not initially name India. What began as an innuendo about a "foreign hand" became a direct reference to New Delhi when pressed by reporters.
He said: "Everyone knows why India has opened its consulates in Afghanistan near Pakistani borders.
India could be in a better position to explain the reasons for opening of consulates in Afghanistan near Pakistani borders."
 Over a billion people means a lot of problems. But while the Bombay attacks and the Kashmir conflict have a high profile on the international scene, the Maoist insurgency in India does not.
Though Manmohan Singh terms it the country's biggest threat, the way in which the Naxalites are being handled sounds cackhanded indeed:
A huge swathe of Dantewada, where no roads penetrate the forest, remains outside the government’s control. There, the Maoists are well-entrenched. Nearly 60 years after independence, the Indian state has still failed to deliver to these parts even rudimentary development: roads, schools, health-care. A big iron mine in the district employs mainly outsiders and pollutes a river. It is easy to see why a crude, violent ideology, discredited even in its homeland, might take root, and why Mr Singh might be right about the Naxalite threat. Other terrorists attack the Indian state at its strongpoints—its secularism, its inclusiveness and its democracy. Naxalism attacks where it is weakest: in delivering basic government services to those who need them most.
Not to mention the army turfing villagers out of their homes, a policy that resembles America's deeply flawed and even counterproductive 'strategic hamlets' tactic from Vietnam. That didn't work either, and it sounds like India is alienating its rural people even further.
You can read all the column inches you like about India's burgeoning economy, but unless a way is found of spreading the wealth, the same old problems are going to linger on - and one day they could explode.
Continue reading "Hearts and Minds" »
Lots of useful stats and analysis on the Iran-Pakistan-India LNG pipeline, and more besides on India's energy issues.
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news - Price imbroglio stymies Iran pipeline
The United States is no longer the main stumbling block to the planned US$7 billion Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) pipeline. All issues, including US pressure to abandon the 2,100-kilometer project, have been relegated to the back burner as India and Pakistan team up to try to persuade Iran to soften the price at which it wants to deliver the gas.
Tehran is demanding $7.20 per million British thermal units, linked to global crude-oil prices. The Iranian position is considerably higher than India's offer of $4.25 per mBtu at its border with Pakistan. Though Pakistan has been voicing plans of going it alone in case India decides to drop out, that may not happen if the price issue is not resolved.
Iran has rejected India's demand for a price equivalent to international long-term gas-supply contracts, saying that New Delhi should forget about buying Iranian gas at a low price. Tehran's stand has been emboldened by a Europe desperately seeking other sources of gas after last year's crisis due to the spat between Russia and Ukraine.
 Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Pakistan launches huge nuclear arms drive
An interesting exchange:
Commodore Uday Bhaskar of the Institute of Defence and Strategic Analysis in Delhi suggested the timing of the report could be intended to influence the US Congress's debate on the Indian deal:
"My initial reaction is that one of the report's authors [David Albright] is a critic of the India-US nuclear deal and therefore this report has to be seen in the light of its passage through Congress. It may be true but there's a reason why the report appears now."
Mr Albright, a former UN weapons inspector who now runs Isis, denied there was any link between the timing of the report and the congressional debate. "It is a strange twist to the debate to see a potential Pakistani threat to India as an attempt to derail the India agreement in Congress," he said, adding that the publication was dictated more by the need to get the report out before the summer holidays began.
There is speculation in Delhi that the new plant may be a fresh sign of China's commitment to a "strategic partnership" with Pakistan. The pair already have extensive military and diplomatic ties.
"China has supported Pakistan since the 80s and it remains the wild card here," Commodore Bhaskar said. "At the time of the Indo-US deal, there were clear indications that Beijing thought if Washington can assist India, China can aid Pakistan."
Mr Albright said Chinese assistance was a possibility.
"You always worry that some of this is coming from China. Can Pakistan really do all this on its own? You wonder," he said. "That would be very serious."
Original Isis report here. Note the conclusion:
South Asia may be heading for a nuclear arms race that could lead to arsenals growing into the hundreds of nuclear weapons, or at a minimum vastly expanded stockpiles of military fissile material. A negotiated agreement that results in a halt to the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons should be a priority for the international community. Not only are such arsenals a waste of precious resources, they increase instability in the region and could needlessly provoke China to respond by increasing the size and lethality of its own nuclear capabilities.
 More doom, gloom and rampant speculation from Asia Times' Chan Akya. However, there is a tenuous point to it:
We have to recognize that no established Islamic power has the ability to strike outside of its immediate border. The armed forces of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran have no capacity to inflict meaningful harm on the West. The sole exception is Pakistan, which is why the global terrorist brotherhood will probably focus more of its attention on this country than any other in the next few months.
Whether or not the Pakistani state can or will "inflict meaningful harm on the West" is not exactly the point, but in terms of vulnerability to collapse or coup, Pakistan is way up there in the list of potential flashpoints.
There isn't a hell of a lot of evidence for the next point either, but it's an interesting theory:
Just as Syria failed to show much control over Hezbollah, Pakistan has lost control of its militants, who now appear to work directly with al-Qaeda command structures. The turning point could well have been the Pakistani army attacks in the Pashtun areas that were undertaken to keep the US happy in its "war on terror".
Disenchanted that the Pakistani army could kill its own creations, Kashmiri militants appear to have bypassed the army, going straight to the Taliban and perhaps even to bin Laden. This explains the attacks on both Srinagar (grenade explosions that killed nine) and Mumbai on the same day, a move that seems to have caught even the Pakistani army by surprise, if its state of readiness in the days preceding the attacks is any indication.
It is certainly true that the Pakistani military is not making friends among Islamic militants, and is caught in a complex web of alliances and counter alliances across the various conflicts on Balochistan, Waziristan and the Northwest Frontier - including with anti-Taliban US Forces. It's a volatile combination that eventually has to break down.
Whether or not Pakistani Islamists are in league with al-Qaeda, as the author suggests, is not really relevant. I'm also not convinced of the argument that the Militants will ventually get their hands on nuclear technology, though there is mounting evidence of increasing production capacity in Pakistan.
Think 'Pakistan' and 'nuclear' and the next word that comes to mind is 'China'. China is key to the build of Pakistan's military, and props the failed state up in other ways in order to gain from its geopolitical position at a key strategic point for oil supply routes.
While there's little danger of China casting aside its ally in Musharraf, the government that would follow him would be another matter. And eventually, Musharraf is going to fall, whether due to pressure from the outside regarding his nuclear ambitions or pressure from the inside from the Islamists and nationalists.
I'm not impressed with Akya's argument that China will side with the West in order to stave the threat of Taiwanese independence in the background: if anything, China might take the opportunity to seize the strategic zones it needs for energy security and then move on Taiwan while the US flounders in Iran and elsewhere.
But, of course, who can tell?
Continue reading "China, India and WW3 (Part 2)" »
Go to town with China, but write home about India
Nice collection of statistics on relative economic indicators. Here's an interesting one:
On the human development front, China’s human development index (HDI) ranking slipped from 82 in 1991, to 85 in 2006. India’s condition was similar as it slipped from 123 in 1991, to 127 in 2005.
Despite all the growth, are things really getting better?
Battleground Balochistan - HindustanTimes.com
The "Balochistan separatist bubble", led by Baloch tribal leader Nawab Akhbar Bugti, has finally burst, an account of military briefing published in newspapers here said on Thursday.
"The organised mayhem is finished off and the separatists plans these sub-nationalist terrorists organisations were making with material support from India have been knocked off," a military official was quoted as saying by The News.
I'd be extremely surprised were this true.
 The Spanish Civil War was really just a prelude to World War II. Could a similar pattern of events alreay be unfolding?
Perhaps somewhat fanciful, premature and over-the-top, but at least someone is thinking about it. Asia Times' Chan Akya considers, in a two part series, how China and India might get involved should the tide of conflict in the Middle East expand further.
After a somewhat overenthusiastic reference to Huntingdon's Clash of Civilizations and a long historical passage, the author then hits a nail more-or-less on the head:
There are today not enough Christians or Muslims in China to push the country in the direction of supporting either the West or Islam in any global conflagration. However, a resurgent West poses more of a threat to China's patriarchal culture, which is not very different from the centralized authority-driven culture of Islam. Given that, it is more likely that China would tilt toward supporting Islam, as its weapons-proliferation efforts over the past few years have shown.
Yep. The Uyghurs are hardly a threat to China, while if India were to side with the West then its Muslim population might just explode. And China has been sponsoring Iran (not to mention Iraq, too) for decades. If the price is right, they'll sell to anyone - and they get the oil rights in return.
As to whether I agree with the concluding paragraphs, I'm not sure:
This leads me to conclude that an escalation of the conflict in the Middle East would eventually necessitate the West to demand adequate support from China, failing which the country itself could become a target. The waxworks of Beijing are likely to grant enough concessions to the West to avoid being attacked, and then lie in wait for their revenge.
The Indian situation is more precarious. While much of the country's right-wing intelligentsia would push it to war against Islam, there is enough of a fifth column in place to thwart the country's historic quest for vengeance. India's Muslims number more than any other country's in the world with the exception of Indonesia. Add to these the populations of both Pakistan and Bangladesh, and Indian military might is in essence boxed in.
The West demand support from China? Like it is already trying to do over sanctions for Sudan, North Korea and Iran? Give me a break. The West knows it won't get a smidgin of help from Beijing, and will thus be more likely to expect direct (or indirect) conflict. China will probably see its opportunity to firm up its energy security, not to mention nationalist ambitions such as Taiwan when the West's back is turned.
India, on the other hand, I do expect to be somehow squeezed in the middle, unable to act in its own interests, effectively encircled by China via Sino-friendly states such as Pakistan and Burma, a weak and politically fractured Nepal and the conquered territory of Tibet.
Read on below.
Continue reading "China, India and WW3" »
Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
The Economist's choice of title (from a poem by Dylan Thomas) for its analysis of the collapse of the WTO talks is apposite indeed. Think of what you might, for better or for worse the WTO is now the light that failed.
The historic chance to truly liberalize the world economy looks like it has eluded us, and at the end of the day those who will suffer most will be the poor and the deprived. Europe's ludicrous and insane Common Agricultural Policy will continue to screw people in Africa and elsewhere:
This is a tragedy, especially for the developing world. Last year, the World Bank estimated that global gains from trade liberalisation would equal roughly $287 billion, of which $86 billion would accrue to developing nations, lifting at least 66m people out of poverty. Activist groups including Greenpeace and Oxfam were quick to condemn both Washington and Brussels for intransigence over agricultural subsidies, saying that rich-world self interest is leaving the poor to suffer.
For the benefit of a few French farmers, cheap subsidised grain will continue to flood the world market putting local producers out of business and ultimately creating the conditions for famine. As Amartya Sen correctly says, it's not just drought that triggers starvation - it's economics.
It's not often that I spring to Bush's defence, and this is not one of those times, but The Economist has a point:
The collapse will probably be blamed on America, which has been pushing for bold action on agricultural tariffs, and resisting a modest compromise deal that includes caps on its own agricultural subsidies. This is ironic, because America has been one of the grave men pushing hard to revive Doha after the round’s first collapse at Cancún in 2003. Despite high-profile deviations, such as slapping tariffs on imported steel, Mr Bush has largely been a committed free trader.
The truth is that while there have been grave men and wise men, the good men have had no real voice. And I too think that the blame lies squarely with our very own beloved EU.
What has not been said, so far, is who else will gain from this. I think there's going to be one big beneficiary... it's coming... China. Without demands to relax trade tariffs on manufactured imports etc. China may well continue to resist becoming the 'world's largest market', as so many expect it to be.
On the other hand, if the West begin slapping tariffs and quotas on imports from China, the whole edifice of the PRC could swiftly begin to crumble. I don't think it'll come to that, but it could be one of a cocktail of factors that lead us further down that dark road, burning and raving at the close of day.
Continue reading "Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night..." »
This guy just got back to China after a visit to Delhi. I think he got the shock of his life.
BBC NEWS | Programmes | From Our Own Correspondent | India struggles to catch China
Every time you turn on the television or pick up a magazine, it is no longer the rise of China, it is now the rise of China and India.
The desire to make comparisons is understandable. Both have more than a billion people. Both are growing at 10% a year.
There are, I suspect, many who are hoping that India, with its freedom and democracy, will win this new race to become the next economic super power. I am not so sure.
I'm on the same wavelength as you, Rupert Wingfield-Hayes. The people who talk this up need to get out there and see, smell and experience it for themselves. Only then can we really progress.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update: see also these posts at Peking Duck and Talk Talk China. I do think that in order to slag India off you need to have actually been there too. Some of the comments on TTC are extremely unbalanced.
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Jirga seeks to broker peace deal
Observers say the creation of the jirga essentially recognises the power of the militants and is an implicit admission that the government's military strategy has failed.
They say it is a significant step by the government, which has gone to considerable effort to ensure that various stake holders are on board.
So is Musharraf for the Islamists or against them? What does this mean for the war on terror?
 Oxford Professor and all-round commentator Timothy Garton-Ash takes a timely look at the state of the world in mid-2006.
His analysis is bleak. Of course, no writer on current affairs has the benefit of hindsight and it'll be a long time before we know how history will view this little episode. But Garton-Ash takes the essentially neo-realist view that a multipolar order is a recipe for disaster.
The neo-liberalist argument that the US will create stability through institutions and 'enlightened self-interest' no longer washes, and the hegemon is clearly on the decline as other powers rise. The kernel of the argument is quite succinct:
This new multipolarity is the result of at least three trends. The first, and most familiar, is the rise or revival of other states - China, India, Brazil, Russia as comeback kid - whose power resources compete with those of the established powers of the west. The second is the growing power of non-state actors. These are of widely differing kinds. They range from movements like Hamas, Hizbullah and al-Qaida, to non-governmental organisations like Greenpeace, from big energy corporations and drug companies to regions and religions.
A third trend involves changes in the very currency of power. Developments in technologies with violent potential mean that very small groups of people can challenge powerful established states, whether by piloting an aeroplane into the World Trade Centre in New York, targeting a missile at Haifa, taking on the US military in Iraq, bombing the London underground, or squirting sarin gas into the Tokyo subway.
Not to mention the US's loss of EH Carr's third kind of power, 'power over opinion' (the others being military and economic power). Since the war America has been much better at provoking than winning hearts and minds. It just can't let go of those balls, and unfortunately Israel tends to follow suit.
Most of all, Garton-Ash displays his disillusionment with the tenets of liberalism (which encompasses a convenient jibe at the commander-in-chief of misplaced liberal values, the French President):
When Jacques Chirac spoke fondly of multipolarity, back in 2003, he conflated two claims: the world is multipolar, and that's a good thing. Claim 1 is being proved right. Claim 2 has yet to be confirmed. For a start, it matters a lot whether this is multipolar order or multipolar disorder. Order is a high value in international relations. It stops a lot of people being killed. At the moment, we have multipolar disorder, and it's not clear what the shape of a new multipolar order might be. Historically, the emergence of new powers, elbowing for position, has increased the chances of violence. So has contested authority within the frontiers of states.
I disagree with the author's fears that nuclear conflict is impending; no state (apart from North Korea, perhaps) would be willing to act in such self-disinterest, and I can't see any terrorist organisations gaining the capability or the will to use the bomb.
But the essence of his fears is spot-on:
We liberal internationalists dream of a world of democratic, peace-loving, human-rights-respecting states... Some of the growing powers fit that vision... to a large extent, India and Brazil. China and Russia definitely do not, nor do many of the non-state actors that are currently making the running in world politics. Henry Kissinger has suggested that the geopolitics of Asia in the 21st century could resemble those of Europe in the 19th century, with great powers jockeying for position, using war as the continuation of politics by other means. But it could be worse. It could be that kind of great-power rivalry on a world scale, plus terrorists. And corporations. And transnational religious communities. And international NGOs. No moral equivalence is suggested between these very different kinds of actor, but what they all have in common is that they don't fit neatly into a world order of states.
By other means, indeed.
Continue reading "New World Disorder 2.0" »
 Pakistan. Not so much a country as a whole bunch of problems all waiting to happen. And as events proceed in the rest of Eurasia, the moment when they all crash headlong into each other draws ever nearer.
Veteran journalist Ahmed Rashid, Pakistan's answer to John Pilger, takes a view on the mounting crises in Pakistan here on the BBC website (see also below).
In a way, he seems to feel almost a little sorry for a President who is mysteriously ambivalent - both a dove and a despot at the same time:
...there is little doubt that Gen Musharraf and the military are facing unprecedented global criticism for their apparent reluctance to wrap up extremist groups who still operate with impunity and brazen openness in Pakistan.
However, at the same time, al-Qaeda and their Pakistani and Afghan allies have long expressed a desire to see the end of India-Pakistan rapprochement and an end to Gen Musharraf, whom Ayman al Zawahri, the number two al-Qaeda leader, credits as being the organisation's worst enemy in the region.
Talk about a rock and a hard place. The situation Musharraf faces is impossibly complex and paradoxical. Take Balochistan, for instance:
In Balochistan the army has depended on the Pashtun-based Jamiat-e-Ulema Islam (JUI) for political support.
The JUI has supported the Taleban since its inception in 1994. Gen Musharraf is hoping to cause a split in the alliance of Islamic parties by weaning away the JUI and enlisting it for his second bid for the presidency. Going against the Taleban now would mean alienating the JUI.
And that is where the contradiction between the international community and the Pakistan military and Gen Musharraf emerges.
Rashid goes on to decribe the devil's pact that the General (who, despite being a tinpot dictator, is also essentially sane and secular) has struck with the Islamists in order to preserve his legitimacy and national cohesion. Ironically in Waziristan the army fights the Taliban, while in Balochistan it's in league with them.
How long the US and India can tolerate these contradictions must be balanced against how long Musharraf can hold his country together - and on a personal level, simply stay alive. If something gives way it'll make the break up of Yugoslavia look pretty.
Continue reading "Many Eggs, One Basket" »
 In this case British Home Secretary Dr John Reid's terrorist, is another man's freedom fighter.
The problem is: how does one differentiate between a true terrorist group and an armed resistance movement attempting to secure self determination under the provisions of the UN Charter? It's a delicate balance indeed. Perhaps it would be more useful to examine the objectives of the groups in question as well as their actions and doctrine.
It's also interesting to note the underlying political motivations of Dr Reid's naming of the Baluchistan Liberation Army and Teyrebaz Azadiye Kurdistan as organisations to be banned. Good relations with Pakistan and Turkey are no doubt also on the British government's mind.
In 1999, Blair and Clinton effectively supported the Kosovo Liberation Army, which could be seen by some as a terrorist group: same goes for the EU's continued relations with Fatah. So there's an element of hypocrisy too.
It's interesting to see the Government of Balochistan website's response. After swiftly condemning terrorism - fascinatingly, the organisation is based in Jerusalem and purports to have friendly relations with Israel - the author goes on to draw some comparisons and make some suggestions:
BLA are freedom fighters who are involved in a "Guerilla Military Action" against the Iranian and Pakistani forces. They are fighting the "Baloch War of Independence" by attacking military forces, blowing up supply lines, destroying infrastructure, and damaging anything and everything that will incapacitate the Iranian and Pakistani government and its armed forces, and taking every measure to avoid civilian casualties. BLA is a resistance force, just like the Forces Fran�aises de l'Int�rieur (French Resistance Army) during World War II.
BLA is taking every measure to avoid any collateral damage. If your government may send a fact-finding mission to Iran and Pakistan to find out the activities of BLA, we are sure that they will declare them a non-terrorist organization. But, by banning BLA without investigating the ground realities is a decision made in haste.
Like the KLA, the BLA and its supporters seek to harness the power of the Internet in promoting their cause. Even the names are similar. It's a fine line.
Original Guardian report below.
Continue reading "One Man's Terrorist..." »
 A very short story, lacking in detail, but which can be read between the lines. If the Pakistani military - ie. the government - is admitting to using the air force in the Balochistan conflict, there's only a few things it could mean:
1. Fighting is escalating and the military is finding it harder and harder to handle through conventional means
2. A major crackdown is on, aimed at stamping out the insurgency once and for all
The trouble with using air power in a guerrilla war, as the Israelis are finding out in Lebanon, and the Americans should have realised in Vietnam, let alone Iraq, is that it doesn't really work. Airstrikes, even with 'surgical precision weapons', generally tend to kill and injure civilians and non-combatants as well as fighters creating a severe loss of hearts and minds.
The bomb has yet to be invented that differentiates between legitimate targets and innocent victims - even the Geneva conventions are unclear on this. The only thing the Pakistani military will achieve will be to anger the Baloch further and invite international condemnation.
In other news, the Government of Balochistan website claims that senior figure Senator Sanaullah Baloch was recently attacked in London, though the lack of mainstream media confirmation casts this into some mystery.
See also Peace Like a River's extensive take on things.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update: Received an e-mail from another source via the Govt of Balochistan website, reading the following:
Today 16 July 2006 in Third World Solidarity seminar Pakistani embassy sent its Punjabi ISI Terrorist to attack senator Sanaullah Baloch while he finished his speech in seminar, he been attacked by a gas which was in a glass bottle which explode on his body as this gas can destroy his face and specially his eyes but thank god as well Baloch activist who save his life by this gas which throw on him by these Punjabi ISI Terrorist in seminar. They even throw eggs, tomatoes on Sanaullah Baloch and Dr. Isaq Baloch as well other Baloch politician. One of prominent Baloch political activist Waja Walid Garboni been attacked by Punjabi terrorist while he was protecting Baloch leaders by these terrorists and Waja Walid been seriously injured in this sham less attack and he been given primary medical add on spot and later he been moved in hospital where after 5 hours treatment he is recovering well and now at his home.
Though this sounds more like an impromptu attack by diaspora Pakistani nationalists, it at least goes to show the strength of feeling on the issue.
Continue reading "Fighter Jets Used in Balochistan" »
 A complex and highly-involved essay on an alternative model to the OPEC system features in Asia Times Online. Far too detailed to get into the nuts and bolts of it - reprinted below - but just imagine for a moment what the planet would look like if we were able to rid ourselves of the political weight of the OPEC cartel.
For a start, the energy security issue could be removed from the Middle East conflict, radical Islam and terrorism. I'm not saying that Russia is a safe and stable country, far from it, but the balance of economic power would shift significantly once the Kremlin became the overlord of our energy supplies rather than the failing states and dictatorships that are lackeys to the US military-industrial complex.
With the Levant disintegrating as I write, war in Iran looming, Iraq a centre of instability and Somalia looking like a new challenge to oil security - commanding as it does the sea lanes to the south of Saudi Arabia - it's an impossible dream that's worth at least considering.
It is quite tough to understand exactly how this would all work:
The OPEC model has been limited to crude oil; the Russian model aims at covering supply of both crude oil and natural gas. The OPEC model has been limited to regulating supply and price, according to the swing-producer mechanism. Until now, this role has been played by Saudi Arabia, with its global lead in crude-oil reserves, and in its flexible capacity to lift, pump to port, and ship.
The Russian model aims to supplant the Saudis, emphasizing Russia's global lead in gas reserves and in barrel of oil equivalent (boe). Already, Russia exceeds Saudi Arabia as the largest producer in boe terms (13.3 million boe per day, compared with 10 million boe/d for Saudi Arabia); the largest exporter in boe terms (18.7% of global hydrocarbon exports); and the largest reserve base (16.3% of world hydrocarbon reserves boe).
From the Russian perspective, the Saudi role and OPEC model have benefited the United States, which can pressure Saudi Arabia into opening the spigot to deal with supply emergencies; the US also pressures other oil producers, such as Libya, Iraq, Iran, Venezuela, and Indonesia, by military methods, diplomacy, and economic sanctions. In the Russian alternative, the US will be far less influential, and have fewer levers, commercial or military, to effect pressure on the energy suppliers. Russian arms and defense-industry partnerships are on offer to relatively weak, intervention-prone energy producers in Africa and Latin America to offset US pressure.
In short, it's a direct affront to US hegemony, and so it ain't gonna happen - at least at this summit. It is also a threat to the lynchpins of globalization - transnational private companies - since the Russian model is based on mega-firms like Gazprom, Rosneft and Transneft, all of which are at least partly state-controlled.
But there may be benefits:
The security of Russian energy supply is thus to be contrasted with the unreliability of US behavior. In the short term, this Russian strategy also enables Russian companies to secure the capital and technology they need for high-cost, high-risk projects in difficult terrain. Reciprocally, the strategy offers access to stable supply and pricing of oil and gas to consumer countries, including diversion of energy transportation away from military pressure at chokepoints - for example, the Strait of Hormuz, through which most oil tankers sail en route to Asia and South Africa. In America's wars with Iraq, and its threatened attack on Iran, oil consumers are dependent on the US Navy to keep the Hormuz waterway open. They are obliged to pay for this protection through the premium US oil companies charge for delivery risk.
And guess who leapt onto the bandwagon straight away:
India was the first to buy into the new Russian model, purchasing a minority shareholding in the first of the Sakhalin Island offshore oilfields to come onstream. This does not supply crude oil directly from Russia - a short-term Indian priority that the government in New Delhi is also pursuing. China followed India with different tactics, first by funding the proposed East Siberian Oil Pipeline, which will assure direct oil deliveries to Daqing; and most recently, by buying into Rosneft's public share flotation.
Immediate success for this model is unlikely. But with energy security such a fundamental issue these days - more important at a globalized economic level than simple political ideology or cultural identity - then we are perhaps seeing the seeds being sown for a new non-aligned movement.
It's no coincidence that these three guys had a meeting today. No coincidence at all.
Continue reading "A Different Model for a Different World" »
 Go away for a week and the world seems to change in your absence. No exception this time, as all-out war looms in the Levant and terrorists strike again, this time in Bombay.
Both incidents are symptoms of intractable conflicts over Israel and Kashmir. Fortunately, while Israel has let loose - one suspects that the capture of two soldiers was the excuse is was looking for to strike against Hezbollah - India's reaction has been restrained, despite the clear indications that the bombers hailed from Pakistan.
In both cases, the actions serve only to provoke retaliation. But Israel can't help itself, while India clearly can. If only the former could learn from the latter, the terrorists would soon be out of business. Instead, another generation is being created.
Whether there will be a repeat of 1978 and 1982 remains to be seen, but all efforts must now be made to stop Syria getting sucked into the conflict. Prospects for the region as a whole don't look good.
 It was those words, delivered in the broadest of Yorkshire accents, that hit home most of all. They came from a young man just like me: almost exactly the same age; raised in Britain, the son of an immigrant from the subcontinent; well-educated and articulate. Yet Muhammed Sidique Khan was prepared to die and to kill for the most abstract of hatreds:
I and thousands like me are forsaking everything for what we believe. Our driving motivation doesnt come from tangible commodities that this world has to offer. Our religion is Islam - obedience to the one true God, Allah, and following the footsteps of the final prophet and messenger Muhammad. This is how our ethical stances are dictated.
Your democratically elected governments continuously perpetuate atrocities against my people all over the world. And your support of them makes you directly responsible, just as I am directly responsible for protecting and avenging my Muslim brothers and sisters.
Until we feel security, you will be our targets. And until you stop the bombing, gassing, imprisonment and torture of my people we will not stop this fight.
We are at war and I am a soldier. Now you too will taste the reality of this situation.
He could so easily have been myself; a twisted reflection from a world we still barely understand. The parallel universe of Jihad, Shar'ia, martyrdom and the AK-47, all served up for our consumption on prime time al-Jazeera.
A year on from the 7/7 bombings and thankfully there has been no repeat. It's no consolation for the families of the dead, but the attack could have been so much worse. Fortunately the second wave failed in a blur of incompetence. But as Khan's fellow bomber Shehzad Tanweer reminded us in a new video aired yesterday, it certainly isn't over:
What you have witnessed now is only the beginning of a series of attacks that will continue and increase in strength until you withdraw your soldiers from Afghanistan and Iraq, and until you stop your financial and military support for America and Israel.
So where are these men - who justify the murder of random people by drawing tenous connections with participation in the democratic process and complicity with government foreign policy - going to come from? There's two answers. The first, and most obvious, is that they will come from within. But the second, and the most worrying, is that they will have been trained and indoctrinated where else but Pakistan.
Pakistan is becoming the new front in the War on Terror, taking the place that Afghanistan held before 9/11. There's plenty more Pakistani diaspora around, from Britain to Bahrain, and it's more easily accessible than Afghanistan was.
Yet by no means is Pakistan under control, and it's doubtful whether the ruling regime has a clue as to what is going on in 80% of the country.
The BBC takes an in-depth look at this and related issues and asks whether or not the bombers were linked to what is nebulously termed 'al-Qaeda'. The conclusion is that indeed someone in Pakistan was directing the bombers, and this has implications for the War on Terror in general:
...in recent months Western intelligence agencies have begun shifting away from the notion that al-Qaeda has largely become an ideology rather than a structured operation, to once again believing that there remains some capability for direct operational planning within al-Qaeda's leadership.
This denies the fact that whether or not al-Qaeda physically exists, it is both an organisation and an idea. It's this idea that inspired the bombers, not the organisation; and their action was a continuation and a reflection of this idea that no doubt will give it further power.
The group itself is becoming increasingly complex, and is intertwined with the many factions fighting for Islam or independence within Pakistan itself:
"There is very much an integration between the Pakistani jihadi community and al-Qaeda's leadership and I think this is the galaxy that spawned the 7 July bombings," explains Alexis Debat, a counter-terrorism expert.
"But it's very hard for investigators to find out where the Pakistani jihadi community stops and al-Qaeda starts. And it's much more difficult for the Pakistani government to go after the Pakistani jihadis."
The only thing that is certain is that of the hundreds of thousands of visitors to Pakistan each year, more than one of them will bring something back with them - a plan, a tactic, a mission. The only questions are when will they release it upon us, and will we catch them first?
Khan's entire speech and BBC story below.
Continue reading "We Are At War and I Am a Soldier" »
 The Economist may be dry, but it has a way of hitting you now and again with a paragraph or two stuffed with pithy aphorisms. Take the opener to this week's Pakistan survey:
Think about Pakistan, and you might get terrified. Few countries have so much potential to cause trouble, regionally and worldwide. One-third of its 165m people live in poverty, and only half of them are literate. The country's politics yo-yo between weak civilian governments and unrepresentative military onesthe sort currently on offer under Pervez Musharraf, the president and army chief, albeit with some democratic wallpapering. The state is weak. Islamabad and the better bits of Karachi and Lahore are orderly and, for the moment, booming. Most of the rest is a mess. In the western province of Baluchistan, which takes up almost half of Pakistan's land mass, an insurgency is simmering. In the never-tamed tribal areas bordering Afghanistan, the army is waging war against Islamic fanatics.
Nor is that all. Pakistan has nuclear weapons, and until recently was selling their secrets to North Korea, Iran, Libya and maybe others. During its most recent big stand-off with India, in 2002, Pakistan gave warning that, if attacked, it might nuke its neighbour. Mostly, however, in Kashmir, Afghanistan and its own unruly cities, Pakistan has used, and perhaps still uses, Islamist militants to fight its warsincluding the confused lot it is fighting, at America's request, in the tribal areas. Several thousand armed extremists are swilling around the country. Thousands more youths are being prepared for holy war at radical Islamic schools. Osama bin Laden is widely believed to be in Pakistan.
If that doesn't have you running for the bomb shelter, then switch to the BBC where you'll find news about gun battles involving the Baloch and a rising British fatality toll over the border in Afghanistan prompting swift reconsiderations.
Does the West really know what it's doing here? More than one empire has bitten off more than it can chew in this lawless, volatile region - are we merely the latest?
Furthermore, so much of the situation is down to just one man:
Pakistan does not need a saviour to become stable and well. It needs a sustainable political system, representing the majority of its people. General Musharraf has had some successes. But by sabotaging Pakistan's fragile democracy, he may well have made the country even more dangerous.
Full story below.
Continue reading "The Sum of All Fears" »
 An interesting and inevitable comparison from the BBC.
The author's point is best made in the opening lines:
The moment you arrive in China, the country shouts progress...
...India, too, is on a dash for growth and riches, but it doesn't always look that way.
The essay correctly identifies the fact that China's progress is not despite its autocratic leadership but because of it; it also notes that India's advantage lies in the ability to innovate and adapt.
It's very much a 'human interest' story for the tabloid generation, and the two entrepreneurs picked out are my no means typical - or atypical. However, I'm not entirely sure that the conclusion that China is heading for 'political upset' adequately addresses the reality of the situation:
So where are Billy and Tarun heading?
Both their cities are rising at a dizzying rate. But I am clear that India lags far behind for now, at least. Democracy, the need for public consent, just isn't delivering change so quickly.
But then in China, with no need for consent, the risks of major political upset seem much greater.
The only certainty is that both countries will go on racing each other and overtake most of the outside world.
In other news, the Nathula Pass opens... more trade for China and access to infrastructural skills for India? Or the next stage in the gradual encroachment upon Tibet?
Continue reading "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" »
While teaching in China, I swiftly became aware that however bright some of the students were, the Chinese education system was not doing them - or China - many favours. This view is backed by a report in Asia Times Online, which (read between the lines) draws parallels with the situation in India.
There's a lot of number crunching in the article but it boils down to this:
Only a few of China's vast number of university graduates are capable of working for a multinational company, and the fast-growing domestic economy absorbs most of those who could. Indeed, China is facing a looming shortage of home-grown talent, with serious implications not only for multinationals now in China, but also for the growing number of Chinese companies with global ambitions....
Lack of quality talent and rising pay have not, as yet, slowed China's economic growth; basing production in mainland China remains cost-effective for most foreign firms. But the growing shortage of executive talent may make the growth assumptions written into many business plans overly optimistic.
Reprinted below.
Continue reading "China's Impending Talent Shortage" »
 Yes, it's coming up on the radar again, however faintly. This time, an analysis in Comment is Free neatly summarises the main issues:
1. The Balochistan situation is a distraction from the 'War on Terror' against the Taliban, sucking up men and resources that might be better spent fighting the men in black. Yet if only the Baloch were given more autonomy, they might be valuable allies against the Taliban.
2. The gas fields in Sui are not irrelevant to the conflict, and the geopolitical elements are all in place:
The Chinese and the Iranians have realised the potential there. The possible Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline was opposed by the Bush administration, but is making slow progress. Resource-hungry China has gained a foothold in the province, by sending engineers and security officials to construct a port at Gwadar for a possible oil/gas pipeline connecting Gwadar with Xinjiang. The Chinese are accused of using Gwadar as a listening post for monitoring US military activities in the Persian Gulf. In return, the Chinese are giving $350 million for an upgrade to the Karakoram Highway and providing assistance to Pakistan's nuclear industry. In 1998, Pakistan escalated the regional arms race by detonating 6 nuclear weapons near Chagai, also in the province of Baluchistan.
3. The Balochs are Muslims, but theirs is a more secular society than those that surround them. However, there are allegations of various human rights abuses being perpetrated against them on both sides of the Iran-Pakistan border:
Human Rights Watch has raised concerns of political incarceration and torture of Baluchi political activists such as Rasheed Azam. The military dictatorship in Islamabad are not alone, there are also human rights violations committed by the Shi'a theocracy in Iran.
4. There are other points of view, as we see in one of the comments:
Alex Bingham's ignorance of the issue is astounding. The Balouch are not the most secular people in Pakistan. The Punjabis are. The Balouch tend to be the most uneducated and poor and this isn't because the federal government ignores their plight but because they're exploited by their own feudal system and overlords. Bughti, Marri and Mengal are all over-fed and fat villains who start a quarrel with the federal government in Islamabad whenever their own interests are threatened. And no prizes for guessing who's providing the "expensive pieces of military hardware".
This is not to say that points 1-3 above are untrue - but when conflict occurs, there's always some reason why. It is therefore important to look at the opposing viewpoint and try to figure out where it comes from.
Full piece quoted below.
Continue reading "Why Balochistan Matters" »
 Perhaps the most interesting feature of this little news item is that the border dispute is still ongoing.
The Times of India reports on a recent meeting between Chinese and Indian ministers. But with trade now the number one priority of each country, why is politics still such a niggly issue, especially over what are really rather narrow and insignificant slivers of land?
See also this BBC story, first of a series.
Continue reading "Sino Indian Border" »
 Of course it is impossible to predict what course the future will take with regard to potential conflict with China. What follows is thus quite speculative. But there are a few factors pertaining to the period around 2012, the next Year of the Dragon, that stand out:
Economic superpower status. Over the next five or six years, China's economic ascendancy will be complete. Publications such as Newsweek are already writing on what they call 'China's Century'. What happens in the Chinese economy sends shockwaves around the world. Not to mention the US budget deficit, much of which is already down to China. With this kind of authority, China is going to be far less shy to act, perhaps radically, in its own interests.
Games over. The Chinese are greatly looking forward to the 2008 Olympic Games and the 2010 Shanghai Expo and are unlikely to do anything to scupper them before they are over. But by 2012 they will have neither of these to lose.
Impending implosion? Over the next decade China's resources will be stretched to a crippling limit while, despite the one-child policy, the population will have continued to rise. Rampant environmental pollution is not going to help put food in the mouths of 1.4 billion hungry citizens. Peasant protests and nationalism are both on the increase and by this time the CCP may no longer be able to keep them under control.
Resources on the wane. And oil: never forget oil. By 2012, unless it has taken serious measures to secure resources for itself, it's going to break down like an old banger - and the incredible economic growth that legitimates the Party's grip on power will break down down with it. Many theorists predict this year as a critical point - see for example the Olduvai Gorge theory, itself based on Hubbert's Peak.
Election year. The year 2012 will see elections in not only the US but possibly also in Taiwan. Elections are also due in Hong Kong; whether or not the authorities will allow them is another matter. It may even be time for the current leadership of the CCP to stand down after eight years in power. The year is thus extremely volatile politically with world leaders distracted and potential flashpoints waiting to happen within 'One China' itself.
 Military superpower status. Finally, if speculations are correct, by 2012 China's military build-up will be complete. It will have its motive, it will have its carrier group, it will have its opportunity. If the PRC moves to retake the ROC, will the US act to defend it or not? If things continue as they have done since 9/11, by 2012 the US military itself will be embroiled in conflicts across the Middle East, from Syria, via Iraq and Iran, as far as Afghanistan. Weakened and overstretched it won't be in a position to fight upon a second front. In a Presidential election year as 2012 will be, the prospect of even more American body bags will not be a vote-winner. And if Taiwan falls undefended, what would happen next?
I hope that it does not come to this. The only outcome that is in all our interests is peace. But as if all the above are not enough, there are enough mystical predictions out there to indicate that something is up: we just don't yet know what.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update - since this hypothesis was first written in Autumn 2005, I've found a couple more articles which seem to justify it. Of course they must be taken with a large pinch of salt, but this Epoch Times report confirms similar thinking on the 2012 date - see also the analysis by the Association for Asian Research.
Read on below for more detailed explanations.
Continue reading "Flashpoint 2012" »
 Worth noting for future reference, an article delineating some of the geopolitical implications of the Gwadar naval port.
Though events may well overtake me, at the moment it is looking like the most likely future flashpoint between China and the US - Taiwan excepted - is going to be here. All of the pieces are in place. China is building up Gwadar in order to protect its Gulf oil supplies, and perhaps export energy via potential pipelines through Pakistan (see map). The US also has a major presence in Pakistan due to the War on Terror, and is actively engaging the Taliban along the border.
Meanwhile, Baloch nationalists are conducting a campaign for independence - which inevitably will bring them into conflict with both powers. India appears to be supporting this, and finally Pakistan and Iran seem to be caught in the middle between their alliances and enmities with the US, China and India.
A more complex and volatile situation could not be asked for. According to the Government of Balochistan website:
The realization of economic and strategic objectives of the Gwadar port by Pakistan is largely dependent upon the reduction of separatist violence in Balochistan by the Baloch freedom fighters. Pakistani response to secessionism is aggressive military action in Balochistan. Pakistani fighter jets, gunship helicopters, heavy artillery, and over 60,000 troops have launched a military operation inside Balochistan to target the ethnic Baloch population, mainly the non-combatant, innocent men, women and children. To date the Pakistani forces have conducted extrajudicial arrests of more than 4,000 Baloch activists, killed over 700 Baloch nationals in direct military action, and planted landmines in Baloch areas to close all escape routes resulting in the deaths of over 10,000 Baloch civilians due of starvation and lack of medical assistance.
Jerusalem, Israel based Government of Balochistan in Exile is in contact with officials of countries that have a vested interest in containing Chinese ambitions in the region. Negotiations are being conducted to explore ways and means to close the Chinese naval outpost in Gwadar. Both the Indian and U.S. policy makers are keen to resolve the grievances of the Baloch people through peaceful means. But, neither Iran, Pakistan nor China agree to retract from their plans and settle the issue of sovereignty of Balochistan with the Baloch leadership. Hence, the Baloch nationalists were compelled to fight for their self-determination, and they have already waged the Baloch War of Independence on both the Iranian and Pakistani government forces.
Full article reproduced below.
Continue reading "Three Great Powers and One Nascent Nation" »
 First the BBC, and now The Economist are increasingly turning their attention to this hitherto little-known conflict. A sign perhaps that, like Darfur, it's beginning to flicker up on international radar?
Further to my initial remarks that it's all about gas, while I don't doubt that resources have something to do with the situation there appear to be many more complex things going on:
While Bugti tribesmen harry the army, a mysterious outfit, the Baluchistan Liberation Army, which the government says is also run by the sardars, is attacking policemen and soldiers across the province. Both groups are believed to have received assistance from India, across the nearby porous border with Afghanistan.
Read behind the lines here: India is using this as a proxy war against Pakistan, in addition to Kashmir. And who are Pakistan's main backers? Along the border with Afghanistan the US fights its futile war on terror; upon the coast, at Gwadar, China builds a massive new naval base for the export and protection of energy supplies. The insurgency is disrupting construction, so sooner or later the Chinese may begin putting pressure on Musharraf.
Furthermore, Baluchistan straddles the border between Pakistan and Iran. An explosive combination if ever I heard one.
In addition to being members of UNPO, with which I became familiar with during my correspondence with Uyghur leader-in-exile Erkin Alptekin, the Baluch movement also has a significant web presence. This comment, which I received this morning, is worth reproducing:
Balochistan is currently occupied by Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan, and the Baloch people are struggling for self-determination. Pakistan forcibly occupied Balochistan in 1948, and treated the territory as a colony by oppressing the ethnic Baloch. The Baloch people launched four unsuccessful insurgencies in the past, and now they have embarked on the fifth one, which is officially declared as the Baloch War of Independence.
However, the military dictatorship of General Pervez Musharraf has resorted to committing serious human rights violation in Balochistan by sending fighter jets, gunship helicopters, heavy artillery, and over 60,000 troops to eliminate non-combatant, innocent men, women and children of Baloch ethnicity. In other words, the Pakistani military regime is systematically conducting ethnic cleansing.
The Baloch want a democratic, liberal and secular Balochistan in midst of military dictatorship and Islamic fundamentalism. The international community must support the Baloch if they want to subdue Talibanization of the region. To read more on Balochistan, please visit our blog.
So the Baloch are not, as I previously believed, an Islamist group driven by resource nationalism but indeed a secular organization that promotes itself as anti-Taliban. Interesting. The site itself is at http://governmentofbalochistan.blogspot.com and contains a number of useful links. Take a look at this story in which a prominent figure also casts a shot at the idea of Balochistan as being a centre of world politics.
Original report reprinted below, and note also this blog with very similar scope to Other Means, discovered via Govt of Balochistan site.
Continue reading "Baluchistan Begins to Hit the Headlines" »
 Not much to go on, and the original link to the Hindustan Times doesn't work, but more evidence of how China's water policy may affect India. Obtained via Phayul Tibetan issues website and BJP archive.
This time, it's not damming the Tsangpo but a smaller, more insidious, project:
Whatever be the stage of construction, the idea of a barrage over the Sutlej which enters India near Shipki La in Himachal Pradesh is bad news for the country. Given the wide body of evidence showing the drying up of lakes, streams and rivers on the northern side of the Himalayas, the barrage raises concern that China may finally be controlling and regulating flow of water into India.
Article quoted below.
Continue reading "Sutlej Barrage" »
A recent UNDP report, reported here in The Guardian, says that trade and globalization are creating unemployment. How did they work that one out?
OK, so it's never a good thing to dismiss a report that tells you something you don't want to hear. But I find it hard to understand how development is creating unemployment.
Technology, on the other hand, does reduce the manpower required - robots, for example, mean that one worker can do the job of 10 on a motor vehicle production line - but the spread of technology is inevitable unless you actually want to go backwards. And I'm pretty sure that a reversion to labour-intensive production is not going to improve poverty, human rights or the economy - it'll probably make it less competitive.
I think that somewhere in the writing of the report some politics have come into play. It's not just the information you find, it's how you present it. The report will probably provide much-needed ammunition for the nostalgic rearguards of the 'Licence Raj' and the 'Planned Economy' in India and China, neither of which did anything for the people but bind them into a poverty trap for decades.
Of course capitalism creates inequality. But eventually, as some grow rich, their capital will create more jobs in service industries and new ventures financed by success. Marx has already been proven to be deeply and utterly wrong - why this enduring affection for his ideas? Development is freedom - it just takes time.
In conclusion though, the article does pick out the good advice buried in the research:
The UNDP human development report calls for greater investment in rural development. It also says that the region's huge foreign exchange reserves - which are seen as protection against another Asian financial crisis - could be better invested in health, education and physical infrastructure, and to help ease the oil price shock in poorer countries.
Exactly. It's not development and trade that are creating unemployment - it's government reluctance to invest in sustaining the boom. China is well ahead of India when it comes to creating masses of jobs in infrastructure: Manmohan Singh needs to utilize the current warmth from the US to attract foreign cash and expertise to build badly needed electricity, communications and transport networks. And education is the real equalizer - give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish...
Reproduced below: hopefully the report itself will soon become available here.
Continue reading "How Did They Work That One Out?" »
 The BBC tries valiantly to shed some light on the situation, and is not entirely successful, but it comes down to this:
Just down the road in Sui lie what many believe is the real cause of the fighting - Pakistan's largest gas fields...
The government is pumping millions of dollars into the province. The idea is to turn Balochistan into a regional economic and energy hub, a land corridor between South-East and Central Asia.
Aside from the geopolitical angle - one which strings together China, India, Iran and the whole damn War on Terror - it's a classic case of resources nationalism. Now that energy has been discovered in the Balochistan, the independence movement has gathered steam. They know what's good for them; if they control the land, then they can gain more access to the wealth:
"The government has a colonial approach," says Kachkol Ali, leader of the opposition in the provincial assembly. "It doesn't need the people of Balochistan, it just wants the resources.
"But the Baloch people want to control their natural wealth. This is a national struggle. The tribal leaders are nationalists, and the Baloch people support them."
Reporoduced below, and a photo story too.
Continue reading "Back to Balochistan" »
 Jill McGivering's second report on the unsung and nasty little war against the Naxalite Maosist insurgency in India profiles the local militia.
It's a somewhat pathetic portrait, yet a little disturbing. Are the Indian army and police really so overstretched and underequipped that it can't handle this itself? Isn't arming a bunch of villagers just going to create more problems than there were in the first place? On the other hand, during the Vietnam War the Montagnard militias were among the bravest and most effective local anti-communist forces, given the right leadership and support.
But the tactics here in Chhattisgarh seem to be little more than "shoot on sight". That may sound bold, but in reality it's ineffective and even counterproductive. It's an unheard of war that may grow in importance as events unfold.
Full report below.
Continue reading "Salwa Judum: Citizen's Army?" »
 Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the jungle. The BBC's intrepid Jill McGivering spent three days with Maoist rebels in India, and here is the first of her reports.
It's easy to dismiss the naivity of these mostly young and often female fighters. But the reasons why they fight are both geopolitically complex and disconcertingly down-to earth:
Analysts talk now about the emergence of the Red Corridor, a great swathe of Maoist militancy which stretches all the way from the border with Nepal, south through India to the sea.
Later I was introduced to a senior Maoist commander, Gopanna Markam, a veteran of 25 years with the guerrilla force. I asked him how he would describe what he was fighting for.
"We're fighting for a new democratic revolution in this country," he said.
"People are hungry, there's nothing to eat. They have no clothes. They have no jobs. We want development for the people. That's why people are coming to this fight."
 The increasing importance of Maoism on the subcontinent - a fascinating contrast to its increasing irrelevance in China - can only be ascribed to the widening gap that is the result of India's breakneck development since the 1991 reforms. As ever, the wealth is going to the upper castes and the educated. The poor are not getting a look-in.
Whether the Naxlite movement will become a threat or not, only time will tell. Story below.
Continue reading "South Asia's Red Corridor" »
 Another exchange in the argument at Comment is Free between various factions attempting to explain India's current success. The current essay is by Gurcharan Das, whose book India Unbound I began yesterday.
Das pulls no punches when it comes to lamenting the failures of the Nehru/Gandhi dynasty in hampering India's development. However, he is not lacking in patriotically-inspired conclusions too:
India's path is unique, and this is a bit scary because it is not following any of the proven success models. Rather than adopting the classic Asian strategy - exporting labour-intensive, low-priced manufactured goods to the west - India has relied on its domestic market more than exports, consumption more than investment, services more than industry, and high-tech more than low-skilled manufacturing.
Surely every country's path is unique? You can't really compare Japan and the tigers of Taiwan, Hong Kong, South Korea and Singapore though people often do: India should not be any different.
Das is also pretty clear about his reasoning:
Unlike China, the entrepreneur is clearly at the centre of India's success story, not the state. As a result, India is spawning highly competitive private companies, such as Reliance Industries, Jet Airways, Infosys, Wipro, Ranbaxy, Bharat Forge, Tata Motors, Bharti, and Tata Steel. Some of these are likely to become global brands soon...
This is in marked contrast to China, whose success is largely based on exports either by state enterprises or by foreign companies.
I'm not so sure about this. China does have a strong state, but competition is king there just like anywhere else. If anything, the state does its job building infrastructure and the like while steering clear of regulating industry. tUnfortunately, in India The opposite is still true; the 'Licence Raj' still exists - see this horror story on driving from Calcutta to Bombay.
I'm also not convinced that Indians have the resiliant characters that Das lauds here:
India's real success lies with its self reliant and resilient people. They are able to pull themselves up and survive, nay, even flourish, when the state fails to deliver. When teachers and doctors don't show up in government primary schools and health centres, they don't complain. They just open up cheap private schools and clinics in the slums, and get on with it. This makes for a tough and independent people.
Many do, of course, I don't dispute that. But on the other hand, when things go wrong many Indians are all to ready to resort to the picket line rather than working together to solve the problem. That's another thing that holds them back, not to mention corruption and incompetence at every level.
In conclusion, I'd like to believe Gurcharan Das. I just don't.
Continue reading "A Hindu Rate of Growth II" »
Believe it or not, 2006 is the year of Sino-Indian friendship, and far from the tail of the programme is this seemingly insignificant bit of news:
China and India have signed an agreement to re-open an ancient trade route which was closed 44 years ago.
Border trade will now resume from 6 July through the Himalayan pass of Nathu La, 4,000 metres (14,000 feet) above sea level.
So? Here's the line that joins the dots:
The Nathu-La pass will be opened just a few days after the first train service starts between eastern China and Tibet.
As always, trade comes first. China and India have settled their basically rather trivial dispute over the Sikkim border and settled down to dine. Tibet? It's probably beginning to know its place.
Continue reading "The Gate Creaks Open" »
 Between these two stories:
Top Indian Maoist rebel "killed"
Nepal power sharing deal hailed
The interesting thing here is that while Communists are a major force in Indian state politics, the Maoist rebels are still just that - rebels. Meanwhile, in Nepal, the rebellion is one of the factors that is forcing reform at the highest level.
In both countries, the Maoists are already de facto rulers of various chunks of the countryside. So is the invitation to the rebels to join the political mainstream at the central governmental level soon in store for India too?
See also this article analysing the Nepal situation.
 The SCO meeting continues, and Washington takes note:
The growing power of China has prompted a rethink in Washington, where rightwing analysts now speak of the SCO as an embryonic rival to Nato. Their fears have been strengthened in the past two years by the inclusion in the SCO of Iran, Pakistan, India, Mongolia and Afghanistan as either observer or guest nations.
Jonathan Watts also correctly identifies the true nature of the meeting:
But it is in the field of energy that the SCO appears to be most powerful. The countries gathered in Shanghai control almost a quarter of the world's oil supplies and are building a series of pipelines across the region. A pipeline is being planned from Iran to China that would cross Pakistan, whose president, Pervez Musharraf, yesterday requested to be admitted as a full member of the SCO.
I feel a thesis topic coming on.
See also this analysis in Comment is Free - and note the abject lack of comments. Unsexy the SCO may be, but it's becoming increasingly important to the fates of the People's Republic, the Former USSR and the whole Subcontinent - not to mention all that oil which the US and Europe wouldn't mind for themselves.
(pic - From left, foreground: the Chinese president, Hu Jintao, Russian president, Vladimir Putin, and Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad)
Continue reading "'An Embryonic Rival to NATO'?" »
Too tired to blog it properly right now, but over at Comment is Free a royal battle is developing.
In the red corner is Pankaj Mishra with his praise of the old days of Marxist planned economies and fears for the new capitalist dawn in India and China.
In the blue corner is Salil Tripathi, reacting against Mishra's nostalgia-fuelled views.
Another round ensued today, with Mishra politely punching back.
I know who my money's on but the fact that people are still thinking Mishra's way is worth noting.
 Here's one to watch for the future - the 5th anniversary of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).
The Economist notes:
Small wonder that full membership of the Shanghai Six is highly valued. Pakistan, which like Iran, India and Mongolia is only an observer at present, is especially keen to join. Its president, Pervez Musharraf, is offering China an energy corridor to Central Asia and the Middle East in exchange. Membership offers hydrocarbon trade, stronger defence links and, for those who want it, a way to counter the influence of the Americans. On the face of it, that makes for a successful club.
Iran would also like to join the gang. Full article here.
Continue reading "Pakistan and the SCO" »
 India's infrastructure is in a parlous state - at least we're not the only ones who're thinking that.
Coming back to India last November after two years in China was a shock to the system in that nothing has changed. It's easy to speak of the 'rising giants of Asia' in the same breath, but the reality on the ground couldn't be more different.
The Economist rightly identifies infrastructure as one of the biggest single problems holding India back, and some of the statistics are incredible:
Although India's road network includes 65,000km of national highways, only 9% of these have two lanes in each direction...
Despite the desperate need, Morgan Stanley's sums show that India's annual spending on infrastructure as a share of GDP sank to a 33-year low in 2003just 3.5%, or $21 billion. The obvious comparison is with China, where spending on infrastructure that year ran to 10.6% of GDP, or $150 billion...
Manmohan Singh has appealed for as much as $150 billion of foreign investment in infrastructure over the next ten years. He has said that airports and railways will require $55 billion over the next decade. Power and telecoms will need $75 billion and $25 billion respectively in just the next five years.
It's difficult to come up with plausible explanations as to why this should be the case beyond corruption, incompetence and red tape on an epic scale. It's aggravating to see India holding itself back like this.
Article below.
Continue reading "Building Blocks" »
The BBC has been running a series this week comparing India with China. In the article reproduced below, Humphrey Hawksley attempts to tackle the knotty question of whether India might be better off following a Chinese model.
The instinct is to say 'yes':
China has outpaced India in just about every level of development.
And in the crucial area of direct foreign investment, China receives almost $60bn a year compared to just $5bn for the whole of India.
But this is to deny India its Indianness. It's not possible to follow the China model without the grand laissez fare that goes with it. China's success lies partly in it irresponsibility - towards its own people, its own laws, its own environment and those of the rest of the world.
With its completely different set-up, it is hard to see India emulating this.
See story below.
Continue reading "Democracy Stops Development" »
The spectre of communism never really went away. It stalks on alive and well in India, and today communist parties won election victories in four states.
If the idea of Marxist-Leninist revolutionaries gaining power through the polls isn't weird enough for you, consider the actual brand of socialism they espouse. It's not so much Marxism-lite as straight capitalism:
Taking a cue from China, Mr Bhattacharya has pushed through an ambitious economic reforms programme with an approach more capitalist than communist.
He has invited foreign investment, privatised state-owned companies and properties and is pushing to make West Bengal a major IT hub - moves that have often earned him the ire of his party's politburo members.
All well and good. However, elsewhere the communists continue to block FDI and other concessions to reality that might just help lift people out of poverty.
 This is the irony of communism in India. It exists, and is popular, because of the enormous disparities in wealth created by the economic boom. However, in a sense, little has really changed for India's poor. The people who benefit from the BPO revolution are the very same educated Brahmins that land on their feet whatever the political environment.
Thus communism, even Maoism (there is an active Maoist guerilla movement in some states) thrives on. Desperate people turn to desperate measures, even though 'real' communism has been proven again and again to be utterly ineffective. BBC report below.
Continue reading "Communist India?" »
A few select cuttings from this year's Internet report by media freedom organisation Reporters sans Frontiers.
I've actually exercised some self-censorship in cutting the name of a dissident currently under arrest in China from the copy. This is not because I am trying to conceal his identity - it's easy to find out, if you have access to the RSF website - but because search engines, spiders, robots and censorship technology within the Chinese mainland may well find his name and add me to the blocked list. Yes, a little overcautious perhaps, but remember that RSF itself is very very blocked in the PRC.
Read on below - don't say I'm not even-handed.
Continue reading "Annual Internet Report" »
Thought from the day, from Rabindranath Tagore:
A most important truth which we are apt to forget, is that a teacher can never truly teach unless he is still learning himself. A lamp can never light another lamp unless it continues to burn its own flame. The teacher who has come to the end of this subject, who has no living traffic with his knowledge, but merely repeats his lessons to his students, can only load their minds; he cannot quicken them. Truth not only must inform but inspire. If the inspiration dies out, and the information only accumulates, then truth loses its infinity. The greater part of our learning in the schools has been wasted because, for most of our teachers, their subjects are like dead specimens of once living things, with which they have a learned acquaintance, but no communication of life and love.
This comes from Tagore's essay 'An Eastern University', published in 1922 in the Creative Unity collection.
In Tagore's other essays that I flicked through in a borrowed book, I glimpsed ideas on the nation state that predate by decades the debate current in International Relations. I now can't wait until my package arrives from New Delhi. Like all great writers, he is still a man for our times.
 Isabel Hilton comments on the Nepal crisis in The Guardian, lamenting that the EU and the US have been ineffective in helping to solve the crisis. She argues:
There is one way out of Nepal's crisis: the king must go and a full democracy that includes the Maoists must be established.
She is being naive. The only thing worse for Nepal than the continuation of Gyanendra's despotic rule would be a complete takeover by the Maoists. Revolutionary guerrillas are not interested in contributing to government via the ballot box - they want to rule by the gun. They would not be satisfied with the solution she proposes, far from it.
I dread to imagine what would happen in Nepal were they to seize total control; whatever their public face, I'm sure that they have violent plans for certain sections of the community. And it would be the bitter end of Nepal's lucrative tourist industry, one of the few things that has kept it going in the past.
It would also be bad news for India, which is also facing Maoist insurgency in certain states (despite Maoist political parties having legitimacy via elections, there are still those who bear arms). A collapse in Nepal would give them succour and would probably mean an extension of their weapon supply routes, a new Ho Chi Minh trail, perhaps.
What Nepal needs is a) for the King to fully hand over the reins and become a symbolic constitutional monarch like our own Queen b) for the government to be enabled to fight off the guerrillas, which may mean foreign support but NOT intervention c) for the government to break the cycle of corruption and actually invest in the impoverished countryside that gave rise to the Maoist movement in the first place.
Full article reproduced below.
Continue reading "Maoists Don't Vote" »
 Or is it too early to tell?
Firstly Nepal. The despotic King Gyanendra appears to have performed a U-turn, and is now saying that he will return power to the people. But there are many who are still dissatisfied. The unrest of the last fortnight continued - fortunately there hasn't been another Tiananmen or Andijan, but tomorrow is another day.
Gyanendra may say things like "the source of sovereign authority is inherent in the people", but how far is he prepared to go? And what do the people really want? The Maoist insurgency in Nepal is in some ways a reaction to the institutions of government and monarchy, and things may well get worse before they get better.
I visited Nepal in 2004, and happened to arrive there on the day of a prime ministerial resignation. There were troops on the street, but it seemed to be business as usual in Kathmandu. Things have changed since then, and I'd like to see Nepal return to normality. Strange how countries I come to like - Zimbabwe was another - fall into chaos just after I leave.
Nepal needs the tourism business, frankly: and it doesn't need to become a geopolitical pawn in the heart of Asia. The king has acted in the country's best interests, but he had better be sure that the country will act in his - lest he find himself with his head on a stick.
Meanwhile, Iraq has a new Prime Minister, Jawad al-Maliki. Not a name that we have heard a lot over the last couple of years. He does, however, recognize the ambivalence of the US's policy of divide and rule - you can't dismiss and rebuild the conventional army and state and rely on local militias and mullahs to keep order for you at the same time:
In his first policy speech after being asked to form a government, Mr Maliki said Iraq's militia groups must merge with the country's security forces, the Reuters news agency reported.
"Arms should be in the hands of the government. There is a law that calls for the merging of militias with the armed forces," Mr Maliki was quoted as saying.
Time will tell. I, for one, am glad I'm not in either of these gentlemen's shoes.
 A comment piece on the two worlds we live in - the Eurocentric western perception and the Asian century.
Is the West lost? Not yet. There's enough other people who realise that increasingly we are going to have to look at the east not as potential resources for exploitation but at best as partners and at worst as dangerous rivals.
The author Martin Jacques correctly identifies the key problem with this relationship: put very simply, we don't understand them:
It is difficult living in two worlds - especially when it is the world called home that is becoming more and more parochial and less and less able to understand the wider world. It is becalmed, bemused, defensive, increasingly introverted and fearful. But there aren't many people I can talk to about it - you see, not surprisingly they are part of the problem.
And he also realises that the Middle East is simply a distraction:
How are Americans going to react to their country's decline and the rise of China and India? At the moment they don't believe it could possibly happen. Despite the disgraceful mess they have made of Iraq, they are still gung-ho. They are still convinced it is the right of God's chosen people to boss the world. And 9/11, unilateralism, and the invasion of Iraq have hugely encouraged that.
I suspect, though, that it was all a huge historical miscalculation. Always beware your moment of triumphalism: such emotions are a poor steer on the future. And that future is not primarily about the Middle East, but east Asia...
Also take a look at the comments, this one for example:
I don't kid myself that China is free from virulent racism and nationalism. Racial epithets are commonly used (Westerners are "Big noses", KOreans are "pancake faces" and Japanese are "Little noses") and the language used about Africans is sometimes appalling. They can be very parochial and extremely nationalistic.
We shouldn't be surprised by this- we are all human beings and we share the same failings. In fact our common humanity means that we are prone to the same stereotyping and beliefs in our own superiority.
Jacques' big mistake is to assume that these are unique to Westerners or are uniquely bad in the West. Factually this is simply not true.
My own comment is below.
Continue reading "Worlds Apart" »
 Manmohan Singh knows what side his roti's buttered. First the nuclear deal with the US, and now another with Russia.
Of course it's in India's medium-term national interests to improve its energy system, and nuclear is the lesser of two evils if you consider the effects of burning enough coal to keep a billion people powered - like they do in China.
But there's a more subtle political game going on in the background too. Singh is cleverly tying himself up with major potential allies, and by so doing puts India on a higher pedastel, confirming her position as a regional power of weight and consequence.
There's a sense that Russia is playing a game of one-up-manship against the US, but as far as India's concerned that's just fine.
Continue reading "Nuclear Diplomacy?" »
 Quite some analysis from Randeep Ramesh in The Guardian today. He tries to pull together a few too many strands, and not all of them tie up, but the nub of the piece is still quite interesting.
It's the great game, again, but Ramesh posits that the recent Bush visit signals that the US is finally recognising India as a player.
Until this year India has been strangely invisible from world headlines, but for the occasional bomb attack, religious festival or threat of nuclear armaggedon. It's still, I would argue, variously perceived as a land of poverty, Gurus and call-centres (they're known as BPOs - Business Processing Outsourcing - in India itself). But increasingly India is arriving at the political table too.
Here's two of the key paragraphs:
As the centre of gravity of the world's economy shifts to Asia, there is recognition that India was needed as a strategic counterweight not only to China but to provide diplomatic options to Japan and Russia.
This period of history, at least in American eyes, is about relations between great powers, and in the Bush vision of India - with its dynamic economy - is about to become one of them. This alone challenges the notion that there is an emerging US empire in the world.
Yet on the other hand, surely this reinforces the US's position as, if not the hegemon, then at least the core of a hegemonistic alliance of which India is the latest jewel in the crown. Ramesh stumbles over his own argument in that it's US self-interest pure and simple that drives this relationship; Washington is building up a front against Islam and China, and India is perfectly positioned for it to do so.
From an Indian perspective, setting aside her own internal issues, she is effectively encircled by China-friendly nations with serious instabilities of their own. Pakistan, Nepal and Burma are some rather thorny problems. India needs a US hand to hold when she feels scared.
Burma suffers under an extremely authoritarian regime, bolstered by China. Nepal is experiencing civil war in which the government and the rebels are both sponsored by, who else, China.
And worst of all, Pakistan has been India's number one rival for 60 years; a hotbed of extremism, President Musharraf is left holding a delicate balance between Islam and his rival sponsors, the US and China. The moment one of these slips out of his grasp, India could be in trouble.
India may well be the regional hegemon for the time being - but in this multipolar world it's a lot more complicated than that. Do you know what George W. Bush's cat is called? India.
Continue reading "From Chesspiece to Chessplayer?" »
 It's easy to forget, sometimes, how we are all interconnected, and how the world around us affects us all. The War on Terror and Islamic extremism all too often appear as disposable images on TV screens, casually consumed over our TV dinners with no relevance to us here and now.
But today, just like on 7 July 2005, a place that I know was attacked. Varanasi, the holy city on the banks of the Ganges, suffered three explosions. At the time of writing the death toll is 15, but except this to rise as morning comes.
It's hard to describe your feelings when something like this happens. No, I am not directly affected, nor those close to me. Yet in Varanasi I spent two of the most illuminating days of my trip to India, and we met a gamut of local characters from street-boys to sweet-vendors to silk-traders any one of whom might just have been caught up in events. The bombed Sankat Mochan temple, for example, was not far from the hotel where we stayed.
Is this Islamic terrorism? It could be Maoists, but for now let's assume the former. Why? It is clearly a brazen attempt to stir up tensions between Hindu and Moslem, just as the attack on the al-Askari shrine in Samarra was aimed at sparking tensions between Shia and Sunni in Iraq.
At times like this you wonder whether Bush was right all along, that terrorism is one of the biggest threats that we face - or whether his policies are actually the inspiration for the carnage and the sorrow and the anger that will ensue.
If India were to descend into violence, as happened in Gujarat in 2002, it would be deeply sad, not only for India but for us all. India has just been welcomed into the nuclear club: for all its faults, and there are many, it has been recognised as a stable and responsible democracy with a key role in the future of the planet. It is a paradigm for the rest of the region it sits within.
A few explosions must not destroy that.
BBC coverage below.
Continue reading "River of Tears" »
 Poverty in Africa gets Bob Geldof, Bono and a whole host of philanthropists, politicians and hairy Irish rockers prattling on about their plight. Today it's Asia's turn.
Here's the key sentence:
As well as being a human rights issue, it also raises fears of social instability.
Absolutely. In Africa, poverty is mainly a moral issue. They don't affect us all that much - they just fight among themselves and die of disease and starvation. Asia is something else. There, poverty is political.
That being said, I do also see the infamous 'hand of history' caressing Tony's shoulder again. He knows that he has only a year or so left in office and with the stigma of the Iraq debacle clinging to him he wants to ensure it's not the only thing he's remembered for.
Perhaps I'm being harsh; perhaps he really means it and should be commended for daring to step where other Western leaders fear to tread. There's certainly self-interest there, for Tony the man, Tony the politician and for Britain as a whole. But even so, something is better than nothing.
See also this editorial in The Guardian by Robin Greenwood of Christian Aid.
I remain suspicious and sceptical about NGOs, particularly religious charities, but he raises a couple of good points:
As the Asian century began, many thought macro-economic growth alone could end the continent's poverty once and for all, but those who still believe this need a reality check.
Asia is home to the majority of the world's population and to most of its poor. Of the planet's 1 billion people who exist on less than $1 (57p) a day, two-thirds live in Asia.
They are not just in fragile states such as Afghanistan, Burma or the freefall economies of former Soviet central Asia. Hundreds of millions still live in poverty despite the fashionable, much-reported success of the region's drivers: China and India.
The myth of a richer Asia is shattered in the slums and villages of these vast countries. Even with double-digit growth rates, the poor are getting poorer.
Precisely. If I forget everything else I saw in China and India, it the gap between rich and poor that will remain with me. Not only is it wrong, but it is dangerous. It needs to be addressed with vigour.
What we in the West do is frequently counterproductive - it is all very well to speak of 'lifting people out of poverty' but the responsibility ultimately lies with government.
Read the BBC article below, or click straight to the conference website.
Continue reading "Turning to Asia" »
 Condi's new buzzword, as elaborated upon in this lengthy Guardian special report (also below) is hijacked from DoD-speak: probably coined in this speech back in 2002, 'transformational' originally referred to a huge shift in military doctrine (including strategy and procurement) inspired by the end of the Cold War and then, of course, 9/11.
Now, according to Ms Rice, we need 'transformational diplomacy'.
Perhaps it's a shame that transformational diplomacy didn't precede transformational military doctrine, but better late than never. The article below elucidates on the new policy - which is basically a diplomatic paradigm shift of the West away from Europe (particularly the former Warsaw Pact) and towards - you've guessed it - Asia and the Middle East.
We can already see it in action:
Exemplifying the new American thinking, George Bush this week travelled to three countries at the heart of the new strategy. First stop was Afghanistan, to reassure its nascent yet fragile government that the US would not abandon its fight against the Taliban. Then India, a new economic powerhouse, which according to some is being courted as a counterweight to the rapidly expanding ambitions of China. And finally to Pakistan, another nuclear power, whose volatile regions provide a harbour for al-Qaida.
This attention to diplomatic in addition to pure military power perhaps reflects a small nudge to the left in US policy, and can only be read as a positive move.
However, Condi and George would do well to read a book by Harvard history professor, Niall Ferguson, named 'Colossus: The Rise and Fall of the American Empire'. It's reviewed here by The Guardian.
I admit, from a personal point of view as someone who's considering a Foreign Office career, that I wouldn't like a posting to Baghdad or Kabul, and certainly wouldn't want to take my loved ones there.
But for diplomats to have just one-year postings defeats the purpose of ambassadorial staff. Why send them home just as they gain contacts, linguistic skills and experience? Is America really in this for the long run?
It's exactly the kind of 'attention deficit' that Ferguson criticises:
...namely, the attention deficit that seems to be inherent in the American political system and that already threatens to call a premature halt to reconstruction in both Iraq and Afghanistan. This is not intended as a term of abuse. The problem is systemic: it is the way the political process militates against far-sighted leadership.
The US needs to realise that it's in this for well beyond the forseeable future. It can't just walk away from Iraq, Afghanistan, or China and India for that matter. Transformational diplomacy is all very well, but the first thing it needs to transform is itself.
Continue reading "Transformational Diplomacy" »
 Bush's visit to India, reported here by the BBC, shows that the US can indeed engage with major third-world nations in a positive and constructive manner.
But it really begs the question: why can't this be done with Iran?
Iran also has nuclear ambitions, and has every right to pursue atomic energy. At the end of the day, it's still the best option we have to counter the incresing threat of global warming.
There are differences between Iran and India, however. India already has the bomb, which is a big stick to be carrying during any negotiations. Iran does not.
Furthermore, Iran is viewed as a pariah state, a member of the 'axis of evil'. Thus the US is out to block it from gaining nuclear technology. It's this dichotomy that is the most hypocritical, and ultimately the least helpful.
Arguably, US policy against Iran - the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act, for example - has done little but encourage the radical elements it is supposed to subdue, and has held back Iran from serious development.
While I too would not like to see a nuclear-armed Iran, the presence of nuclear detente between India and Pakistan has kept the peace between them for a few years. So the bomb is not such a bad thing after all. If only the US were willing to engage with Iran the way they can with India, then a lot of problems would fade away.
Continue reading "The Nuclear Family" »
 Everyone's talking up 2006 as India's year, and the Bush trip is going to be a big part of it.
The Economist leads with an editorial on the visit (reprinted below), and has a special report too.
But is it really India's year? And is India really the 'new China' as many writers put it these days?
Both views are very simplistic. Yes, it might be
|
