Time to take charge

My post about the need for India and China to take up a more responsible role in the region, particularly in times of crisis such as the Pakistan floods.

"Being a regional/global power is not just about economic growth rates and size of the economies, it is also about understanding one’s regional/global responsibilities and fulfilling them efficiently. It is about being emphatic and generous to the enemy in need, while taking control of the situation; understanding one’s humanitarian responsibilities without losing sight of the opportunities that the situation presents. It is high time for regional powers to take charge and not expect the US to be the never-depleting relief bank."

Read the rest of the piece here.

Too soon to approach the WTO

Last week the US Congress passed a border security bill that plans to generate funds by hiking H1-B and L-1 visa fee by $2000 per application per person. This would help fund the $600 million emergency fund for securing the US border, particular with Mexico.

Though it is not explicitly directed towards Indian IT companies, they would be one of the worst affected by the provision. Losses could run into millions of dollars for the bigger companies such as Infosys and TCS.The Indian side has retaliated by threatening to go to the WTO in protest against the protectionist move by the US. I, have a problem with that.

I sincerely believe that it is too soon for the move. The Indian side should first talk to the US and exhaust all bilateral avenues before going the WTO route. The proper way to go about it would be to sit down, analyze and draw up a plan of action in conjunction with the Indian companies that would be affected by the move. It is their business and their money that will be lost, and they are one of the most important stakeholders in the issue. The government is more of a facilitator. The effects on other aspects of bilateral trade and bilateral relations with the US should be carefully analyzed before taking any aggressive measures. The Indian side should have a serious conversation with the US and persuade it to change the provision. If talks fail, then taking the US to the WTO would be an option.

An important question that the Indian side needs to ask itself is, "Can the WTO really change things?" Organizations such as these are good for pressuring smaller countries with lesser clout. But would it really matter to the US if it was taken to the WTO for being protectionist? Even if the WTO were to ask the US to change its provision, would the US do it?

Another thing that puzzles me is the motive behind this desire to go to the WTO. Is it serious indignation and protest, or simply symbolism that the Indian government is interested in? As mentioned earlier, taking the US to the WTO cannot be expected to produce any significant effect. So then is the Indian government trying to show the world that it is not afraid to stand up against the US? Or is it putting up the show for its domestic US-hating/doubting allies?

I am all for standing up against the protectionist attitude of the US. But not at the cost of damaging diplomatic relations and goodwill. National interest comes first, and business, the kind that Indian IT companies generate, is a big part of it. But any protest registered against the US should be carefully planned for maximum effect and minimum damage to Indian interest. It should be remembered that the US, even with its economic recession, can afford to ignore Indian protests and wallow in its own arrogance. India can hope to affect US decisions by wielding the bilateral business/trade card, but the mutual dependence factor with a comparatively weaker Indian side should not be overlooked.

The US decision to hike H1-B visa fees is protectionist, punishes the wrong people for generating profitable business, and will most likely do more damage to US jobs and move them out of the country than the outsourcing haters would like to believe. Yet, it is still not the right time to approach the WTO against the US.

Awesome!

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Deep Space Naan
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Ron Paul Interview

McNamara-India-China link

This is something I never knew about McNamara. Though not entirely improbable, it seems rather an extreme stand at a time when India was viewed as being pro-Soviet. But then it was the Cold War!

Creating false equivalencies

Charles Krauthammer in this Washington Post piece criticizes Obama for "hovering above mere mortals" and "distorting history for political effect." While I agree that maybe Obama could have indulged in little less self-flagellation, considering the intended purpose of the speech it is not impossible to imagine why those words were chosen.

The problem I have is with Krauthammer's comments upon Obama juxtaposing U.S. sponsored government overthrow in Iran, and Iran's role in violence against the U.S.

"A CIA rent-a-mob in a coup 56 years ago does not balance the hostage-takings, throat-slittings, terror bombings and wanton slaughters perpetrated for 30 years by a thug regime in Tehran (and its surrogates) that our own State Department calls the world's "most active state sponsor of terrorism." "

For one, I doubt if Obama was trying to call it even. Secondly the "thug regime" that came into being in Iran and perpetuated the violence was in ways enabled by the U.S. coup against the democratically elected leadership of Mosaddegh. Just as the Taliban problem in Afghanistan had to do with U.S. supporting the Mujaheddin to fight the Soviets. It can reasonably be argued that had Mosaddegh been allowed to rule, Iran would have been a favorably different country. So it definitely does not balance things out.

*Disclaimer: I do not condone or support terrorist activities, whether sponsored by Iran or any other country.

Repair and reuse

It is funny how people getting their shoes repaired can be news. I am listening to NPR and a story that people in the US are getting their shoes, luggage, clothes repaired and reusing them due to economic slowdown is amusing to say the least. Of course it says not everyone is being frugal and people are still buying new shoes, with one girl preferring to replace than repair.

When I first came to this country I was amazed at how repair shops are rare and expensive. Back home you just walked over to your corner shoe/purse/luggage repairwala and your shoes could be as good as new in a couple of bucks. I remember my brother getting his school shoes repaired at least twice a month. Or getting those school mandated leather shoes polished from the chappalwala at the start of every new year so they looked brand new. The hundreds of times my dad repaired purse zippers for mom.

In its own weird way the story made me feel at home, very nostalgic and a kid once again.

Lobbying the new administration

India is apparently making some significant lobbying efforts to be excluded from the South Asian group of problem countries. It does not want to be clubbed together with Pakistan. This reminds me of the numerous times when during discussions with friends and colleagues, I have made an effort to distance myself as an Indian from Pakistanis. Trying to point out how the bigger problem is Pakistan, not India; Pakistan is the rogue nation in the region, not India. In spite of appreciating that our nuclear program has been an act of proliferation, I never wanted it to be rated on par with that of Pakistan's in terms of the risks and proliferation concerns it raises. But the truth is that the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) was largely in reaction to and to avoid the repetition of situations like the first Indian nuclear tests. It is also true that the Indo-US civilian nuclear cooperation treaty is very likely to undermine nonproliferation efforts.

While it can be flaunted as my patriotism and love for my country, it does not take away the holier-than-thou attitude inherent in it. We are a part of the problem. Maybe not as big as Pakistan or Afghanistan is, but definitely a part. And we should be willing to recognize and deal with it if the tensions in the region are subside. While I am with the government on not wanting to internationalize the Kashmir issue, it is unofficially an international issue. There is an UN mission in the region. The U.S., UK, China talk about it in the same breath with Pakistan. Various international non-profits are involved in helping people deal with the consequences of the constant conflict. It would be oversimplifying if I say that solving the Kashmir problem will solve all Indo-Pak problems. But it would definitely reduce them.

We, as a nation have to appreciate that we are part of the problem. And we will have to be an active part of the solution. We cannot go on with a holier-than-thou attitude forever. That will only alienate other countries in the region. We would be following the U.S. path if we do that. South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) is not a big success because we are seen as the dictating big brother in the region. Being proud and being arrogant are two different things. We cannot afford to be arrogant if we really want to be an economic and regional superpower.

Some more reflecting

Nimish has an excellent post about the elections here. The following is my comment on it, which I am taking the liberty to reproduce since it ended up being so long.

"You raise some very pertinent questions about Obama, the historic significance in terms of what Obama can do and symbolizes for democracy, the expectations people have from him, if attitudes can change suddenly…

Like you, I was initially a Clinton supporter, or rather was in favor of Clinton over Obama or McCain. Part of it was to do with her being a Democratic member and a woman. I have a long standing question about why the US has never had a woman President, and I still have to find a really convincing answer to it. But that is a different story.

As for Sarah Palin, she was a glamour doll for a party that was desperate for some glamour. Had she showed some understanding of issues, I would have been sympathetic. But the minute she spoke, she was a disaster. It is wrong that election campaigns resort to mudslinging, but that is politics and no one has escaped it so far. It is admirable that that is not the only thing that happened there was serious policy debate too. And for that some character assaults could be pardoned.

I don't really remember when I was charmed by Obama, but that's what happened. For all my educational and professional background, I was finally charmed by his oratory and smile. I could see the "hope" everyone talked about. And after the initial daze subsided, I started listening to him objectively. He is an intelligent man. There were issues I did not agree upon, or was skeptical about, but there was the underlying fact that he was a rational intelligent man who could be expected to make policy decision based on facts, who would be able to grasp the various aspects of a situation, at least when informed about them, and that made him different. Of course it would be unreasonable to expect him to take decision without political and electoral considerations. But within the scope of his party ideology they would be rational. Obama’s victory is historic in that he is the first black President. But if it will end at that is speculative. There are unreasonable expectations of him. He will be closely watched because of that and because he is Black. And he will fail numerous times. How that is handled will tell us if that race gap has been bridged.

The question you raise about kalyankari neta saving the people is also very interesting. But that it happened here in the US is not a surprise because of the very nature of their political system, their democratic setup. Through a presidential democracy they have institutionalized the ek kalyankari neta idea for decades. The fact that they vote less on party lines, more for the actual person inculcates that within them. We in India are oriented into thinking about the party we are voting for than the person. There are very few leaders who we vote for individually. We vote for the Congress, the BJP, CPI, SP, BSP… The candidate might be a convicted criminal, but the party is good. We vote for a group of people. It is always ambiguous who the Prime Ministerial candidate is. But even then it is sarkar maibaap.

They way I understand government as an institution it came about because people need someone who will look after them, who will undo their problems, who will uplift them from their hardships. Even if we look at government as a group of people, as an institution, or even a bunch of buildings, we are still looking for someone to help us live our lives happily. Even a socialist, communist government is expected to do that. The idea remains and will continue to exist as we as people always need something that we individually cannot provide ourselves with. As part of a society, due to our interactions and interdependence we need someone ‘other’ to look out for us. The need for a kalyankari neta, the sarkar maibap continues."

Obama inauguration...Change has come!

It is a historic day today. I am watching Obama taking office. And I wish I was there in D.C. right now. After having lived there for two and half years, not being there today makes me sad. Its exactly one month since I left D.C. And so I am trying to blog live as I watch TV.

9.45 am (CT): The crows cheers crazily as Obama and Bush walk out of the White House. That man does have an infectious smile. And Michelle Obama is a charming woman. The crowds are enormous and considering how it felt that day in November walking down D.C's streets and reflecting back upon the last few days of the campaign, I can only imagine what the mall must feel like today.

9.55 am (CT): The motorcade is driving down to the ceremony and its a sight to behold. A sea of people cheering them. Not being an American, or black doesn't matter. It just feels amazing!

Did I ever watch an Indian PM being swore in with this indescribable feeling within me? Maybe when A.B. Vajpayee was sworn in. But I was too young to remember too vividly. I was excited. Having heard him talk had been a pleasure during the election campaign. And I must say he is one of my favorite orators. More on it later though.

10.00 am: Bush and Obama arrive at the Capitol to arrive at the swearing in podium on the West side.

10.05 am: Obama's cabinet members arrive.

Who is that announcer? Nice voice.

What are they feeling? Biden's mother and Bush's parents? And the Clinton's as they walk down to the ceremony? It could have been her being sworn in today! They have been through the ritual before. She looks happy. She is a graceful lady, no doubt. And Carter is walking in too. And the Bush kids.

10.28am: And there are Sasha and Malia and their grandmother. Those are two cute little girls. Smart kids. All smiles. They must be so proud. Michelle's mother too. And they are taking pictures.

They are showing the movers taking out the boxes from the White House. And apparently everything, the actual moving in is done during this ceremony. Having moved houses quite a few times, I think that is impressive. They have help. But even then.

10.32 am: Bush is walking down the corridor, and I feel a little bad for him.
Michelle Obama and Jill Biden have come out.
Cheney is in a wheelchair. For a proud man like him, that must be difficult.

10.36 am: President Bush walks out. The final few moments, and then he is back to Texas. Does he look relieved?

10.38 am: Obama is in the corridor. Looks proud, happy, a slight smile on his face. But contemplative. So many hopes and expectations from him. Smart man. So confident. I would like a John Malkovich moment right now.

10.43 am (CT): And there is Obama, walking out for his swearing in. Goodness!
There is humility on his face as Rick Warren reads the invocation.

10.57 am (CT): The actual swearing in to being... Biden sworn in.
A musical performance. Beautiful. Solemn. And happy.

It is 12.00 ET, which means that Obama is President now. Power transfer takes place at 12 ET on 20 Jan. according to the Constitution. Though there is some debate about what happens if the actual oath has not been taken till then. The White House website has changed to "Change has come." More about it later.

11.05 am (CT): Obama is finally being sworn in. He has taken his full name. And slipped for a moment in reciting the actual oath. Michelle smiles. And Obama is President. The crowds have gone crazy! Many smiles and tears. And now for the much awaited speech.

Speech: Says he is humbled by the generosity. Thanks Bush for his service to the nation. Mentions the many challenges and that they will be overcome together. What a wonderful speaker! Revoking the ancestors. Calls upon people to remake America. Taking bold and swift action. Question is not weather government is too big or small, but if it works. Talks of restoring trust between people and government. About accountability and regulation. America is friend of all, he says. And I want to believe him. He talks of reducing the nuclear threat. Addresses the Muslim world and says wants peace and friendship. "We will extend a hand if you unclench your fist." He refers to his father often. And the spirit of America and the possibility of doing right and good through hardwork. A beautiful speech. Such language. He is said to have written it himself. The language is consistent with his campaign speeches, and I think it might be his writing. He talked about so much in those 15 minutes. There was a strong call for action. Appropriate considering that it is his first speech as President.

11.40 am: The presidential party starts to leave. A beautiful ceremony. And yes, change has come.

I.K. Gujral's advise to Obama

I am sure he meant to say a lot more than what he actually does. Foreign Policy asked world leaders for advise for Obama and there are some good things people have said. And if Mr. Gujral were to meet him, the one thing he would say to Obama is,

"I would tell Barack Obama that we are a country that is [like] Gandhi, and anything one wants to understand about India, one should read Gandhi more than anyone else."

As the former Prime Minister of India that would be his advise to the new U.S. President? Nothing about governance, policy-making, not even the Gujral doctrine.

And of South Asia, Obama should know that,

"We are [of the] same stock, India and Pakistan. I was born [in Pakistan], for instance. I lived there; then the partition came. We have a very warm feeling for [Pakistani] society. ... I hope from now onwards both societies will live as friends."

I think both Mr. Gujral and Foreign Policy could have done better.

Gut 'wrench'ing

When the campaign ended, I thought it was the last that we would hear of him. But he seems to be pushing his 15 minutes of fame. Joe the Plumber is now Joe the Reporter. I don't know what is more ridiculous, that McCain played him up during the elections or that he is being turned into a reporter because he sees "glaring oversight in the journalism field." No one told me that is the way to being a reporter and covering important world events. I have been wasting my time studying and trying to understand world politics and the "field of journalism." I should have simply trained to be a plumber, or maybe not.

Of course this does say a lot about today's news media (particularly 24 news channels) and its dependence on gimmicks and ratings. The Mumbai blasts showed us what the Indian news channels are up to. The newspapers are losing out to the news channels and it is ironic how the first major New York Times front page advertisement was by CBS.

Hope

The United States has finally come down (albeit softly) on Pakistan. It has imposed sanctions on A.Q Khan & Co. Though I am skeptical about the real benefits of such sanctions, it is a positive gesture. Particularly since the safety of Pakistan's nuclear weapons and facilities is a matter of grave concern. I have always worried about proliferation by/from/through/due to Pakistan, more than the threat of proliferation by Iran. Iran's program is a concern, but there is still hope due to the absence of any real weapons. With Pakistan, they have proved that they can and will proliferate if opportunity presents itself. Maybe even go looking for one. The consequences of their actions are for all to see in North Korea and Libya. And least we forget, Pakistan's program has Chinese blessings.

With Bush leaving, and Obama having displayed intelligence and understanding of issues, I am hoping that the threat from Pakistan is duly understood and appropriately dealt with. Musharraf might be out of the way, but the weak government, overly ambitious army and ISI combo can be lethal. And the worst part is that there are no real chances of this power structure changing anytime soon. All we can do is hope.

Pyaar ke side effects

Dear Sitaram Yechury,

You deserve a prize!

But just so that you know, terrorists came to Indian shores long before the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal was conceived. Long before India was considered by the U.S. to be a "strategic ally."

Another thing, Mr. Yechury. Avoid contradictory thoughts in the same speech. "He opposed any move to "curb the rights" of the states by enacting a federal investigative agency....There is a need to create a new security architecture in the country...Yechury said." You further point out that "It is not the inadequacy of any law that caused the Mumbai terror attacks. If needed we can correct the loopholes in the present laws."

Well. Inadequacy of counter-terrorism laws, inadequacy of border protection laws, inadequacy of anti-corruption laws (to name a few) caused the Mumbai attacks. And the many more before it too. Also I don't understand how the rights of states will be curbed through a new agency. It will be a new law. You can write it such that any possibility of "curbing rights" will be eliminated. In fact you can plug the loopholes in the system as a whole. It is a fresh new opportunity, you see.

Sacrilegious as the thought may be for you, we could in fact use some help from countries like U.S. and Israel. As disastrous as their "war on terror" has been, it is true that the U.S. has been able to avoid any terrorist attacks on its soil after 9/11 through strict laws. And Israel has one of the best intelligence agencies in the world.

Of course you deserve credit for recognizing that India has been exposed to "new dangers" due to the nuclear deal. What kind, is a matter for another letter. I don't want to confuse you.

Regards
Manasi Kakatkar

(Additional reading: India announces security overhaul.)

Reflecting on elections

Ashutosh’s experience with volunteering for Obama made me think again of what this campaign said to me - the conspicuous absence of middle class and student participation in elections in India. I don't remember any of my peers or colleagues that I genuinely respected campaigning for any party or candidate. I always carried an image of the mawali kinds campaigning in jeeps and motorbikes, and an important reason why I never thought about participating actively. It is a stereotype and not a completely honest representation, but that is the image I still carry when I think of Indian elections.

Because I was always interested in politics and elections excited me, I could have been easily recruited into campaigning for someone. But no one appealed to my rationality as a voter. No one every tried to convince me of their worth such that I could then plausibly pass it on to others. There was no way I could rationalize and argue for any one candidate with sincerity and conviction. I never felt that any one candidate deserved so much of my time and energy. Every candidate and party had in fact insulted my intelligence.

As against that, watching the campaign here I knew I could have gone out and volunteered for Obama. When the thought first struck me, I was ashamed and guilty. I thought maybe the guilt was because my thoughts were a betrayal of my country. But it was more than that. The guilt was because I had not participated enough in the democratic process in my own country. I had, like millions others merely voted. I had not demanded answers to real questions. I had laughed and brushed away the political rhetoric, and voted on lines my family had for a long time. As a student of politics and democracy, I had not thought long enough about why I was voting for whoever it was. As a journalist I had merely been a passive observer.

While nothing can replace my love and respect for my country, being here and witnessing this election has made me respect the US as a nation. Maybe it is because it’s the election season or maybe because I am in DC, but the respect accorded to rationality and voter intelligence has left me stunned. I have said earlier that the campaigns were not perfect and had their share of mud-slinging and irrationality. I am critical of the US’ foreign policy and attitude. They carry a lot of blame for the kind of world we live in today, from the threats of nuclear war to the economic crisis. But the world wouldn’t have been what it is today without the US, for the better or worse.

Talking to some friends I have heard an argument that the parliamentary form of democracy with hundreds of parties makes it difficult to have a campaign like in the US. My problem with this argument is that I am not merely asking for formal debates. I am asking for a rational discussion and argument from candidates and parties about why I should vote for them. It has nothing to do with the structure of how these policies and rationales are conveyed. It has to do with explaining them in the first place. The party manifestos are meant to describe how a party will govern the country. But I have never known people to actually have access to and read election manifestos to make a decision. But they do turn up at rallies, which is where the policies of the candidate and parties could be discussed. There are interviews and press conferences. There are the 24 hour news channels hungry for news and information. I see no reason why they would not lap up candidates’ policy explanations if they are offered to them.

How and why a person ultimately votes is his personal choice. The people we trust our lives with could at least make an effort to ensure that the reason is rational.

Why I like NYT features

I always enjoy reading the New York Times. They have some of the best op-eds and features you could find in a newspaper. This one today about the man who could spoil your renovation plans is one of them. Not only is Mr. Glass himself very interesting and Newyorkery (my coinage. Look at his picture and you will know what it means), but also in a way a weird example of how one stranger (strictly belonging to the group of 'unelected' strangers) can have so much control over your decisions.

"He has no secretary or associates, no decorations on the wall. For that matter, his office has no Web site, e-mail address or even a computer — especially odd for a modern architect. Mr. Glass, who is 73, does have a telephone, but is rueful about it...
...Thousands of Manhattan’s most elite co-op dwellers do not break a wall or move a sink without Mr. Glass’s approval."

Catch 22

Two of United States worst enemies have expressed their preferences for the next US president. While Iran prefers Obama, Al Qaeda should prefer McCain. This puts the United States in a difficult position. The Republican campaign has already accused Obama of "palling around with terrorists." Now he is officially friend-apparent of Iran and Ahmedinejad. And even McCain is being recommended by friends of terrorists for President. So no matter who gets to the White House, 'terrorists' and enemies of the United States win!

Update: The endorsement from hell.

Stories in ACT

I have two pieces in the November 2008 issue of Arms Control Today. The first one discusses the 2008 session of the Conference on Disarmament. The second piece looks at potential candidates for Director-General of the IAEA.

Russian or US?

The New York Times reports about possible connection of a Russian scientist in providing nuclear assistance to Iran. This comes as part of the IAEA's investigations into Iran's nuclear program. While the IAEA is quoted as clearing the Russian government of any involvement, the Arms Control Wonk by bringing up the Merlin operation accuses the United States government of assisting Iran. Jeffery ponders about the possibility of the Russian scientist in the IAEA investigations and the one that the CIA sent out being one and the same.

I was completely unaware of the Merlin operation, but was not particularly surprised that the CIA attempted it. The CIA, with support from Clinton, planned to send Iran on a wild goose chase by giving it the wrong blueprints for a nuclear bomb in 2000. The purpose of the operation was to estimate where Iran was in its nuclear program, how close was it to getting a nuclear bomb. However, the Russian scientist or the agent recognized the flaw in design and put in a note for the Iranians to contact him to locate it. Maybe it really is the same Russian scientist the IAEA is talking about.

Reading these stories I was worried about how many times the United States has done this before and where. The motives might be good, but was there sufficient understanding and discussion about the consequences? Or did Clinton go into this like Bush went into Iraq?

Drudge does it again

The Drudge Report has been a good substitute for the morning tea-time newspaper for me. However, there are times when he leaves me flabbergasted by his word twisting that can turn a whole story upside down. If you do not read the story and are to go by his headlines, you are sure to have a whole different picture of some situations.

Like today the banner headline runs, "Dems want Iraqis to pay up: With oil." My first reaction was 'height zhali!' And then I made up the story as anyone does upon reading a headline. My story ran something like this,

In wake of the increasing oil prices and sacrifices made by US soldiers in Iraq, the Democrats want the Iraqi government to provide subsidized oil to the US as payment.

And it turned out to be this,

"Democrats plan to push legislation this spring that would force the Iraqi government to spend its own surplus in oil revenues to rebuild the country, sparing US dollars."

Of DST and Iran

Even the novelty of daylight saving time (DST) did not make me look it up the two times I lost an hour in Spring. I had come to accept it as just another of the US 'time' things like the many time zones, and I hardly thought of it beyond the time required to change my watch. However, when the term appeared in an article about Iran I was surprised and promptly looked it up. As one of his many erratic decisions, Ahmadinejad abolished the use of daylight saving in 2006. However, the Iranian parliament has voted to reintroduce the system that shall come into effect at the midnight of Thursday-Friday.

Today approximately 70 countries use DST. It was surprising to know that even we tried experimenting with it during war times. According to the MSN Encarta the idea was first introduced by Benjamin Franklin in an essay in 1784, and later seriously taken up by a British builder in 1907. The logic behind using this system during World War I was the need to conserve fuel needed to produce electricity. Taking advantage of the extra sunlight in the morning means there is lesser need for electric lightening in the evening, thereby saving energy. The Uniform Time Act of 1966 gives US its current system of daylight saving time.