A Reckless Mind-Altering President


Democracy is a demon.

How else can we describe the current sorry state of affairs in the U.S., which in turn is causing consternation all around the world?

At the outset, it is difficult to challenge the “simpleton” logic employed by Donald Trump.

  • Is it wrong to make an attempt to control illegal immigration?
  • Is it wrong to separate young children from their parents who are illegal immigrants?
  • Is it wrong to challenge China for its trade policies which have caused a huge lopsided trade deficit with the U.S.?
  • Is it wrong to arm twist the European Union on defence spending for their own protection?
  • Is it wrong to select a conservative Supreme Court Justice who shares common opinions with the President?
  • Is it wrong to impose customs tariffs on imported goods which affect American industries and cause unemployment?
  • Is it wrong to attempt to control legal immigration and disallow spouses of temporary legal corporate employees from working?
  • Is it right for American manufacturers to shift production to low-cost countries like what Harley Davidson has done?
  • Is it wrong to attack the “fake” media when it has been proven that there are instances when the real media reported fake news?
  • Is it wrong to attack long-standing American allies on trade, immigration and defence spending?
  • Is it right to exit from the U.N. Human Rights Council?
  • Is it right to throw away an international agreement with Iran which was signed by the previous Presidential administration?
  • Is it right to schmooze with President Putin of Russia when there is significant evidence that Russia had interfered with American Presidential Elections in 2016?
  • And so on, and so forth………..

Prima facie, it appears that the President is doing all the things that he committed to do while campaigning for the President job, and it also appears that he is right to carry out his commitments to the American people who elected him President, right?

Right. That’s for him.

Right. That’s for the vocal electorate in Middle America who voted for him.

Right. That’s for the coterie of his cabinet members who are not allowed to have their own unique opinion which could be different from those of the President.

Wrong. That’s for the rest of us.

But does he care? Absolutely not.

President Trump is convinced that he is doing the “right” thing for America and the American people. It is his unshakeable belief.

What he does not understand, or does not wish to understand, is that the U.S. is currently the #1 Nation impacting global policies in all facets of human life. Almost. When the U.S. is in such a unique and vaunted position, it is absolutely necessary for it to take the global impact into consideration, notwithstanding the fact that it could sometimes appear to be a philanthropic action, or cause temporary negative impact on the U.S. itself. Unfortunately, no other nation has been able to rise to the level of the U.S. over the past 70 odd years or so. American Presidents cannot be reckless and clueless about rules governing international law, trade, immigration, security, and diplomacy.

While what President Trump does to his people is his own business, Americans are now sufficiently global in their thinking that they should see through if their leader is violating global compacts and policies. Fortunately for President Trump, the U.S. economy has been doing well, and unemployment rate is falling. But, this is a time-sensitive phenomenon, and it only takes a couple of months before things start to unravel, as his trade policies are sure to cause trouble.

Global diplomacy is not about just getting to know each other, shaking hands and indulging in small talk. There is a huge amount of work which goes in, preparing for a global summit meeting. President Trump is now realizing that fact with reference to North Korea.

President Trump indulges in propagating fake news himself at his election rallies. There is only one single truth on every matter, and factual inaccuracies are mounting in his talk at his rallies where wild crowds of supporters cheer him on. He goes back to the White House with increased drive to continue his policies. His twitter feed has become a series of utterances against his “enemies”.

Overall, here is a President who self-indulges himself, berates constantly against his opponents, derides the Special Counsel investigation on Russian interference in U.S. elections, stumbles on conflicts of interests, communicates his racist tendencies, and his bad views on women in general. When a global leader of stature meets President Trump, what do you think will be going on in the mind of that global leader?

It is not hard to guess.

So, President Trump needs to get back to the basics of governance which are probably taught in a U.S. university of repute such as Georgetown in Washington DC itself, or consult past Presidents who could provide him some serious counselling. He needs to kick out sycophants from his Cabinet. He needs to listen to some seasoned leaders such as Angela Merkel of Germany. He needs to understand that running the U.S. government and managing global affairs is totally unlike running a corporation. And, he needs to kill his twitter handle. His digital skills have ruined policy making.

In a nutshell, President Trump can recover from his governance lows by actively seeking counselling assistance. All of us need counselling or mentoring at some stage in our lives, and it is nothing to smirk or laugh about. So, here we are – President Trump will hopefully read this blog post of mine and adopt my sage advice rendered to him without any prejudice by a global citizen who thinks globally.

Have a great week ahead,

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan

8th July 2018

 

Advertisements

Two Dictators and their Antics


Singapore was witness to a historic summit between two dictators earlier this week (on the 12th June 2018) in the idyllic small island of Sentosa off the main Singapore island.

One dictator has established himself as a ruthless governor of the pariah state of North Korea (NK or otherwise known as DPRK – Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea). He has been the leader of NK for the past 7 years only, but has amply demonstrated his cruelty by murdering many of his people in the shortest possible time, including his own uncle. His citizens are starving. He has channeled all his slush funds into developing ballistic missiles and nuclear bombs, and his unstable government has incited fears even in his closest ally, China. I do not understand the relationship between NK and Russia, however. May be technology transfer? In a nutshell, NK is neither democratic nor socialistic – people are just slaves of the Kim family for over 7 decades.

All these things are well documented, with news coverage of NK being incessant over the past 12 to 18 months or so, with the aggressive posturing of its young leader, often against the U.S.

The other dictator I am referring to here is of course, Donald Trump, the President of the U.S. who is unpredictable, unstable, and easily incited into drastic actions. How can he be the so-called “leader of the Free World”?. Under his stewardship, the U.S. is being castigated for a series of diplomatic and trade-related missteps. No one in the U.S. government or even the White House knows what Trump is up to with his early morning tweets setting government policy and heavily criticizing his opponents and the media. He wants his way in everything that matters to him, and appears to be totally devoid of careful counsel. And, that is exactly the way he made the trip to Singapore to meet with Kim Jong Un.

The meeting was totally unscripted and was deemed to be a “relationship” meeting as Trump continually attempted to downgrade expectations, having built up those expectations to a feverish level in the days leading up to the “dictators’ meting” in Singapore. Kim was wiser, he hardly stated anything publicly, and kept his counsel, and demonstrated a cool head during his Singapore visit without appearing to be unduly excited.

Why should he be? He was, in any case, not giving away anything to Trump. The meeting was hailed as an outstanding success by Trump, though many observers thought it was a complete waste of time having accomplished nothing of substance – no complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearization; no stopping of missile launches; no resolution to the thorny issue of abducted Japanese citizens by NK agents; no tight time schedule for anything; no way forward on the big human rights violations by NK against its own citizens; and no, no, no for many other demands.

For Trump, it was a public relations exercise, becoming the first ever sitting President of the U.S. to have met with the leader of NK – ever. He thinks he has figured Kim out and can handle him well. How? All by touch and feel, as Trump claimed in his media interactions? Why would he think and then say that Kim is a “talented” guy? Trump expressed his appreciation of the fact that Kim took over as Chairman in 2011 when he was barely 26 years of age, and brushed aside questions on the very bad human rights record of NK.

In my opinion, it was a waste of time with no solid returns for the stakeholders – South Korea, Japan and the U.S. It was a failure.

It was horrifying to see that the leader of the Free World has now become a close friend of the worst dictator on earth. For a very long time, the U.S. has entertained dictators all over the world, and antagonized democracies. Any one who has followed world history will attest to this fact. The U.S. always hid behind domestic compulsions, national security, and cold war antagonism. In the past one week, Trump has even alienated his closest allies in the G-8 meeting in Canada, and blasted Justin Trudeau, the Prime Minister of Canada, as a dishonest person and a liar.

So, the world is heading towards a circus play of these two dictators. We have no choice but to play along, as otherwise the world will be headed towards another war – as Trump himself stated during his Singapore trip, he has saved 28M lives! Totally ridiculous, unacceptable and irresponsible.

Singapore spent a lot of money in organizing this summit of the two dictators – upwards of $15M. Many locations, especially the hotels in which the two dictators were staying, and the meeting venue in Sentosa were all in locked-down status. Thousands of police personnel were pressed into duty. For Singapore, it was beneficial as it gained worldwide attention as the venue of the summit, having been friends with both sides over the years. Singapore is a close military ally of the U.S. and it also has other wide-ranging business, trade, economic relations with the U.S. Singapore has also maintained diplomatic relations with NK, though it complied with the U.N. sanctions against the regime.

Chairman Kim Jong Un gained big publicity as well – he was treated as a visiting head of state and acquired legitimacy as a leader in his own right. This would not have happened for a long, long time under the U.N. sanctions scenario (which still apply).

So, in a nutshell, lot of noise and fanfare for a very weak 4 points agreement which has been touted as something huge back in the U.S. by President Trump, and deserving of a Nobel Peace Prize.

Nobel Prize? Forget it. NK has a long way to go before the world recognizes it on par with South Korea (unless there is a merger).

In any case, visit Singapore and see the Capella Hotel in Sentosa Island – you might like to walk along the same corridor that both the dictators walked on!

Here’s Wishing all Friends a “Selamat Hari Raya or Eid Mubarak”.

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan

16th June 2018

 

The fallacy of elections


Just this week we saw how democratic election results can be hijacked by instruments of democracy – I am referring here to the State Elections in the Southern Indian State of Karnataka. As most people know, Bangalore is the famed capital city of the Karnataka State which is responsible for the IT revolution which propelled India as the world’s leading software services power.

This is not the first time, and it will not be the last time that such hijacks take place in the democratic process. By and large, India has proved that democracy does work as a system of government over the past seven decades, except for a brief two-year period when it was itself hijacked with the imposition of “emergency” in 1975 -77. Well, there are many lacunae in any system of government, and democracy is no exception. It has its own share of problems in implementation, but that is for another blog post!

The federally appointed Governor of Karnataka State invited the Opposition BJP Party to form the government, instead of inviting the ruling Congress Party which had formed an alliance with another party, the JDS. The number of legislators in this alliance was 117, as against the 104 in BJP. In the normal procedure, the Governor would have invited the biggest alliance which can then win a trust vote in the State Assembly.

However, the Governor invited the single largest party (the BJP) and gave it 15 days to prove its majority in the State Assembly, which is only possible if BJP is able to snare at least 8 legislators from Congress/JDS alliance. And, how will that happen? Just think about it. India has already passed the Anti-Defection Law, which means it would be hard for legislators or parliamentarians to cross the aisle and join the other party. It is also not moral to do so, having been elected under the auspices of the party under whose symbol the legislator(s) won the election.

In other State Elections in India, the respective Governors had invited the biggest alliance to form the government, not the single largest party. That suited BJP (the party which rules India at the federal level) in couple of States. However, in the case of Karnataka, they tried to change that rule which a Governor should follow once he or she receives the letters of commitment from the legislators.

So, what happened?

In a tense 3 days of drama, played out in the Supreme Court of India and in Bangalore, the BJP lost out against the alliance of Congress/JDS. I am not in favour of either party, but I am concerned when the powers that be plays out the political game with utter disregard towards established precedents under their own rule. The Supreme Court played a central and decisive role in the whole episode and determined what way things should go in Karnataka State Assembly – it gave just 24 hours to the BJP Chief Minister (who had been invited by the State Governor to form the government) to face a trust vote in the Assembly. So, left with no time to indulge in horse-trading both sides brought their safely guarded legislators to the Assembly for the trust vote. Facing the loss of the trust vote, the BJP Chief Minister resigned.

The whole drama could have been avoided if the Prime Minister had intervened and ensured that proper procedures are followed. The fight should be at the hustings, not at the assembly after the elections were completed. Exposing the respective parties’ machinations to the common man and to the world at large, and going to the Supreme Court which was forced to intervene are not good examples of running the world’s largest democracy.

This proves that at the end of the day, all politicians are the same in India. Some are articulate, polished, well-behaved, and most are corrupt and bend rules in their favour. However, when it comes to winning elections, they let lose anarchy and throw principles to the wind. Similar things happen in other nations as well in varying degrees. However, India cannot risk its strong democratic institutions and the three well delineated arms of governance – the Executive, the Parliament/Legislature, and the Judiciary. These are self-balancing to a large extent, and each one is expected to check on the abuse of power by any other arm, and eventually balance the overall system of governance.

What the Karnataka Elections proved is simple – the will of the people have to be respected and cannot be manipulated in the way that one party wants. The alternative would be to call for re-elections at a great cost, annoying the voters; or, to bring down the government once it has been formed by legislative techniques and defections. However, it has been proven time and again that the voters exercise their power at the hustings to elect their representatives and have the ultimate power to dislodge parties which do not perform to their expectations.

Viva La Democracy, or to put it precisely “vive la démocratie!”.

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan

20th May 2018

 

The News Bias


There exists a political bias in almost all news organizations. Most famous ones such as CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times and The Washington Post are considered liberal, which means “leftist” in the U.S. News organizations such as Fox News, The Wall Street Journal and countless others are best characterized as conservative, which means “rightist” in the U.S. There is hardly any neutral news organization or publication anywhere in the world. The closest that I have seen are The Hindu newspaper in India, and The Guardian in the U.K. There may be others that I do not know, and my lack of mentioning others does not mean that there are no other neutral publications or TV news channels.

There is nothing wrong with some bias, as news editors are, after all, human beings, and have certain orientations and thought processes in their heads as they handle news and news analyses. However, they are not supposed to twist or tweak the factual news to their advantage, with an insidious purpose in mind. It could be that they wish to provoke an anti-government or anti-establishment public reaction, which goes against the grain of news gathering and publishing. The editorials could convey what the editor(s) wants to comment on the main news of the day, but the reporting has to be absolutely factual, as otherwise it could turn dangerous, as we have seen recent instances especially in India with fake news (“faked” news) dominating and corrupting the public’s view of the happenings. Such reporting happens in many countries around the world, and is designed to serve the political orientation of the editor or owner of the publication.

It is becoming increasingly clear that there has to be a law to regulate news, much like in the old days when news publications could be prosecuted for incorrect news reporting which results in public mayhem, destruction, deaths, violence, etc., (this used to be called “censorship” in old times). There is nothing wrong in seeking to enforce law and order against what is famously known as the “Fourth Estate”. I am not inclined to believe that a carefully calibrated law and order enforcement against an erring news publication or TV channel or news organization can be termed as shutting down press freedom. Everyone is subject to the same laws, so what is so unique about one segment of the society?

Well, we might need a “news ombudsman” to ensure impartiality, and to enforce actions against all publications without fear or favour. It is easier said than done. Any government appointee is going to be at least slightly biased, and so it is critical to select someone with the involvement of the government of the day, the political opposition in the parliament and the judiciary, and to embed sufficient powers in the office of such an ombudsman, who can issue orders to law enforcement, much like the Election Commissioner, or the Head of Anti-Corruption Agency.

News organizations should also include all social media platforms such as FaceBook, Twitter, Instagram, et al. They need to be regulated simply because they are more powerful than any brick and mortar news producer. News on such platform posted by anyone spreads at exponential speeds and rumours could create havoc. We have also recently witnessed how FaceBook sacrificed the personal data of millions of people who use their platform for monetary benefit. Given the proclivity of the younger generation to take up social media platforms with amazing speed, it becomes essential to moderate such platforms without causing damage to the neurons of youngsters at a very young age.

I enjoy flipping the news channels between CNN, BBC, Fox News, CNBC, and other local / regional channels. The priority given to news coverage varies across the channels. Sometimes what you think is a very important piece of news does not even merit a mention in some of the channels. If things do not go well for the audience of Fox News, then the anchors distract them with some unimportant sidelights. And so on and so forth. Of course, it requires a worldly intelligence to segregate fake news from what is real. It is not an easy skill, as fake news could easily be debunked and thrown away upon a refresh of the news website; it could be worded in a convincing way which reflects in certain measure some amount of truth, or it could be covered by a famous news anchor. If Russia is disliked by most news channels for ideological or political reasons, it is very easy to spot that dislike. If China is berated for trade or intellectual property thefts, that also gets highlighted in a big way. There are hardly any counter arguments that you would hear in the world famous TV news channels against their own governments or allies. It is not unnatural, but it is not normal in a news reporting organization. There are, of course, good examples of news reporting which is balanced and also good analysis of news with differing viewpoints which we get to see sometimes, but such balanced coverage is slowly declining in my opinion, as the audience wants “supportive” analyses, not “destructive” analyses by political commentators. There is also disdain of these commentators or opinion-producers amongst the common public, as they are repeatedly used throughout the year, with more or less the same views. They are either “supportive” of the government, or in some cases “destructive” of the government’s stand on issues. Eventually, people will realize that anyone on this planet can have a view of his/her own on any issue which may or may not affect him/her. Nothing wrong with that position either. The point is that fast-talking commentators have not helped to define a news organization, they only reflect their own biases in their opinion piece.

Looking at the overall stained news scenario, it is but normal to conclude that we should make up our own news – what I mean is that, you pull together pieces of news from various publications using some software which can generate your own news as per your own criteria. If I am a conservative, rightist kind of person, then my filters would produce news that I am looking for! Tomorrow, I could become a liberal and I will then get to enjoy the “liberal” view of world news and happenings!!

Well, folks have a good weekend, and avoid drinking alcohol,

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan

14th April 2018 (Today is TAMIL New Year, Wishes to my Tamil Friends and Families!)

Why is the West always against Russia?


In the world of geopolitics, there are two constants: spying and deterrence.

Almost every major nation has an army of spies – whether they are directed to obtain the military, political or technological secrets of their most important competitor nation(s) or not, it is a fact that they do exist formally (as part of embassy operations) or informally, as undercover agents. Both Russia and the U.S. are masters in the art and science of spying, and we have to include the U.K. and increasingly, China, in this list of major spying countries of the world.

Deterrence is a simple concept which has evolved into a key policy initiative of large countries. The idea here is that the arsenal of weapons at the disposal of a major power is such that it would make any potential attacker think many times before launching a direct attack, or even a proxy attack. An important extension is that nations communicate their policy framework allowing them to cause an asymmetrical, disproportionate damage on the attacker, ensuring that it is almost impossible for the attacker to defend himself or launch a second attack. I am only providing a layman’s understanding of these important concepts, and there are many resources from which one could derive a better and stronger understanding.

When combined, these two constants form the basis of a “siege” or war-like mentality, at least in the minds of military planners. Options such as pre-emptive attack, and counter-attack dominate the minds. Various military scenarios are played out in computer simulation, laying out options and the abilities to deal with these options. The whole idea is how to put the enemy out of business for good. But then, such a conclusion is not inevitable. The enemy never goes away from the world ecosystem.

In the past, the U.S., the U.K., and France justified spying as legitimate activity as something which is crucial in a cold war mentality. It was necessary, no doubt about it. Spying was used both for good and bad outcomes, as we all know. Any student of political history which has transpired in the past seven decades would understand that not all decisions made by the so-called “good” nations were actually good for anyone, and not all decisions by the “bad” countries were actually bad, and vice versa. Nations have their reasons for taking decisions, but unfortunately the cost of those decisions were never fully understood at the time of making decisions, and we all know the repercussions.

In today’s world, the West is not unfortunately enjoying the good name it had in the past. Due to various misdeeds, and misguided decisions taken by the West, millions of people have been annihilated all around the world. This cannot be justified based on the principle that “good” outcomes trump the means to achieve them. Means are as important as the desired ends, and no sacrifice, intentional or otherwise, should be planned into decisions.

Russia is not guilt-free either – it has been the cause of millions of deaths in the past due to the power of the Soviet Union. Communist ideology failed to take off in the Soviet satellite countries, and even in Cuba. In a clear analysis, it is not impossible to conclude that the five Security Council Members have been the cause of the maximum number of war deaths in the world, post the Second World War. Most of these wars were unnecessary, as these were fought on ideological grounds.

So, now the West is against Russia due to multiple reasons, not the least of which being the chemical poisoning of an ex-Russian spy and his daughter in the U.K. While no proof has been offered, it is clear that the chemical was invented in Russia. What is not clear is how it made its way to the U.K. Diplomats have been ejected from many Western countries as a show of support to the U.K. Russia has countered by ejecting similar number of  Western diplomats last week.

So, who is going to gain? No one is going to benefit as a result of this tit-for-tat expulsions. The diplomatic situation is fast deteriorating, and it is not inconceivable that we will very soon see the advent of Cold War 2.0 with the world getting divided into two blocs. Of course, China will always be behind Russia, so there you have two veto-wielding Security Council Members fighting back against the West.

I also believe that the West is strongly against Vladimir Putin, the President of Russia (who just got re-elected for yet another 6 year term). It is a strong personal revulsion of the individual. They cannot trust him, and they want him to go away, hopefully to be replaced by a more pliant president that they can control in some way. Russia as a country is a big market, with a preference for Western products, and why would the West walk away from a market of 160M people? Further, Russia seems to be doing all right economically, though not great. It is all about one individual, who is intimately controlling Russia, and who has apparently no flexibility at all towards the West.

Now that Putin is re-elected, what would the West do? They will create disturbance in Russia, support the opposition candidates (like Alexei Navalny), and do a variety of things that Russia could not find and retaliate about. The West will continue to constantly irritate Putin on a number of factors on which they have better control. They will push Russia and China into a tighter bond. We do not know if Putin or his coterie is responsible for the chemical attack in Salisbury, probably we will never find out. Given that plausible scenario, it is surprising how the U.K. reacted and pushed forward with the formation of a “coalition” of like-minded Western countries to expel Russian diplomats. It is an unusual act by a country which cannot do much against a bigger superpower at its doorsteps, with or without NATO. Likewise, the U.S. chose to retaliate rather strongly against Russia, which was promptly returned in kind by Russia.

And, so on and so forth. It will never end. There is simply no dialogue happening, and I will not be surprised if the diplomatic relations are downgraded which will be a very serious setback to normal relations between world’s most important military powers.

No one knows where all this will end, but one thing is very clear. Vladimir Putin is an ex-spy and spymaster, and he is not about to give up his chess game easily. He has the tools, techniques, weapons, and the most important thing – nuclear deterrence.

Have a good weekend, and a great Easter break,

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan

31st March 2018

 

 

 

Falling Markets


We saw that the major equity markets around the world suffered steep losses during the week which just ended.

There are always multiple reasons why the equity investors fret at times and start a major selling operation of their holdings. Mostly it is sentiment, sometimes emotions, but almost always there is a reason or many reasons why the market sell-off happens.

In the current scenario, the negative sentiment is driven by multiple factors afflicting the U.S. economy, aggravated by bad government policies which appear to keep shifting all the time under the wise administration of President Trump. To start with, there has been a series of exits of experienced people from the administration – the latest being General McMaster who was the National Seecurity Advisor to the President. He has been replaced by the rather hawkish hothead – John Bolton, who is likely to plunge the U.S. into another back-breaking war, either with Iran or North Korea.

So, you have a combination of the following factors:

  • a huge deficit budget of USD 1.3T which has just been signed off by the President, necessary to keep the government running till end of September 2018, which has a massive allocation for the military (not all of that is necessary);
  • a possible credit squeeze, with the Federal Reserve planning to raise the interest rates at least twice if not more times during this calendar year;
  • a high dependency on China which buys most of the U.S. Treasury Bills;
  • a looming trade war primarily with China, with the President planning to impose tariffs worth USD 50/60B on imports from China, and the already planned retaliation by China;
  • a strong noose tightening around the President’s neck – the Russia investigation of Special Counsel Robert Mueller – Trump cannot fire Mueller as that would lead to unforeseen consequences, but he might still do it, plunging the U.S. into uncertainty;
  • more potential exits from the Trump administration – Jeff Sessions is one clear possibility;
  • sex scandals threatening Trump from a series of women – the courts are admitting the cases against the wishes of Trump and his lawyers;
  • the clear possibility that Kim Jong Un might refuse to enter into talks with the U.S. if John Bolton is involved; North Korea termed Bolton as a “scum” and a “blood sucker” in 2003/04 and is unlikely to talk to him if Trump deputes him or brings him along to threaten Kim Jong Un, which will very likely happen;
  • the Iran nuclear deal imbroglio; Trump might refuse to certify the continuance of the deal when it comes for his quarterly certification signature as required by the U.S. Congress, in which case Iran will be free to walk away from the deal, and that might lead to Bolton arguing his case to bomb all of Iran’s nuclear facilities;
  • the continuing loss of elections to the Democratic Party as just happened in Pennsylvania – the potential loss of both the House and the Senate majority, which is not likely, but appears possible now;
  • and, so on and so forth…………there are many such factors

So, the equity markets falling was expected by all and sundry. If I recollect, the U.S. market ran up by more than 6,500 points (DOW) in about 14 months from the time Trump took office, allowing him to tout the market gain as one of his signature achievements. Now out of this increase, 3,000 points are gone, and it is likely that the sell off will continue into next week.

A government that is so critical for world peace and stability cannot be tottering every day. One has to just see CNN News and the U.S. Talk Shows by major news organizations, to get the full import of what is going on in Washington D.C. The Trump administration has become a laughing stock, even within the U.S.

The only silver lining is that Trump is the first U.S. President who has succeeded in pushing North Korea to the negotiating table (mostly by harsh tweets from Trump!), though both Koreas claim that they decided to play the Olympic game together and cool off the rhetoric. The other achievement of Trump is that he is the first U.S. President to stand up to China without any fear of repercussions and challenge them to a trade war.

While these are great to see and hear about, we have to recognize that Trump has still not won any battle with either one of these countries. He could not even win the Border Wall case against Mexico, which refused to foot the bill. It is going to be very tough for the U.S. to negotiate when Trump has surrounded himself with foreign policy and military hawks such as Mike Pompeo (the new Secretary of State, yet to be confirmed by the Congress), John Bolton (the new National Security Advisor who does not need Congress confirmation), Gina Haspel (the new CIA Director nominee who needs to be confirmed by the Congress), and the perennial lady hawk Nikki Haley who is the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. A war is surely looming with such hot heads around the President, who himself is a strong hot head who will not take a slight from anyone, or advice from anyone. All the major departures have happened apparently due to the fact that the concerned person begged to differ from the views of the President.

So, here we are, with markets having fallen all around the world, including India’s SENSEX. We are entering an uncertain phase in world history and diplomatic relationships. Everything can come off unhinged. No relationship is going to remain sacred. Continuous drama at the White House is going to rock the markets on a daily basis. The markets can no longer afford to do their own business disconnected from political and economic realities.

So, we are all in for a rocky ride, folks.

Enjoy the ride however.

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan

24th March 2018

Doing the right things for America


I have been ambivalent when it comes to judging President Donald Trump of the U.S.

In my initial observations (more than a year ago), I took his side, and even my family did not like my views. There were a number of friends who disagreed with me on this subject, especailly my point that “President Trump is the best thing that could have happened for America”. I tried to justify my orientation towards Trump but it did not carry weight.

Then, I became vexed with his constant shift in stance towards global foreign policy matters, and the constant barrage of almost stupid stuff that his people in the White House were spewing out on a daily basis. I started moving away from my earlier position in support of Trump, but then I had no one else to support as the Opposition Democratic Party was in a worse situation with no coherent strategy or leadership to counter Trump (they still continue to bask in President Obama’s legacy and their great idealism). So, here I am with no one to propagandize in the U.S. Politics (please take note that I am not a U.S. Citizen, however I feel that as a global citizen concerned about global affairs, I have not only an obligation but a right to express my views and debate with others who are equally concerned about the status of affairs in global policy matters, which should bother and concern all of us).

Of late, I am seeing a new Trump (though inconsistent in messaging and incompatible with his own team due to lack of coordination apparently) from the manner in which he is tackling (a) gun violence; (b) budget-related issues; (c) trade matters; and, (d) immigration.

Let us look at gun control issues, now raging in the U.S. due to the most recent mindless killing of 17 people in a high school in Florida. The gun lobby (read NRA – National Rifle Association) has come under severe pressure from the student and teacher community, and also from the general public. As I have written in my past blog posts, the U.S. is unique in allowing gun ownership in a rampant manner under the cover of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the U.S. which permits citizens to bear arms. I do not understand how this will be relevant in the 21st Century. Not only that, even a 18-year old can buy “assault rifles” which are used only in times of war by the military. What is the need for such high velocity, high magazine rifles in the hands of normal citizens, and more specifically, in the hands of a 18-year old?

President Trump has taken a tough stand, and is holding his ground against his own Republican Party and the NRA in a high-profile standoff. He is more credible in this effort than President Obama would ever have been. We have to of course, see what happens eventually in the gun legislation that needs to pass both the Senate and the House of Representatives, and I believe given that both Parties have avid gun owners amongst their ranks, it is unlikely to pass either legislative body. However, let us compliment President Trump for his principled stand, and his threats to sign executive orders banning “bump stocks” which converts an ordinary rifle into a high-discharge rifle.

On Budget issues, again President Trump has won where President Obama failed. The U.S. has to reduce Corporate Taxes to enhance its business competitiveness and bring trillions of dollars stashed away by big corporations in offshore locations. There are pros and cons, but it is critical to pass a Budget Reform Bill, and then may be they will keep tweaking it. This is a very important and significant legislative victory for President Trump and his Republican Party. The Democratic Party failed in its strategy to modify the bill, and finally let it pass without much of a fight.

On Trade matters, President Trump is finally taking action against countries which dump their goods below costs in the U.S. Yesterday, he imposed tariffs of 25% on Steel and 10% on Aluminium, and more are coming. While such tariffs will distort trade, anger important allies, and raise the cost for U.S. Manufacturers, nevertheless the action sends a very important message to the world that the U.S. will make its own decisions to suit its own government and people, rather than engage in endless persuasion. There is a strong message to China in this whole matter, though China is not one of the top 5 steel or aluminium exporters to the U.S. China should be aggressively rethinking its strategy as its “take no prisoners” kind of tactics will no longer work with the U.S.

Eventually, the trade matter will settle down and the stock markets though rocked will reach some equilibrium status. Nothing much to worry on that count. However, President Trump is sending decisive communications to all countries that he is his own man – not even a “party man of the GOP”, and he has innate thoughts on many global affairs that he thinks would require reckoning under his rule.

I will write separate blog post on the U.S. Immigration Policy changes.

Welcome to the new U.S.

Enjoy your weekend,

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan

3rd February 2018

The inevitable rise of the assertive hegemon


It is inevitable, isn’t it?

I am referring to the unstoppable rise of China as the new pivot in international relations, strongly positioning itself as a counter to U.S. interests in Asia-Pacific region. There is no competitor to China as such, with even Russia and Turkey vigourously supporting the rise of China as a strategic counterweight to the U.S. (even the U.K., France, and Germany seem to be drifting away from U.S. positions as witnessed recently in the Palestine vote in the U.N. General Assembly).

While no country would take an opposing view to China in global forums, given its economic and military might, a few countries are thinking aloud about the potential ramifications of what they consider as “influence-peddling” by China to gain global power, by lending billions of dollars to poor countries hungry for infrastructure investments. Thousands of Chinese workers have been deployed in scores of countries around Asia and Africa, with their visible presence communicating a sense of beholdenness on the part of the local populations who have to pay back the loans eventually to China, failing which China would demand a stronger involvement in more government and private sector projects in those countries, thereby making certain countries as its vassals. An extreme observation, but nevertheless likely to happen in the next 10 to 20 years, as part of China’s inevitable rise towards the #1 position in economic power. It is estimated that by 2032, China will match the U.S. in terms of GDP size.

Now, who are these few countries with doubts about China’s rise and influence-peddling? These are Japan, Australia, the European Union as a collective, and of course, India. For instance, the EU and India have raised objections to China’s OBOR (One Belt, One Road) initiative, which is mostly an economic exercise to spread China’s influence over 65 countries with USD 124B investment via loans which will eventually make most of those countries forever indebted to China. There is no transparency in the way China has promoted the OBOR initiative, which is mostly President Xi Jinping’s vision without a “hard” blueprint of planning and execution. It is touted as the world’s largest ever infrastructure investment, many times bigger than the U.S. Marshall Plan which was implemented in the aftermath of the Second World War. China will try to spread its political and military influence over many of these “poorer” countries, such as what it has been doing in Pakistan and Sri Lanka. It will “buy” entire sea ports or towns and develop these as its own enclaves in those countries. Economic dominance will eventually impoverish these countries.

A lot of thought is required before nations can commit to OBOR. They have to seriously question China’s intentions, which cannot just be global trade and economic growth. There is a cost to everything, and nations have to understand the overall plan and their role in it. Further, all procurement cannot go only to China companies, there must be fair and transparent bidding processes. Land grabbing cannot be allowed in return for money, and human rights have to be respected (not in the way China does these things, however). There cannot be institutionalized corruption as part of the OBOR rollout in countries with weaker governance or authoritarian rulers. What is touted as a global initiative and vision, need to have global governance and a strong underlying framework, and cannot just be controlled entirely by one country (China).

The EU is likely to demand all of the above and more – it would like to have a say if China wishes to extend the OBOR initiative deep into the European heartland. We have seen that the EU is more balanced than the U.S. (or even the U.K.) when it comes to trade matters and human rights, and may be it will become the last bastion for fairness in all global matters of critical importance like this initiative.

I would like to complement President Xi Jinping for his vision of OBOR. It might become a much needed investment plan for most of the world in the coming decades. It might further China’s strategic interests and enhance its geopolitical influence against the U.S. It might even make China a well-accepted “partner” in many of the countries who are in the process of signing up for the OBOR program. All good, but the policy planners in these countries should carefully analyze the cost-benefits of participation in OBOR and advise their governments to seek responses from China in an appropriate manner, conducive to eventual participation.

My guess is that even India will eventually consider participation in OBOR, if its concerns are appropriately addressed by China. More importantly, China has the continuing habit of trying to “block” the world’s largest democracy from the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group and acting against Pakistan’s terrorists in the U.N. Security Council – these things do not go down well in India for sure, and repeated needling at border locations like the recent skirmish at Doklam is not helpful at all. If China wants to defeat India economically, it needs to first understand that it has already achieved that objective couple of decades ago. If China wants to defeat India militarily, that goal has also been achieved 55 years ago (though that may not be possible again). However, if China wishes to “encircle” India in a strategic manner and constrict it from growth and multilateral participation, then India will retort by intensifying its strong strategic partnership with the U.S. and Japan. It will also bring in Australia and Israel into the equation. India has the advantage of “soft” power which China lacks. India is mostly trusted around the world and at the U.N., while China suffers from a strategic distrust about its territorial ambitions as evidenced in Asia by its claims on the South China Sea.

So, where are we? Where is the world? I mean, on the OBOR program? A lot of questions need to be clarified before it can make a big impact on the world.

I wish President Xi Jinping all the best in OBOR acceptance and rollout, but he better take actions to smoothen the rollout – otherwise it will be consigned to history as a program which was conceived well as a vision, but did not have the essential elements in place and the strategic concerns appropriately addressed.

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan

14th January 2018

Welcome to 2018


We welcomed the New Year in Singapore with non-stop rains, which played spoil sport for the thousands of party goers assembled at multiple venues for cheering the arrival of a new year. This past year has been a successful one for the Singapore economy with GDP growth almost doubling from its original forecast, and a general uplift in the mood of people with increasing income levels. Real estate prices are climbing yet again after several years of tightening measures by the government. Jobs are available for the right skilled people. Immigration is under check. Workers are adapting to newer technologies. Population of “smart” workers is on the rise. MNCs still view Singapore as a critical piece of their Asia Pacific expansion and growth strategy. Home rents are lower thanks to an oversupply of apartments. New Healthcare initiatives are being rolled out.

However, the world around does not share similar performance as that of Singapore, even in the immediate neighbourhood. While young Asians share an optimism about their future prospects, the Asian governments need to balance their thirst for economic growth and advancement and their strong desire to maintain social order and stability. This is an issue even with developed countries, so it is not new. However, the younger demographics of Asia could pose a tough challenge to governments. The younger generation has been defined by social media proliferation and intense networking, and share a common desire to break away from traditional viewpoints, often espoused with strong vigour by many Asian government leaders.

This is one reason why the Singapore government is infusing its party and ministerial line-up with younger, high-potential leaders. I am sure several other governments in Asia are also thinking and executing along the same lines. It is more critical and important to have an energetic global view of governance and its challenges, rather than just fall in line and toe the party line. Younger generation of today brings unbridled energy, enthusiasm, drive and passion to whatever they do, and if they feel they are not going to be heard, then they will head for the exits – it is not going to be a revolution of sorts, but going where they can be heard and can play a crucial role via contributing to the rise of new technologies. Governments so should devise a strong policy framework to keep their younger talent at home (at least a majority of them), rather than lose them to the same set of developed nations who provide a better ecosystem for such young workers.

The U.S. still remains the bastion of new ideas, despite the damaging influence of President Donald Trump. May be he will go away, and then the new President would liberalize the country and its tech-driven economy, and also further integrate the U.S. with its major trading partners more closely. The world will wait for that to happen. Nevertheless, people with dreams will still find a way to migrate to California.

Now, on another critical topic of interest to all global citizens:

2018 promises to be a year with lot of hopes, aspirations, desires and dreams. Global citizens should unite to stop war threats, and hold the U.N. accountable for ensuring peace in war-ravaged countries. Civilian casualties should completely stop. The International Criminal Court should prosecute more war criminals, keeping its mandate strictly in mind. Lack of peace and war-mongering are the antitheses of economic growth and social development. Let us not forget that there is more investment on offensive weapons and ammunition than on building national infrastructure, providing a higher quality of primary and secondary school education, ensuring a high quality of national healthcare, and other key people-oriented initiatives that governments should consciously implement with the tax payers’ money.

More weapons, higher the stock prices of the defence systems contractors. Who else benefits?

Given that the global wish is to have a peaceful 2018, let us all petition the U.N., the U.N. Security Council, and the U.S. President Donald Trump (no choice folks!), to stop all ongoing wars, and not to start a new one, and to commit not to use nuclear weapons irrespective of irresponsible provocations by rogue regimes. This is the best outcome for a peaceful world in 2018. Our collective conscience should demonstrate our joint commitment to demand that our leaders listen to our collective voice, and act based on that voice. People have a vote, a voice and of course, they pay taxes. Expecting leaders to listen is not an “out of the world” requirement.

So, friends, let us dedicate all our joint efforts in the coming months to stop wars. Please run through some of the anti-war initiatives in the following websites:

United National Antiwar Coalition

Peace and Security: UNITED NATIONS

United for Peace and Justice

International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (which won the Nobel Peace Prize 2017)

List of Anti-War Organizations

I strongly feel about this anti-war philosophy – every day brings news on atrocities committed by governments, sometimes on their own citizens, and on other governments which are waging wars under the pseudo-umbrella of a “coalition” against all norms of humanity, civilization, and decency. How can killing of innocent civilians and children benefit any country? I fail to understand the concept of “war” perpetrated by countries with advanced weapons against poor, innocent civilians in the name of obliterating an opposing political or religious philosophy that they are not comfortable with. And, in all this, our great U.N. has been found to be wanting, totally lacking of firm leadership.

I can go on and on, but it is very important for all of you to stop for a few minutes and think, especially those of you living in developed countries. The planet is under threat of wars and an impending nuclear cloud. If you think you can escape by virtue of living in an advanced country, you are totally and clearly mistaken with an absolute lack of understanding of these threats which could become rather real in 2018.

Welcome to a challenging, yet promising New Year folks!

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan

01 January 2018

The Palestine Imbroglio


As I had written in one of my blog posts a few years ago, the Israel – Palestine conflict is an unnecessary one which has ravaged the Middle East politics and society, and caused untold misery and deaths.

I generally like Israel and the Jewish people who are creative, resourceful and talented. Israel was born out of the misery of the Jewish people. As was usual in those days (1940s), Britain was the cause of many territorial problems around the world. Britain just walked out of many trouble spots that they themselves created, and left it for the warring parties to settle scores. They did it in many nations, and I come from India wherein, Britain caused major damage to the fabric of Indian society.

It was no different in the Middle East. The Palestinian problem could have been resolved with the intervention of Britain (who was the occupier of many of the lands) just around the time of formation of Israel. Britain failed to resolve the matter and the result? A festering problem even 7 decades later.

I am not blaming either Israel or Palestinians for the problem. However, Israel is the more powerful party in the conflict, and it indeed has the most powerful military in all of the Middle East, the only one to have nuclear weapons and very advanced missile technology. Israel has the power – both military and moral – to stop all the killings which occurs in their conflict with the Palestinian factions. Please read one of my earlier blog posts – The Unnecessary War.

Now that the U.S. President Donald Trump has recognized Jerusalem as the official capital of Israel, the Middle East is in a state of unrest yet again. Clearly, the Palestinians see this as a direct endorsement of the policies of Israel by its ally, the U.S., which is now increasingly losing its position as a conflict mediator between the two parties. The Palestinian President rightfully refused to receive and host the Vice President of the U.S. Mike Pence after President Trump’s announcement.

Israel has a great chance (it always had a chance) to call for an absolute truce and sit down for a dialogue without the presence of any third parties. Israel needs to communicate its sincerity about peace without getting irritated by unofficial statements of the Palestinian factions, and the anti-Israel utterances of many nations in the aftermath of the Trump announcement. Israel can show its magnanimity towards the suffering Palestinians and offer them the pathway to a dignified life with a statehood as they deserve. Of course, Israel’s security is absolutely critical, but then I believe that Israel is the most prepared nation in the event of an attack or a conflict. Israel needs to make it very clear to the Palestinian leadership that any violations of its security will lead to a complete reversal to the status quo.

And, Palestinians need to play ball with sincerity as well. There is no point in getting riven by internal factional politics without focusing on the welfare of the Palestinian people. They need to understand that the existence of the State of Israel is non-negotiable, and they need to make some compromises towards achieving a state of long-standing peace, like what Israel has to do as well. It takes two hands to clap, and the third hand(s) are now getting out of the picture, if you understand what I am trying to say.

So, in my opinion, the stronger party has to take the lead in establishing peaceful conditions for negotiations to move forward. Building settlements on Palestinian land (or, disputed land) should stop. Using brute force against unarmed Palestinians should stop. Accusations against the U.N. should stop. Similarly, Palestinians should stop street violence against the Israeli Defence Forces. They should compel their military factions to stop launching rockets against Israel. They should work with Israel in a positive way to defuse the current tense situation, and enter into negotiations with Israel.

Are all these things practical? Will they ever happen in our lifetime? There are tons of naysayers who preach that hostilities will continue till the time a “two-state” solution is reached, which appears impossible as of now, which then means that hostilities will indeed continue.

However, I think that if the U.S. and the U.K. get out of the peace negotiations, and let direct talks start between the Palestinian leadership and Israel, then we can hope to see some concrete progress in about a year’s time, provided there are no provocations from either side. If both parties are willing to make some compromises, make some much needed adjustments in territorial claims, remove irritants from the relations, and talk every day, then things can indeed move in the positive direction for both parties.

For Israel, this will be a positive step ahead towards lasting peace. For Palestinians, it will be a stop to their never-ending misery in living conditions, a stop to unnecessary deaths, and a potential realization of an official homeland for all of them, even with some limitations and compromises. It will be a huge start for them.

This is a real possibility only if Israel starts the ball rolling towards the Palestinians in a proactive manner, without any pre-conditions for starting the negotiations.

Let us all hope Israel will take that much-needed initiative, and bring about a much-needed peace to their lands, for the benefit of both Israelis and Palestinians. I hope Palestinians will cooperate if Israel takes the first positive initiative towards securing peace. Then together the world can celebrate the Israel-Palestine peace sometime in 2018.

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan

17th December 2017