De-Consolidating Democracy- Role of SAARC

                              

By  Kazi Anwarul Masud, Former Secretary and Ambassador of Bangladesh,   

Through out history men have been trying to express themselves to declare his existence.

Albeit these efforts were thwarted by events beyond his control or even with their own volition because they conditions they wanted to change were beyond their capacity or tradition made them accept the situation that prevailed at that time.  

Yale University Professor Robert Alan Dahl also known as Dean of American Political Science Association and a powerful voice in research of democracy attempted to trace the history of known human civilization.  In one of his articles Dahl wrote  “The most famous city-state, in classical times and after, was Athens. In 507 B.C.E. the Athenians adopted a system of popular government that lasted nearly two centuries, until the city was subjugated by its more powerful neighbor to the north, Macedonia. ….  It was the Greeks-probably the Athenians-who coined the term democracy, or demokratia, from the Greek words demos, the people, and kratos, to rule. It is interesting, by the way, that while in Athens the word demos usually referred to the entire Athenian people, sometimes it meant only the common people or even just the poor.

The word democracy, it appears, was sometimes used by its aristocratic critics as a kind of epithet, to show their disdain for the common people who had wrested away the aristocrats' previous control over the government…. the political institutions of Greek democracy, innovative though they had been, in their time, were ignored or even rejected outright during the development of modern representative democracy”. As in Athens, the right to participate was restricted to men, just as it was also in all later democracies and republics until the twentieth century. 

The question that is uncertain to answer is whether in the present circumstances the world besieged   by pandemic is seeing the approach of democratic deconsolidation. Some would argue,   Amanda Taub of Fodham University and NYT journalist, for example, as she examines  “Early signs of decline Political scientists have a theory called “democratic consolidation,” which holds that once countries develop democratic institutions, a robust civil society and a certain level of wealth, their democracy is secure.

For decades, global events seemed to support that idea. Data from Freedom House, a watchdog organization that measures democracy and freedom around the world, shows that the number of countries classified as “free” rose steadily from the mid-1970s to the early 2000s. Many Latin American countries transitioned from military rule to democracy; after the end of the Cold War, much of Eastern Europe followed suit. And longstanding liberal democracies in North America, Western Europe and Australia seemed more secure than ever.

But since 2005, Freedom House’s index has shown a decline in global freedom each year. Is that a statistical anomaly, a result of a few random events in a relatively short period of time? Or does it indicate a meaningful pattern?”  Mr. Mounk and Mr. Foa developed a three-factor formula to answer that question. The first factor was public support: How important do citizens think it is for their country to remain democratic? The second was public openness to nondemocratic forms of government, such as military rule. And the third factor was whether “antisystem parties and movements” — political parties and other major players whose core message is that the current system is illegitimate — were gaining support.If support for democracy was falling while the other two measures were rising, the researchers marked that country “deconsolidating.” And they found that deconsolidation was the political equivalent of a low-grade fever that arrives the day before a full-blown case of the flu.

While the process of dedemocratisation   is worrying, the optimists are of the opinion that human urge to act as they wish barring the bounds of law cannot be held in check for any length of time because once economies worries are over and a viable middle class has been formed the wish for a voice in the governance of the country becomes a premier concern. This is no less applicable for the less developed countries where economies predominate the day to day life. It is believed that peoples’ urge for a representative government becomes predominant when the question of taxation comes into play. The people then want to know how and where their money is being spent.

It is not necessary that such wish would be fulfilled in less developed countries particularly because of the reins of the government have already passed on to the patricians( not the landowning gentry of the past) who would be reluctant to part with such power wielded with the corrupt portion of society “elected” by the people. These people have their muscle men in every locality also duly “elected” or associated with different wings of the ruling political party. Not very dissimilar with the Chinese “wolf warrior diplomacy”  (The Diplomat—12 July  2020)  the writer reasons that this kind of diplomacy earned the ruling elite soaring nationalism.

The writer reasoned that “First, this change did not occur suddenly. Since 2010, when China’s GDP overtook Japan’s as the world’s second largest, the Chinese have become more confident and China’s foreign policy has become more assertive, gradually departing from Deng Xiaoping’s taotaoguang dictum. As the Communist Party continues to promote “four confidences”— in our chosen path, in our political system, in our guiding theories, and in our culture — nationalism has been on the rise. “Wolf-warrior diplomacy” is an extension of soaring nationalism at home.      

 In recent years, President Xi Jinping has advocated “a fighting spirit” on several occasions, whether speaking to soldiers or party officials….The latest diplomatic offensive is also part of the official effort to project China as a great power leading the global fight against the COVID-19.        China’s image suffered during the crisis due to its bungled handling of the outbreak at the early stage. Many blame China for initially covering up the human-to-human transmission of the virus and not sharing complete information with the international community.      

 From China’s perspective, wolf-warrior diplomacy is a direct response to “unfair” approaches by other countries, especially the U.S., toward China and the Chinese people….. In fact, wolf-warrior diplomacy is already hurting China’s foreign policy, since it has generated pushback, such as Australia’s calls for an independent probe into the coronavirus’ origins. China’s soft power is weak globally; a belligerent approach will further damage China’s global image. According Pew polls released on April 21, 66 percent of Americans say they have an unfavorable view of China, its most negative rating since Pew began asking the question in 2005. The problem with China is her miscalculation of feeling too confident to be able to take on the US militarily. Equally a part of the elite Chinese establishment is sounding caution against any misadventure.

 History teaches us that the US protected by the Pacific and the Atlantic oceans and having no credible threats in the vicinity should not be regarded as a hermit nation but one used post-1945 as a nation eager and willing to act as a policeman of the world. Besides the US and Europe convinced of its ideological superiority of democratic institution and technological advancement, aware as they are that G7, G20 and other organizations have changed the definition of developed and developing countries, are certain that the world would not accept the Xi jinping and Mao Tse Tung dictatorship, different as it is from Deng Xiaoping’s cautious approach.

 In the above lines the possible global role as a passive observer in the ongoing pandemic situation looks missing. But it is highly unlikely. Time is now for cooperation among nations, despite China’s initial bungling on covit-19 and WHO’s initial hesitancy in announcing to the world that it is beset with a pandemic. Time for taking account may pend for a later date. Historically American Exceptionalism bas been a by-word for the people living in the continent.

Noted political scientist Seymour Martin Lipset argues that while the US has exercised tremendous influence over Western countries since WW II  it remains exceptional: Americans are more religious, more patriotic, more populist, more egalitarian, more likely to volunteer, less likely to vote, more prone to divorce, and wealthier than citizens of other developed countries. Lipset asserts that these seemingly contradictory qualities result from several traits that have characterized America from its founding: a commitment to competitive individualism and self-determination; a deep anti-statist orientation; and a tendency toward populism and egalitarianism. What has emerged from this mix is a genuinely ``liberal'' society in the classical sense:

Even those called conservatives in our political lexicon are committed to individualist and egalitarian principles that would have marked them as radicals in 19th-century Europe. The moral foundation of public affairs in America has resulted in an ideological, crusading approach to foreign policy, while the commitment to individualism has resulted in high crime and divorce rates. Lipset adds “Being an American, however, is an ideological commitment. It is not a matter of birth. Those who reject American values are un-American. .. As G. K. Chesterton put it: "America is the only nation in the world that is founded on a creed. That creed is set forth with dogmatic and even theological lucidity in the Declaration of Independence. . . ." As noted in the Introduction, the nation's ideology can be described in five words: liberty, egalitarianism, individualism, populism, and laissez-faire”.

Lipset does not escape criticism. Harvard University’s Stephen Walt states that there is no difference in the way the US behaves as a great power as England, France, Portugal behaved in the same way in their heydays. Nor does the US behave better than the others. The US has not succeeded due to any special genius but due to luck. Walt writes “America’s past success is due as much to good luck as to any uniquely American virtues. The new nation was lucky that the continent was lavishly endowed with natural resources and traversed by navigable rivers. It was lucky to have been founded far from the other great powers and even luckier that the native population was less advanced and highly susceptible to European diseases”. But if Americans want to be truly exceptional, they might start by viewing the whole idea of "American exceptionalism" with a much more skeptical eye.

 All said and done nearer home in South Asia we have to traverse a long way in which SAARC has to play a very important role. India as the logical leader of the area has to brace itself in words and deeds. Catering to a particular creed to gain votes in elections while alienating others from different creeds may lead the country to greater peril. 

 

Tags: 

SAARC

            

 

 

Category: 

Papers

Countries: 

South Asia (General)

Topics: 

Political

Save the World from the Valley of Death: The Pandemic and the India-China Face off-

 Paper No. 6606                   Dated 21- June-2020

By Kazi Anwarul Masud (former Secretary and ambassador of Bangladesh)

Till today no definitive cure for the coronavirus has been found. Nor is it certain when it will be found. The failure is not due to lack of trying. The best brains of the world are engaged in relentless efforts to solve the elusive nature of the pandemic which like a magician changes its appearance frequently. The most optimistic view is that a cure may be found by September. Pessimistic view puts the period in years.

Majority of the intellectuals, however, agree that the world we had known and got used to since 1945 will not be there in post-coronavirus era. It is feared that the growth the developed countries had achieved and the developing countries were achieving would be wiped out by the global politico-economic slowdown.   Given the fact that what politico-economic advantages the developed and the developing worlds is not going to be amnesiac of the achievement gained so far they are going to build upon it in an post-coronavirus era which possibly will be more technology based. Since the developed world had the advantage of technological innovation, they are going to hold on to their lead with the developing world following their lead.

The question that arises is the division between the two worlds which would not be as defined in the centuries past. According to Global Finance (January 17 2020). to determine where a country stands in the global tech race, the Global Finance used four integrated metrics, three of which serve as standard measures of the availability and prevalence of technology: internet users as a proportion of the population; smartphone users as a percentage of the population; and LTE users as a percentage of the population. The fourth metric used was a Digital Competitiveness Score developed by the IMD World Competitiveness Center. Their competitiveness score focuses on technological knowledge, readiness for developing new technologies, and the ability to exploit and build on new innovations.

Ranking nations according to these metrics produced interesting results. For example, smaller advanced countries seem to score better than larger ones—Hong Kong and Taiwan are both ranked above Japan, the country that produced game-changing inventions like the Nintendo, the Walkman, and the VCR. This is likely due to the fact that smartphone penetration is higher in Hong Kong and Taiwan. In Hong Kong, approximately 97% of internet searches are done on smartphones, indicating their prevalence.

Perhaps the biggest or most shocking anomaly is Russia’s poor showing, being ranked 47^th out of the 67 countries on the list. Russia does poorly across all metrics, with low scores on smartphone penetration as well as digital competitiveness. In fact, Ukraine is ranked two slots above Russia despite having a GDP 14 times smaller. Perhaps this is because Ukraine long served as a technological hub of the former USSR and currently structures its education and business interests towards promoting its information technology sector.

Some of the rankings are less surprising. Every one of the top 20 countries has a developed economy and European countries with advanced economies lead the pack, making up four of the top five most technologically advanced. However, Asian countries including the U.A.E, Singapore, Hong Kong, and South Korea are all in the top 12, giving the top players in the global tech race a measure of geographic diversity. Among South Asian India ranks 60 and Pakistan ranks 67 while China is at 38. Global Finance’s ranking is debatable. Many other factors have to be considered. China is the second largest economy in the world with a population of 1.3 billion. China has the largest foreign exchange reserve and a worldwide presence. In 2020 India’s GDP was  3.3 trillion with a population over 1.2 billion. Singapore, Hong Kong and South Korea have already graduated to developed country status.

 Indian economy is the third largest in the world by purchasing power parity (PPP). The long-term growth perspective of the Indian economy remains positive due to its young population and corresponding low dependency ratio, healthy savings and investment rates, and its `increasing integration into global economy.   The visit by coronavirus in all parts of the world has changed the prospects for not only India and China but for the entire universe.

In the midst of this uncontrollable pandemic India and China are engaged in a border dispute.  The fights are bloody though firearms have not been used. The fights occurred in April and May in Ladakh and in Sikkim. Chinese troops occupied around 40 to 60 square kilometers of territory that India considers to be its own. The Economist (India and China have their first deadly clashes in 45 years       The border affray is a sign of worrying military escalation between Asia’s giants. June 16th 2020)   adds that “India is anxious over China’s growing economic and political clout on India’s periphery—in Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka—and over the influx of Chinese warships into the Indian Ocean.       In response, successive Indian governments have tilted closer to America.... A quartet of China-skeptic countries known as the “Quad”, comprising America, Australia, India and Japan, now meet regularly. Though India is at pains to stress that the Quad is not an alliance, Australia may soon join naval exercises involving the other three countries, lending a naval dimension to the group.       The violent turn in the border dispute is likely to accelerate these trends”.

 Optimists however think that bilateral trade estimated at US $ 95 billion in 2018 compared with US $ 3 trillion economy supplying US dollar 13 trillion, consumer oriented middle income Chinese market could be a deterrent to India’s military response. Then India has to consider asymmetric power balance between the two countries. China’s GDP is five times larger than that of India and spends four times more than Indian defense budget. International mediation seems neither possible nor sought by the combatants. Yet the gory details appearing in the Indian media of soldiers mutilated bodies retrieved from the battle field and the pressure on the Indian Prime Minister to respond forcefully  to the Chinese aggression further complicated by Chinese leadership’s  belief in the (How to Prevent a War in Asia The Erosion of American Deterrence Raises the Risk of Chinese Miscalculation By Michèle A. Flournoy June 18, 2020)  “military doctrine  that the side that can make and execute battlefield decisions most quickly will gain a decisive advantage in any conflict.

 China’s theory of victory increasingly relies on “system destruction warfare”—crippling an adversary at the outset of conflict, by deploying sophisticated electronic warfare, counter space, and cyber-capabilities to disrupt what are known as C4ISR network (command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance), and thereby thwarting its power projection and undermining its resolve”. All said it has to be recognized that the world is now passing through a fluid situation due to coronavirus epidemic and the global responsibility lies in saving lives and distraught economies shelving muscle flexing however genuine the grievances may be.

Tackling Corona (Wuhan) Virus. Must We Surrender to George Orwell’s Animal Farm?

 Paper No. 6579                                 Dated 17-May-2020

By Kazi Anwarul Masud ( Former Secretary and Ambassador- Bangladesh)

   Time and again credible intellectuals have told the global audience that the world we had been used to since the great world war that ended in 1945 would no longer be there after the unpredictable and viscous coronavirus has left us. It is as yet unknown with the best scientific brains trying to find out when this “unpredictable” will become “predictable” and the people of the world will have a weapon to fight this demon.

Another battle also would have to be fought on the question of who gets the first shot of the nectar, will it again be  distributed along the lines of the rich and the poor, the haves and the have-nots, the privileged and the underprivileged, the developed and the underdeveloped world. Any kind of justice requires that the claims of all be considered equally.

As Amartya Sen elucidates in his Theory of Justice by giving an example of three competing claims on a flute one claim based on his being the best flutist; another claim based on his being the poorest; and the third because of his expertise in making the flute. Sen argues that the three arguments are based, in turn, on principles of utility, economic equity, and the entitlement to the fruits of one’s unaided efforts. Each can be defended with strong, impartial arguments. But is the outcome necessarily arrived at the most optimum result? At least one can be satisfied that all claims were discussed and the decision was arrived based on the claims put forward at the time of discussion.

 If an eventual or at least temporary palliative for coronavirus is discovered then its availability should be based on   the necessity of all the people of the world because as yet no scientific basis has been found to base necessity except Angela Merkel’s advice to the Germans of “ testing, testing and testing”  which alone can detect the contagious from the non-contagious. This testing. is possible more easily for the rich countries than the poor who are equally affected but have little to cope with the fallout both justice and necessity demands that the nectar be equally made available to all.  While equitable distribution is being debated Sino-US conflict has taken a turn for the worse.

 In an article James Palmer (China’s Coronavirus Success Is Made Possible by Xi’s Brutality-May 14^th) writes: “After an initial and disastrous cover-up, the systems that allowed the government to successfully act are the same ones that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) uses to maintain its control over citizens—and that are currently being used as part of a campaign of mass imprisonment and cultural genocide against Uighurs and other minorities in the western region of Xinjiang. This omnipresent domestic control apparatus is funded out of a so-called stability maintenance budget larger than that for national defense. These systems are not necessary for success, as Taiwan and South Korea have shown, but in China they proved critical”.)

A contrary view has been expressed by The Economist casting doubt on Trump administration’s “coherent” accusation that China is responsible for the pandemic, its birthplace is in Wuhan laboratory, the contagion did spread from an animal market in Wuhan which helped transmission from animal to human being though no direct allegation has yet been made of Chinese malfeasance.    The Economist chided US Secretary of State for his unwavering loyalty to Trump administration’s which has resulted in Mike Pompeo’s demotion from the position of the Western world to one singing a lonely tune. “It is hard to think the words of any previous American chief diplomat, a role traditionally considered supra-partisan to a degree, have carried less weight.         Yet, in an administration of mediocrities, Mr Pompeo remains a substantial figure. He is one of its last significant talents. Even his critics note his smarts—famously displayed in a stellar record at West Point and Harvard Law School—and policy seriousness. His articulation of an America First foreign policy that engages with the world consistently but sceptically is a fair stab at making Trumpism coherent. Since the sacking of John Bolton eight months ago, he has been the administration’s foreign-policy tsar. Mark Esper and Robert O’Brien, the Defence secretary and national security adviser, are nonentities by comparison”.

  (Is the Pandemic China’s Sputnik Moment? What a Virus Reveals About Two Systems By Branko Milanovic May 12, 2020).  Branco milanovich also compared the momentary Soviet surge in global influence following its successful sending of Sputnik into space. It was an inspiring feat for the Soviet Union in greater global influence but it was transitory in the evolution of human history. The Soviet camp was no less delighted but the Americans were not to be left behind. The US stole the march by putting a man on the moon despite Yuri Gagarin’s orbiting the earth before the US could even match the Soviet feat.

Similarly, China’s control of coronavirus through Xi Jinping’s draconian measures, Chinese data, disbelieved as these are globally, is likened to Soviet transient Sputnik feat of the yester years. In the ultimate analysis the longevity of a discovery, assuming a vaccine against coronavirus will be found in time to remove the global distress, may also seem Sputnik like Soviet victory as the Chinese claim of controlling the coronavirus’ forward march in heightening humanity’s distress.  In the quest for global influence some countries may emotionally embrace the saying of “a friend in need is a friend indeed” as the Italian Foreign Minister did in receiving prompt Chinese help. Such transient emotional expression do not have a long life as realpolitik slips in the fight for global influence.

The truest armor the West has is the   consent of the people in framing the architecture of their fate which the alternative form of government cannot offer. (COVID-19 Tempts Would-Be AuthoritariansBut Exploiting a Pandemic Comes at a Cost By Ruth Ben-Ghiat May 5, 2020—DEMOCRACY). Ruth Ben Ghiat points out the cooicidence of the appearance of coronavirus with a phase in our history with the rise of authoritarianism. Some how people in parts of the world were getting comfortable with strong leaders some of whom they felt were better suited to lead them out of the dystopian world where no end was in sight. Fortunately for us their number was small as the great majority still had not lost their faith in Jurgen Habermas’ communicative action where people could debate and reach results, if not consensus, on what needs to be done.

 The strength of communicative action lay in discussions, and not in being forced to accept what a small   minority of “leaders” felt was good for all. Granted the system was not Periclean in essence yet it gave the people to discuss and reach conclusion on what was best for all. Ruth Ben Ghats felt camaraderie with Taiwan based analyst Victor Lin Pu who described the Chinese government’s chief goal during the early days of the epidemic was not to contain the virus but “to maintain regime stability and social control.”          

 For authoritarian leaders, staying in power nearly always trumps the public’s welfare. The Chinese authoririties’ attempts to conceal the Wuhan debacle is common knowledge now. Yet many in the world would like to take account from the Chinese at a later date than now. The most important thing now is to survive and find a way out of this maze. This attitude is not one of surrender nor reflecting one of “by gone be bygone” but a practical one of survival.  The people of the world is not looking at the menace with Voltaire’s Panglossian eyes ( Candide) but with a certainty that one day the fog will disappear and a new normal, in whatever shape it comes, will be embraced.

 For South Asians India should prepare itself to be the beacon of light for the region. Despite differences, as differences must remain among neighbors, but similarities of history and tradition outrank the differences, and most importantly India is steeped in embracing a multi-lingual, multi-ethnic, multi-religious carpet for centuries and have provided shelter and voice to all. This what makes India great and acceptable to the region.     

Tags: 

Wuhan Virus

South Asia

           

 

Category: 

Papers

Countries: 

South Asia (General)

Topics: 

Global

General

Tackling Corona (Wuhan) Virus. Must We Surrender to George Orwell’s Animal Farm?

 Paper No. 6579                                 Dated 17-May-2020

By Kazi Anwarul Masud ( Former Secretary and Ambassador- Bangladesh)

   Time and again credible intellectuals have told the global audience that the world we had been used to since the great world war that ended in 1945 would no longer be there after the unpredictable and viscous coronavirus has left us. It is as yet unknown with the best scientific brains trying to find out when this “unpredictable” will become “predictable” and the people of the world will have a weapon to fight this demon.

Another battle also would have to be fought on the question of who gets the first shot of the nectar, will it again be  distributed along the lines of the rich and the poor, the haves and the have-nots, the privileged and the underprivileged, the developed and the underdeveloped world. Any kind of justice requires that the claims of all be considered equally.

As Amartya Sen elucidates in his Theory of Justice by giving an example of three competing claims on a flute one claim based on his being the best flutist; another claim based on his being the poorest; and the third because of his expertise in making the flute. Sen argues that the three arguments are based, in turn, on principles of utility, economic equity, and the entitlement to the fruits of one’s unaided efforts. Each can be defended with strong, impartial arguments. But is the outcome necessarily arrived at the most optimum result? At least one can be satisfied that all claims were discussed and the decision was arrived based on the claims put forward at the time of discussion.

 If an eventual or at least temporary palliative for coronavirus is discovered then its availability should be based on   the necessity of all the people of the world because as yet no scientific basis has been found to base necessity except Angela Merkel’s advice to the Germans of “ testing, testing and testing”  which alone can detect the contagious from the non-contagious. This testing. is possible more easily for the rich countries than the poor who are equally affected but have little to cope with the fallout both justice and necessity demands that the nectar be equally made available to all.  While equitable distribution is being debated Sino-US conflict has taken a turn for the worse.

 In an article James Palmer (China’s Coronavirus Success Is Made Possible by Xi’s Brutality-May 14^th) writes: “After an initial and disastrous cover-up, the systems that allowed the government to successfully act are the same ones that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) uses to maintain its control over citizens—and that are currently being used as part of a campaign of mass imprisonment and cultural genocide against Uighurs and other minorities in the western region of Xinjiang. This omnipresent domestic control apparatus is funded out of a so-called stability maintenance budget larger than that for national defense. These systems are not necessary for success, as Taiwan and South Korea have shown, but in China they proved critical”.)

A contrary view has been expressed by The Economist casting doubt on Trump administration’s “coherent” accusation that China is responsible for the pandemic, its birthplace is in Wuhan laboratory, the contagion did spread from an animal market in Wuhan which helped transmission from animal to human being though no direct allegation has yet been made of Chinese malfeasance.    The Economist chided US Secretary of State for his unwavering loyalty to Trump administration’s which has resulted in Mike Pompeo’s demotion from the position of the Western world to one singing a lonely tune. “It is hard to think the words of any previous American chief diplomat, a role traditionally considered supra-partisan to a degree, have carried less weight.         Yet, in an administration of mediocrities, Mr Pompeo remains a substantial figure. He is one of its last significant talents. Even his critics note his smarts—famously displayed in a stellar record at West Point and Harvard Law School—and policy seriousness. His articulation of an America First foreign policy that engages with the world consistently but sceptically is a fair stab at making Trumpism coherent. Since the sacking of John Bolton eight months ago, he has been the administration’s foreign-policy tsar. Mark Esper and Robert O’Brien, the Defence secretary and national security adviser, are nonentities by comparison”.

  (Is the Pandemic China’s Sputnik Moment? What a Virus Reveals About Two Systems By Branko Milanovic May 12, 2020).  Branco milanovich also compared the momentary Soviet surge in global influence following its successful sending of Sputnik into space. It was an inspiring feat for the Soviet Union in greater global influence but it was transitory in the evolution of human history. The Soviet camp was no less delighted but the Americans were not to be left behind. The US stole the march by putting a man on the moon despite Yuri Gagarin’s orbiting the earth before the US could even match the Soviet feat.

Similarly, China’s control of coronavirus through Xi Jinping’s draconian measures, Chinese data, disbelieved as these are globally, is likened to Soviet transient Sputnik feat of the yester years. In the ultimate analysis the longevity of a discovery, assuming a vaccine against coronavirus will be found in time to remove the global distress, may also seem Sputnik like Soviet victory as the Chinese claim of controlling the coronavirus’ forward march in heightening humanity’s distress.  In the quest for global influence some countries may emotionally embrace the saying of “a friend in need is a friend indeed” as the Italian Foreign Minister did in receiving prompt Chinese help. Such transient emotional expression do not have a long life as realpolitik slips in the fight for global influence.

The truest armor the West has is the   consent of the people in framing the architecture of their fate which the alternative form of government cannot offer. (COVID-19 Tempts Would-Be AuthoritariansBut Exploiting a Pandemic Comes at a Cost By Ruth Ben-Ghiat May 5, 2020—DEMOCRACY). Ruth Ben Ghiat points out the cooicidence of the appearance of coronavirus with a phase in our history with the rise of authoritarianism. Some how people in parts of the world were getting comfortable with strong leaders some of whom they felt were better suited to lead them out of the dystopian world where no end was in sight. Fortunately for us their number was small as the great majority still had not lost their faith in Jurgen Habermas’ communicative action where people could debate and reach results, if not consensus, on what needs to be done.

 The strength of communicative action lay in discussions, and not in being forced to accept what a small   minority of “leaders” felt was good for all. Granted the system was not Periclean in essence yet it gave the people to discuss and reach conclusion on what was best for all. Ruth Ben Ghats felt camaraderie with Taiwan based analyst Victor Lin Pu who described the Chinese government’s chief goal during the early days of the epidemic was not to contain the virus but “to maintain regime stability and social control.”          

 For authoritarian leaders, staying in power nearly always trumps the public’s welfare. The Chinese authoririties’ attempts to conceal the Wuhan debacle is common knowledge now. Yet many in the world would like to take account from the Chinese at a later date than now. The most important thing now is to survive and find a way out of this maze. This attitude is not one of surrender nor reflecting one of “by gone be bygone” but a practical one of survival.  The people of the world is not looking at the menace with Voltaire’s Panglossian eyes ( Candide) but with a certainty that one day the fog will disappear and a new normal, in whatever shape it comes, will be embraced.

 For South Asians India should prepare itself to be the beacon of light for the region. Despite differences, as differences must remain among neighbors, but similarities of history and tradition outrank the differences, and most importantly India is steeped in embracing a multi-lingual, multi-ethnic, multi-religious carpet for centuries and have provided shelter and voice to all. This what makes India great and acceptable to the region.     

Tags: 

Wuhan Virus

South Asia

           

Category: 

Papers

Countries: 

South Asia (General)

Topics: 

Global

General

Post Corona Virus- Global Change:

   Paper No. 6576                        Dated 9-May-2020

 By Kazi Anwarul Masud (former Secretary and ambassador of Bangladesh)

Very people doubt that a global change is in the offing. Debate surrounds about the nature of the change.

Change is nothing new. History of mankind has borne testimony to changes. From ruthless and sometimes benign monarchies, over thrown by guillotines, mass royal murders of the Romanovs, institution of ruthless doctrinaire so-called peoples’ revolution which massacred thousands of people through starvation or through negation of right to disagree.

Hubris of the likes of Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany too played a role in the death of one million people in the First World War notwithstanding other factors that also played no minor role. Many historians consider Wilhelm the individual most responsible for the outbreak of war in 1914. While opinions vary, there is a consensus that Wilhelm II’s brash leadership and imperialistic and nationalist agenda was a critical factor in the road to war. Wilhelm II’s main interest was in expanding the power, prestige and size of the German Empire. This was necessary, he believed, so that the German people could enjoy their “place in the sun”.

Historians believe that the burgeoning ‘German problem’ would have required exceptional wisdom, restraint and tact on all sides and particularly in Berlin, qualities which were spectacularly absent under the erratic personal military monarchy of Wilhelm II. The root cause of the First World War (and by extension of the Second World War too) was thus seen to lie in this fundamental conflict between Germany’s elemental drive for supremacy and the determination of Britain along with her continental partners to uphold the existing balance of power in Europe. Kaiser Wilhelm II was arguably the very last person who should have been entrusted with the immense powers of the Hohenzollern military monarchy at such a critical juncture in Germany’s and Europe’s history.

  

Perhaps one of the great lessons of history is not to repeat the mistakes of the past. Like Alice in Wonderland we and the surrounding forces are not similar and hence it is no use going back. The other lesson Alice has given us is though it is important that we care about our fellow human beings, but minding our own business when it comes to following the rules set for our own good and for the community gossip is better good rule to live by.

Without being pessimistic one has to admit that the war being fought to defeat coronavirus epidemic from past experience of Spanish flu, SARS, HIV, plague of the pre-modern era may look Quixotic   but to leave the millions to their fate is also not acceptable. Humanity’s journey from pre modern to modern to post-modern eras cannot go in vain. The main question we are trying to find the distribution of power in a multi-layered society where the emerging economies or at least the leaders among them would get seats at the high table.

There is a general consensus that post-Second World War state of affairs would not be tenable nor is it tenable now. The very existence of G 7, G 20 and other regional bodies are recognition of the fact that the world is already multi- layered. The question would arise how much the USA is ready to concede ground to the claim of Harvard University’s luminary Stephen Walt (The United States Can Still Win the Coronavirus Pandemic-April 3 2020) that the decline of US influence would result in end result in a world “that is less open, less prosperous, and less free” than the world of today.  Walt refers to National Security Expert Rachel Klein’s March 31 piece where she wrote:  global responses to date do not vindicate authoritarianism:

Some democracies have done very well in reacting to the crisis, and some dictatorships have reacted very badly. In other words, regime type doesn’t appear to be the critical variable here.

There is another reason why the United States may get out of this in better shape than one might initially think: the dollar. It remains the world’s reserve currency and is still considered a relatively safe asset in times of economic uncertainty”. Walt argues that the extent of long-term damage to America’s global position will depend on two main factors. First, can the United States get the pandemic under control at home, so that it can safely restart its economy and so that other nations will decide that Americans still know how to respond in a crisis? The country will have to do a lot better henceforth than it has done so far, but it certainly isn’t impossible. Second, does the United States maintain an “America first” approach to this global problem, or does it begin to exhibit the kind of global leadership that it showed after World War II, the 9/11 attacks, or the financial crisis of 2008. 

These are crucial questions to the world that abhors a system that denies Universal Declaration of Human Rights and imprisons human quest for knowledge beyond cosmos and acquisition of technology that will make life easier   being conscious of the fact that robots will replace human beings and make a sizeable portion of humanity unemployable.  There are always a cost-benefit analysis conducted in corporations and in governments when new products/methods are introduced. Intelligent governments like corporations look at shareholders or stakeholders benefits.

 In this case Australia’s former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd in a lengthy article (The Coming Post-COVID Anarchy-May 6 2020) has weighed with his views on the post-coronavirus global order. Kevin Rudd immersed as he was in his country’s politics and in Australia’s diplomacy should be taken with due interest by all those who bodes well for this planet. Rudd having been a strong US ally for decades (from the Second World War and remains a staunch ally in this region). Kevin Rudd opposes the common trend of thinking that Beijing has profited from the pandemic pandemonium.

On the contrary “the outbreak has opened up significant political dissension within the Chinese Communist Party, even prompting thinly veiled criticism of President Xi Jinping’s highly centralized leadership style. This has been reflected in a number of semiofficial commentaries that have mysteriously found their way into the public domain during April. Xi’s draconian lockdown of half the country for months to suppress the virus has been widely hailed, but he has not emerged unscathed. Internal debate rages on the precise number of the dead and the infected, on the risks of second-wave effects as the country slowly reopens, and on the future direction of economic and foreign policy” 

The economic damage has been massive. Despite China’s published return-to-work rates, no amount of domestic stimulus in the second half of 2020 will make up for the loss in economic activity in the first and second quarters. Drastic economic retrenchment among China’s principal trading partners will further impede economic recovery plans, given that pre-crisis, the traded sector of the economy represented 38 percent of GDP. Overall, 2020 growth is likely to be around zero—the worst performance since the Cultural Revolution five decades ago.

 Kevin Rudd has not been complimentary to the US either. He thinks fragmented establishment will constrain US‘s global leadership and more so as the economy will shrink considerably adding to a long list of unemployed Americans lining up for dole. In the ultimate analysis peoples’ distaste to be told what is to be done will win the day for liberal democracy. Hungary and Serbia , AFD in Germany and Marie Le Pen may for a while  increase membership but a repeat of 1938 Weimer Republic general elections that catapulted Hitler to power has no parallel to today’s pandemic situation. 

Tags: 

Wuhan Virus

           

Category: 

Papers

Countries: 

others