The Rapid Rising Economic Power
The Chinese leadership has unveiled a strategy to lead the globe in seven of the most important industries.The economic blueprints focus on seven “Strategic Emerging Industries” that Beijing aims to dominate on a global level: alternative energy, biotechnology, new-generation information technology, high-end equipment manufacturing, advanced materials, alternative-fuel cars, and new energy technologies. Global firms that compete in everything from hydropower to flat panel display technology will have to account for stronger Chinese competition. And for countries, such as Japan and Korea, with hopes of having their domestic firms lead these industries, these new Chinese plans may necessitate revamping their policies of state assistance for corporations.(The Atlantic)
Move towards a global military power, in the last 12 months China has crossed several significant milestones that analysts say mark a growing self-confidence
that Chinese armed forces can now begin to match the country’s status as a rising economic super-power.(The Telegraph)
Facing the Threat of Piracy, China Starts to Talk Like a Superpower,For counter-piracy campaigns to be effective, we should probably move beyond the ocean and crash their bases on the land… It is important that we target not only the operators, those on the small ships or crafts conducting the hijacking activities, but also the figureheads.chen(Globalspin)
China has dialogue mechanisms on defense, security with 22 countries.China has established consultation and dialogue mechanisms on defense and security with 22 countries, and has military-to-military exchanges with more than 150 countries, Chinese Defense Minister Liang Guanglie(xinhuanet)
Rare Earth Elements, advanced military technology depends on these elements
97 percent of the world’s supply comes from mines in China, and China is prepared to simply stop exporting these strategic elements to the rest of the world by 2012.Rare Earth Woes Could Mean Trouble for U.S. Stealth Fleet.(wired)
China Surpasses U.S. as World’s Biggest Energy Consumer China surpassed the U.S. last year as the world’s largest energy consumer, according to an annual report by British oil giant BP
The Rapid Decline Ecnomic Power
Chronic unemployment worse than Great Depression.CBS News correspondent Ben Tracy reports that the chronically unemployed face the hardest road back to recovery, and that while the jobs picture may be improving statistically on a national level, it is not for them.Tinong Nwachan, for example, has far too much time on his hands. When CBS News met the former truck driver he had been out of work for two years. “I don’t really tell too many people this but I’m not ashamed or nothing, I’m homeless,” Nwachan said.(cbsnews)
Decline and fall of the American empire.The US is a country with serious
problems. Getting on for one in six depend on government food stamps to ensure they have enough to eat. The budget, which was in surplus little more than a decade ago, now has a deficit of Greek-style proportions. There is policy paralysis in Washington.(guardian)
Jack Lifton as saying, “A real crunch is coming. In America, Britain and elsewhere we have not yet woken up to the fact that there is an urgent need to secure the supply of rare earths from sources outside China.”So what’s the problem with these rare elements? 97 percent of the world’s supply comes from mines in China, and China is prepared to simply stop exporting these strategic elements to the rest of the world by 2012.If that happens, the world will be crippled by the collapse of available rare earth elements. Manufacturing of everything from computers and electronics to farm machinery will grind to a halt. Electronics will disappear from the shelves and prices for manufactured goods that depend on these rare elements will skyrocket.(naturalnews)
Paul Gilding, the veteran Australian environmentalist-entrepreneur, who described this moment in a new book called “The Great Disruption: Why the Climate Crisis Will Bring On the End of Shopping and the Birth of a New World.” “When you are surrounded by something so big that requires you to change everything about the way you think and see the world, then denial is the natural response. But the longer we wait, the bigger the response required.”(THOMAS L.FRIEDMAN)
Has Economic Power Replaced Military Might?
At the Cold War’s end, some pundits proclaimed that “geo-economics” had replaced geopolitics. Economic power would become the key to success in world politics, a change that many people thought would usher in a world dominated by Japan and Germany.
Today, some interpret the rise in China’s share of world output as signifying a fundamental shift in the balance of global power, but without considering military power. They argue that a dominant economic power soon becomes a dominant military power, forgetting that the United States was the world’s largest economy for 70 years before it became a military superpower.Political observers have long debated whether economic or military power is more fundamental. The Marxist tradition casts economics as the underlying structure of power, and political institutions as a mere superstructure, an assumption shared by nineteenth-century liberals who believed that growing interdependence in trade and finance would make war obsolete. But, while Britain and Germany were each other’s most significant trading partners in 1914, that did not prevent a conflagration that set back global economic integration for a half-century.
(Joseph S. Nye)
After almost 10 bloody years, it is the beginning of the endgame in Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden drew America into Afghanistan; his death will be seen by many as the strategic rationale to depart. Even before this game changer occurred, the talk in Washington and other capitals was focusing on troop withdrawals, political settlements and negotiations with the Taliban.
After the downfall of the USSR, the US has engaged upon itself, on a contradictory basis, the mission of
recreate the world in its own image but the representation of hegemonic disruption creates sub-national actors such as Taliban an imperative role in the global power relationships between great powers. It is not Taliban’s material power or its ability to utilize force that presents its greatest impact but their capability to use power to press forward an ideology that gives its position in great power politics that challenge the US to dis-engage in global or hegemonic war that leads to the dominance of one state, which then establishes an international order and act as “world –police”. In Afghanistan, finally the hegemonic scheme started to weaken, a challenger appears in the form of ISI and Pakistan Army now the cycle
begins yet again with a hegemonic competition the hegemonic order weakens. As the world stand witness to scheming propagation of an ideology that the hegemonic ideology spread by the US; the so called war on terror. This only inspired the emergence of more traditional insurgencies; and the seizure of power in nation-states the manipulation of the ungovernable failed states to develop sanctuaries, the sponsorship of radical regimes already in power, and terrorist attacks against the US and its allies sending a unswerving coercive message: “back off! From this part of the world which we considered OURS! We don’t need you! We don’t want you! Get the heck out of my country you dummy! (by Ayesha V in comment section).
The Americans have tried several options to negotiate peace in Afghanistan on their terms – “A non-Talibanized peaceful Afghanistan.” Pakistan too has endorsed the idea. Both are on the wrong track, because in this brutal contest, the Talibans have won and have the right, to lay down the terms for peace and not the American and the allies who have lost the war. In fact the Americans have to demonstrate ‘diplomatic wisdom’ to accept defeat, as the Soviets did in 1989 and asked for the ‘safe exit’. In 1989 Pakistan helped the Soviets to withdraw, because Mujahideen were friendly, but now Pakistan has no such leverage over the Taliban. And the dilemma!
The Taliban of today are very different from the Mujahideen of 1989 – their elders. The hard-core of Taliban consists of the die-hard, 20-30 years old Afghans, who have grown under the shadows of war. They are hardened fighters, with life time experience of war. They are brutal and ruthless. They are guided by one single idea, that is, “to defeat the enemy and liberate the country.” That is the single purpose, which is a matter of life and death for them. As early as 2002, they defined it in these words: “We have resolved to fight the occupation forces till they are routed. When we gain freedom, we would take decisions under a free environment. It is unthinkable for the Afghan nation to follow the American plans, as it was not in harmony with their national ethos and traditions. We will carry the war to its logical end, and Insha Allah we will triumph over the enemy and win our freedom”. Word by word, they have done, exactly what they claimed.
Mullah Umar and the senior Taliban leadership do have a soft corner for Pakistan and USA, for helping the Afghans to defeat the Soviets, but the “hard-core Taliban” consider USA and their allies, including Turkey as their enemy. They consider the Pakistan Army and the ISI as their enemy, because they joined America’s war on Afghanistan. Even Mullah Umar, who has full control over the movement, cannot take decisions against the wishes of the ‘hard-core Taliban’. Therefore, for the Americans, their allies and the Pakistanis, the only course open is to negotiate with the Taliban, who are “prepared to engage with the Northern Alliance to work-out a new constitution for the future government in Afghanistan.” Any other course to be adopted would lead to greater chaos.
As for the Taliban, they are at peace with themselves. They have fought and sacrificed for over thirty years and will continue to fight, because their faith and commitment to the cause, provides them the abiding strength and resilience to face the mightiest of the mighty. They already have won the contest and will wait for the time they will be asked to define the peace parameters. There is a rethink in Pakistan also to establish friendly relations with the Afghans – our neighbours. The ISI is in the process of re-claiming the lost territories.This change in mood and temper therefore, must be correctly understood, to explore new possibilities, in order to establish a meaningful relationship with Pakistan. (By General Mirza Aslam Beg)
This development hurts USA badly as they need a safe exit from Afghanistan. Targeting ISI and calling it a terrorist organization, is counter productive and demonstrates American frustration at the changed situation, which they have failed to understand. President Karzai is already doubting the power of the U.S. in Afghanistan, and considering switching sides to Taliban. President Obama has planned a withdrawal from the country but No safe-exit for American, when begin withdrawing troops from Afghanistan, Daggers Drawn Tend to Draw Blood, cost dearly in blood and treasure.
Afghan war winnable without Pakistan help on border: US
President Obama insisted that the assault force hunting down Osama bin Laden last week be large enough to fight its way out of Pakistan if confronted by hostile local police officers and troops, senior administration and military officials said Monday.
How far they go to Pressurize Pakistan and make series of accusations against Pakistan’s intelligence agency, ISI. The United States could break with Pakistan and try to handle things on its own in Afghanistan, but the supply line fueling Afghan fighting runs through Pakistan.Afghanistan is war at the end of the Earth for the United States, and to fight it, Washington must have Pakistani supply routes.
Its not Washington to decided the Fate of Afghan but Region Powers that is Pakistan,China,Russia,Iran and Turkey.
Nothing in the killed of bin Laden changes the geopolitical realities.
The United States is now looking for an exit from Afghanistan. Its goal, the creation of a democratic, pro-American Afghanistan, But US-led NATO forces have been facing defeatism in Afghanistan where they have badly failed to cope with the stiff resistance of the Taliban insurgents. In this context, in the recent days, an international conference was held in Kabul in order to hand over security of Afghanistan to the Afghan military and police. As a matter of fact, America and its allies have decided to exit Afghanistan in accordance with the announced schedule, though apparently, they show reluctance in this matter.D.C could accept that it will not win in Afghanistan and will not be able simply to eliminate terrorism.
Europe and America.The two countries are now agreed on a common position to oppose any move by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to conduct a ground operation in Libya. Russia and China no longer trusts the United States or its NATO allies to be transparent about their intentions with regard to Libya and the Middle East.
CIA Announces that Next False Flag Terror Op will be Blamed on Pakistan’s ISI; China Backs Islamabad in Looming Confrontation; Collapse of the US Empire Brings Heightened Danger of General War.New strategic challenges for China and Pakistan, which will become more dependent on each other as a result.
(PRESS TRUST OF INDIA)
At the early stage after 9/11, Afghan Taliban needed Pakistan’s support, especially during the winter season they needed hideouts in the tribal areas of Pakistan. But now they enjoy good enough support inside Afghanistan.After fighting for almost 10 years, the Afghan Taliban are emerging as an invincible power; they could lead their war against the US-led forces without Pakistan’s help.
The fighting season in Afghanistan is starting to get under way as spring arrives, and Western officials including US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have warned it could bring some of the bloodiest fighting yet in the near ten-year war. The most sophisticated war machine in history could not stabilize Afghanistan despite trying various approaches for a decade, how can the poorly armed Afghan Army succeed in pulling off this miracle now?
They would not force the Taliban to surrender, nor would they convert them. But he went on: “By challenging the insurgency … by building legitimate governance … the Afghan government, with our support, can prevail.” Today Mr Miliband, backbench MP, is less certain – on any of those three counts. Last week he said the Taliban’s numbers were growing,quoting an Isaf estimate of 35,000 full-time fighters. So while the west has set a date for the end of the war in 2014, Mr Miliband concluded that no political strategy yet exists to end the conflict.
All this comes late in the day. The western intervention is now longer than the Soviet one. But three years from the date set for withdrawal, no political component to that deadline exists. Nor is there a unified view in Washington about how to achieve it. With the Taliban pushed as a major presence out of Helmand and Kandahar, self-congratulation and self-doubt fill the air in roughly equal portions. The surge of US troop numbers is at its peak, but everyone is bracing themselves for another year of ferocious bloodshed, as the Taliban merely switch tactics from roadside bombs to suicide bombings and softer targets. Instead of fighting its way to the negotiating table, the US troop surge may simply be sawing the legs off it.
There is no dearth of creative ideas for an end to this conflict. But Washington may not be as powerful as it thinks in the endgame. A former UN negotiator involved in the Geneva agreements on the Soviet troop withdrawal from Afghanistan, Giandomenico Picco, said in a paper that we may have to abandon the idea of Afghanistan as a centrally governed nation state – a fallacy shared by the Soviets, the Taliban and the west. Some critics suggest that a strategic partnership and Western bases in Afghanistan might further provoke Pakistan and Iran to intensify their meddling in Afghan affairs.Its porous borders could only be guaranteed by a regional summit of the countries that effect them – Pakistan, India, Iran and Saudi Arabia. Everyone seems to have forgotten Riyadh’s influence on Islamabad. And including Iran as a regional power in a forum, unconnected to the nuclear issue, could also be a way of breaking that deadlock.