Sunday Posts

It was fascinating to watch the very public breakdown of US-Ukraine relationship yesterday. It was realpolitik in real time. There are many explanations on offer, but I shall reject both the extremes. Trump was not standing up for the American people, and neither is he a 'Russian asset'. In this season of conspiracy theories, I have one to offer: That he pushed for a minerals deal, putting American business interests ahead of anything, and his administration realised that either such a deal is not on offer (without security guarantees) or not practical, and perhaps both. In that sense, US-Ukraine relationship did not break down in that extraordinary press meet at the White House, it had broken down much earlier when this quid pro quo was established. There is obvious moral outrage in Europe about Putin winning. But there is a practical side of it too: For too long, Europeans, and particularly Western Europeans, have enjoyed a lifestyle whose burdens were borne by other people. ...

One of the great regrets of my life has been that history ended too soon. I was not even out of college when Soviet Union collapsed, and all ideology seemed to end. Everyone, right and left, agreed that there is no point arguing about how to build a good society and all difference is about the difference in emphasis. But I was already past twenty and arrived in this post-ideology world rather stuck in old-fashioned cocktail of idealism, values etc.  Worse still, I found my nirvana in Internet. That became my place to run away from life. My Indian suburban life, all its expectations, restrictions and pre-conceptions, could be left behind at the first crack of modem handshake. After that, I was transported to the world where people spoke my language, a different type of friendship, dream of an unmoored life. I could be ideological again, at least for those connection minutes I could afford to pay for.  But then it became more user-friendly. The browser was the start of the frami...

We are all watching Kyiv with horror.  Were we not supposed look forward a spring of openness, after two years of staying home and washing hands? Instead, we are peering into a new normal, of which we know nothing of and never expected. Not everyday one sees a country invade another. Further, not everyday one sees a big country being invaded, with no clear plans of an exit. This is where the war on Ukraine most crucially differ from all the other wars I have seen in my lifetime. What is Vladimir Putin is trying to do? Is it just regime change in Kyiv, as Americans tried to achieve, and miserably failed as a consequence, in Iraq and Libya? But warped as his vision may be, he sure knows the practical consequences of regime change: That a Russian-installed government will have no legitimacy and they will end as badly as they did before, in Kyiv!  Or, is he just trying to divide Ukraine along East-West lines and control the access to Black Sea? Whether that objective calls for a g...

The simmering geopolitical tensions between India and China came to blows earlier this week, but then didn't. As the deaths of personnel being mourned in both countries, the leaders were sensible enough to walk back from the brink, recognising the futility of the conflict. However, while a hot war looks unlikely, the countries are likely to settle for another long period of disengagement and conflict. And, it seems the way it should be : Two emerging countries vying for global roles, with thousands of miles of common but unsettled borders and burning jealousy of trade are destined for conflict. Besides, the incompatible political systems, democratic India versus communist China, are supposed to engage - so say the commentators - in twentyfirst century's defining battle. But is this the way it must be? The current conflict seemed to have emerged from India's US pivot, a shift of foreign policy dating back to the 2008 Nuclear Treaty with US, which pulled India into the orbit ...

Given that there is no dearth of bad news, I was not paying attention to the steadily rising din of the China-India conflict in the Himalayas. I surmised - and remain of the same opinion - that the skirmishes wouldn't come to much. China has enough on its plate, with its trade war with America and unrest in Hong Kong, to start yet another conflict. And, while the current regime in India loves a little war, but taking on China is a completely different thing compared to needling a weak Pakistan. My expectations, therefore, were that both sides would play for the gallery a bit and then step back from the brink as they have always done in the past. But blood has been spilled! The news that Indian (and possibly Chinese) soldiers were killed in the skirmish yesterday changes things. Indeed, I would still expect that the cooler heads will prevail and the Army commanders will be able to de-escalate the situation, but a new line has been crossed. It is in everyone's interest that these...

 History is the result of human actions, but not of human design, wrote Friedrich Von Hayek. ‘Brexit’ bears that out. Globalisation was not supposed to go backward. The Lisbon Treaty of 2007 included Article 50, the option to exit. But that was never meant to be invoked. The British politicians demanded it to sell the treaty at home, but it was always assumed that once done, the British public would always stop at ‘we can go but why should we’ thought. But 2015 was not 2007. A lot changed, and three things, in particular, wrecked that cosy assumption. The First and the most obvious one is immigration. The expansive Blair-Bush foreign policy encouraged the EU to expand East and Southwards, adding 10 new countries in 2004. Free movement rights into Britain for the citizens of the new member states sent in, against the plan for a few thousand, a million new migrants. The second – and the most painful – factor was the 2008 recession. Yet it’s the aftermath that m...

Every year, governments of various Indian states roll out the red carpet for its diaspora. The shining, the leading, the welcoming and the emerging compete to attract the attention of prodigal sons (and some daughters), putting up ever better shows and ever sweeter promises. Hundreds of MoUs get signed and Ministers get their headlines for bringing jobs and prosperity. And, then, carpets are rolled up, everyone goes home and mostly nothing happens. It is tempting to think that this is typical of government jamborees, but this also reflects how India treats its diaspora. Despite all the new-found love, India never had a Deng Xiao Ping moment of wanting to learn from the diaspora. While it is country with a large English-educated young population, which is expected to be footloose, it has treated its diaspora with a mix of indifference - these are the people who left - and greed - whose remittances home kept the exchange rate in check. But while it wanted its money, its opinions ...

Imran Khan's ascension to Premiership in Pakistan could have been a great democratic moment: An elected government completed its term, only the second time in the country's history; the two dynastic parties, who took turns in government during the democratic intervals in-between Military rule ever since the 1970s, were defeated and replaced by a charismatic man with a track record of professional success and reputation of determination and commitment. In a society where the love of Cricket unites the all the diverse groups and classes, Imran is supposed to have a unique appeal; and, his charm, uniquely among all Pakistani politicians, extend to India.   But it is not. Mr Khan is widely seen as a stooge of the Pakistani army, the election rigged in his favour by the Generals. In Pakistan and abroad, his elevation was seen to be illegitimate, and instead of a promise of peace, it is seen as a portentous moment of conflict. Rather than being a moment of celebration of the b...

Is Donald Trump mad? That's the question that popped out in my mind as I engaged with the very unlikely New York Times piece When The Leader of the Free World is an Ugly American ,which argues that Trump's Foreign Policy approach is consistent - contrary to the claims made by the Foreign Policy establishment in America and elsewhere - with the longstanding American approach that put the American national interest above everything else. It is powerfully argued, and maintains that the Liberal commentators may be getting fooled by their own rhetoric of globalism. Can this indeed be right that there is method in Trump's madness, or what is portrayed as madness? Indeed, it is rather easy to convince myself that Trump is mad if I look at Facebook. A number of Facebook posts confirm a number of psychologists said so. Indeed, we are at a time of implosion of Facebook itself, proving that it may be just showing you what you already believe. So, more you click on posts t...

It is possible to see the recent history as an interplay between Politics and Economics, and 2016 as some kind of inflection point that made politics interesting again. Allowing for a broad generalisation, my point is that the narrative of harmonised economic interest keeping the status quo, which effectively meant a professional political class indulging in risk-free politics, is no longer the only story in town after 2016. The broad consensus that kept emotions out and interests predominant in public affairs has taken a serious beating in Brexit, Trump and myriad other political changes around the world. This includes the failed bids too, as Marine Le Pen reaching second round or AfD entering Parliament make politics something that all intelligent people should be engaged into.  And, yet, if the 2016 was only the beginning, the events in Catalonia yesterday mark a political turn that all the preceding events pointed to. Whether or not this really leads to a Catalan sece...

The world of politics is changing profoundly. It is not just about the rise of the strongmen rulers - President Xi of China, Prime Minister Abe of Japan, Prime Minister Modi of India or President Duterte of Philippines - or their perennially ubiquitous counterparts in Mr Putin, Mr Erdoğan , Mr Netanyahu and Mr Zuma. The shift that we are seeing is more than the shocks, such as Brexit or a Trump Presidency, or the ascendance of extreme nationalists like Marine Le Pen in France, Geert Wilders in Netherlands or Nobert Hoffer in Austria. The anti-Semitic rallies in Poland, the authoritarian Viktor Orbán in Hungary, the absurd Beppe Grillo in Italy and the abhorrent Golden Dawn in Greece are all part of a big shift, which is not just about the rise of nationalism and breakdown of the post-war institutions. There may be a more fundamental shift underway. Discussion about such a shift is not new. This has been discussed in the scholarly circles for some time. But, since the last year, ...