he Long bumpy NAM Journey

Fifty years is surely a long time, especially in developing nations where average life expectancy is about 60 years. Much current has gone by, leaving in its wake, myriad changes, some fundamental and have altered the world economic, political, and social system for ever, others a repeat of past events, perhaps showing more than anything else that man, still stubbornly refuses to learn from past lessons. One of the most significant and influential changes we have witnessed has been the collapse of communism, not the philosophy as many vestiges of diehards still abound,  hoping  for yet another revanche, but even them, despite fervent zealotry have had  to accept that practically the  sentimentality of a collective society with property belonging to all, hardly any leadership to direct others; has been proved by time if not by events, to have been a mere figment of Fredrick Angels and Karl Max  imagination. Well, at best it was an ingenuous masterpiece of  rhetoric, obfuscation  and semantics, ever pieced together by God’s creation..

Indisputably China is still avowed largest communist state, economically buoyant Vietnam still venerates the sickle and hammer as part of its national symbol, Cuba, despite odds, still flirts with communism dictates, at least in rhetoric and official circles.   Like it or not, the magic of a free market economy as conceived by Reagan and Margaret Thatcher has apparently taken hold. The incessant jockeying of  “ bread-and-better is better than bullets” has at long last prevailed, at least in high political circles. Economic liberalization has taken hold, albeit begrudgingly in many nations and circles, as deregulation of financial and real sectors took hold, divesting state investment to usher in efficiency and incentive for investors became catchphrases towards the end of the 20^th century. With time, however, economic realities tend to take courses that are diametrically opposite  to those  promised to ardent seekers of change. Apparently, leaving the  market to the forces of an  ‘invisible hand’,  does not always, if at all, do the wonders of allocating resources to the most needy sectors; rather  as abundant evidence has shown, opens the Pandora’s box of economic, social, and political malaise, from which many a nation that  pell-mell threw its weight behind the  free market have often been forced to revisit not only the concept, but the practicality in a world incomplete, thin, or no markets at all in many a product, input and services, in which transactions are conducted in developing economies. In a word, we are at the cross roads today. While many owners of immense capital continue to bandy about the idea that freeing markets is the magic wand, call it the hard and fast fix to all economic, and social woes, rising numbers are questioning the very rationale of it. Communism with the command state was the first casualty;  slowly but surely sweet romanticism with  laissez  faire capitalism is all but flickering  out.

 It is difficult for longtime workers in multitude of dingy Russian Federation coalmines, to imagine losing the meager social security they have, at the time when their small real wages have been truncated by rising inflation. The case is not any difficult in Ukraine, whose only hope perhaps, today, is a corrupt free democratic society. Even here, the way Yuschennko handles Industries in the East, will determine whether he will lead Ukraine out of poverty or propel the impoverished nation into deeper economic, social and political quagmire. Privatization has become a bitter word n many a moths, these days. Be an antagonist and you win votes, be a proponent, and you write your political obituary. If that is the world today, can one unequivocally say, the 1950s are beckoning once again?  Those days when state had overpowering control over economic, social, political, even cultural life? Well maybe not quite to the letter. The world then as now, was under the tutelage of the industrialized nations. Few nations such as Indonesia, Egypt, India, Pakistan, defunct Yugoslavia, were already holding their heads high as strongly nationalistic, and ready, if need be, to go it alone. This was more than evidenced by the Asia –Africa conference of 1955, when President Soekarno, Prime Minister  Jawahru Nehru,  Gamel Abdel Nasser, and Josip Broz Tito, of Indonesia, India, Egypt, and now  defunct Jugoslavia, respectively, among others, took chances to chart a new course, which they hoped, was in the interest of de-colonized nations. The conference led to the founding of the Non Aligned movement, which, as its name denotes, was supposed to display impartiality to either political block then in ascendance. The conditions underlying the formation of the non-aligned movement o purported to exercise was characterized by a bitter divide between nations that saw capitalism as the way forward for the better of mankind, North American and Western European nations trying their might to win over as many nations as they could to their side, an exercise that was echoed in  former Eastern block and Soviet nations.  The move was of strategic importance for several reasons. By declaring their non-alignment, the move sent a signal to big nations that ‘we are not ready to become subservient again’. The expectation was that common ground would be taken on issues that pitted the capitalist camp on one hand, and the Communist camp, on the other.  One surmised developing nations, would play the capitalist camp against the communist camp to their advantage. Did things go as expected? Perhaps not. For several reasons. It was difficult to figure out what   role the non aligned movement would play on the international scene, once the deliberations were over, and delegates went   home to juggle solutions to economic, social and political difficulties that were both common and unique to them. Perhaps, another mishap, was that some leaders thought of the organization as a way to catapult themselves from national to international leaders, which itself meant that some nations had to agree to a truncation of their independence for the common good of a solid non aligned movement.

One cant forget to note that coming as it did, just in the thick and thin of the raging de-colonization movement especially in Africa, some eyes the budding states as potential satellite states to fulfill their megalomaniac ambitions. This feeling definitely threw off many potential enthusiasts from not just signing treaty to join the organization, but play an active role in it. That explains why many a small nation, decided to continue working with a strong former trusted colonial power, rather than throw themselves into the stranglehold of potential empire builders. Another problem with the organization was that the leaders on the forefront saw it as an avenue to vent their anti-imperialism sentiments, which was noble and good. The problem was that the communists, though not entirely supportive of their ambitions, didn’t show as vehement opposition to its principles, as it did with the capitalist camp.  The capitalist camp didn’t fail to see a tenuous sharing of a common goal between dictates of non-alignment and saving the workers of the world from Imperialist yoke, championed by the Eastern Bloc nations. Political and eventually military support often came from the communist countries to aid the non-aligned cause, which created a wedge between avowed members of the organization and the west. Without plan of action to further its goals, and sandwiched between the East and West in international forums, no plans of action, not sufficient funds to pursue any concrete plans duly because of its closeness to the impoverished Eastern bloc, the non-aligned movement only served the landmark as an assorted assemblage of fiery leaders, with ambitions plans but hardly any concrete strategy to realize them. So as we commemorate 50 years of Bandung Asia Africa conference, reflections should focus on what went wrong! Why a noble goal can end up becoming a loud sounding, but hardly hard-hitting paper tiger? The role to be played by the non-aligned world in the new world economy of a single superpower (single  economic bloc) is awaited. At a time when the largest communist nation is the largest recipient of foreign direct investment, and others are trying to emulate what it has done to achieve that, irrespective of ‘overt’ political inclinations. Let us wait for the memorable communiqué that will be issued by the dedicated delegates. It should be encouraging if a redefinition of the non-aligned movement takes center stage, to give a new lease of life to the all but dormant organization. Otherwise, if it will be business as usual, this once again will be nothing more than pomp and pageantry with no substantial long-term benefits to people in the developing world, and a huge waste of the scarce resources. It is an opportunity cost developing nations can’t afford today.  

 

 

s the ‘hiccup’ in Sino-Japanese relations a storm in tea cup?

Looking at 2004 WTO figures on global trade, one is stunned at the breakneck speed at which the Chinese economy is galloping away. The value of imports and exports reached  US$1283.8 billion and US$1248 billion, respectively, which in fact puts  China into World’s number three trading nation, behind the United States , and Germany.  This catapults the US$1.2 trillion r economy to behind USA, and Germany in that order. GDP growth projections for the first quarter are turning out to be too conservative as the economy reaches full throttle growth nearing double-digit figures.  It is not surprising that many nations are trying their best to join the fray by undertaking direct investments, China is Number one investment destination in the developing world; become sources of imports of raw materials, machinery, technology, and so on for its apparently insatiable economic engine that is literally running at six-piston speed.

Not a single World-class manufacturer hasn’t made forays into China. From  Renowned enterprises in plastic surgery salons, are as jockeying for a notch in the rapidly  growing economy as are  makers of pharmaceuticals, automobiles, electronics,  computer hardware and software, name it. China economy has become so important that even British based MG  Rover had great expectation of overcoming its woes through a deal, that is now dead and buried, from a Chinese Auto maker. Doubtless, the new millennium is proving the dictum often quoted by political economists that  what is  permanent is not friendship but national interest,  friends change as the source and focus of national interest changes,  and apparently this time economic interest a prevails over other forms. China is on the road to  patching up long-running border dispute  with India which  saw three cross-border wars in the last millennium  between the two nations,  to boost bilateral trade in fields of  finance, civil aviation, education, science and technology, tourism, and cultural ties.  The volume of  Sino-India  trade stood at US$13.6 billion, and is projected to reach US$20 billion thanks to the new arrangements. India’s Software and information technology industry will prove very beneficial   to China’s burgeoning rapidly growing information and telecommunications industry, provide cheap training ground for China’s diligent labor force, and exports.

 

Of course China has its eyes set on the Diamond cutting industry, too, expertise from which should be invaluable. The rapidly growing middle class in India should provide tourism dollars to the Panda bear loving nation. Moreover, India second only to China as World’s populous nation, and both registering phenomenal growth, should boost the bargaining force of both nations, in a geopolitical sense, but more importantly bolster economic leverage in Asia, and the world at large.   Australia is reported to have embarked on trade talks with China, after the ‘perfunctory’ recognition of China as a market economy. One should not forget that Australia clinched the multi-billon dollar deal to supply natural gas to China, a surprise to Indonesia, also a contender, reckoned to have the largest natural gas reserves. The ASEAN 10 are not sitting on their laurels either. Well if you find it hard to beat a rival, which not join with him, is an apt description. Talks are underway to establish a free trade area to Include China, along side Japan, and Korea, three of the four Asia’s source of economic growth. China should benefit from such an arrangement through lower tariffs on Chinese exports , technological and technical expertise transfer from Japan and South  Korea.

 

However, things may not be that rosy in the long haul as China’s economic muscle is translated into political power , at the regional and World level. Well, remember, China continues to be the largest and now , the most successful, communist state, with all the implications such a status may have on the kaleidoscope of the regional and World political, economic, and military chessboard.

 

There are indications that China sees Japan as the largest stumbling block in its ambitions to become regional power, which can only be achieved after bringing Taiwan to its knees. The reaction of Japan to China communist party resolution that obliges Taiwan not to secede from the mainland or else face military confrontation,  overwhelmingly passed by the  recent national party convention. Japan saw such a move as  endangering  regional stability, which of course didn’t go down well with China, considering the fact that was the stance taken by the United States. So, Japan is seen as  a thorn in the fresh of China’s ambitions. This explains why a fracas over a history textbook, recently sanctioned by the Japanese government evoked quite vehement reaction from China, which wasn’t the case few years back. Then it was only South Koreans who engaged in running battles with riot police to quell their anguish at what they saw as glossing over Japan’s history. One would argue that this time the history book was exacerbated by Japanese claim over an outcrop in the seawaters that separates the two nations, coupled by allowing Japanese companies to embark on exploring offshore gas in an area that is under dispute between the two nations. Yet, the scale and intensity of  protests in China, apparently backed by Official circles, evident in a remark by Prime Minister Chen Wen  Jiabao that called on Japan to live up to its past, shows that the demonstrations may not be just caused by a history text book that glosses over history, rather far deep-seated issues. This was made the more clear by remarks credited to the Chinese Prime Minister which in effect  called on Japan to re-think  its  ambition to become a permanent member on the security council. So the widespread protests against Japan and its businesses in China, which are impossible to conceive without being stage-managed from official circles, is another manifestation of the nascent rivalry between the two nations. And this is worrying not only to Japan, but to neighboring countries. For if such action can be allowed against Japan, number one investor in China, what can other nations without as much economic leverage, expect from their strong neighbor?

 

Of course Taiwan benefits from a tense relationship between Japan and China as Japan should become more opposed to China’s re-unification ambitions at least for national interest. Reorienting investment to other countries in the sub-region, though may benefit  recipient nations,  but overall may not induce as high  world economic growth as is the case today in China, thus not in World’s interest. And we know how China has boosted many a weakening economy as growth sucks in million tons of raw materials, machinery, technical expertise, name it.

 

What is difficult, is  to contemplate  the response that Japan, the second largest Economy, will take in the long term.. There haven’t been any widespread protests in Japan save minor Vandalism and attempt to commit suicide by one irked Japanese national. Yet, it cant be ruled out that, Japan end up may re-orienting  its investment policy from China, which may become Its Frankenstein Monster, to other smaller nations, and India, with lesser potential economic and military threats.  Perhaps, the forthcoming meeting and trade pact between Japan and India, may be the beginning of realization of such a policy. Moreover, the unexpected nosedive in the relations between China and Japan, may send some rancor among Japanese, especially the ultra conservatives, who yearn for the glorious past. Calls for a more active and strong military establishment may overtime become  acceptable to the hitherto pacifist majority. There is already a precedent, when Japan for the first time sent its Self defense force to Iraq to keep peace. So, to rule out a reorientation of Japanese military establishment under the current and future  uncertain circumstances, maybe forgetting a lot of history that has shaped  our lives.

 

Hopefully, things wont have to go that far as calls from many sources are   imploring China and Japan to iron out the  ‘hiccups’ in their relations for  the  good of  humanity. And fortunately Japanese Prime Koizumi and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao have expressed acceptance to attend the forthcoming Asia-Africa summit slated for April 23-24. It is an opportunity that shouldn’t be missed to avert yet another convulsion in our already conflict riddled world. It is an opportunity; the Indonesian President should take to display not only his election winning skills, but also mediation and international diplomacy. It should be an invaluable achievement to be written in the annuals of the rejuvenated Asia-Africa cooperation. Surely, the world is large enough for all nations to live amicably.