By Nilanjana Sen

To understand a society by becoming a part of it is to undergo a process of self-realisation and often transformation. I spent the summer of 2014 with the Tibetan Exile community in Dharamshala.

I was intrigued by the ease with which the Tibetan community had assimilated itself in the Indian society, though there were the occasional skirmishes with the local community. I was particularly fascinated by the appeal of Bollywood in the Tibetan community and I noticed how cultural familiarity had bridged the divide between the Indian and the Tibetan communities. It is not surprising to see Tibetans swaying to Bollywood music or humming the tune of a Bollywood song. Such is the power of culture.

The reality of South Asia is not very different. During a discussion with friends from Nepal on the cultural similarities between India and Nepal, it was consistently stressed that in terms of religious practices and social formation the two countries have much in common. The story is not very different when we compare other South Asian countries. India and Bangladesh connect linguistically and the appeal of Tollywood (the Bengali film industry) in Bangladesh is not surprising. And as far as India and Pakistan are concerned, despite the persistent differences strong historical and cultural ties exist.

Does South Asia have a common culture? Culturally the region is too complex and diverse to evoke such a claim but there are certain universal values which bind the people of the region. The popularity of the Hindi movie industry or Bollywood as it is popularly known owes largely to its successful depiction of “South Asian values”. For example, the centrality of family as depicted in Bollywood films finds an audience in the whole of South Asia. It is therefore not surprising when you hear about life coming to a standstill in Afghanistan or Nepal when the popular Hindi soap operas are being aired.

Bollywood is an important source of soft power in South Asia and its depiction of the South Asian reality can contribute to the integration process in the region. While India exercises its soft power through creative mediums like films, it must be remembered — as Joseph Nye puts it — “soft power is a dance that requires partners.” To develop a South Asian identity and for India to be acknowledged as a credible regional and global power by its neighbours, she will have to be conscious of her neighbours as stakeholders and not as lesser mortals.

The public space in South Asia is culturally dynamic and this dynamism regulates the sway the government has over it. Increasingly culture has begun to play a prominent role in shaping people’s identity and their definition of the self. Bollywood has successfully tapped on the cultural commonalities that exist in South Asia. The influence of soft power relies heavily on its ability to impact the audience and also elicit certain desired responses. Bollywood has strategically exercised soft power by focussing on themes which enjoy an appeal in the region as a whole. Bollywood movies became popular in countries like Nepal, Afghanistan and Pakistan because of the centrality of love, family, religion and hope as themes.

Also, what is particularly appealing about Bollywood as a source of soft power is its ability to depict tradition and modernity as co-existing and complementing each other. Since South Asia today is in the grip of globalisation the exercise of soft power has to be through mediums which can capture the essence of globalisation and allow people in the region to represent their hopes and desires. The popularity of Bollywood owes a great deal to India’s internal political and social make-up. The depiction of freedom and dissent in Bollywood movies has found an audience outside India and these are values which are particularly appealing to countries still struggling to draw a balance between modernity and tradition.

In South Asia, India has been particularly successful in exercising soft power. She has done it through mediums that are often beyond government control. We are presented with an interesting situation where a country which has for the longest time been characterised by a subject political culture has successfully managed to delineate a cultural space. This is not to suggest that this cultural space enjoys complete autonomy but only to stress the power of culture to define its own existence.

While there is often nothing subtle about Bollywood, its role in cultural diplomacy has been played out rather subtly. While tapping on values that resonate in the whole of South Asia, it has managed to promote certain values which are uniquely Indian. It has successfully depicted an image of India that represents both modernity and tradition. While India has her own share of problems it has successfully managed to uphold the principle of pluralism and hence modernity does not always enjoy an uneasy relationship with tradition.

While governments represent people politically, soft power represents everyday experiences and is a more accurate representation of lived realities. The future of South Asian integration lies in a strategic use of soft power to promote values which are beneficial for the region as a whole. For this purpose culture will become an important variable since it enables us to bypass an impersonal government and focus on values which define our very existence.

(Nilanjana Sen is a student at South Asia University who is interning with the SPS. She can be contacted at southasiamonitor1@gmail.com)

This article appeared at South Asia Monitor.

The post Building Bridges: The Role Of Culture In South Asia – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Paul Craig Roberts

The Russian government has finally realized that it has no Western “partners,” and is complaining bitterly about the propagandistic lies and disinformation issued without any evidence whatsoever against the Russian government by Washington, its European vassals, and presstitute media.

Perhaps the Russian government thought that only Iraq, Libya, Syria, China, and Edward Snowden would be subjected to Washington’s lies and demonization.

It was obvious enough that Russia would be next.

The Russian government and Europe need to look beyond Washington’s propaganda, because the reality is much worst.

NATO commander General Breedlove and Senate bill 2277 clearly indicate that Washington is organizing itself and Europe for war against Russia.

Europe is reluctant to agree with Washington to put Ukraine in NATO. Europeans understand that if Washington or its stooges in Kiev cause a war with Russia Europe will be the first casualty. Washington finds its vassals’ noncompliance tiresome. Remember Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland’s “fuck the EU.” And that is just what Washington is about to do.

The US Senate’s Russian Aggression Prevention Act, about which I reported in my previous column, does even more mischief than I reported. If the bill passes, which it likely will, Washington becomes empowered to bypass NATO and to grant the status of “allied nation” to Ukraine independently of NATO membership. By so doing, Washington can send troops to Ukraine and thereby commit NATO to a war with Russia.

Notice how quickly Washington escalated the orchestrated Ukrainian “crisis” without any evidence into “Russian aggression.” Overnight we have the NATO commander and US senators taking actions against “Russian aggression” of which no one has seen any evidence.

With Iraq, Libya, and Syria, Washington learned that Washington could act on the basis of baldfaced lies. No one, not Great Britain, not France, not Germany, not Italy, not the Netherlands, not Canada, not Australia, not Mexico, not New Zealand, not Israel, nor Japan, nor S. Korea, nor Taiwan, nor (substitute your selection) stepped forward to hold Washington accountable for its blatant lies and war crimes. The UN even accepted the package of blatant and obviously transparent lies that Colin Powell delivered to the UN. Everything Powell said had already been refuted by the UN’s own weapons inspectors. Yet the UN pussies gave the go-ahead for a devastating war.

The only conclusion is that all the whores were paid off. The whores can always count on Washington paying them off. For money the whores are selling out civilization to Washington’s war, which likely will be nuclear and terminate life on earth. The whores’ money will incinerate with them.

It is hardly surprising that Washington now targets Russia. The world has given Washington carte blanche to do as it pleases. We have now had three administrations of US war criminals welcomed and honored wherever the war criminals go. The other governments in the world continue to desire invitations to the White House as indications of their worth. To be received by war criminals has become the highest honor.

Even the president of China comes to Washington to receive acceptance by the Evil Empire.

The world did not notice Washington’s war crimes against Serbia and didn’t puke when Washington then put the Serbian president, who had tried to prevent his country from being torn apart by Washington, on trial as a war criminal.

The world has made no effort to hold Washington responsible for its destruction of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and now Syria and Gaza. The world has not demanded that Washington stop murdering people in Pakistan and Yemen, countries with which Washington is not at war. The world looks the other way as Washington creates the US Africa Command. The world looks the other way as Washington sends deadly weapons to Israel with which to murder women and children in the Gaza Ghetto. Washington passes Senate and House Resolutions cheering on the Israeli murder of Palestinians.

Washington is accustomed to its free pass, granted by the world, to murder and to lie, and now is using it against Russia.

Russian President Putin’s bet that by responding to Washington’s aggression in Ukraine in an unprovocative and reasonable manner would demonstrate to Europe that Russia was not the source of the problem has not payed off. European countries are captive nations. They are incapable of thinking and acting for themselves. They bend to Washington’s will. Essentially, Europe is a nonentity that follows Washington’s orders.

If the Russian government hopes to prevent war with Washington, which is likely to be the final war for life on earth, the Russian government needs to act now and end the problem in Ukraine by accepting the separatist provinces’ request to be reunited with Russia. Once S.2277 passes, Russia cannot retrieve the situation without confronting militarily the US, because Ukraine will have been declared an American ally.

Putin’s bet was reasonable and responsible, but Europe has failed him. If Putin does not use Russian power to bring an end to the problem with which Washington has presented him in Ukraine while he still can, Washington’s next step will be to unleash its hundreds of NGOs inside Russia to denounce Putin as a traitor for abandoning the Russian populations in the former Russian provinces that Soviet leaders thoughtlessly attached to Ukraine.

The problem with being a leader is that you inherit festering problems left by previous leaders. Putin has the problems bequeathed by Yeltsin. Yeltsin was a disaster for Russia. Yeltsin was Washington’s puppet. It is not certain that Russia will survive Yeltsin’s mistakes.

If Washington has its way, Russia will survive only as an American puppet state.

In a previous column I described the article in Foreign Affairs, the journal of the Washington foreign policy community, that makes a case that the US has such strategic advantage over Russia at this time that a “window of opportunity” exists for the US to remove Russia as a restraint on US hegemony with a preemptive nuclear attack.

It is almost certain that Obama is being told that President John F. Kennedy had this window of opportunity and did not use it, and that Obama must not let the opportunity pass a second time.

As Steven Starr explained in a guest column, there are no winners of nuclear war. Even if the US escapes retaliatory strikes, everyone will die regardless.

The view in Washington of the neoconservatives, who control the Obama regime, is that nuclear war is winnable. No expert opinion supports their assumption, but the neocons, not the experts, are in power.

The American people are out to lunch. They have no comprehension of their likely fate. Americans are an uninformed people distracted by their mounting personal and financial problems. If Europeans are aware, they have decided to live for the moment on Washington’s money.

What life is faced with is a drive for hegemony on the part of Washington and ignorant unconcern on the part of the rest of the world.

Americans, worked into a lather about Washington’s unfunded liabilities and the viability of their future Social Security pension, won’t be alive to collect it.

The post Does Russia (And Humanity) Have A Future? – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Additive manufacturing, more commonly known as 3-D printing, is inherently creative. Materials are layered together and built up, constructing an object from powder and heat and code. In the future, the U.S. Army wants to turn this innovation to far more destructive ends, by printing new warheads.

The latest issue of Army Technology focuses on 3-D printing. Designing new shapes for warheads is one promising new avenue of research.

Directing the explosion of a weapon is a big deal, as it can mean both deadlier military tools and more precise attacks. Last winter missile maker MBDA tested a differently shaped charge on a missile whose narrow explosion is designed to hit a target and nothing else. In the future, 3-D printed warheads could do something similar, giving troops and commanders more options about how and to what extent they should blow something up.

While printed warheads are the shiny tip of the spear, it’s almost certain that 3-D printing will make a difference with mundane supply tasks like spare parts first. Multiple stories in the issue focus in on this immediate need. In “Getting to Right Faster,” Master Sergeant Adam Asclipiadis of the Army’s appropriately named Rapid Equipping Force, describes how they used Statasys Fortus 3-D printers in Afghanistan.

Further articles in the issue examine the military applications of 3-D printing in medicine, food, new materials, at supply depots and in building miniatures to better understand a battlefield. There’s also a look at 3-D bioprinting human tissue for treating wounds, especially burn wounds, suffered in the field of battle– perhaps in new patterns left by creatively shaped 3-D printed warheads.

The post US Army Ponders 3D Printed Warheads appeared first on Eurasia Review.

US GDP grew at a 4.0 percent annual rate in the second quarter after shrinking at a 2.1 percent rate in the first quarter. Much of the shift was due to a considerably more rapid pace of inventory accumulation. Inventory changes, which had subtracted 1.16 percentage points from first quarter growth, added 1.66 percentage points to growth in the second quarter. New car sales added another 0.42 percentage points to growth, after adding just 0.13 percentage points in the first quarter.

Equipment investment, which grew at a 7.0 percent rate, added another 0.4 percentage points to growth for the quarter. Investment in structures rose at a 5.3 percent rate, while investment in intellectual property products increased at a 3.5 percent rate. After declining in the prior two quarters, residential investment rose at a 7.5 percent annual rate.

Another positive item in this report was continued slow growth in health care costs. After a reported drop in the first quarter, health care costs grew at a 2.6 percent annual rate. They stand just 3.0 percent above their year-ago level. While there were likely some errors in the data leading to a sharp reported rise in spending in the fourth quarter of 2013, followed by a nominal drop last quarter, taken together these numbers indicate there was no surge in spending associated with the implementation of Obamacare.

Year-Over-Year change in personal healthcare expenditure, 2000-2014

On the negative side, the trade deficit expanded again last quarter, rising to an annual rate of $564.0 billion, as imports grew at an 11.7 percent annual rate. The deficit subtracted 0.62 percentage points from growth in the quarter.

Government spending grew at a 1.6 percent rate, adding 0.3 percentage points to growth. A 3.1 percent rise in state and local spending more than offset a 0.8 percent rate of decline in federal spending. It is likely that the government sector will be a modest positive for growth for the next several years

The core personal consumption expenditure deflator hit 2.0 percent in the 2nd quarter. This is the first time it has been at or above the Fed’s 2.0 percent target since it was 2.1 percent in the first quarter of 2012. The overall GDP price index also increased at a 2.0 percent rate.

This report included annual revisions to prior years’ data. The revisions show a somewhat slower pace of growth for 2011 and 2012, with growth being revised down by an average 0.35 percentage points. Growth for 2013 was revised up slightly to 2.2 percent from 1.9 percent. This leaves average growth for the past three years at just 2.0 percent.

There were also modest upward revisions to national income in the last two years, primarily due to higher interest payments. The upward revision to income, coupled with the downward revision to GDP led to a larger negative statistical discrepancy. For 2012 and 2013 the statistical discrepancy in the revised data stands at $209.2 billion and $211.9 billion, or roughly 1.3 percent of GDP in both years.

The movement toward a large negative statistical discrepancy is consistent with past patterns in which large increases in stock and house prices were associated with a rise in income relative to output. This is what would be expected if a portion of realized capital gains get reported as normal income. One implication is that the savings rate (5.3 percent in the second quarter) is actually lower, since disposable income is being overstated.

While the 4.0 percent growth for the quarter is a sharp turnaround, it was very much in line with expectations. It means that for the first half of the year, the economy grew at less than a 1.0 percent annual rate. The economy will have to sustain a growth rate of more than 3.0 percent over the second half of the year just to reach 2.0 percent growth for the year as a whole. This means 2014 will likely be another disappointing year for growth.

It also difficult to see how an economy growing at just a 2.0 percent rate can sustain a rate of job creation in excess of 200,000 a month. Presumably, GDP growth will speed up or employment growth will slow.

The post Strong Inventory Accumulations And Car Sales Boost US 2nd Quarter Growth – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

From 2011 to 2013, at least 27 human rights activists (11 women and 16 men) were assassinated, according to “The Right to Defend Human Rights in Mexico: Report on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders, 2011-2013,” released July 3 by the National Network of Human Rights Organizations “All Rights For Everyone,” known as RedTDT. In those three years, another 171 people (56 women and 115 men) were victims of non-fatal attacks.

According to RedTDT, “In Mexico there are no adequate and integral policies ensuring safe envi¬ronments for the defense of human rights. This reveals that the Mexican state is short of instruments to protect defenders against aggressions. In a national context, the defenders in a situation of risk can appeal to the National Human Rights Commission (CNDH) and each of the States’ Human Rights Commissions, which can grant precautionary or cautio¬nary measures. In the same way, the Protection Mechanism for Human Rights Defenders and Journalists was enabled at the end of 2012. It procures and implements protection, prevention and preventive measures.”

Agnieszka Raczynska, an official with RedTDT, said during the report’s release that there has been a notable trend in criminalizing social protests, as evidenced by cases of arbitrary detentions “in which authorities arrest people who organized or participated in acts of civil disobedience, and are then accused of major crimes like ‘terrorism’ or ‘kidnapping’.”

Types of attacks

The report documents 42 types of attacks and/or human rights violations. The seven most frequently used are: death threats, threats, arbitrary detentions, physical assault, intimidation, violent deaths, and violations of the right to respect, honor and reputation.

“The most common aggressions are death threats, either in reference to men defenders (29) as to women defenders (20). In case of the male de¬fenders, arbitrary and illegal detentions are the second most recurrent. Threats appear as the second type of attacks used against women de¬fenders,” the study noted.

Raczynska highlighted that one of the primary findings in the report was that the majority of attacks are against those who defend the rights of women, indigenous populations, and sexual minorities.

“There is a criminalization not only of the act of protesting, but also of a difference of ideas, and of course that impacts the right to defend human rights as well,” she said.

RedTDT, which comprises 74 human rights organizations throughout the country, said there is a propensity to approve and implement legal mechanisms to limit social dissidence.

“A tendency conveyed in different reports on the situation of human rights defenders is the increasing practice of the improper use of legal frameworks against them, done mostly in two ways: in one hand, the increased use of the law to tamper and control the defender’s work; on the other, in the last few years we have seen how the adoption of restrictive legislations has considerably increased, affecting human rights defenders and limiting the range of their activities instead of giving them protection,” the report stated.

These restrictions include limits to accessing funding and other resources dedicated to civic organizations, in an attempt to “repress and silence the calls for democratic change or to evade responsibilities if human rights are violated,” the report said.

For Raczynska, “that is extremely concerning, because legislation is curtailing the right to defend human rights.”

The post Mexico: Human Rights Activists Targeted In Attacks appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Mary Ann Tétreault

Governments around the world—and their expensive yet oddly clueless intelligence agencies—are watching in shock and horror as militant Sunni radicals sweep from Syria into Iraq.

Yet today’s crisis was both predictable and predicted ever since President George W. Bush made it clear that he and whomever he could persuade to join him were going to invade Iraq. That decision was the first in a long train of bad decisions hurtling toward the situation we find ourselves in today. Indeed, the reality of this post-Saddam world can be traced all the way back to the first plans for a post-Saddam Iraq bruited about by U.S. policymakers—in early 2001.

The conduct of foreign policy is similar to a perpetual broadcast of “Let’s Make a Deal,” whose trademark device is for contestants to choose one of three doors, each concealing a prize to be exchanged for something already in-hand. Once the contestant chooses a door, she is committed to the exchange. She cannot reject the revealed prize and try again, although if she gets a truly horrible prize, a “zonk,” she can exchange it for $100 after the show is over.

Foreign policy makers and actors also have resources to trade or spend. The doors they confront have labels—“rescue Kuwait,” “invade Iraq.” What is unknown is the outcome of the course of action lying behind the chosen door.

Unlike the TV show, however, the foreign policy game doesn’t end, and there’s no token cash prize to console contestants who make poor choices (although they may earn large fees by regaling sympathetic audiences with revisionist histories after leaving the studio). While they remain in the game, policy actors are repeatedly confronted by new sets of doors stemming from the decisions they’ve already made. Each offers a narrower range of choices and exacts more in exchange for them. This game resembles moving down a funnel that continually narrows until the decider falls out the bottom or, even worse, gets stuck.

Bush’s doors led to choices that were substantially free, including: “invade Iraq with a coalition of the ‘willing,’” “finish up in Afghanistan and do not invade Iraq,” and “get the United Nations to endorse an invasion of Iraq and help pay for it and carry it out.” The last was the door chosen by his father when he intervened against Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait.

Bush the son—with his sidekick, British Prime Minister Tony Blair—chose door number one.

The next set of doors led to post-war reconstruction and reconciliation. U.S. government agencies did their best to provide not only choices, but also predictions of what would happen if various courses of action were pursued or not. Bush chose to let the Iraqis work things out for themselves.

The other doors were not free. All of them would have required a long and substantial troop deployment that both would have diverted money from favored contractors to military members and would have constituted an admission that General Edward Shinseki, who had testified before Congress that the Bush administration had badly underestimated the number of troops it would require to stabilize Iraq, had been right.

The Doors after Saddam

The next doors led to who would preside over Iraq. Door number one opened on Paul Bremer, a protégé of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who opened the door to disband the Iraqi army.

Reconstruction of Iraq proceeded without proper planning and supervision, leaving the country in far worse shape than it had been under Saddam. Meanwhile, the doors facing disgruntled Baathists and desperate Iraqi Sunnis left unemployed thanks to Bremer’s choices led to insurgency, exile, or immiseration. Different actors chose different doors, although the existence of the doors, what lay behind them, and who and how many had chosen door number one to insurgency were furiously denied by the Bush administration.

2006 was not a good year for Iraq or for President Bush. Elements of the Iraqi insurgency reportedly joined forces with al-Qaeda in Iraq, turning a fraudulent rationale for the Iraqi invasion into a post-war reality. U.S. war deaths remained high, and Bush’s approval rating hit a personal low in early May. The 2006 midterm elections substituted Democratic for Republican majorities in both houses of Congress. It was time for new choices in Iraq.

With the insurgency degenerating into sectarian warfare, and in the face of opposition from the House of Representatives and his own generals, Bush chose a door he had gone through twice before: increasing troop levels in Iraq. This time he announced a “surge” of 30,000 additional troops. In the end, they amounted to about 20,000 Army forces augmented by 10,000 National Guard troops because the Army could not spare the full number.

Bush was criticized both for proposing a surge in the first place and for sending too few troops to make it work. As it proceeded on the ground, he was criticized for the rise in U.S. casualties it produced. When General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker reported to Congress about the progress of the surge in September 2007, Democrats disputed their optimistic testimony even as it quieted other critics. By the time that officials announced the first withdrawal of surge troops in November 2007, the surge appeared to have succeeded.

But did it? To Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in January 2007, the door with the offer to send more U.S. troops to protect Baghdad was not the deal he wanted. He was hoping for a “donut” deployment that would put US troops outside Baghdad, allowing his militia-run ethnic-cleansing project inside the city to proceed. As Sunni Iraqis were driven out of the city entirely, or ghettoized in areas surrounded by concrete barriers courtesy of the U.S. military, Shiite Iraqis were moved in, many by Muqtada al-Sadr’s feared Mahdi Army. The ethnic cleansing campaign was responsible for many of the bodies littering Baghdad’s streets. As it achieved its objective, the violence in Baghdad decreased.

Al-Sadr’s militia was highly criticized for the brutality of its operations, which led him to a new set of doors, some offering possible career changes. Al-Sadr announced a “freeze” on militia operations in August 2007. Originally for six months, the freeze was repeatedly extended. Meanwhile, al-Sadr went to Iran, reportedly to study, although U.S. observers believed he had left to avoid capture. The departure of al-Sadr and his militia from the scene removed a major contributor to the violence in Baghdad.

The third contribution to reduced sectarian violence in Iraq was the political maneuvering employed by U.S. Marines serving in Anbar province. Sunni tribal leaders offered to change sides if the Marines would help them fight off al-Qaeda. The tribes’ alliance with al-Qaeda had lost its charm despite continuing economic hardship. Al-Qaeda had found that the militant anti-Sunni policies of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki had opened doors to the takeover of Sunni communities in Anbar and elsewhere. Some of them found openings to cut in on the tribal leaders’ local smuggling businesses, which was particularly resented. The “Sunni Awakening” was intended to slam the doors, leaving al-Qaeda on the outside.

The Marines were happy to work with the tribal leaders. When their successes came to the attention of General Petraeus, he made it into “a national project,” according to the New Yorker. “Ultimately, during 2007 and 2008, the United States Army hired about a hundred thousand militiamen, known as Sons of Iraq, at three hundred dollars per month, to serve as neighborhood guards; the Army eventually expanded the program to include Shia militiamen.” Sunni-initiated violence also decreased. Iraq appeared to be moving closer to reconciliation, allowing President Bush to open the door to an end of U.S. involvement in the fighting and, if not another victory speech, a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) providing for the complete withdrawal of all U.S. forces by the end of 2011.

After Bush

The story of what Iraq and the United States found on the other side of that door is a long and contested one.

Among its puzzling aspects is President Obama’s decision to apply a surge strategy in Afghanistan which, in the absence of the underlying factors that made the surge in Iraq look successful, was mostly ineffective, with the exception of increasing U.S. casualties. In Iraq, Obama tried to persuade al-Maliki to permit a small deployment of U.S. forces to remain in Iraq after the end of 2011, but he was not successful.

Obama, who had opposed the Iraq war from the start, had promised to end it. Keeping U.S. forces in Iraq without protection from Iraqi jurisprudence beyond the time specified in Bush’s SOFA was not a door he wanted to open. Al-Maliki wanted to show himself as fully in charge in Iraq, a situation that he feared would not last if the Americans’ preference to include his political rival, Ayad Allawi, in the government were part of the deal. The Kurds also avoided being drawn into a power-sharing agreement, and the attempt to recreate a post-occupation of Iraq failed. Al-Maliki rejected the last-minute appeals, and U.S. forces departed on time.

Decisions by Sunnis throughout northern and north-central Iraq not to oppose—indeed, often to join—ISIS, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (now IS, the Islamic State), might look puzzling. But these decisions derive from the earlier policies of al-Maliki when he continued excluding Sunni citizens from power and repressing them. It’s no surprise that al-Maliki, an Iran protégé, prefers to rely on Iran and Hezbollah, along with Bashar al-Assad, to defend what is left of Iraq.

The real mystery is why Obama, if not surging back into Iraq, has opened the door to trickling in. Bullied by the veterans of Team Bush, eager to whitewash the storming of door number one that brought the United States into Iraq in 2003, surprised by the collapse of al-Maliki’s army in the Sunni areas he had consigned to their pre-awakening status quo of abuse and isolation behind door number two, he seems to be cracking open door number three and another U.S. attempt to halt the march of ISIS—and al-Qaeda—across Iraq.

But as a younger Obama could have predicted, it is not going to work. In the absence of Marines handing out monthly salaries to Sunni Iraqis and without the newly self-declared caliph of IS, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, taking off for religious instruction in Saudi Arabia, the best Obama might find behind the doors facing him now would be an effective pro-Maliki uprising by the Shi’a in Baghdad and successes on the ground pushing IS out of its current bridgeheads elsewhere in Iraq.

Indeed, this is a door he does not even have to open. Compared to the inadequacy of Bush’s 30,000 military forces in 2007, Obama’s tiny commitment of 300 Special Forces is nowhere near enough to train and equip an army or even begin to end the corruption that has hollowed out Iraqi political and military forces, already shown to be impervious to years of efforts by hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops, contractors, and diplomats. His decision to send them is more than enough, however, to tar Obama with al-Maliki’s—and Bashar al-Assad’s and Hezbollah’s—brush.

So, which door will Obama now choose?

The problem with surges is that policymakers find it easier to get in than to get out of them. If Obama continues through door number one—following a pattern going back to the Vietnam War and committing more and more U.S. resources to an incompetent and ineffective regime—he is likely to get stuck in the funnel. Door number two might open onto an international effort to halt the violence and come to some sort of negotiated deal. Door number three opens on to a room where the violent politics that lay on the other side of Maliki’s doors are played out.

The president has said on more than one occasion that the use of military force should not be the first recourse of policymakers. If he goes through door number one, the Obama doctrine will find its end in the sands of Iraq. But in this narrow part of the funnel, every door leads to a prize he is likely to be reluctant to claim.

Mary Ann Tetreault is the Cox distinguished professor of international affairs emerita at Trinity University in San Antonio. She frequently writes on the Arab Gulf and U.S. foreign policy.

The post Behind Door Number Three In Iraq – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Hillel Fradkin and Lewis Libby

In December of 2011, Fred Hof, then Pres. Obama’s senior official for Syria policy, testified to Congress that Syrian President Bashir al Assad was a “dead man walking.” This was Administration policy and defense: if Assad were ineluctably falling, why push?

But Assad thrives. On July 16, 2014, Assad, newly “re-elected,” celebrated the start of his third 7 year term. Past U.S. initiatives to admonish him — Geneva I, Geneva II etc. – are but dead men talking.

To mark the occasion, he mocked America, claimed terrorism would be coming our way, and threatened all Syrians who hadn’t actively supported him. It turns out there are real red-lines in Syria: the red carpet he strode to his inauguration, and the lines of blood that will flow within Syria, and from Syria to the West.

Assad’s lengthy and Orwellian inaugural address to “free Syrian revolutionaries” – his supporters – praised both the “morals” of his culture and the slaughter, past and future, of citizens who oppose his family’s rule. The Assad of barrel bombs, poison gas, and civilian slaughters praised his followers’ honor. For their support, he praised Iran, Russia and China for “non-interference” in other countries’ affairs, and then without irony thanked Hezbollah for fighting his opponents.

Assad praised his once-open hand of reconciliation to Syrians, but proclaimed it now a closed fist for those who hadn’t accepted. His enemies are not just those who had taken up arms, but those who “waited” or “bet against him” or “manipulated” others – i.e., anyone he chooses – for they are as dangerous as terrorists, he claims.

Yes, he noted with some sarcasm, there were those who “called for a revolution” under the banner of the “falsely called Arab spring,” but these were merely the treacherous agents of “a sinister plot for the whole region,” a long-standing Western-Israeli plot, stretching back over a century, prosecuted now by sectarian and terrorist means. He had opposed the invasion of Iraq because it would spread sectarian war, he sniffed, ignoring his role speeding Sunni fighters into Iraq from 2003 to 2011, and ignoring his patron Iran – whom he elsewhere praised for non-interference in others’ affairs – sending arms and fighters to kill Iraqi Sunni. Somewhere, George Orwell ruefully smiles.

Assad’s inaugural drips with disdain for America and President Obama. Loyal Syrians, he boasts, have brought down the “superpowers and their satellite states, and decision makers and their obedient executers.” Assad savors the moment’s irony, “For the enemies of our homeland, these elections were the instruments they had been waiting for to delegitimize the state.”

Assad praises Syrian “steadfastness,” in contrast to Obama’s wavering: “positions changed, players withdrew, terminology dropped, alliances vanished, councils divided and other bodies disintegrated.” Assad, relieved when Obama limited his interests to chemical weapons and gleeful when Obama then abandoned his red-line, now ungraciously scorns him for it.

But, most of all, he scoffs at Obama’s inaction. “During these years, whilst they were talking,” he tells supporters, “you were doing; they sank in their illusions, whilst you made today a reality.” Translation: Today, the supposed “dead man walking” celebrates re-inauguration.

“Countries are not measured by the size of their surface area or population,” Assad taunts, they are measured “by their will . . .” The Syrians, “brought down all those who distanced themselves from the battle waiting to see where the balance of power will settle.”

Assad derides Obama’s sole reliance on Syrian opposition. His enemies failed, Assad gloats, “because they depended on lackeys and agents. They did not know or understand how to deal with masters and honourable and patriotic people. . .” America misjudged Syria, because it is “unable to interpret the true meaning of honour, sovereignty and freedom.” Americans are too shallow. “Those who want to predict the behavior and reaction of an ancient and civilized people should have the same historical and civilizational depth.”

Assad will not even grant Obama his retreat. To dismiss Syria, Obama claimed it was “someone else’s civil war.” Assad portrays this as just another futile American subterfuge: “The term ‘civil war’ today is used as a political cover to legitimize the terrorists as one side in a Syrian–Syrian conflict rather than despicable instruments in the hands of external powers.” Nor, Assad correctly notes, will Syrian “civil war” spare slaughters elsewhere.

Assad predicts his enemies now face a “painful price” for their inaction. In this, sadly, Assad is right. He gives two grounds. First, “many other nations, sooner or later, will suffer from the same terrorism.” Indeed, the Obama Administration proclaims terrorists returning from Syria endanger America. “As a result of their ignorance,” Assad decries, “we now have incubators for terrorism and a springboard for aggression.”

In addition, the Sunni Islamist terrorist group which calls itself the Islamic State (IS) has expanded from its base in Syria to seize large portions of Iraq. IS, murderously hostile to Assad, Iran and its Shiite allies, threatens them. But its success was partially engineered by Assad himself to discourage America acting in Syria. This trick still works: America focuses now on whether a unified Iraq will endure.

Having risen from the dead, Assad sees little to fear from the US now. In a turn that Assad would see as true to form, President Obama is talking again about a limited plan of support for the Syrian opposition. On current lines, it will take more than a year to implement. Perhaps he considers inviting the President to walk the red carpet of his Fourth Inaugural.

About the authors:
Hillel Fradkin
Director, Center on Islam, Democracy and the Future of the Muslim World

Lewis Libby
Senior Vice President

Source:
This article was published by the Hudson Institute and may be accessed here.

The post Doing And Talking: Assad’s Rebirth And Triumph – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Hindus have expressed support for Sami reindeer herders in northern Sweden who are battling an iron ore mine.

Hindu statesman Rajan Zed has urged Swedish authorities not to approve British company Beowulf Mining’s application for a 25-year mining concession, known as Kallak project. Sweden should not base its decision on mercantile greed only and put people first instead of profit first, Zed added in a statement in Nevada (USA) today.

Zed, who is President of Universal Society of Hinduism, argued that proposed mine and its infrastructure on this ancient land could endanger the livelihood of Sami community; affecting reindeer grazing, migration and herding; and thus destroying Sami culture and their unique way of life.

Rajan Zed stressed that Swedish authorities should show more responsibility to its Sami community by protecting their traditional rights and not bowing to powerful mining lobby, properly follow Swedish law and international conventions, and consult the area Sami communities before making any final decision. He urged intervention of Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt.

Zed further said that mining in this area; dominated by nature reserves, national parks, spruce woods, sparkling lakes and stunning mountain environment; reportedly would have negative implications on wilderness, could lead to the contamination of a river next to the proposed mine site and could adversely affect the environment. Moreover, mine sat on a popular spring grazing ground for the reindeer.

Rajan Zed suggested Beowulf to abandon its Kallak project; thus ensuring the survival of unique culture of Sami, Europe’s only indigenous people, who faced uncertain future.

Zed pointed out that world needed to save the culture of the Sami (who had lived in the area for over 5,000 years, predating the founding of Sweden), which generations of Sami community had tried to preserve, nourishing a harmony with nature philosophy.

Rajan Zed also appealed to the United Nations to intervene to protect Sami rights and help preserving their spiritual and cultural identity. Mine could also be threat to nearby Laponia World Heritage Site of UNESCO, known for its outstanding natural beauty and cultural importance for the Sami. Exploitation and encroachment of areas, where Sami communities functioned and lived; and damage to Sami grazing lands needed to stop, Zed added.

The post Hindus Support Sweden’s Sami Battling Iron Mine appeared first on Eurasia Review.

(Civil.Ge) — Georgia’s Ex-president Mikheil Saakashvili said on July 30 in Budapest that one of the reasons behind bringing criminal charges against him was apparently to “restrict” his international travels and active advocacy for Ukraine .

He also said that he does not need to seek asylum any country.

“As far as I can understand main [purpose of] this decision to take this foolish, completely groundless, unfair and ludicrous [step]… is to restrict my movement,” he told Rustavi 2 TV in Budapest, where he met Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán.

“They [the Georgian authorities] are irritated by my active [advocacy] for Ukraine. How are they going to restrict it? As you see I am now here in one of the Europe’s main countries with its leader [PM Orbán],” he said.

Standing alongside with PM Orbán, Georgia’s ex-president said that there are only two countries where he cannot go – Georgia and Russia.

“This is temporary, very, very temporary,” Saakashvili said.

Asked if he thinks that he may require political asylum or if he had already been offered such, Saakashvili responded: “Why do I need a political asylum? As you see I am welcomed everywhere with great pleasure. I am welcomed very well in the United States – you have seen the U.S. reaction to [bringing criminal charges against him]… The only country which approves and which is happy about it [criminal charges against Saakashvili] is in the North [referring to Russia] and countries, which protect [Georgia], are angry.”

Charges against Saakashvili have been filed under part three of article 333 of the criminal code, involving exceeding official powers, committed more than once with use of violence and insult of victim’s dignity, which carries imprisonment from 5 to 8 years as punishment.

Charges are stemming from break up of the November 7, 2007 anti-government protests, as well as raid on and “seizure” of Imedi TV station and other assets owned at the time by tycoon Badri Patarkatsishvili, who died in February, 2008.

Several other former high-ranking officials have also been charged in the same case, among them Zurab Adeishvili, who was chief prosecutor in 2007 and then justice minister. Adeishvili, who is wanted in Georgia for other criminal charges, reportedly has an asylum in Hungary.

Although charges have been filed against Saakashvili, no arrest warrant has yet been issued. Prosecution can file a motion in court asking for pre-trial detention for Saakashvili in absentia. Prosecutor’s office is tight-lipped about when, if at all, it plans to file such motion in court.

The post Saakashvili Responds To Charges Against Him appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Whilst the strong link between ethnicity, territory and governance has caused problems that contribute to the Bosnian crisis, the constitutional reform cannot hope to overcome this, but can only reduce its impact at best. Constitutional reform entails a trade-off between seeking to achieve modest improvements of the institutional structure, whilst sustaining public debate on topics that sideline the issues of main concern for Bosnia and Herzegovina’s citizens, such as poverty, corruption and the economy.

By Florian Bieber

At a meeting at the German Foreign Ministry in Berlin on the future of Bosnia with senior international officials and experts, I have had a chance to discuss the benefits and disadvantages of constitutional reform, a perennial topic for Bosnia. Here are some of the considerations I had the chance to present and discuss as to why I remain skeptical of the need to prioritize constitutional reform.

The constitutional structure is often identified as the main problem of Bosnia and Herzegovina, including two recent proposals by a coalition of Bosnian NGOs K143 (drafted by the Democratization Policy Council) and the International Crisis Group. The Dayton constitution is indeed not much loved and would find few supporters in its entirety. Over the past 15 years or so, countless drafts and ideas have been floated and no self-respecting international think-tank, political party and other observer would not have launched their own ideas. From abolishing the Federation (ESI), to abolishing the entities and replacing them with new multinational regions (SDP and SBiH), to creating a Croat entity (ICG) or just having strong municipalities (K143), there is hardly an option that has not been proposed. Indeed, considering the flaws of the constitution, it is easy to come up with better options. However, most proposals are unclear on one crucial question, how can such a change be brought about? A second question most proposals assume or leave unconsidered is whether such changes would unlock the country and bring about fundamental change.

Constitutional reform in Bosnia is inherently a process with a number of corollary reform needs. For example, any reform of the state presidency to bring it in line with Sejdić-Finci ruling of the ECHR would require the amendment of a number of other laws, most notably the election law. Other reforms of the constitution would require changing institutions (such as the constitutional court, parliament, council of ministers), thus constitutional reform per definition is more extensive than just changing Annex 4 of the Dayton Peace Accords.

A comprehensive approach would reach even beyond this and at its foremost would reform the constitution not just of the state, but also of sub-state units, in particular the Federation and Cantons. Furthermore, it would address larger question of the link between the constitution and the Dayton Peace Agreement. Currently, the constitution is still part of the Peace Agreement and its binding version is English, not BCS. This might be a small and banal point, but it means that the constitution remains embedded in a broader peace agreement that remains in place, including the OHR and the provisions on refugee return. A comprehensive approach in regard to Dayton would address these issues, and replace or reform the constitution in conjunction with the Peace Agreement. The outcome would be a final peace settlement that would transform Dayton.

Another form of the comprehensive approach would be to expand the matters to include issues that were not part of Dayton, but are rather related to current needs of Bosnia, such as EU integration or reducing patronage and corruption in the Bosnian system. Thus, the package would be more transformative than constitutional reforms can be.

Taking a step back from these options, we need to consider the reasons for opting for a comprehensive approach. The first motivation is to unlock a number of blockages in Bosnian system and thus transform the political dynamic in Bosnia beyond the constitution. The second approach would be to increase the pie to facilitate settlement. Here, the comprehensive approach provides for additional incentives for parties to accept constitutional reform that otherwise might not be palatable for them. Here, the relevant comparison is the April Agreement between Kosovo and Serbia that provided external incentives in the form of EU accession to both parties. The two motivations for a comprehensive approach are not easily compatible as the former seeks to address the problems of Bosnia comprehensively which inherently would include clipping the power of ethnonationalist political parties and their patronage networks, while the latter approach would be about securing a buy-in from all parties.

The format of such a comprehensive approach would require extensive international mediation, probably over several rounds of negotiations, even if short-term negotiated settlements might be more appealing, they risk failure considering the complexity of the subject matters and the varying incentives of political actors involved. Such comprehensive approach has not yet been tried in Bosnia and would require consensus among key international actors (in particular EU member states, the USA and preferably the two signatories of Dayton, Serbia and Croatia). A package solution also runs the risk of holding up reforms as they are all folded into the comprehensive package. Furthermore, external incentives for political actors are hard to come by, since currently rewards in terms of faster progress towards the EU appear to have little appeal.

If a comprehensive approach, or rather either of the two presented variants, appear unlikely, the option remains whether or not a constitutional reform by itself should be pursued and if so, whether through a gradual process or a “big bang” approach. The gradual process would see passing of several constitutional reforms over time, either negotiated by party leaders (with all normative problems this entails) or in parliament (with all practical problems) and build on each other. The big bang approach would seek a larger reform package to be passed in one go. The former has the advantage of building a gradual momentum, as well as normalizing the idea of constitutional change rather than reducing it to a one-off event. However, such process might take very long and failure at each step can derail the entire process. The big bang has the advantage of settling the most pressing issue at once and also allowing for some degree of horse trading that would provide different parties with incentives to compromise. The main problem is that both approaches have been failing for ten years. Gradual change has not happened and the constitution has only been changed once since Dayton to include the reference to the district of Brčko. The big bang approach also failed in April Package in 2006 and the Butmir Process in 2009 and also the Prud Agreement 2008 never reached fruition. Of course, the April package of constitutional reforms failed narrowly and was a near success. However, since Bosnian politics has become more intractable, the likelihood of a repetition of the constitutional reforms negotiated in 2006 appears slim.

The challenge arising from this observation is the tension between ambitions of those who have made plans for constitutional changes in Bosnia and the ability to translate them into reality. Any realistic process of constitutional reform will have to take place through the existing Bosnian institutions. Even an international conference on Bosnia will not have the legitimacy or the ability to enforce a large-scale institutional change without consent of Bosnia’s elected officials. There is no other realistic scenario of institutional change in Bosnia—even mass protests would at best create pressure on the institutions to act rather than overthrow them altogether, especially not country-wide. Thus, it is imperative to reckon with the political interest of the office holders in the country. In addition, despite evidence of significant disillusionment with the dominant political parties and the system, there is little to show that Bosnian citizens have a shared political project and consider themselves to be part of one community. Of course, if voters would bring into power parties with radically different politics, this would change, but so far there is little evidence for that.

Keeping these constraints in mind, there is no reason to believe that a comprehensive and far-reaching reform of the Bosnian constitution that would abolish the entities would be possible, as a recent proposal by K143 a coalition of Bosnian NGOs proposed, or otherwise transform the governing structure. Why would any political party from the RS agree to give up the entity veto when it provides it with an easy mechanism to block any decision at the state level? Similar questions can be raised about all major stumbling blocks of constitutional change. The only manner in which some elements of corporatist ethno-territorial control could be loosened would be through deals that offer other incentives or safeguards. Thus, increasing the number of members of the House of People would, for example, increase the number of MPs needed to evoke an entity veto, creating potentially higher hurdles. At best, such changes will undo some of the most egregious examples of ethnonationalist blockages or quotes, but not fundamentally transform Bosnia into a different political system. Thus, the link between territory and group identity is likely to remain strong, veto rights will exist, as will quotas. Removing open discrimination and somewhat streamlining decision-making could be achieved. This, however, neglects one key factor: is the main problem of Bosnia’s current crisis institutional or constitutional and can re-negotiated institutions alleviate these? The answer to the first part of the question is a partial yes, to the latter a no. Institutions are overly complex and blocked. However, it is telling that the protests in February focused on the local and cantonal level. In particular in Tuzla, neither does power-sharing matter nor is it one of the more dysfunctional cantons. Thus, grievances with political elites cannot be obviously fixed through constitutional amendments.

In effect the discussion about Sejdić-Finci in the aftermath of the protests in February seemed like the discussion among medieval angelology about how many angels can dance on the pin of a needle, esoteric and mostly irrelevant. Of course, discrimination is not desirable and deserves to be removed, yet the position of Roma is not going to change if one of them would have a theoretical chance of joining the state presidency as a Rom, since Roma can be elected as presidents in all neighboring countries without this having any practical effect.

Surely, the strong link between ethnicity, territory and governance has caused problems that contribute to the Bosnian crisis, but constitutional reform cannot hope to overcome this. It can at best only reduce its impact. At the same time, constitutional reform discussion have been reinforcing the power of established elites, as discussions on such reforms focus on protecting national interests, entity rights, threats to identity and other topics that are the life-blood of ethnonationalist rhetoric. Constitutional reform thus entails a trade-off between seeking to achieve modest improvements to the institutional structure while at the same time sustaining public debate on topics that sideline the main issues of concern for BiH citizens, such as poverty, corruption and the economy.

A procedural approach to constitutional reform would shift the focus on benefits of a having a process that seeks to build consensus and thus re-establishes Bosnia as a consensus-based polity, no matter the substance of the reforms themselves. Of course, taking a too liberal view of such a procedure of substance approach would accept even problematic „deals“, such as the „reforms“ agreed between Milorad Dodik and Zlatko Lagumdžija in 2012.

What constitutional reform (at the state and entity level) in the short and medium term at best can deliver is technical fixes to some matters that blocked decision making in Bosnia (i.e. by increasing the number of MPs in both chapters in order to increase the number of MPs needed to block laws through the entity clause or the formation of the House of Peoples in the Federation). This can alleviate some of the blockages that Bosnia encounters, but is more likely a recipe for further procrastination than a panacea.

Florian Bieber is a political scientist working on inter-ethnic relations, ethnic conflict and nationalism, focusing on Southeastern Europe. He is a Professor in South East European Studies and director of the Center for South East European Studies at the University of Graz. Florian is also a Visiting Professor at the Nationalism Studies Program at Central European University. He is the editor-in-chief of Nationalities Papers and the associate editor of Southeastern Europe , and is on the editorial board of Global Society, Ethnopolitics, Südosteuropa.

This piece was originally published on Florian Bieber’s blog and is available by clicking here.

The post Why Constitutional Reform Won’t Solve The Bosnian Blockade – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Dr Subhash Kapila

BRICS and SCO are basically China-Centric multilateral organisations. They perceptionaly stand designed to counter United States and Western domination of the global geopolitical space and of global financial institutions.

India is one of the founder member states of BRICS which now six years old comprises Brazil, Russia, India and China originally, and with South Africa as a recent entry.

SCO membership comprises China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. Observer States Status was extended to India, Pakistan, Iran, Mongolia and Pakistan. SCO has three Dialogue Partners —Turkey, Belarus and Sri Lanka.

SCO is headquartered in Beijing and the BRICS Bank finalised in BRICS Summit 2014 is to be located ate Shanghai. In essence therefore, the alternatives to US-dominated geopolitical and financial groupings/organisations will be headquartered in China.

BRICS advocates cite statistical evidence and a very impressive list too, of the combined weight of the six-member economically vibrant nations. However what is lost sight of is that in terms of economic systems, economic policies and strategies all six member-states are widely divergent. Economic integration is a far cry and even the recently announced BRICS Bank and BRICS Contingent Reserve Fund materialisation would take years to fructify.

Besides in India where strategic vision of the policy establishment is confined to economics and economic gains linked to development and infrastructure plans it needs to be reminded that economic strategies of countries like China are determined by geopolitical priorities. China is prone to jettison any economic collaboration/cooperation in any bilateral or multilateral system if China’s strategic aims are not met.

Within BRICS, China economically stands out in asymmetric proportions with Russia, India and the others. At the recent 2014Summit India is reported to have blocked China to contribute the maximum contribution of $41 billion initially in one go as against the $ 5 billion each to the BRICS Bank that was agreed to. The Chinese aim was clear –to gain initially the upper hand in controlling the BRICS Bank and this needs to be taken as a trend that would be repeated by China in the coming years.

How advantageous it is for India to be a member of BRICS as a global alternative to the IMF and World Bank? Would it lead India not to go to World Bank or IMF for diversified financial needs? Would membership of BRICS lead to India exercising greater leverages in terms of its financial dealings with the global economic powers and global financial institutions?

One is afraid that no advantages accrue to India other than sitting at the same table with two Permanent Members of the UN Security Council, namely Russia and China who today are at loggerheads with the United States and which on its own is seeking to restore impetus in the US-India Strategic Partnership independent of India’s association with BRICS or SCO.

The only beneficiary of BRICS is China which needs respectable avenues to channelize its vast US Dollars reserves in trillions. The BRICS route offers that advantage. Its predominance in BRICS may add certain leverages to China at the global level both geopolitically and financially.

Through the BRICS route Chin could muscle into India’s economy even in sensitive sectors which ordinarily would stand greater scrutiny. Though not related to BRICS but as an example of Chinese investments economic penetration has been the reported news of Anil Ambani’s Reliance Communications w securing a $1.9 billion loan advance from a Chinese bank. This also has strings attached in that the PLA owned Huawei Technologies emerges as the main actor from the Chinese side. It needs to be recalled that Indian intelligence agencies have opposed HUAWEI entering sensitive sectors in India like digital communications.

Though the apex appointments in BRICS Bank and other mechanisms are being shared by all the member states but it stands to reason that in the overall policy directions and strategizing, the will of China as a BRICS dominating partner will outweigh that of other member states. Also to be noted is the fact that Russia even though it may be inclined to align with India against outright Chinese domination of BRICS will not be able to do so simply for the reason that for geopolitical compulsions, Russia would be forced to go along with China.

It needs to be pointed out that the last BRICS Summit held last month in Brazil was a virtual non-event as far as India was concerned as one did not see any major English TV channels in India conducting debates on the advantages to India of BRICS membership.

Overall, there are many faltering steps that await the full integration and materialisation of the BRICS Bank and Contingent Reserve Fund besides harmonising the different economic ideologies of member states into a workable and unified approach so as to provide a credible alternative to the World Bank, IMF and ADB.

What does India do in the interim when it requires prompt infusion of massive financial inputs for its infrastructure development? Having type- casted itself with a grouping supposedly challenging existing global financial institutions, would India have a call on them? Then why get avoidably type-casted when industrialised economic powers are as it is excited in investing in India’s potential as an emerging power?

Moving to SCO, two things need to be pointed out even though India has only an Observer Status, but is being wooed to take Full Member status. SCO is an out and out China-Centric geopolitical organisation in what was earlier touted as being an Eastern NATO designed to checkmate the eastern creep of NATO towards Russian and Chinese peripheries.

Has SCO been successful in countervailing United States and NATO predominance on Chinese peripheries? Has SCO been successful in countervailing US predominance in the Asia Pacific? Other than Russia, has China been able to enlist any other major power to align with the China-dominated SCO?

The answer is in the negative and Russia too was a reluctant entrant to SCO as a result of United Sates not resetting US-Russia relationship. Russia had to add some strategic ballast to its aspirations to emerge as an independent power centre and Russia does still retain certain leverages with the Central Asian Republics members of SCO and which does give it a handle deal with China within the SCO.

So where does India fit into this geopolitical framework and especially when China and India have competing strategic interests in Asia Pacific and China would oppose India gaining any economic or strategic foothold in the Central Asian Republics.

In February 2014 the SCO Secretary General was in New Delhi to motivate India to become a full-fledged member of SCO. This was partly in response to the previous Government’s Foreign Minister expressing such thoughts at the last SCO Submit.

Indian advocates of India becoming a full-member of SCO forget that China needs this as an excuse to add Pakistan also as a full member of SCO. Also such advocates plead that joining SCO would enable India to enter the Central Asian Republics markets for energy security needs and trade. They seem to forget that China would never assist a competing power like India for such an entry and that too in a region where China as it is involved in a tussle with Russia.

Concluding one would like to emphasise that India as a rising power should rise on its own strengths and its own two legs rather than hope that it can successfully reach the top by piggy-backing on China-Centric multilateral organisations and groupings.

India hardly garners any substantial advantages by getting type-casted into alignment with China-Centric organisations. If India lacks the political guts and will to use its extensive power attributes to ‘ride alone’ in pursuit of regional and global power and feels impelled to join a “posse” then it would be well advised to join a US-led posse rather than a China-led posse

The post China-Centric Organizations BRICS & SCO: How Advantageous To India? – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Kathy Kelly

Last week, here in Kabul, the Afghan Peace Volunteers welcomed activist Carmen Trotta, from New York, who has lived in close community with impoverished people in his city for the past 25 years, serving meals, sharing housing, and offering hospitality to the best of his ability. Put simply and in its own words, his community, founded by Dorothy Day, exists to practice “the works of mercy” and to “end the works of war.” We wanted to hear Carmen’s first impressions of traveling the streets of Kabul on his way from the airport to the working class neighborhood where he’ll be staying as the APVs’ welcome guest.

Carmen, second from left, with friends in Carmen, second from left, with friends in Kabul. Photo credit: Abdulhai Safarali, VCNV.

He said it was the first time he’d seen the streets of any city so crowded with people who have no work.

Carmen had noticed men sitting in wheelbarrows, on curb sides, and along sidewalks, unemployed, some of them waiting for a day labor opportunity that might or might not come. Dr. Hakim, the APV’s mentor, quoted Carmen the relevant statistics: the CIA World Fact Book uses research from 2008 to put Afghanistan’s unemployment rate at 35% – just under the figure of 36% of Afghans living beneath the poverty level. That’s the CIA’s unemployment figure – Catherine James, writing in The Asian Review this past March, noted that “the Afghan Chamber of Commerce puts it at 40%, the World Bank measures it at 56% and Afghanistan’s labor leaders put it at a shocking 86%.”

Overall statistics for Afghanistan are grim. A recent article in the UK’s Independent reported that one million children under five are acutely malnourished, 54 per cent of girls do not go to school and war has displaced 630,000 Afghans within their own country. Relentlessly, the fighting continues. Now, on average, 40 children are maimed or killed in fighting every week.

Rustom Ali, a cobbler – a shoemaker, born here in Kabul – visited with me the day after Carmen’s arrival, and explained more about employment in his city, and the prospects for Afghans surviving this latest decade out of a near-half-century of near-constant foreign invasion. He had to find time out of a 12 hour workday to meet with me. Rustom Ali, a cobbler in Kabul, Photo credit: Abdulhai SafaraliRustom Ali, a cobbler in Kabul, Photo credit: Abdulhai Safarali

Rustom mends shoes, or waits for shoes to mend, 7 days a week, from 7:00 a.m. – 7:00 p.m., at the roadside. His “shop” consists of a box containing equipment and a primitive, portable overhead shelter. He sits on a ledge, under the blazing sun, (or in freezing cold during Afghanistan’s harsh winter).

Each day he earns about 250 Afghanis, equivalent to roughly four and a half dollars in U.S. money. Dependent on him for food and shelter are his wife Fatima, his daughter Narghis (age 7), and five-year-old Mehdi, his son; Rustom’s father also lives with them and has no work. Each day, the price of bread to feed the family is 100 Afghanis ($1.76). Beyond supplying bread, rice, beans and oil, he must also pay for rent and gas. He will never be able to save money at this rate, despite his fierce yearning for a better future for his two children.

Twenty years ago, Rustom had hoped for a far different life for himself. He had travelled to Iran and, although Iranians generally discriminated against Afghans, he was able to go to school, where he was an excellent student, always working part time as a cobbler. He enjoyed sports, and also liked learning English in his spare time. He showed me two notebooks he had begun then, filled with details about his family history and reflections about his life.

One day, when he was 18 years old and still living in Iran, a car carrying flowers to a wedding hit him as he crossed an intersection, catapulting him into the air. He landed on his head. After 48 days in hospital and then three more months spent recovering at home, he was finally able to walk and speak again. His speech and memory are still affected by the accident.

Rustom hired a lawyer, hoping a judge would compel the driver who caused the accident to pay some reparations. But the driver was a native to Iran and Rustom was an Afghan. “I endured great pain and permanent brain damage because of the accident,” he said, “But being treated as though I wasn’t a human being,” – the reaction of the Iranian court – “it was more painful. Every day I could see this kind of discrimination against Afghans in Iran.” And so he took his chances and returned to Kabul.

When I asked Rustom about his greatest hopes for his own children, he said that he and his wife teach them, every day, never to discriminate against others the way he was discriminated against in Iran. He had been sorely hurt when the courts there refused to see him, a foreigner, as a human being.

Abdulhai, an Afghan Peace Volunteer, translated between me and Rustom, having developed a friendship with Rustom since they first sat and talked several months ago. Abdulhai had confessed to Rustom that he was struggling with loneliness and sadness. Rustom offered comfort and encouragement. He has great hopes for Abdulhai, who has, in his view, a future much brighter than so many here, given his enrolment in school and his interest in learning new skills. Rustom said that after four years sitting daily in the same place waiting to repair shoes, Abdulhai was the first person to engage him in a genuine conversation.

Dehumanization is central to war. Rustom Ali’s and Abdulhai’s friendship defies dehumanizing forces in their impoverished society, so battered by war makers ‘predatory ventures.

This morning, Carmen and Faiz, another APV member, took a long, early morning walk through a main street in the neighbourhood where we live. By now, Carmen is recognizing faces and names. He knows the bakers who’ve stopped their work to share a cup of tea with him. Sayyaf, who lost both legs during civil war in Kabul and survives by selling glasses and mousetraps from a somewhat ramshackle cart, waved to Carmen with a broad smile and offered him a cup of tea.

As the U.S. cobbles together justifications for its ongoing, foolhardy war in Afghanistan, glimmers of hope persist in small communities like Carmen’s in New York and the APVs in Kabul. They agitate against war. They believe that doing the works of mercy helps us set aside the works of war. And, they’re renewed, consistently, by discovering that numerous people, who may seem to be sitting idly by, earnestly long to form humane relations and, as Carmen’s community puts it, “build a new world within the shell of the old.”

Kathy Kelly (Kathy@vcnv.org) co-coordinates Voices for Creative Nonviolence
(www.vcnv.org)

The post Jobless Kabul And The Works Of War appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Hassan al-Obaidi

The “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant” (ISIL) declared a so-called “Islamic caliphate” in northern Syria and eastern Iraq on June 10th, 2014. In this special series, people from all walks of life speak to Mawtani about the hardships of life under ISIL and how they will ensure it does not gain a foothold in any territory it claims to control.

Displaced Fallujah residents told Mawtani they fled the city due to violence and the crimes of the “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant” (ISIL), which overran large parts of the city.

ISIL seized residents’ homes and looted their belongings, said Hameed Saadi, 49, now a resident of al-Saqlawiyah, a town near Fallujah that is under the control of Iraqi security forces.

“There is no rule of law in the city,” he said, adding that “ISIL gunmen are instead issuing their own improvised rulings and purposely humiliating people”.

“That is why we abandoned Fallujah,” he said.

Saadi’s wife, Umm Ghaith, said she had feared for the security and safety of her sons.

“I do not trust them with the safety of my children,” she said. “They prohibited them from freely choosing their clothes, forced them to grow beards and prohibited them from frequenting cafés and video game arcades.”

“We decided to leave after they subjected a youth to an extremely humiliating public flogging because he did not follow one of their instructions,” she added. “I do not want that scene repeated with my children.”

Fallujah residents who fled the city told Anbar governor Ahmed al-Thiyabi al-Dulaimi that cigarette smokers had been flogged, hair salons closed and restrictions placed on barber shops.

ISIL also banned local preachers from entering the city’s mosques and replaced them with others “which made many [residents] refrain from entering and praying in the mosques”, he said.

Many families fled the city after ISIL began to punish youth in public squares, he said.

“People have come to distinguish between life in a state of law and life among backward ignorant gangs who know only death and destruction and are distorting and misrepresenting religion at their whim,” al-Dulaimi said.

Residents refuse to recognise ISIL’s sharia courts

Thousands of Fallujah residents have been displaced from the city, said Fallujah tribal council member Sheikh Nasser al-Issawi, who is living outside the city.

Some families were forced to stay due to financial hardship, he said, adding that those who remain in the city long for tolerance to return and for law and order to be restored.

Anbar military operations commander Lt. Gen. Rasheed Flaih told Mawtani about 500 ISIL gunmen have set up headquarters in the homes of Fallujah residents displaced by violence.

“They have looted and turned those homes into criminal headquarters,” he said, adding that “we are preparing to launch a massive offensive on four fronts to retake Fallujah from them”.

Those newly displaced from Fallujah say ISIL has opened a new sharia court, al-Issawi said, but that no one goes to it to plead their cases “even though it has been a month since it was established”.

“People prefer to resort to the official courts in nearby cities for their marriage contracts and personal disputes, which indicates that people do not recognise ISIL and abide by the rule of law imposed by Iraqi courts, not ISIL,” al-Issawi said.

The post Life Under ISIL Caliphate: Commandeering, Looting Homes appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Harsh V. Pant

(IDN | Yale Global) – Asia’s leading nations have been slowly coming together to face the challenge of an assertive China. To the chagrin of Beijing, US, Indian and Japanese naval vessels gathered for a joint exercise in the Pacific ostensibly against piracy and terrorism. The rise of nationalist leaders in Japan and India, combined with growing US concern about aggressive Chinese policy, have created new dynamics in the region.

The Malabar exercise, an annual affair between the United States and India, commenced on July 24 at Sasebo Naval Base, Japan. China had reacted angrily in 2007 when the United States and India invited Japan, Australia and Singapore for the Malabar exercises. Under pressure from Beijing, New Delhi backed off and since then had refrained from making these exercises multilateral. But China’s growing maritime ambitions in the Indian Ocean region and greater assertion on territorial issues have led India to a more forceful posture, resulting in joint India-Japan naval exercises since 2012 and the invite to Japan this year for the Malabar series.

India-Japan ties are expected to get a boost from the personal camaraderie of Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and newly elected Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Both leaders are emblematic of a new, ambitious and nationalistic Asian landscape. They have decisive mandates to reshape the economic and strategic future of their respective nations.

Modi and Abe decisive mandates

Modi has already underlined that India and Japan share a “fundamental identity of values, interests and priorities.” Japan’s economic and technological development has inspired Modi to emulate the Japan model, with flexible and bold fiscal policy that encourages private investment in infrastructure and technology. Modi’s first bilateral visit outside South Asia was supposed to be Japan, but the Indian Parliament’s budget session precluded this from happening. Moreover, Modi wanted that visit to showcase concrete deliverables. He wrote personally to the Japanese prime minister to express his regret, and speculation is underway that his trip to Japan, set for August, will result in big-ticket announcements.

Since serving as chief minister of Gujarat, Modi has enjoyed a close relationship with Abe. Modi is just one of three people followed by the Japanese prime minister on Twitter, along with a journalist and Abe’s wife. Abe, a longstanding admirer of India, has been a strong votary of strategic ties between New Delhi and Tokyo.

For Abe, “a strong India is in the best interest of Japan, and a strong Japan is in the best interest of India.” He was one of the first Asian leaders to envision a “broader Asia,” linking the Pacific and Indian oceans to form the Indo-Pacific. And as he has gone about reconstituting Japan’s role as a security provider in the region and beyond, India, of all Japan’s neighbors, seems most willing to acknowledge Tokyo’s centrality in shaping the evolving security architecture in the Indo-Pacific.

At the annual Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore in May, Abe claimed a larger security role of Japan in Asia by assisting countries like the Philippines which have territorial disputes with China, suggesting that “Japan will offer its utmost support for the efforts of the countries of ASEAN as they work to ensure the security of the seas and the skies.” He went on to underscore US-Japan-India cooperation as a driving force for regional security and prosperity of the Indo-Pacific region.

Japanese corporate sector has big hopes

Modi would like to use his personal connection with Abe to consolidate national ties. The Japanese corporate sector is enthused by Modi’s victory, looking to boost its presence in India, and Modi will be building on his personal ties with the Japanese businesses cemented during his tenure in Gujarat, to give a fillip to Japanese investment in India. India is the largest recipient of Japanese foreign aid.

The Japan International Cooperation Agency has been involved in the funding of Delhi Metro, India’s biggest subway system, and has agreed to fund the next phase of the Mumbai subway. Japan is expected to play a major role in a number of high profile infrastructure projects, including completion of the ambitious Delhi Mumbai industrial corridor, a Chennai-Bangalore industrial corridor and a dedicated freight project in southern India.

India has also invited Japan to invest in infrastructure projects in India’s northeastern region, where tensions with China loom large. India has expressed keen interest in buying Japanese ShinMaywa amphibious aircraft, the US-2i, a deal of around 15 planes worth more than $1.5 billion.

China, observing these trends, has been reaching out to the Modi government, both via bilateral and multilateral means. China and India, as part of the larger BRICS grouping, took one step towards challenging the western dominance of the global economic and financial order in July 2014 when they decided to set up the New Development Bank, headquartered in Shanghai, to finance infrastructure and development projects.

At the bilateral level, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi who visited Delhi in June 2014 as special envoy of the Chinese president to meet the new Indian leadership and boost bilateral ties saluted the new Modi government for injecting “new vitality into an ancient civilisation.” In an attempt to woo New Delhi at time when Chinese relations with Japan and Southeast Asian nations including Vietnam and Philippines have been deteriorating, Wang underlined that China was ready for a final settlement of its border disputes with India and prepared to invest more in India.

Away from lack of direction

But the tensions show no sign of abating and Modi remains a nationalist looking to raising India’s profile on the global stage. He invited the political head of the Tibetan government in exile, Lobsang Sangay, for his swearing-in ceremony to which China reacted with a démarche. In a highly symbolic move, former Indian army chief General V.K. Singh was named a minister in Modi’s cabinet, holding the dual charge of the affairs of India’s northeastern states bordering China as well as being the junior minister in the ministry of external affairs. Though India has been trying to beef up border defenses vis-à-vis China that process suffered from lack of direction. Singh, who served in the area in his military capacity, wants to prioritize development in the northeastern region so as to narrow the gap with the Chinese infrastructure development on the other side of the border.

For the first time, a young member of parliament from Arunachal Pradesh, Kiren Rijiju, has been given a key ministerial position in the cabinet – minister of state for home – to underscore the administration’s intention of making the troubled northeastern region a priority. Lamenting the fact that India has, even after 68 years of independence, failed to ensure connectivity in its border areas, giving China a strategic advantage, Rijiju has been vocal about the need to strengthen the forces guarding the border where China claims more than 90,000 square kilometers of land disputed by New Delhi in the eastern sector of the Himalayas, including most of Arunachal Pradesh, called South Tibet by China.

At a time when China has alienated most of its neighbors with aggressive rhetoric and actions, India has an opportunity to expand its profile and work proactively with other likeminded states to ensure a stable regional order. Given the Modi-Abe connection, many expect a paradigm shift in Indian-Japanese relations. Whether or not that happens, Japan will remain a priority for India in the coming years.

Harsh V. Pant teaches at King’s College, London. This article originally appeared in YaleGlobal Online on July 29, 2014 with the headline Hindi-Nippon Bhai Bhai?

The post India-Japan Link Amid Concern Over China – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Republican lawmakers on Tuesday proposed a total revamping of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), accusing the agency of being a political group rather than a nonpartisan government collection agency, according to the House pf Representatives Oversight Committee’s latest report titled, “Making Sure Targeting Never Happens: Getting Politics Out of the IRS and Other Solutions.”

The Oversight Committee’s Republican members, led by Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif.., claim they have overwhelming evidence that President Barack Obama’s unprecedented condemnation of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the controversial Citizens United case encouraged IRS’s upper-echelon staff members to target conservative groups such as the numerous Tea Party organizations, pro-gun owner groups, and other conservative or libertarian organizations.

The House report also states that too many IRS executives were overwhelmed with kicking off the IRS’s role in the Affordable Care Act of 2010, a/k/a ObamaCare, which in essence allowed IRS officials like Lois Lerner, the former director of tax-exempt groups and the central figure in the Tea Party controversy, to have too much autonomy for a political operative in a supposedly non-political position..

Under the President Barack Obama, the IRS has become a partisan “body and full-fledged arm of the administration in power,” the Oversight report said.

One of the key changes sought by the Oversight Committee’s Republican members report is the elimination of the position of Commissioner of the IRS and the creation of a bipartisan group that could manage the agency that is responsible for handling trillions of taxpayer dollars.

Rep. Darrell Issa’s July 29 report states:

Other operational failures within the IRS contributed to the targeting. The IRS trained its agents to identify and elevate applications that could draw media attention, even though media attention has no bearing on a group’s qualification for tax-exemption.

As Washington employees evaluated the applications, they evaluated whether the groups’ activities were “good” nonprofit activities or merely “emotional” propaganda with “little educational value.”The IRS allowed these tax-exempt applications to languish for years without action. Subsequently, as it sought to work through the backlog, the agency requested inappropriate and burdensome information from groups applying for tax-exempt status.

But the committee member jokingly referred to as Issa’s arch-rival, Maryland Democratic Rep. Elijah Cummings, condemned the new report, and took issue with the proposal to eliminate the IRS commissioner’s position.

However, during the Issa-led IRS probe, information obtained by the public-interest group, Judicial Watch, points to Rep. Cummings being one of the Democrats who had complained to Lerner about the non-profit groups that opposed the overall Democratic Party political agenda.

One of the Republican proposals that’s sure to anger Obama and his minions is the suggestion that the Affordable Care Act implementation be taken away from the IRS and given to a more nonpartisan group that’s free from White House manipulation.

The post US House Report Advises Eliminating IRS Commissioner Job – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Valentina Gasbarri

Worldwide, there is increasing recognition that faith and religion play a vital role in promoting peaceful and harmonious relationships within and between nations.

For more than half a century, the United Nations, the European Union and numerous other international and regional organizations have affirmed the principle of religious freedom. Journalists and pro-human rights organisations have reported on persecution of minority faiths, outbreaks of sectarian violence and discrimination practices against religious individuals and communities in many countries.

But until now, there have been few examples of quantitative contributions that review the positive impacts of faiths and religions to social wellbeing and on policies of national and international communities.

A study by the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life, published in January 2014, showed that 5.3 billion people – nearly 76 percent of the world’s population – live under high or very high restrictions on the freedom of religion and beliefs. Some restrictions result from government actions, policies and laws.

This includes efforts by governments to ban particular faiths, prohibit conversions, limit preaching or give preferential treatment to one or more religious groups. In 178 countries (90%), religious groups must register with the government for various purposes, and in 117 (59%) the registration requirements resulted in major problems for – or outright discrimination against – certain faiths.

Others result from hostile acts by private individuals, organizations and social groups. This includes mob or sectarian violence, harassment over attire for religious reasons and other religion-related intimidation.

One example is the abuse of religious minorities by private individuals or groups in society for acts perceived as offensive or threatening to the majority faith of the country. Incidents of abuse targeting religious minorities were reported in 47% of countries in 2012, up from 38% in 2011 and 24% in the baseline year of the study.

In Libya, for instance, two worshippers were killed in an attack on a Coptic Orthodox church in the city of Misurata in December 2012. This was the first attack specifically targeting a church since the 2011 revolution, according to the U.S. Department of State.

In Egypt, attacks on Coptic Christian communities went up during the year. In China, increasing numbers of Buddhist monks, nuns and laypeople protested government policies toward Tibet by setting themselves on fire. Also in Nigeria, there was rising violence between Muslims and Christians, including attacks by the Islamist group Boko Haram. In Burma (Myanmar), communal violence between Rohingya Muslims and Rakhine Buddhists has resulted in hundreds of deaths and displaced more than 100,000 people from their homes.

The share of countries with a high or very high level of social hostilities involving religious restrictions reached a six-year peak in 2012, according to the study.

The highest overall levels of restrictions are found in countries such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Iran, where both the government and society at large impose numerous limits on religious beliefs and practices. But government policies and social hostilities do not always move in tandem. Vietnam and China, for instance, have high government restrictions on religion but are in the moderate or low range when it comes to social hostilities. Nigeria and Bangladesh follow the opposite pattern: high in social hostilities but moderate in terms of government actions.

Among all regions, the Middle East-North Africa has the highest government and social restrictions on religion, while the Americas are the least restrictive region on both measures. Among the world’s 25 most populous countries, Iran, Egypt, Indonesia, Pakistan and India stand out as having the most restrictions when government and social restrictions are taken into account, while Brazil, Japan, the United States, Italy, South Africa and the United Kingdom have the least.

Religious freedom and business

Will a religious-based approach make economic growth more productive, as “The Religious Market Theory” suggests. Brian Grim, president of the Religious Freedom & Business Foundation has in fact explained why religious freedom is good for business for several reasons.

First, religious freedom fosters respect by protecting something that more than eight-in-ten people worldwide, 84 percent according to the study, support. Religious freedom ensures that people, regardless of their belief or non-belief, are accorded equal rights and equal opportunity to have a voice in society.

Second, religious freedom reduces corruption, one of the key impediments to sustainable economic development. For instance, research finds that laws and practices burdening religion are related to higher levels of corruption. This is borne out by simple comparison between the Pew Research Center’s analysis and the 2011 Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index. Eight of the ten most corrupt countries have high or very high governmental restrictions on religious liberty.

Third, research clearly demonstrates that religious freedom engenders peace by reducing religion-related violence and conflict. Conversely, religious hostilities and restrictions create climates that can drive away local and foreign investment, undermine sustainable development, and disrupt huge sectors of economies. Such has occurred in the ongoing cycle of religious regulations and hostilities in Egypt, which has adversely impacted the tourism industry.

Fourth, religious freedom encourages broader freedoms that contribute to positive socio-economic development. Economist and Nobel laureate Amartya Sen, for instance, argues that societal development requires the removal of sources of “unfreedom.” Removing impediments to religious freedom facilitates freedom of other kinds.

Fifth, religious freedom develops the economy. When religious groups operate in a free and competitive environment, religion can play a measurable role in the human and social development of countries.

Sixth, religious freedom overcomes over-regulation that accompanies certain types of religious restrictions that directly limit or harm economic activity. A few current examples from the Muslim-majority countries – a set of countries with particularly high religious restrictions – are illustrative of how the lack of religious freedom contributes to worse economic performances.

One direct religious restriction impacting economic freedom involves Islamic finance. For instance, businesses involved in creating, buying or selling Islamic financial instruments can find the situation that one Islamic law (sharia) board deems a particular instrument acceptable while another board does not, making the instrument’s acceptance on stock exchanges subject to differing interpretations of sharia.

And seventh, religious freedom multiplies trust. Religious freedom, when respected within a company, can also directly benefit a company’s bottom line. These include both lower costs and improved morale. An example of lower costs includes less liability for litigation. Moreover, Important business stakeholders include business partners, investors and consumers, and a growing segment of ethically sensitive customers tend to prefer companies that are responsive to human rights. Indeed, consumer and government preferences given to human-rights-sensitive companies may give a company an advantage in competitive markets and enable it to charge premium prices and land choice contracts.

The analysis by the Pew Research Center also implicitly applies the theory of religious markets, highlighting the main implications in the context of real economies. Indeed, as it occurs in every economy, the more the religious market is subject to regulations by the government of other public authorities, the more will be the social hostilities in the country. The degree of religious freedom is one of the three main factors, along with the average Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth rate over the last 5 hears and the stability of prices and monetary policy, which determine the economic success of a country.

Applying the 10th indicators of the World Economic Forum, which represent the competitiveness of a country (namely through the education system, infrastructures, communication and efficiency of labour market), the study shows that those indicators reported better performances when religious freedom and belief are guaranteed and social hostilities associated to religion are limited.

China and Brazil

An interesting comparison could address the relationship between religion and business in countries such as China and Brazil, under the common recognition of BRICS’ economies (comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) but with diverse approaches to the economic, social and cultural development.

Over the past 50 years, China has developed the highest government restrictions on freedom of religion and belief. In the 1960s during the Cultural Revolution, all religions were suppressed and people who identified with a religion were subject to beatings and other forms of harassment. According to the Pew Research Center’s study, today half of the Chinese population identifies itself with a religion but with a large number of formal and informal restrictions still enforce in the country. However, China has the largest Buddhist population in the world, the 7th largest Christian population and the 17th largest Muslim population in the world.

On the other hand, Brazil is an emerging economy with a widespread enthusiasm for businesses. It is among the 76% of countries recently identified in the Pew Research study with initiatives to lower religious restrictions and hostilities. For instance, on January 15, 2012, President Dilma Rousseff approved an agreement to include the Holocaust, anti-Semitism, and other Jewish-related subjects, as well as racism, xenophobia, and intolerance, in the curricula of some schools, universities and other educational institutions.

Another expression of such support for religious freedom occurred in the spring of 2014 when the government of São Paulo – Brazil’s commercial hub and the western hemisphere’s most populous city at 20 million – declared [The writer] that henceforth May 25 will be “Religious Freedom Day”. This declaration coincided with a multi-faith religious freedom festival that drew nearly 30,000 participants, including the participation of the Catholic archdiocese, leading politicians and celebrities.

Valentina Gasbarri is a Junior Expert of the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR). She has a strong background in East-Asia geo-strategic relations, development issues and global security studies.

The post Interfaith Harmony Can Generate Development – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Aygun Badalova

Eight new mini hydropower plants with the total capacity of over 6700 MW of electricity have been launched in Tajikistan, Asia Plus reported on July 30 citing the open Joint – stock Holding Company “Barki Tojik”.

The hydropower plants have been built within the “Construction of Mini Hydropower Plants (MHPP) in Rural Areas of Tajikistan” project, which is being implemented through the credit of the Islamic Development Bank.

Within this project, mini hydropower plants have been constructed in Ayni, Nurabad, Rasht, Tajikabad, Jirqatal, Baljuvon, Tursunzade and Shahrinav districts of Tajikistan.

At the moment, “Barki Tojik” owns 29 hydropower plants, 16 of which are mini hydropower plants.

The post Tajikistan: Eight New Mini Hydropower Plants Launched appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Dr Kumar David

It seems that the Modi government is preparing the ground and softening up Tamils at home and in Lanka to ditch the 13-th Amendment and the Indo-Lanka Accord of 1987; not explicitly but to go halfway down this road.

Any who, including this writer thought after Prime Minister  Modi’s conversation with President Rajapakse at the former’s inauguration, that India intended to hold firm and retain continuity in respect of it’s stance on Lanka’s national question. Subsequent reports however point in the opposite direction. Ceylon Tamils who consider Indian support a bargaining lynchpin had better wake up. Is the Modi government preparing to sell them down river for thirty pieces of silver? Has Modi resolved to throw in his lot with Rajapakse? If so, his reasons I will speculate on at the end of this piece.

Compelling evidence for this volte-face comes from a high level five-man BJP team which held a seminar in Colombo during the last week of July. Two long interviews in the local press were even more significant. Before I summarise, let me assert that the incontrovertible coup de grace will be if Modi prohibits the UNHRC Investigation team from visiting India to collect evidence and surmount the travel ban placed by the Rajapakse government. The message then would be loud and clear; the Modi and the BJP do not want the Lankan state and military investigated for human rights violations and war-crimes. The decision has not been formally announced but is widely expected and Jayalalitha has raised the alarm. Secondly, if the Indian military participates in an exercise planned by its Lankan counterpart for later this month (August 2014) while the UNHRC investigation is still in progress, Delhi and its military will knowingly mire themselves in a diplomatic and political morass.

A prime motive in Rajapakse’s recent decision to backdate the review period of the Paranagma Disappearances Commission was to include the time the IPKF was operating in Lanka. Till recently Delhi was leaning on Colombo on human rights and devolution issues. The threat to inquire into violations by the IPKF was intended to hit back. In the wake of the Subramanium Swamy led seminar in Colombo and the statements of the participants, clearly the BJP is besotted with the Rajapakses. Therefore Colombo’s attempt to embarrass Delhi by opening the door to a recording of the dirty deeds of the IPKF is a little baffling; it may boomerang.

The position of the former Congress led government was that it assisted the Rajapakse State to destroy the LTTE in the civil, but on condition and in the expectation that the Tamils of the north and east would be permitted a reasonable degree of devolution and self-administration. The Indo-Lanka Accord and the 13-th Amendment to the Constitution encapsulated the expectations. While the BJP cheered the eradication of the LTTE it has never shown much loyalty to the Accord negotiated by its Congress rival Rajiv Gandhi and never had much empathy for Ceylon Tamils. It has negligible standing in Tamil Nadu hence it is immune to home grown Tamil sentiment and cannot be pressured into feigning empathy for Ceylon Tamils. (Ceylon Tamil is used in this essay to distinguish from the Upcountry Tamil community).

Till a few weeks ago the expectation was that the BJP would let the mandarins in Delhi run Sri Lanka policy; continuity. It was thought that Modi had no incentive for policy reversal. This expectation has turned out to be incorrect. According to the visiting BJP team, de facto if not de jure, 13A the Indo-Lanka Accord will be deposited in the waste paper basket; Ceylon Tamils will be told to go fly a kite; human rights and war-crimes concerns will be swept aside; and an axis between the BJP and the lame duck Rajapakse administration, now struggling on its last legs, will be crafted. Tamil diaspora busybodies will no longer be entertained in Delhi and shown the door. If you are a Ceylon Tamil or a human-rights activist you will not enjoy hearing this; but tough luck, these are the facts say the visitors.

The BJP visitors

This was no tour group visiting to enjoy the scenery and lie on the beach in swimwear; this was a delegation sent by the BJP with a political purpose, and possibly after liaison with Lanka’s Defence and External Affairs Ministries. Their talks at the plush BMICH Centre and in subsequent interviews could not have pleased these Ministries more if they had scripted it themselves. Team leader Subramanium Swamy’s views on Lanka’s ethnic imbroglio are well known. He has always been fiercely anti LTTE and celebrated its demise; he may be described as belonging to that fringe of the BJP that has no patience with the so-called ‘Tamil cause’. A fair description of his stance on the Lankan State and its handling of Tamils would be: Mr Swamy is a virtuoso violinist in the Rajapakse orchestra.

In and interview with Lanka Paranagama given much prominence in the Daily Mirror of 25 July and available on its Breaking News website (http://www.dailymirror.lk/), BJP Foreign Policy Cell national convener and member of the National Executive, Dr. Seshadri Chari, was most revealing. Here is a sample that illustrates changes that are on the way.

Question: Promises made by the Government of Sri Lanka to implement the 13th amendment are yet to be realized. How will India proceed to ensure the promise is not limited to mere promises?

Answer: 13A is the product of a particular situation that existed at the time when it was originally drawn up. Much water has flown since then, so in the changed circumstances, all the stakeholders need to look at 13A and implement its provisions in a phased manner. If Colombo is able to set a particular time frame on the implementation, it would help build bridges between various communities. It is up to Colombo to reap the peace dividends by implementing 13A.

Question: What are your comments on India’s abstention from voting at the US-backed resolution on Sri Lanka at the 25th UNHRC session this year?

Answer: The BJP has always held views contrary to the former government of India on the voting on the matter at the UNHRC in 2012. In 2014 however, good sense prevailed and India abstained. We have always believed that the issues between Colombo and the Tamil population is an internal matter of Sri Lanka. India has always opposed any internalization of domestic problems and we strongly believe this problem can best be solved through negotiations between India, Sri Lanka and other parties involved. As far as human rights violations are concerned, India strongly believes that Sri Lanka is seized of the matter; LLRC is active, it has submitted a report and now the question lies on the implementation aspect. I strongly believe that both India and Sri Lanka should resolve this issue and collaborate to get the resolution completely withdrawn. (This combines together the responses to a few questions on the same theme).

Question: Given that victims of these alleged HR violations have fled Sri Lanka, isn’t the internationalization of the issue inevitable?

Answer: The activities of the Tamil diaspora are a subject matter for the Government of Sri Lanka to tackle (sic!). India is against the kind of negative lobbying carried out by the diaspora and I hope they would better engage on the economic development and confidence building measure of post-war Sri Lanka.

The other significant interview, splashed full-page across the Ceylon Today newspaper of 29 July 2014, was with Dr Swapan Dasgupta, described as a close Modi confidante and tipped to be the next Indian High Commissioner to London. A few extracts are sufficient to confirm that the BJP is in the process of making a policy switch. (Questions and answers have been abridged; the full version is available in print and web).

Question: The position of the Congress was the implementation of 13A and 13A+. Would that be the same with the BJP?

Answer: It is too early to tell. I believe 13A is something for Sri Lanka to work out. They have their constraints; it is not a matter for India to decide. It is important for India to encourage Sri Lanka to resolve its own problem.

Question: the 13 th Amendment stems from a bilateral agreement, the Indo-Lanka Accord.

Answer: Let’s wait and see what importance the new government attaches to the Jayawardene-Rajiv Gandhi accord. (Notice the deft and deceptive switch from a country to country agreement to a deal between two individuals) . . . to what extent it moves on with fresh eyes.

Question: What is the position of the BJP on the UNHRC war crimes investigation?

Answer: It is work in progress . . . look at it with fresh eyes and see what elements need to be continued and what needs to be changed.

Question: Could the issue over war crimes investigation be sorted out amicably between Sri Lanka and India?

Answer: I believe Sri Lanka itself can resolve the issue.

This is carte blanche that the Rajapakse siblings and military could have hoped for in their wildest dreams.

Why the rapprochement with Rajapakse?

The BJP has no inherited allegiance to the Indo-Lanka (or as it now calls it the Jayawardena-Rajiv Gandhi) agreement; it has no Tamil clientele in India that it needs to be sensitive about; it has no interest in human rights in Lanka; and most important its ideology and value system are different. I need to spell out this last point in a paragraph or two.

The outgoing Congress government was corrupt, a failure and rotten. But it was also ideologically and historically a different from the BJP. It was a little bit more secular than skin-deep; the BJP will not challenge the secular basis of Indian polity only because it dare not. Congress did not subscribe to a Hindi-Only ideology (we Sri Lankans have an idiom called Sinhala-Only types) in the way that the Modi government has already got into dogfights with southern and western States pushing Hindi on the sly. The BJP represents the values of a new commercial bourgeois class whose norms are different from the old elite. If it moves, buy it, or sell it, such is the quintessential mentality of merchant capital.

To this backdrop must be added current imperatives which may motivate policy switching; I say may because the matter is not settled yet, last week’s obtuse BJP visiting delegation not notwithstanding. The BJP and Modi will, obviously, be asking themselves, what is there in it for us in switching policy; what is there in not switching? The case for continuity is stability in Tamil Nadu and indeed all the non-Hindi provinces, alignment with the moral high ground occupied by the elite, conformity with the well worked out strategies of the Delhi mandarins, and association with the US and the West which have pretty much decided on regime change in Colombo.

If the contrary view prevails, that is to say if Modi and the BJP judge that the Rajapakse regime is a going concern with many more years of virility to it, then a decision will be made to go against the current described above and engage in policy realignment. The China factor, the Pakistan factor and so on, are subsidiary footnotes that follow only if one determines that the Lankan regime is secure. Secure in this context is not just remaining in office, which it well may after the next election cycle next year, but strong and stable. If the BJP opined that this was so it would be making a different call of judgement from many Lankan commentators and the West who see a limping regime with diminished authority even if it scrapes back into office. My judgement is that this is a crippled regime which may hang on but my view is irrelevant. India’s choice will be known soon.

The post India’s BJP Doing A Volte-Face On Lanka’s Ethnic Issue – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Hari Bansh Jha

While presenting his budget for the year 2014-15 in the Lok Sabha on July 10, 2014, the Indian Finance Minister Arun Jaitley gave a major thrust for increasing production, improving business environment, encouraging foreign investment, giving boost to the manufacturing sector, developing infrastructure, cutting government debt, streamlining subsidies, generating employment opportunities and bringing macro-economic stability in the country with a view to catching up higher rate of sustainable economic growth. All this was in line with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s vision to transform the present-day India into a vibrant and modern economic power.

In order to achieve the above goal, all possible efforts have been made in the budget to ensure transparency and establish non-discriminatory regulatory regime with a view to wooing both the domestic and foreign investors. For this, provision of retrospective taxes was done away with. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) was promoted in all such important sectors, which could boost up the Indian economy.

Realizing the importance of investment in defense sector, Finance Minister Jaitley in this budget speech accorded high priority on the investment and production of domestic manufacturing of arms. India happens to the world’s largest buyer of defense equipment, despite the fact that there is huge potentiality for its indigenous production. As a corrective measure, the share of foreign ownership in the defense sector was stepped up significantly from the 26 per cent to 49 per cent with full Indian management and control. Such a step might not only enable this country to reduce its dependence on other sources in defense sector, but it might also help it to emerge as one of the major centres of arms supplier in the world. The country might also save huge chunk of foreign currency and thereby generate employment opportunities on a massive scale through the domestic production of arms. Until recently, foreign investment in the defense sector was a taboo.

Equal importance was given by the Finance Minister for investment in the industrial sector. Towards this end, several important changes were introduced to strengthen the hands of the private sector. Thrust was given for the revival of Special Economic Zones to attract funds from the foreign investors for the development of infrastructure and also to utilize the available unauthorized land effectively. The Indian Custom Single Window Project was proposed to facilitate trade. A National Industrial Corridor Authority was envisaged with its headquarters in Pune with a view to coordinating the development of industrial corridors with smart cities for which US$ 16.7 million has been proposed.

As the development and modernization of infrastructure has remained the top priority of Modi government, a modified Real Estate Investment Trusts type structure was announced for the infrastructure projects. Besides, the public-private partnership (PPP) approach was revitalized so that more of funds to could be generated for in infrastructure sector and other construction activities. Enormous chunk of money was earmarked for the development of highways. Construction work on several airports was envisaged under PPP model. Most importantly, in the river sector a huge Jal Marg Vikas project was proposed for connecting Allahabad to Haldia covering 1620 km distance between the two places.

Construction of a bullet train in the Mumbai-Ahmadabad sector was accorded highest priority. Besides, metro rails were proposed in Ahmadabad and Lucknow. For the development of northeastern region of India, further rail connectivity was proposed. FDI in the railway sector was raised up to 100 per cent, which earlier was banned. As if this was not enough, the government also adopted private and foreign direct investment and public private partnership model to meet the resource crunch. Also, the government in the pre-budget exercise announced the increment of 14.2 per cent on fares and 6.5 per cent on freight rates.

Given the importance of agricultural sector in the national economy, the Finance Minister not only proposed for the establishment of agricultural and horticultural universities, but also for the development of river linking projects. Irrigation projects were given major boost up. Kishan Television are to be established to provide due information to the farmers on farming and several other agricultural activities.

In the energy sector, construction of 15,000 km pipeline gas scheme was given due thrust under PPP scheme. Priority was accorded to the development of Ultra Mega Solar Power Project in Rajasthan, Gujarat, Tamil Nadu, Laddakh and Jammu & Kashmir for which $8.35 million has been earmarked. Besides, plan has also been made to promote solar power driven agricultural pump scheme at the cost of $ 66.8 million.

Given the fact that the tourism has a tremendous scope in India, the Finance Minister introduced Electronic Travel Authorization (e-Visa) system to give boost to this sector. Initially, this facility would be made available in a phased manner at nine airports of India. In science and technology sector, five additional IITs along with another new five IIMS would be set up.

In order to boost up the moral of the Indian soldiers, a national war memorial, along with a war museum, was proposed, which would be built close to the India Gate in New Delhi with a view to honour the soldiers who laid down their lives for the nation ever since India’s independence in 1947. Though late, due honour was also given to Vallabhbhai Patel, the founding father of modern India, through the provision made in the budget to erect the his statue at the cost of $33 million.

Of course, the success of a budget does not lie in figures, but in its implementation. The economic growth of India which averaged around 8 per cent annually after the liberalization effort made by Narsimha Rao government in early 1990s reduced below 5 per cent in the recent years. This was the worst economic performance in India in a quarter century. In the emerging situation, the budget has offered hope that the rate of economic growth of the country would again bounce back to 7-8 per cent in the next three years. Also, given the fact that the present government led by Narendra Modi in India is determined to take the Indian economy to a new height, it can safely be concluded that there is a greater possibility that it would bring solution to many of the inherent problems that the economy has been facing over the years.

(Jha is Professor of Economics and Executive Director of Centre for Economic and Technical Studies in Nepal.)

The post Indian Budget 2014: A Step Towards Minimum Government And Maximum Governance – View From Nepal appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The Chinese government has been actively promoting innovation via policies such as R&D subsidies, tax relief, and location policies. Since 1995, central and local governments have established more than 100 clusters in over 60 cities. This column presents new evidence on the effect of the concentration of firms on product innovation (new products) in the manufacturing industries.

By Hongyong Zhang

Spatial agglomeration of economic activities is generally assumed to improve productivity and spur firms’ innovation through localisation economies and urbanisation economies.¹ There is an extensive empirical literature investigating the effects of localisation and urbanisation on firm-level productivity. Despite its economic importance, there are few empirical studies focusing on agglomeration and product innovation. Feldman and Audretsch (1999) and De Beule and Van Beveren (2010) are two of the few exceptions. Feldman and Audretsch found a tendency for innovative activity in complementary industries sharing a common science-base to cluster together in a city. In the US, diversity has a strong positive effect and specialisation has a negative effect on new product introductions. De Beule and Van Beveren (2010) found a positive impact of own-industry employment concentration on the product innovation of Belgian firms. However, they considered localisation only.

Does agglomeration account for product innovation in developing countries such as China? If it does, how do the innovation activities of Chinese firms benefit from agglomeration economies, from localisation economies, and/or from urbanisation economies? To address the above questions, in my latest paper (Zhang 2014) I empirically analysed the effect of agglomeration economies on firm-level product innovation using Chinese firm-level data from 1998 to 2007.² Although the deepening of industrial agglomeration in China and its effect on productivity are well documented (see for example Lu and Tao 2009, Lin et al. 2011), whether agglomeration contributes to product innovation has not been explored.

Measures of agglomeration and product innovation

I followed Martin et al. (2011) to construct variables for agglomeration economies at the industry-city level.³ Localisation economies are measured by the number of other workers working for neighbouring firms in the same industry and in the same city. Urbanisation economies are measured by the number of workers in other industries in the same city and by the diversity of industries in the same city.

The criteria used by the National Bureau of Statistics for measuring the variable ‘new products’ are as follows: New products refer to brand new products produced with new technology and new design, or products that represent a noticeable improvement in terms of structure, material, or production process, significantly improving the character or function of the older versions. They include new products certified by relevant government agencies within the period of certification, as well as new products designed and produced by enterprises within a year without certification by government agencies.⁴

Geographical distribution of product innovation

Table 1 shows that there is wide variation across provinces regarding new product output, new product intensity, and the share of new product firms. The coastal provinces – especially Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Shandong, and Guangdong – account for a large amount of new product output. Meanwhile, inland provinces, such as Inner Mongolia, Guizhou, Qinghai, and Ningxia have very limited new product output. In terms of new product intensity, compared with the average of all provinces (3.6%), Beijing (19.2%), Tianjin (10.5%), Sichuan (9.1%), Chongqing (8.3%), and Zhejiang (7.4) are the most innovative, whereas Hainan (0.4%), Inner Mongolia (0.5%), Tibet (0.8%), and Xinjiang (1.3%) are the least innovative. Furthermore, Beijing, Tianjin, Zhejiang, Chongqing, and Sichuan have the highest percentage of firms with new product introduction, at about 20%. On the other hand, Inner Mongolia, Fujian, and Hainan have the lowest percentage of such firms at 1.1%–2.9%. These findings suggest that there are large disparities in product innovation across regions in China.

Table 1. Product innovation across regions (2007)

Note: New product intensity is the ratio of new product output to total output.

From the estimation of a model of new product introduction, I find that urbanisation economies – both size and diversity of neighbouring industries – make statistically significant contributions to the probability of new product introduction. Conversely, I find that there are no positive effects of localisation economies. Using an alternative measure of product innovation for the dependent variables, I find that the new product output and new product intensity are also benefits from urbanisation economies rather than localisation economies. All estimations are carried out after controlling for the local strength of competition and firm-specific characteristics, including total factor productivity (TFP), firm size, average wage, ownership, and production subsidy. So it is obvious that product innovation is determined not only by firms’ internal capacity, but also by external economies (urbanisation economies here).

In addition, I divide all of the samples into several sub-samples – domestic firms and foreign-invested firms, high-tech industries and other industries. The aim is to investigate whether there are differences in factors affecting product innovation by ownership or sector. Urbanisation, size, and diversity are still strongly positively associated with the probability of new product introduction and new product output. The results show that the contributions of urbanisation economies are stronger for domestic firms than for foreign-invested firms, and stronger in high-tech industries than in other industries.

Policy implications

Clusters with industrial diversity can be an effective means of fostering product innovation. Policymakers could promote product innovation by encouraging firms to locate in industrially diversified areas. Chinese authorities have established more than 100 economic zones (such as economic and technological development areas and high-technology industry development areas) in over 60 cities since 1995. Note that most of these economic zones – such as Zhongguancun Science Park (Beijing) and Suzhou Industrial Park (Jiangsu Province) – are not clusters of firms from the same narrowly defined industry (such as a 2-digit or 3-digit industry). The deepening of inter-industry outsourcing, knowledge spillovers, and procurement of intermediate goods are likely to lower the sunk costs of introducing new products, and thereby to promote product innovation.

Editor’s note: The main research on which this column is based (Zhang 2014) first appeared as a Discussion Paper of the Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI) of Japan.

About the author:
Hongyong Zhang
Fellow, RIETI; Lecturer at the School of Economics, Senshu University

References
Brandt, L, J Van Biesebroeck and Y Zhang (2011), “Creative accounting or creative destruction? Firm-level productivity growth in Chinese manufacturing”, Journal of Development Economics, 97: 339–351.

De Beule, F and I Van Beveren (2010), “Does firm agglomeration drive product innovation and renewal?”, KU Leuven VIVES Discussion Paper 14.

Feldman, M P and D B Audretsch (1999), “Innovation in cities: Science-based diversity, specialization and localized competition”, European Economic Review, 43: 409–429.

Lin, H, H Li and C Yang (2011), “Agglomeration and productivity: Firm-level evidence from China’s textile industry”, China Economic Review, 22: 313–329.

Lu, J and Z Tao (2009), “Trends and determinants of China’s industrial agglomeration”, Journal of Urban Economics, 65: 167–180.

Martin, P, T Mayer and F Mayneris (2011), “Spatial concentration and plant-level productivity in France”, Journal of Urban Economics, 69: 182–195.

Zhang, Hongyong (2014), “How Does Agglomeration Promote the Product Innovation of Chinese Firms?”, RIETI Discussion Paper 14-E-022.

Footnotes
1. Localisation economies indicate that the concentration of an industry in a given area generates positive externalities on input markets, labour markets, or knowledge exchange. By contrast, urbanisation economies imply that industrial diversity in a city facilitates the transmission of technology and knowledge of different industries, thus creating new knowledge and technology.

2. The large dataset comes from the Annual Surveys of Industrial Firms conducted by China’s National Bureau of Statistics. The survey includes all industrial firms that are state-owned, or non-state owned firms with sales above five million RMB. See Brandt et al. (2011) for details.

3. I use the Chinese Industry Classification at the two-digit level. The number of cities is about 336 during the sample period.

4. According to Lu and Tao (2009), a product is identified as a new product by the National Bureau of Statistics only if it is produced for the first time at least within a province. As Lu and Tao (2009) point out, some of the new products may just reflect local catch-up efforts in copying new products from other firms located in other regions and, to some extent, a considerable percentage of innovation in China involves imitation. However, this still represents an important step forward in product development and product innovation.

The post Agglomeration And Product Innovation In China – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.