By PRITAM S RANA
Ever since the US president decided to topple Saddam Hussein using military force, Iraq has become a huge mess. The recent decision by President Bush to change the leadership of US commanders in the region will also yield little positive result if the same policy is pursued to control the insurgency and keep Iraq intact.
In 2003, US president Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair agreed to mount military operation to topple Saddam Hussein, who was increasingly defying US pressure. The US and allied military analysts calculated that Saddam's potential stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons could be lethal if they were provided to Al Qaida. Although lacking evidence linking Al Qaida with the Saddam regime, the US planners decided to go against Iraq despite outright opposition from many European and other countries. The decision proved costly.
Although the US and British forces quickly defeated Saddam's defenders who were greatly weakened by years of sanctions, they were faced by a brutal insurgency by Iraqis who were either Saddam loyalists, Sunnis and Shiite paramilitaries. As the US attempted to set up a democratic political system in a country long ruled by an iron-fisted dictator, the much oppressed Shiites emerged as the majority ethnic group. The shift in political power from Sunni-dominated Saddam regime to Shiites was widely resented among the Sunni community, which constituted the second largest ethnic group. Fearing dominance by Shiites, Sunnis launched a brutal insurgency, which was also backed by Al Qaida led but now deceased Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. The third major ethnic group, the Kurds were Washington's allies against Saddam regime. They were already in a tussle with Sunnis over control of major oilfields in northern Iraq.
Iraq's three major ethnic groups were kept in a tight grip under Saddam's totalitarian rule. Once Saddam was gone, the communities began to reassert their roles and soon found themselves at each other's throats. Today there are Sunni and Shiite paramilitaries killing each other. Besides attacking US troops, bomb blasts, mortar attacks, drive-by shootings occur almost everyday in Baghdad and other cities. The life of ordinary Iraqis have been reduced to a hell with possibly hundreds of thousands of Iraqis already dead since 2003.
So, what is Washington's goal in Iraq? It can be said that initially in 2003, the US administration thought of getting rid of Saddam first. He was thought to be a too dangerous old enemy in post 9/11 world, a regional threat and possible Al Qaida partner. President Bush might also have thought that he could democratize Iraq after Saddam was flushed out. A new democratic Iraq, a partner in the Global War on Terror, could possibly be an example in the whole Middle East. Leftists and anti-US theorists have always argued that Iraq's oil wealth was great motivating factor for Washington's invasion of Iraq. They have said that the US wanted lucrative oil and rebuilding contracts including the entry of US multinationals into Iraq.
The US troops in Iraq are widely resented as occupiers by ordinary Iraqis. The insurgents seek to create maximum US casualties in order to force it leave Iraq. It was reported that President Bush has decided to replace top US commander in Iraq and also the theater commander who oversees the war in Afghanistan. The previous commanders are said to have favored US troop cuts which is also being demanded by the new Democrat majority Congress in the US. Appointing new commanders but pursuing same old policy may not help Washington. Besides, President Bush is said to favor increasing US troops in Iraq.
If the US leaves Iraq tomorrow, it is not at likely the killing would stop. In fact the US troops along with the fledgling Iraqi security forces are trying to curb sectarian violence. But past reports of Iraqi security men being involved in kidnapping and execution of rival ethnic groups is truly a disturbing sign. If Iraqis can't live together anymore, they may have to be divided permanently. Killings cannot continue in the name of preserving the territorial integrity of Iraq. Three states, one each for the Shiites, Sunnis and the Kurds can be carved out. However, the fair distribution of natural resources including oil would be a mounting challenge for the three communities, which could fuel more conflict.
One of the lamest arguments in Iraq is the blame that the US was somehow responsible for the horrendous civilian casualties, which are being in fact perpetrated by Iraqi insurgents. Analysts have argued that Iraq was a powder keg from much early on. It is said that just like former Yugoslavia, which was at peace with itself only under iron-fisted rule of Tito, ethnic animosities in Iraq was only subdued under Saddam's total dictatorship. One way or another, if Saddam had been toppled from within, Iraq would have easily exploded into a full-fledged civil war.
Elsewhere, the US failure to capture Osama bin Laden and Mullah Mohammed Omar is also eroding US credibility. With titanic intelligence budget and resources, failure to hunt down these men has put a question mark on US and NATO military operations in Afghanistan. The US technological edge and its superiority in trained manpower have not been successful to capture these fugitives in the barren mountains of Afghan-Pakistan border. Once US warfighters get grid coordinates of possible bin Laden hideout, they are supposed to swoop down like eagles and take'em out much in the same fashion as Zarqawi was eliminated last year in Iraq. To the chagrin of US commanders, this has not happened yet.
The US, however, seemed more successful in the Horn of Africa. Ethiopia, acting as a US proxy, recently wiped out Islamist forces from Somalia aiding a secular government to take power. A purported Al Qaida video tape recently showed its no.2, Ayman al-Zaywairi, urging Muslims to pounce upon the Ethiopians. As the Ethiopian juggernaut rolled into Somalia driving away the Islamists, US Navy warships blocked sea routes to check the escape of Islamists by sea. Al Qaida wanted Somalia to become the "Mecca of the Mujahedeen", alas it has failed for now. But, Somalis resent Ethiopians and this resentment and the backing of Islamists by Ethiopia's northern neighbor Eritrea should be a cause of concern for the Bush administration and Adis Ababa.
Beginning from January 9, 2007, US Special Forces aviation units have conducted a series of airstrikes have hit several Somali villages thought to be hideouts of Al Qaida operatives. A prominent Al Qaida figure, Fazul Abdullah Mohammed was reportedly killed by a US helicopter raid in southern Somalia recently. The US Joint Task Force Horn of Africa based in Djibouti, a former French colony, is active to hunt down the likes of Mohammed, who the US authorities say was behind 1998 bombings of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.
The US is engaged in a global struggle with Islamists while on the other hand it is mired in domestic unrest involving massive violence in Iraq. While Washington may have moral high ground in its war against the merciless Islamists, its policies in Iraq will continue to receive criticism as the killings continue unabated.
Wednesday, August 06, 2008
China defying world by persecuting Tibetans
--Pritam S Rana
Reports by news agencies (and those posted on local news portals in Nepal – e.g. “e-kantipur”) outline unspeakable cruelty displayed by Chinese authorities against Tibetans attempting to escape flee China. Such acts of inhumanity cannot be permitted to pass.
According to reports, a group of about 70 Tibetan refugees including women, children and monks tried to cross into Nepal from the Tibet, on Saturday. Chinese soldiers having prior information of the flight “arrived with weapons and opened fire.” According to published reports, about 40 refugees managed to cross into Nepal while two were reportedly killed. Additionally, 2 others have gone “missing.”
While the world is focused on conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan, Darfur, Sri Lanka and other hot spots, Tibet remains till this day, under a brutal occupation. The Chinese entered Tibet with military forces in 1950 and consolidated it after 1959.
China’s indifference towards the people of Tibet is reflected by Saturday’s tragic event. In stark contrast to universally accepted standards, Chinese soldiers chose to mow down fleeing and unarmed Tibetans for what was termed a ‘border violation’. Despite the modernity of their economic enterprise, the Chinese seem wed to the Stalinist dictum of keeping foreigners out and insiders within. The actions of China’s border troops show parallels with the attitudes of KGB (border guards).
China may think that its economic prowess and its capacity as the world’s largest market gives it the go ahead to suppress the Tibetan people. It is now an established fact that China has colonized Tibet with Han Chinese to such an extent that Tibetans are now a minority in their own homeland.
Tibetans are in such a sorry predicament that no country in the world (including the United Sates) is openly willing to challenge China on its Tibet policy. The US needs China’s vast market to sell its produce while other major European powers also do not want to antagonize China for fear of economic retaliation. China, as the largest holder of the US Treasury’s 30-year bond, exercises considerable leverage not just in bi-lateral regional trade, but truly in the smooth functioning of the entire global economy.
Owing to China’s increasing economic might, the cause for Tibetan freedom is now championed only by individuals and diminishing groups. They do not receive government support, for fear of antagonizing China. And despite the Tibetan spiritual leader (the Dalai Lama’s) heightened stature as a Nobel laureate, the cause he champions appears to be losing momentum.
China’s reaction towards the Dalai Lama has been harsh. Beijing puts pressure on foreign governments not to welcome the Dalai Lama in their countries. Such pressure is acutely felt in countries like Nepal which are forced to bow down to Beijing in the name of ‘peaceful coexistence.’
Beijing’s propaganda in tandem with the aid it provides to Nepal has been consistent over the years. The leftist and communists in Nepal have steadfastly backed China’s claim to Tibet. Nepal has held a long relationship with both China and India. Nepal was a trade partner and co-belligerents in different wars of the past. Nepal is one of the few countries besides India, which can trace the independence and sovereignty of Tibet in the past through a careful study of history. Despite China’s constant claim that Tibet was forever part of China, historical analysis reveals that Tibet was only an ally of China during its wars with Nepal. In fact, the China laid claim on Tibet after the Tibetans asked for Chinese military assistance during a war with Nepal. The Chinese simply decided never to leave.
It was a miserable decision by the former Nepali government to close the Tibetan contact offices in Nepal. Tibetan people are Nepal’s earliest neighbors. Many ethnic groups in Nepal (including the renowned Sherpas and Tamangs) are said to have migrated to Nepal from Tibet. Nepalis and Tibetans have fraternal relations that go as far back as the time of the Lichhavi King Amshuvarma who married his daughter Bhrikuti to the Tibetan King Srong Chong Gampo.
The Chinese on the other hand, came into contact with the Nepalis only after the Tibetans felt threatened by Nepal’s expansionist policies in the 18th century. Tibet sought military support from China, which brought them to Nepal’s border at that time.
It is commonly held misperception that the Tibetans and Chinese are one people or of the same stock. The language, script and culture stand wide apart when these two peoples are compared. The current existence of Tibetans as a Chinese minority is but a recent invention.
For a country like Nepal, it cannot allow Tibetan freedom fighters to operate from within its borders. In the past, Tibetan Khampas (supported by the CIA) had launched anti-Chinese operations from inside Nepal’s borders.
However, as is the case today (as it was then), Nepal’s geo-strategic position does not permit any actions that could potentially provoke China. But, this should not stop Nepal from providing moral support to the beleaguered Tibetans.
China has no right to ask Nepal not to allow such figures as Dalai Lama into the country. It also cannot ask Nepal not to accept Tibetan refugees, from entering Nepal.
There have been incidences of Nepali security agencies arresting and deporting Tibetan refugees back into China. These kinds of activities cannot be condoned as they violate internationally accepted human rights standards and humanitarian laws.
As a self-declared loktantric nation, Nepal cannot be seen enforcing hypocritical standards in aid of draconian Chinese policies in Tibet. Nepal should not be an accessory to such immoral and despicable activities. Human and political rights are not just for the Nepalis, the Tibetans in Nepal should enjoy these rights are well. As a secular state, there should not be prohibitions on Tibetan refugees gathering at Boudhha during Dalai Lama’s birthday celebration.
Nepal and Nepalis should learn to tolerate and show solidarity to the Tibetan people if we are expect similar support during the hour of their need. Conflicting standards that tout universal human rights and freedoms for purposes of convenience are morally unacceptable.
When it comes to the issue of Tibetan refugees seeking asylum in Nepal, our rights activists need to do much more to ensure their rights are protected. Moral pressure from American Senators or Indian politicians should not be our guiding principles. Rather, our own conscience should guide Nepal’s policy on Tibetan refugees.
(Note from the Nepal Horizons Editorial Team:The views and opinion expressed in this artice are that of the author and not of NHC. We request individuals with interest in Nepal to submit their views on contemporary Nepalese issues to the following e-mail address: editor@nepalhorizons.com. Pictures of contributors or images that relate to submissions are welcome).
Reports by news agencies (and those posted on local news portals in Nepal – e.g. “e-kantipur”) outline unspeakable cruelty displayed by Chinese authorities against Tibetans attempting to escape flee China. Such acts of inhumanity cannot be permitted to pass.
According to reports, a group of about 70 Tibetan refugees including women, children and monks tried to cross into Nepal from the Tibet, on Saturday. Chinese soldiers having prior information of the flight “arrived with weapons and opened fire.” According to published reports, about 40 refugees managed to cross into Nepal while two were reportedly killed. Additionally, 2 others have gone “missing.”
While the world is focused on conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan, Darfur, Sri Lanka and other hot spots, Tibet remains till this day, under a brutal occupation. The Chinese entered Tibet with military forces in 1950 and consolidated it after 1959.
China’s indifference towards the people of Tibet is reflected by Saturday’s tragic event. In stark contrast to universally accepted standards, Chinese soldiers chose to mow down fleeing and unarmed Tibetans for what was termed a ‘border violation’. Despite the modernity of their economic enterprise, the Chinese seem wed to the Stalinist dictum of keeping foreigners out and insiders within. The actions of China’s border troops show parallels with the attitudes of KGB (border guards).
China may think that its economic prowess and its capacity as the world’s largest market gives it the go ahead to suppress the Tibetan people. It is now an established fact that China has colonized Tibet with Han Chinese to such an extent that Tibetans are now a minority in their own homeland.
Tibetans are in such a sorry predicament that no country in the world (including the United Sates) is openly willing to challenge China on its Tibet policy. The US needs China’s vast market to sell its produce while other major European powers also do not want to antagonize China for fear of economic retaliation. China, as the largest holder of the US Treasury’s 30-year bond, exercises considerable leverage not just in bi-lateral regional trade, but truly in the smooth functioning of the entire global economy.
Owing to China’s increasing economic might, the cause for Tibetan freedom is now championed only by individuals and diminishing groups. They do not receive government support, for fear of antagonizing China. And despite the Tibetan spiritual leader (the Dalai Lama’s) heightened stature as a Nobel laureate, the cause he champions appears to be losing momentum.
China’s reaction towards the Dalai Lama has been harsh. Beijing puts pressure on foreign governments not to welcome the Dalai Lama in their countries. Such pressure is acutely felt in countries like Nepal which are forced to bow down to Beijing in the name of ‘peaceful coexistence.’
Beijing’s propaganda in tandem with the aid it provides to Nepal has been consistent over the years. The leftist and communists in Nepal have steadfastly backed China’s claim to Tibet. Nepal has held a long relationship with both China and India. Nepal was a trade partner and co-belligerents in different wars of the past. Nepal is one of the few countries besides India, which can trace the independence and sovereignty of Tibet in the past through a careful study of history. Despite China’s constant claim that Tibet was forever part of China, historical analysis reveals that Tibet was only an ally of China during its wars with Nepal. In fact, the China laid claim on Tibet after the Tibetans asked for Chinese military assistance during a war with Nepal. The Chinese simply decided never to leave.
It was a miserable decision by the former Nepali government to close the Tibetan contact offices in Nepal. Tibetan people are Nepal’s earliest neighbors. Many ethnic groups in Nepal (including the renowned Sherpas and Tamangs) are said to have migrated to Nepal from Tibet. Nepalis and Tibetans have fraternal relations that go as far back as the time of the Lichhavi King Amshuvarma who married his daughter Bhrikuti to the Tibetan King Srong Chong Gampo.
The Chinese on the other hand, came into contact with the Nepalis only after the Tibetans felt threatened by Nepal’s expansionist policies in the 18th century. Tibet sought military support from China, which brought them to Nepal’s border at that time.
It is commonly held misperception that the Tibetans and Chinese are one people or of the same stock. The language, script and culture stand wide apart when these two peoples are compared. The current existence of Tibetans as a Chinese minority is but a recent invention.
For a country like Nepal, it cannot allow Tibetan freedom fighters to operate from within its borders. In the past, Tibetan Khampas (supported by the CIA) had launched anti-Chinese operations from inside Nepal’s borders.
However, as is the case today (as it was then), Nepal’s geo-strategic position does not permit any actions that could potentially provoke China. But, this should not stop Nepal from providing moral support to the beleaguered Tibetans.
China has no right to ask Nepal not to allow such figures as Dalai Lama into the country. It also cannot ask Nepal not to accept Tibetan refugees, from entering Nepal.
There have been incidences of Nepali security agencies arresting and deporting Tibetan refugees back into China. These kinds of activities cannot be condoned as they violate internationally accepted human rights standards and humanitarian laws.
As a self-declared loktantric nation, Nepal cannot be seen enforcing hypocritical standards in aid of draconian Chinese policies in Tibet. Nepal should not be an accessory to such immoral and despicable activities. Human and political rights are not just for the Nepalis, the Tibetans in Nepal should enjoy these rights are well. As a secular state, there should not be prohibitions on Tibetan refugees gathering at Boudhha during Dalai Lama’s birthday celebration.
Nepal and Nepalis should learn to tolerate and show solidarity to the Tibetan people if we are expect similar support during the hour of their need. Conflicting standards that tout universal human rights and freedoms for purposes of convenience are morally unacceptable.
When it comes to the issue of Tibetan refugees seeking asylum in Nepal, our rights activists need to do much more to ensure their rights are protected. Moral pressure from American Senators or Indian politicians should not be our guiding principles. Rather, our own conscience should guide Nepal’s policy on Tibetan refugees.
(Note from the Nepal Horizons Editorial Team:The views and opinion expressed in this artice are that of the author and not of NHC. We request individuals with interest in Nepal to submit their views on contemporary Nepalese issues to the following e-mail address: editor@nepalhorizons.com. Pictures of contributors or images that relate to submissions are welcome).
Review of an American classic
Tenessee Williams was one of the greatest southern playrights, according to wikipedia and Elements of Literature book published in New York, New York (refer Campion College, class of 1999). His Gothic style and mendacity in 'Cat on a Hot Tin Roof' is something I can't really describe at this point of time. Glass menagerie of matriarch Laura is suffocating. It is according to wikipedia, Tennessee William's own story.
Breaking of glass is symbolic, twice seen in the movie. Amanda Wingfield (Katharine Hepburn)'s absolute control of her son Tom played by Sam Waterson is outrageous. Tom is a rebel but he loves his mom. He wants to be a writer (refer wikipedia) like myself.
Laura's (Joanne Miles) character is somewhat difficult to understand. She is reared as a Christian housewife. Amanda has been to college but Laura appears totally behind the northern avante garde movement. Jim (Michael Moriarty) and Tom want to stay ahead of the bunch. They want to take rhetoric classes even though Tom is forced to work in a garage.
I also want to see the other version with (if I am not wrong, Kiefer Sutherland ref. wikipedia). Music is demure, suited to the play.
Breaking of glass is symbolic, twice seen in the movie. Amanda Wingfield (Katharine Hepburn)'s absolute control of her son Tom played by Sam Waterson is outrageous. Tom is a rebel but he loves his mom. He wants to be a writer (refer wikipedia) like myself.
Laura's (Joanne Miles) character is somewhat difficult to understand. She is reared as a Christian housewife. Amanda has been to college but Laura appears totally behind the northern avante garde movement. Jim (Michael Moriarty) and Tom want to stay ahead of the bunch. They want to take rhetoric classes even though Tom is forced to work in a garage.
I also want to see the other version with (if I am not wrong, Kiefer Sutherland ref. wikipedia). Music is demure, suited to the play.
Tuesday, August 05, 2008
When dragon snarls at eagle
-Pritam S Rana
FLASHPOINT
The United States, the world’s sole superpower and China, the economic giant and the emerging superpower, are natural adversaries. But the two countries have fought only once in a major conflict in recent history – The Korean War (1950-1953) – which resulted in a stalemate and a divided Korean peninsula. As China expands its economic power, its military too is being fed with increased budgetary allocations in a bid to modernize its armed forces. The US, on the other hand, has stretched its military forces wide across the globe, thanks to its global commitments. Washington is engaged fruitlessly in Iraq since 2003. Also, its efforts to tame opponents in Afghanistan since 2001 are also yet to succeed.
In East Asia, China has the most powerful military potential in terms of its massive population, geography, industrial capacity and sheer numbers of its armed forces personnel, which currently has 2.3 million active troops. Japan, the world’s number two economy and Washington’s chief ally in the region, although bound by a mutual security pact with the US since 1945, appears to be charting a fresh course for its foreign policy. The Japanese want to establish their own sphere of influence as evident of their wooing of other emerging powers like India. However, Japan is too weak to counter China alone. It would need US military assistance in any eventual showdown with China. Japan’s recent overtures toward India can be understood as its aim to build new alliances and reduce dependence on the US.
China is rapidly building up its military muscle. It is producing advanced combat aircraft, both of indigenous and foreign design. It also wants to build an indigenously designed aircraft carrier, a major naval force multiplier platform. China’s new aircraft carrier and its follow-ups shall boost its naval power once only equaled in the region by Imperial Japanese Navy of World War II era.
China’s traditional headache, Taiwan, although impressively armed with US weapons, is too weak to stand up to China’s military might. China has assembled a vast array of ballistic missiles ranged against Taiwan, which has the potential to paralyze Taiwan’s nerve centers in one lethal volley at short notice. The US supplied Patriot air defense batteries in Taiwanese service would be incapable of intercepting all but a few incoming Chinese warheads.
But it is not easy for China to seize Taiwan without facing massive resistance. The US, Taiwan’s traditional security gurantor, can block Chinese attempt to storm the breakaway island state. The US Pacific Fleet’s combat power is too awesome to allow Chinese ships to cross the Taiwan Straits from the mainland with ease. China also lacks a large airlift capability to mount a massive airborne operation against Taiwan. Even if China later acquires this capability, Taiwanese air force equipped with modern US and French made fighter jets, backed by US carrier based fighters, have the power to negate any such Chinese attempt to intrude Taiwanese airspace. Chinese generals, therefore, cannot hope to replicate Nazi Germany’s successful takeover of Crete in the Mediterranean at the heights of World War II (1941).
But the trend is moving toward China’s favor as it modernizes its armed forces by pouring more money from its economic success. China is rapidly inducting Russian made Su-27 ‘Flanker’, a fourth generation advanced fighter aircraft designed to best US F-15s, into its service. It is manufacturing these long endurance aircraft equipped with advanced avionics and deadly air-to-air missiles with license from cash hungry Russia. Russia is more than willing to sell advanced weaponry to China. Russia has also drastically boosted China’s ground based air defenses by supplying S300 air defense missiles systems, which also have ballistic missile defense capability.
In terms of quality military manpower, the US and Taiwan have the edge for now. For example, the US and Taiwanese pilots are better trained with more flying hours per year of training than their Chinese counterparts. But this trend is shifting as China’s new material prosperity allows it to pour more money into military training, maneuvers and more frequent rehearsals.
China and Russia recently conducted joint exercises in Chinese territory. Both Russia and China are also busy forming a counter alliance to North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The new axis, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which pairs Russia and China along with some other Central Asian states, is rapidly seeking to recruit some other remaining states into its camp, instead of them joining NATO. It is to be seen if Moscow and China’s romance would also extend to the Far East.
Keeping in mind China’s growing airpower, the US deployed advanced, radar evading F-22 Raptor interceptors in Okinawa, Japan early this year. The F-22 has just entered US Air Force service and it is the US military’s top-of-the-line silver bullet fighter aircraft. However, there are only few of them around as they are extremely expensive, only US seems to be able to afford them. Analysts said the US wants to sell these advanced warplanes to Japan. Japan’s air force currently has US supplied F-15s as its frontline fighter aircraft, which can be matched or outclassed by China’s Su-27s.
The US can also count on the powerful Japanese navy in joint maneuvers against China in any regional conflict. However, as mentioned earlier, Japan’s hawkish government under Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (Abe has resigned since) appeared to favor an independent foreign policy in recent times. It might indicate that Japan might choose not to intervene in any US-China conflict, triggered most likely by any flare-up in the Taiwan Straits. The current Japanese constitution also forbids military expeditions beyond Japanese home waters.
The most ghastly scenario would be if any armed conflict between the two giants, the US and China, extends to the Chinese mainland. The US and its ally Taiwan (provided Taiwan agrees to fight inside Chinese mainland) would fare to be caught in a protracted and costly war a.k.a. Iraq, which might eventually outlast US determination to fight. The Chinese mainland is favorable to Chinese government forces, where skillful propaganda by Beijing can portray the US as a foreign occupying power rather than any liberator of the Chinese people. The lessons of the Korean War should be too fresh in the minds of American civilian and military leaders if they choose to engage the Chinese military in their own homeland. The modern Taiwan also lacks the appeal to arouse public opinion in the mainland as it is rapidly moving toward formal independence, a break from its past Kuomintang ethos as a pan-Chinese political entity.
Despite indications that hint adversarial relationship, the US and China are firmly interlinked by trade and economic ties. Besides being the major trade partner of the US, China has bought US debt which allows financing of Washington’s war in Iraq and Afghanistan. China’s humungous foreign currency reserves which totaled some $1.33 trillion in June 2007, allows it to boost its military spending, which officially stood at $36.6 billion in 2006. The US and other observers disagree and say Beijing spends much more, perhaps two or three times more than the announced figure. The Americans and the Japanese are simply worried about growing military spending by Beijing and have warned that they might be compelled to review their own security posture if there is continued lack of transparency in this issue.
Despite occasional rifts with the US, China is no mood to fight and risk global economic collapse. The cost of such a conflict could be too heavy for the Chinese to sustain. Even if China overwhelms Taiwan with military might, it would be a pyrrhic victory, for much of the prosperous country’s spoils would be lost. Beijing, instead, wants to incorporate Taiwan peacefully in the same manner as Hong Kong and Macau. It is willing to concede total control of Taiwan, parceling out internal self rule in exchange for sovereignty. China appears to be following a course as prescribed by Sun Tzu, the classical Chinese warrior-philosopher:
“The one who figures on victory at headquarters before even doing battle is the one who has the most strategic factors on his side.”
prittwitz@hotmail.com
August 21, 2007
Edited: September 13, 2007
THE END
Pritam S Rana worked as a sub-editor for The Kathmandu Post national daily in Kathmandu, Nepal from 2004 to 2007. He is working to complete his master’s degree in political science from Tribhuvan University, Nepal. He is seeking a new writing career as he moves to the US in 2007. He has been published previously in various leading newspapers and online portals in Nepal.
FLASHPOINT
The United States, the world’s sole superpower and China, the economic giant and the emerging superpower, are natural adversaries. But the two countries have fought only once in a major conflict in recent history – The Korean War (1950-1953) – which resulted in a stalemate and a divided Korean peninsula. As China expands its economic power, its military too is being fed with increased budgetary allocations in a bid to modernize its armed forces. The US, on the other hand, has stretched its military forces wide across the globe, thanks to its global commitments. Washington is engaged fruitlessly in Iraq since 2003. Also, its efforts to tame opponents in Afghanistan since 2001 are also yet to succeed.
In East Asia, China has the most powerful military potential in terms of its massive population, geography, industrial capacity and sheer numbers of its armed forces personnel, which currently has 2.3 million active troops. Japan, the world’s number two economy and Washington’s chief ally in the region, although bound by a mutual security pact with the US since 1945, appears to be charting a fresh course for its foreign policy. The Japanese want to establish their own sphere of influence as evident of their wooing of other emerging powers like India. However, Japan is too weak to counter China alone. It would need US military assistance in any eventual showdown with China. Japan’s recent overtures toward India can be understood as its aim to build new alliances and reduce dependence on the US.
China is rapidly building up its military muscle. It is producing advanced combat aircraft, both of indigenous and foreign design. It also wants to build an indigenously designed aircraft carrier, a major naval force multiplier platform. China’s new aircraft carrier and its follow-ups shall boost its naval power once only equaled in the region by Imperial Japanese Navy of World War II era.
China’s traditional headache, Taiwan, although impressively armed with US weapons, is too weak to stand up to China’s military might. China has assembled a vast array of ballistic missiles ranged against Taiwan, which has the potential to paralyze Taiwan’s nerve centers in one lethal volley at short notice. The US supplied Patriot air defense batteries in Taiwanese service would be incapable of intercepting all but a few incoming Chinese warheads.
But it is not easy for China to seize Taiwan without facing massive resistance. The US, Taiwan’s traditional security gurantor, can block Chinese attempt to storm the breakaway island state. The US Pacific Fleet’s combat power is too awesome to allow Chinese ships to cross the Taiwan Straits from the mainland with ease. China also lacks a large airlift capability to mount a massive airborne operation against Taiwan. Even if China later acquires this capability, Taiwanese air force equipped with modern US and French made fighter jets, backed by US carrier based fighters, have the power to negate any such Chinese attempt to intrude Taiwanese airspace. Chinese generals, therefore, cannot hope to replicate Nazi Germany’s successful takeover of Crete in the Mediterranean at the heights of World War II (1941).
But the trend is moving toward China’s favor as it modernizes its armed forces by pouring more money from its economic success. China is rapidly inducting Russian made Su-27 ‘Flanker’, a fourth generation advanced fighter aircraft designed to best US F-15s, into its service. It is manufacturing these long endurance aircraft equipped with advanced avionics and deadly air-to-air missiles with license from cash hungry Russia. Russia is more than willing to sell advanced weaponry to China. Russia has also drastically boosted China’s ground based air defenses by supplying S300 air defense missiles systems, which also have ballistic missile defense capability.
In terms of quality military manpower, the US and Taiwan have the edge for now. For example, the US and Taiwanese pilots are better trained with more flying hours per year of training than their Chinese counterparts. But this trend is shifting as China’s new material prosperity allows it to pour more money into military training, maneuvers and more frequent rehearsals.
China and Russia recently conducted joint exercises in Chinese territory. Both Russia and China are also busy forming a counter alliance to North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The new axis, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which pairs Russia and China along with some other Central Asian states, is rapidly seeking to recruit some other remaining states into its camp, instead of them joining NATO. It is to be seen if Moscow and China’s romance would also extend to the Far East.
Keeping in mind China’s growing airpower, the US deployed advanced, radar evading F-22 Raptor interceptors in Okinawa, Japan early this year. The F-22 has just entered US Air Force service and it is the US military’s top-of-the-line silver bullet fighter aircraft. However, there are only few of them around as they are extremely expensive, only US seems to be able to afford them. Analysts said the US wants to sell these advanced warplanes to Japan. Japan’s air force currently has US supplied F-15s as its frontline fighter aircraft, which can be matched or outclassed by China’s Su-27s.
The US can also count on the powerful Japanese navy in joint maneuvers against China in any regional conflict. However, as mentioned earlier, Japan’s hawkish government under Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (Abe has resigned since) appeared to favor an independent foreign policy in recent times. It might indicate that Japan might choose not to intervene in any US-China conflict, triggered most likely by any flare-up in the Taiwan Straits. The current Japanese constitution also forbids military expeditions beyond Japanese home waters.
The most ghastly scenario would be if any armed conflict between the two giants, the US and China, extends to the Chinese mainland. The US and its ally Taiwan (provided Taiwan agrees to fight inside Chinese mainland) would fare to be caught in a protracted and costly war a.k.a. Iraq, which might eventually outlast US determination to fight. The Chinese mainland is favorable to Chinese government forces, where skillful propaganda by Beijing can portray the US as a foreign occupying power rather than any liberator of the Chinese people. The lessons of the Korean War should be too fresh in the minds of American civilian and military leaders if they choose to engage the Chinese military in their own homeland. The modern Taiwan also lacks the appeal to arouse public opinion in the mainland as it is rapidly moving toward formal independence, a break from its past Kuomintang ethos as a pan-Chinese political entity.
Despite indications that hint adversarial relationship, the US and China are firmly interlinked by trade and economic ties. Besides being the major trade partner of the US, China has bought US debt which allows financing of Washington’s war in Iraq and Afghanistan. China’s humungous foreign currency reserves which totaled some $1.33 trillion in June 2007, allows it to boost its military spending, which officially stood at $36.6 billion in 2006. The US and other observers disagree and say Beijing spends much more, perhaps two or three times more than the announced figure. The Americans and the Japanese are simply worried about growing military spending by Beijing and have warned that they might be compelled to review their own security posture if there is continued lack of transparency in this issue.
Despite occasional rifts with the US, China is no mood to fight and risk global economic collapse. The cost of such a conflict could be too heavy for the Chinese to sustain. Even if China overwhelms Taiwan with military might, it would be a pyrrhic victory, for much of the prosperous country’s spoils would be lost. Beijing, instead, wants to incorporate Taiwan peacefully in the same manner as Hong Kong and Macau. It is willing to concede total control of Taiwan, parceling out internal self rule in exchange for sovereignty. China appears to be following a course as prescribed by Sun Tzu, the classical Chinese warrior-philosopher:
“The one who figures on victory at headquarters before even doing battle is the one who has the most strategic factors on his side.”
prittwitz@hotmail.com
August 21, 2007
Edited: September 13, 2007
THE END
Pritam S Rana worked as a sub-editor for The Kathmandu Post national daily in Kathmandu, Nepal from 2004 to 2007. He is working to complete his master’s degree in political science from Tribhuvan University, Nepal. He is seeking a new writing career as he moves to the US in 2007. He has been published previously in various leading newspapers and online portals in Nepal.
Beefing up against Iran
The Bush administration has just made the decision to provide $20 billion worth of arms aid to Saudi Arabia and other neighboring Gulf states in a bid to strengthen their defenses against Iran. Iran, on the other hand, is adamant to continue its coveted nuclear program. The defiant Islamic republic is also spending more money to locally produce a vast array of armaments. Local production is necessitated by threat of US led sanctions. The Bush administration wants to rein in Iran's growing military power and its ambition to become a strong regional player. Washington is also concerned over Iran's influence among wartorn Iraq's Shias, with whom Iran shares cultural and religious ties.
The US and Iran are locked into a mini-Cold War. Both countries are trying to woo other regional states into their respective camps. Iran has great influence over Lebanon's powerful Shia group, the Hezbollah. Hezbollah is vociferously anti-Israel, having fought a bitter summer war with the Jewish state in 2006. It still is engaged in a deadly cat-and-mouse game with Israel on the latter's northern border with Lebanon – lobbing rockets at outlying civilian settlements there. The 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war showed that Israel's vaunted military power could not break the back of Hezbollah, which conducts lightning artillery and guerilla raids, pinpricking Israel. Iran has supplied anti-tank missiles, artillery rockets and manportable surface-to-air missiles to its pet client Hezbollah. Although Hezbollah is not directly targeting US interests, it remains on America's watch list of active terrorist groups.
Washington's principal ally among the Arab states, oil rich Saudi Arabia, is the world's leading producer and exporter of the "black gold". Ruled by the House of Sauds, a royal family, since its founding in 1911, the Saudi kingdom has been a key US client state since the end of World War II. The US established Arab American Oil Company (Aramco) in the 1930s to exploit the country's vast oil reserves. Aramco is now wholely Saudi owned. To beef up its airpower, the US supplied F-15 fighter aircraft and AWACS airborne command and control platform to the Saudis in the 1980s, despite vehement opposition from Israel, which feared growing Arab menace. Washington ostensibly wanted to secure Saudi airspace from spillover effects of the Iran-Iraq war, which raged from 1980-1988.
Iran with a population of over 65 million has a much greater military potential than Saudi Arabia or even if all the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states combined against it. Moreover, Iran is trying hard to be self-sufficient in production of weapon systems. It has also purchased MiG-29 fighter aircraft, Kilo class submarines, and T-72 tanks from Russia to boost its military power. It is thought to be co-producing many of these weapon systems under license. Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, has no industrial capacity to produce major weapon platforms. It is solely dependent on imports from the US and the UK. Saudi air force has recently ordered Eurofighter Typhoon, a European designed fifth generation combat aircraft, to replace its ageing fleet of Tornado fighters and bombers. Saudi Tornados were no match for Iran's MiG-29s, according to assessments made as early as in the 1991 Persian Gulf War. In terms of geography, both Saudi Arabia and Iran are evenly matched. Their large land area allows dispersion of military and economic infrastructure, prime targets in a major armed conflict. Iran's ports are located only in the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea while the Saudis can depend upon their Red Sea ports for resupply if any major war blocks access to the busy lanes of the Persian Gulf.
Saudi military is trained by US advisors and is equipped with latest Western weapons. Although Iranians have poorer quality weapons, they enjoy overwhelming numerical superiority against all the Gulf states combined. Iran has the ability to invade Saudi Arabia with 'human wave' tactics, employed albeit unsuccessfully against Iraq in the 1980s. The Saudis would need massive firepower to stem Iranian infantry onslaught. Iran's huge population allows it to recruit more manpower as it sustains heavy casualties, provided the mullahs and ayatollahs boost Iranian morale with intense religious fervor.
Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states would require overt US military aid to confront Iran. Iran is also busy building its ballistic missile force, a surest means to deliver nuclear warheads. Only Saudi Arabia is thought to possess Chinese supplied intermediate range ballistic missiles to reply in kind to any Iranian first strike. However, the reliability of the Chinese made missiles is an issue compared to other Western weapons in the Saudi arsenal. US naval units including aircraft carrier battle groups routinely patrol the Straits of Hormuz, the choke point leading to the Persian Gulf. Some 90 percent of world's oil supply passes through this route. Any major war or intensive mining of these waters could disrupt the global economy, especially that of Europe and Japan.
In addition to the threat posed by Iran, Saudi Arabia has other enemies linked to its homegrown opposition. The Al Qaida is trying to topple the ruling House of Saud family from power, seeking to establish a Sunni Islamic state in the country which houses Islam's two holiest sites, Mecca and Medina. This is thought to be a major objective of the transnational terror network led by the mysterious Osama bin Laden, a Saudi national. Although the Saudis, backed by American intelligence, have had recent spate of successes against homegrown Al Qaida affiliates, its threat cannot be discounted easily.
The greatest possible threat comes from a scenario when Al Qaida and Iran, somehow, patch up their differences and establish a working relationship. Both parties share common interest to mitigate US influence in the region. Therefore an alliance between these two parties is probable despite the Sunni-Shia schism apparently observed in Iraq. US commanders in Afghanistan have already pointed their fingers at Iran of aiding the Taliban, which is fighting to oust the Americans and their other foreign allies.
Iran's release of captured UK sailors some months back was a gesture of goodwill backed by force. Although Iranian leaders cannot pursue a hostile course against the West, they made a point by asserting their sovereignty over disputed waters of the Persian Gulf. But Iran cannot risk a major war. Its perceived quest for nuclear weapons can be seen as its interest to maintain regional hegemony and to counter US strategic interests.
Israel's traditional rival, Syria, can also count on Iran's support. The two nations are close allies since Iran-Iraq war and have shared interests in both Iraq and Lebanon. Syria, lacking extensive oil wealth, is much weaker than Iran. Syria lost its traditional backing after the breakup of the former Soviet Union. Its military aid pipeline was cut drastically and it had to pay cash to Moscow to order new weapons. Israel, on the other hand, enjoys continued military aid from Washington. The new scenario has increased Syria's dependence on Iran.
Once Iran acquires nuclear weapons, it will be much difficult for Washington to put pressure on it. Any US led military operations against Iran would backfire as Europe would be held hostage to Iran's nuclear strike. Iran may eventually acquire intercontinental ballistic missile capability, allowing it to directly threaten the continental United States. Such a scenario has alarmed Washington, which has pushed plans to deploy radars and anti-ballistic missile sites in Eastern Europe. But, Russia, Iran's patron is not happy over this. The Russians say the US plan is aimed against it, which Washington denies. Ultimately, Iran is gaining from this dispute. Iran also wants to acquire additional weaponry from Russia, which it can easily pay with its fat oil revenue. Iran knows it cannot prevail against the US in a frontal attack. But it acutely perceives US vulnerabilities. For example, the impact of US casualties on American public opinion is not lost in Iranian minds. Thus, in any major showdown with the US, Iran would seek to cause maximum US casualties. If a US carrier or another type of capital ship is hit hard or at best sunk, it would immediately force a humiliating withdrawal of the Americans. Such would be a great victory for Iranians as they perceive it.
However, Iran's growing young population is not as anti-US as Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad would like to see. The theocratic political leadership realizes this. The US, too, wants moderates like past Iranian president Mohammad Khatami to come back and take the yoke of Iranian leadership. Also, the pragmatist Hashemi Rafsanjani has been elected to the post of chairman of the Assembly of Experts, a most crucial Iranian political institution responsible among other things for dismissing and electing the Supreme Leader, the highest ranking political and religious authority of the Islamic state. The new development brings a ray of hope in possible warming up of ties with the West.
Real détente with the Iranians is, however, only possible through direct dialogue and success in persuading them to give up their nuclear weapons program in exchange of firm security guarantee.
THE END
Pritam S Rana worked as a sub-editor for The Kathmandu Post national daily in Kathmandu, Nepal from 2004 to 2007. He is working to complete his master’s degree in political science from Tribhuvan University, Nepal. He is seeking a new writing career as he moves to the US in 2007. He has been published previously in various leading newspapers and online portals in Nepal.
prittwitz@hotmail.com
Pritz Inc. (2007)
The US and Iran are locked into a mini-Cold War. Both countries are trying to woo other regional states into their respective camps. Iran has great influence over Lebanon's powerful Shia group, the Hezbollah. Hezbollah is vociferously anti-Israel, having fought a bitter summer war with the Jewish state in 2006. It still is engaged in a deadly cat-and-mouse game with Israel on the latter's northern border with Lebanon – lobbing rockets at outlying civilian settlements there. The 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war showed that Israel's vaunted military power could not break the back of Hezbollah, which conducts lightning artillery and guerilla raids, pinpricking Israel. Iran has supplied anti-tank missiles, artillery rockets and manportable surface-to-air missiles to its pet client Hezbollah. Although Hezbollah is not directly targeting US interests, it remains on America's watch list of active terrorist groups.
Washington's principal ally among the Arab states, oil rich Saudi Arabia, is the world's leading producer and exporter of the "black gold". Ruled by the House of Sauds, a royal family, since its founding in 1911, the Saudi kingdom has been a key US client state since the end of World War II. The US established Arab American Oil Company (Aramco) in the 1930s to exploit the country's vast oil reserves. Aramco is now wholely Saudi owned. To beef up its airpower, the US supplied F-15 fighter aircraft and AWACS airborne command and control platform to the Saudis in the 1980s, despite vehement opposition from Israel, which feared growing Arab menace. Washington ostensibly wanted to secure Saudi airspace from spillover effects of the Iran-Iraq war, which raged from 1980-1988.
Iran with a population of over 65 million has a much greater military potential than Saudi Arabia or even if all the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states combined against it. Moreover, Iran is trying hard to be self-sufficient in production of weapon systems. It has also purchased MiG-29 fighter aircraft, Kilo class submarines, and T-72 tanks from Russia to boost its military power. It is thought to be co-producing many of these weapon systems under license. Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, has no industrial capacity to produce major weapon platforms. It is solely dependent on imports from the US and the UK. Saudi air force has recently ordered Eurofighter Typhoon, a European designed fifth generation combat aircraft, to replace its ageing fleet of Tornado fighters and bombers. Saudi Tornados were no match for Iran's MiG-29s, according to assessments made as early as in the 1991 Persian Gulf War. In terms of geography, both Saudi Arabia and Iran are evenly matched. Their large land area allows dispersion of military and economic infrastructure, prime targets in a major armed conflict. Iran's ports are located only in the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea while the Saudis can depend upon their Red Sea ports for resupply if any major war blocks access to the busy lanes of the Persian Gulf.
Saudi military is trained by US advisors and is equipped with latest Western weapons. Although Iranians have poorer quality weapons, they enjoy overwhelming numerical superiority against all the Gulf states combined. Iran has the ability to invade Saudi Arabia with 'human wave' tactics, employed albeit unsuccessfully against Iraq in the 1980s. The Saudis would need massive firepower to stem Iranian infantry onslaught. Iran's huge population allows it to recruit more manpower as it sustains heavy casualties, provided the mullahs and ayatollahs boost Iranian morale with intense religious fervor.
Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states would require overt US military aid to confront Iran. Iran is also busy building its ballistic missile force, a surest means to deliver nuclear warheads. Only Saudi Arabia is thought to possess Chinese supplied intermediate range ballistic missiles to reply in kind to any Iranian first strike. However, the reliability of the Chinese made missiles is an issue compared to other Western weapons in the Saudi arsenal. US naval units including aircraft carrier battle groups routinely patrol the Straits of Hormuz, the choke point leading to the Persian Gulf. Some 90 percent of world's oil supply passes through this route. Any major war or intensive mining of these waters could disrupt the global economy, especially that of Europe and Japan.
In addition to the threat posed by Iran, Saudi Arabia has other enemies linked to its homegrown opposition. The Al Qaida is trying to topple the ruling House of Saud family from power, seeking to establish a Sunni Islamic state in the country which houses Islam's two holiest sites, Mecca and Medina. This is thought to be a major objective of the transnational terror network led by the mysterious Osama bin Laden, a Saudi national. Although the Saudis, backed by American intelligence, have had recent spate of successes against homegrown Al Qaida affiliates, its threat cannot be discounted easily.
The greatest possible threat comes from a scenario when Al Qaida and Iran, somehow, patch up their differences and establish a working relationship. Both parties share common interest to mitigate US influence in the region. Therefore an alliance between these two parties is probable despite the Sunni-Shia schism apparently observed in Iraq. US commanders in Afghanistan have already pointed their fingers at Iran of aiding the Taliban, which is fighting to oust the Americans and their other foreign allies.
Iran's release of captured UK sailors some months back was a gesture of goodwill backed by force. Although Iranian leaders cannot pursue a hostile course against the West, they made a point by asserting their sovereignty over disputed waters of the Persian Gulf. But Iran cannot risk a major war. Its perceived quest for nuclear weapons can be seen as its interest to maintain regional hegemony and to counter US strategic interests.
Israel's traditional rival, Syria, can also count on Iran's support. The two nations are close allies since Iran-Iraq war and have shared interests in both Iraq and Lebanon. Syria, lacking extensive oil wealth, is much weaker than Iran. Syria lost its traditional backing after the breakup of the former Soviet Union. Its military aid pipeline was cut drastically and it had to pay cash to Moscow to order new weapons. Israel, on the other hand, enjoys continued military aid from Washington. The new scenario has increased Syria's dependence on Iran.
Once Iran acquires nuclear weapons, it will be much difficult for Washington to put pressure on it. Any US led military operations against Iran would backfire as Europe would be held hostage to Iran's nuclear strike. Iran may eventually acquire intercontinental ballistic missile capability, allowing it to directly threaten the continental United States. Such a scenario has alarmed Washington, which has pushed plans to deploy radars and anti-ballistic missile sites in Eastern Europe. But, Russia, Iran's patron is not happy over this. The Russians say the US plan is aimed against it, which Washington denies. Ultimately, Iran is gaining from this dispute. Iran also wants to acquire additional weaponry from Russia, which it can easily pay with its fat oil revenue. Iran knows it cannot prevail against the US in a frontal attack. But it acutely perceives US vulnerabilities. For example, the impact of US casualties on American public opinion is not lost in Iranian minds. Thus, in any major showdown with the US, Iran would seek to cause maximum US casualties. If a US carrier or another type of capital ship is hit hard or at best sunk, it would immediately force a humiliating withdrawal of the Americans. Such would be a great victory for Iranians as they perceive it.
However, Iran's growing young population is not as anti-US as Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad would like to see. The theocratic political leadership realizes this. The US, too, wants moderates like past Iranian president Mohammad Khatami to come back and take the yoke of Iranian leadership. Also, the pragmatist Hashemi Rafsanjani has been elected to the post of chairman of the Assembly of Experts, a most crucial Iranian political institution responsible among other things for dismissing and electing the Supreme Leader, the highest ranking political and religious authority of the Islamic state. The new development brings a ray of hope in possible warming up of ties with the West.
Real détente with the Iranians is, however, only possible through direct dialogue and success in persuading them to give up their nuclear weapons program in exchange of firm security guarantee.
THE END
Pritam S Rana worked as a sub-editor for The Kathmandu Post national daily in Kathmandu, Nepal from 2004 to 2007. He is working to complete his master’s degree in political science from Tribhuvan University, Nepal. He is seeking a new writing career as he moves to the US in 2007. He has been published previously in various leading newspapers and online portals in Nepal.
prittwitz@hotmail.com
Pritz Inc. (2007)
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Universal Studios - Fear Station Zebra
The Simpson's ride was fantastic. At first it was very scary. Then I imagined myself as a Typhoon pilot (remembering my granddad BK Singh). The motion of the display was a breathtaking experience.
The Mummy show was too much. I just had to shut my eyes. The fear (factor) built up rapidly. I prayed.
The whole place is... I can't describe it in one entry.
The Mummy show was too much. I just had to shut my eyes. The fear (factor) built up rapidly. I prayed.
The whole place is... I can't describe it in one entry.
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Batswing
An action packed tribute to Heath Ledger. His phenomenal portrayal of anarchist Joker deserves much acclaim. Direction is superb. Music and cathartic effects combined with thrilling music produces pure magic. Christain Bale's Bruce Wayne is rather less appealing than George Clooney and Michael Keyton. But the technology is awesome. Special effects is just phenomenal. Batman's ultramodern gear compensates for Bale's rather less than powerful Wayne personality.
Joker's appearance at unlikely places, his attempted assasination of Lt. James Gordon (Gary Oldman) are some of the memorable scenes. Batman's supposed fall from grace and his pursuit by public and the media reflects the utopianist ideals of American society.
Maggie Gyllenhaal (Rachel Dawes)is simply elegant. I could not understand Harvey Dent's (Aaron Eckhart) metamorphosis into a villain. How could Joker influence him to change his ideals?
Joker's appearance at unlikely places, his attempted assasination of Lt. James Gordon (Gary Oldman) are some of the memorable scenes. Batman's supposed fall from grace and his pursuit by public and the media reflects the utopianist ideals of American society.
Maggie Gyllenhaal (Rachel Dawes)is simply elegant. I could not understand Harvey Dent's (Aaron Eckhart) metamorphosis into a villain. How could Joker influence him to change his ideals?
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Viva Gloria Estefan
Gloria Estefan is an epic artist. She represents the voice of freedom for all of us living in the free world. Her songs "Oye mi canto" and "open up your eyes, here I am standing by" are captivating. I love her for what she represents. I proudly want to invite her to inspire me to lead UDPN. She is a true diva, a motherly figure for me. Her anti-communist ideology also appeals to me. And, above all, she is a very beautiful woman.
Source: wikipedia.org
Source: wikipedia.org
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Commission for the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights
July 12, 2008
IPR is an issue of concern to everyone. In the modern world, piracy and intellectual property rights dispute is common. Nepal can be the right place to start the anti-piracy effort in the whole of Asia. Piracy affects artistes, writers, singer songwriters across the world. In order to resolve IPR disputes and claim proper compensation the Royal Nepali government should take immediate steps to establish a powerful commission for the protection of intellectual property rights. From its unique location in Nepal, the commission can direct prosecutors to even our neighboring countries India and China, where piracy is rife. If Nepalis learn to uphold IPR laws and international understanding, all the artistes and writers can benefit in terms of both recognition of their work and proper monetary compensation.
Pritam S Rana,
Partner,
Pritz Wissenschaft Inc.
IPR is an issue of concern to everyone. In the modern world, piracy and intellectual property rights dispute is common. Nepal can be the right place to start the anti-piracy effort in the whole of Asia. Piracy affects artistes, writers, singer songwriters across the world. In order to resolve IPR disputes and claim proper compensation the Royal Nepali government should take immediate steps to establish a powerful commission for the protection of intellectual property rights. From its unique location in Nepal, the commission can direct prosecutors to even our neighboring countries India and China, where piracy is rife. If Nepalis learn to uphold IPR laws and international understanding, all the artistes and writers can benefit in terms of both recognition of their work and proper monetary compensation.
Pritam S Rana,
Partner,
Pritz Wissenschaft Inc.
Friday, July 11, 2008
Hannah's prayer
'God - may there be no end
To sea, to sand
Water's splash
Lightning's flash
The prayer of man.'
- Hannah Senesh (1921-1944)
Copyright: 2004, Phil Blazer and Shelley Portnoy, Blazer Communications.
Pritam's thoughts on Hannah
The feeling expressed have magical connotations to me. It touches my heart even though written at a different time. Hannah was a very brave woman, exceptional for her young age. She volunteered for the most dangerous job of her time. I respect her truly. Hail Hannah!
To sea, to sand
Water's splash
Lightning's flash
The prayer of man.'
- Hannah Senesh (1921-1944)
Copyright: 2004, Phil Blazer and Shelley Portnoy, Blazer Communications.
Pritam's thoughts on Hannah
The feeling expressed have magical connotations to me. It touches my heart even though written at a different time. Hannah was a very brave woman, exceptional for her young age. She volunteered for the most dangerous job of her time. I respect her truly. Hail Hannah!
Sunday, July 06, 2008
Jabotinsky's famous quote
"The basis of the Betarian viewpoint consists of one idea: the Jewish state. In this simple idea however, lies a deep meaning indeed. What do the nations of the world symbolize? They symbolize that every nation must contribute its own share to the common culture of mankind, a share which is distinguished by its own specific spirit. the contribution should not and cannot consist merely of the ideas and good advice to other nations; it must serve as a living example of ideas and ideals, tangibly realized, expressed not only in books but in the collective life of the people as well. For this purpose, every nation must possess its own 'laboratory', a country where in the nation alone is master and can freely suit the common life in accordance with its own conception of good and evil. A people's own state is such a laboratory."
-Ze'ev Jabotinsky
Copyright: Pioneers of Israel, Phil Blazer and Shelley Portnoy, Blazer Communications, 2004.
-Ze'ev Jabotinsky
Copyright: Pioneers of Israel, Phil Blazer and Shelley Portnoy, Blazer Communications, 2004.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Nepal's woes
The current veering of Nepal to far left is dangerous development. The Maoist majority in constituent assembly is unfortunate. The aim of the Maoist armed group is to set up a communist republic. This goal will essentiailly destroy Nepal's identity. The ouster of Hindu king is another example of movement toward secularism. Secularism does not guarantee freedom or equality for the minority faiths. It might end up with more competition and subsequent disharmony among various faiths. Sectarian riots like of India can be common now. Separatism and irredentism is on the rise. These negative anti-national activities could ultimately lead to complete breakdown of central authority.
Maoist leaders like Prachanda, Baburam and Badal must be tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity. They began the brutal war against the Nepali people. Justice must be served to the victims of Maoists.
Maoist leaders like Prachanda, Baburam and Badal must be tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity. They began the brutal war against the Nepali people. Justice must be served to the victims of Maoists.
Wednesday, April 09, 2008
End of Prachanda
Prachanda who started terrorism in nepal is certain to die like FARC leader. His hand was displayed by his former comerades. Ha Ha, said Jose Manuel Santos, defense minister of Colombia.
Sunday, April 06, 2008
Deport Carlos to US
Carlos the Jackal, whose persona is being worn by that rascal "Badal" the so called terrorist leader in Nepal should be brought before the International criminal Court in Hague. Responsibe for the damage of innfrsatructure worth billions of rupees in Nepal, the maoist group should pay for all the damages. Otherwise, Nuernberg style trial should be brought forward. Nepal is in danger of falling in the same trap of Rwanda 1994 and other failed states. President Bush said, "It is easy to tear the country part than build it....". The same principle should be upheld in Nepal. United Nations is a mere spectator. It can't even destroy the arms of the violent rebels who want to become FARC (Fuerzas Areas of Revolutionarias des Colombia) and FMLN of El Salvador. These people must be stopped from contesting in polls in Nepal. I want to petition to the whole world citizens that these extremists be not allowed to engage in politics. The same way as the West German constitution forbids Nazis and communists from engaing in politics.
Friday, March 21, 2008
Reinstate Red Corner against Maoists
Prachanda, Baburam Bhattarai and his coterie belong to kal kothari. These people have blood on their hands. Thus they cannot engage in politics in Nepal. Castigate these criminals. The government of Nepal should re-issue red corner notice against all the cadres and leaders. Murder cannot be condoned before a life sentence. Prachanda, who wants to be Saddam Hussein of Nepal, may see the same fate as Saddam. By destroying the infrstructure of Nepal, the Maoists have caused damage worth billions of rupees. These monies have to be accounted for at the soon to be created General Accounting Office.
Communists of Nepal have to give up their violent ideology and become like the Social Democrats of Germany. If they retain their communist roots, they will be stooges of Russian and Chinese communists. If anybody like CP Mainali have blood on their hands, they belong in prison and penetentairies. Matthew Kahane is pandering to Maoists. He does not let Tibetans to protest in front of his office. And, he thinks he can manage Nepal. The Human Rights Commission is also a tool of the Maoists to save their murderers. The International Criminal Court in Geneva has expressly failed to push His Majesty's Government to take stern action.
Prachanda and Maoists are forcing Nepali patriots to organize resistance in the manner of United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia. I think Jose Manuel Santos, Colombia's defense minister has much to advise Nepali leaders to handle the insurgency.
Communists of Nepal have to give up their violent ideology and become like the Social Democrats of Germany. If they retain their communist roots, they will be stooges of Russian and Chinese communists. If anybody like CP Mainali have blood on their hands, they belong in prison and penetentairies. Matthew Kahane is pandering to Maoists. He does not let Tibetans to protest in front of his office. And, he thinks he can manage Nepal. The Human Rights Commission is also a tool of the Maoists to save their murderers. The International Criminal Court in Geneva has expressly failed to push His Majesty's Government to take stern action.
Prachanda and Maoists are forcing Nepali patriots to organize resistance in the manner of United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia. I think Jose Manuel Santos, Colombia's defense minister has much to advise Nepali leaders to handle the insurgency.
Sunday, February 03, 2008
Why Nepal needs monarchy
Nepal's unrelentless propulsion toward republic could create another disaster ala Sikkim and Tibet. Look at Poland's history. It was divided between Hitler and Stalin and the Poles bombed and driven out. Is this the fate Nepalis deserve? Prachanda the would be Saddam Hussein of Nepal ought to understand this.
When Nepal's institution of monarchy is dissolved, Nepal would be no more. The massive forces of globalization coupled with new trends has the potential to wipe out monarchy. When Kenichi Ohashi, world bank rep speaks of feudalism, he better be careful. He is one of the special interest group supporting Maoist Nepal. Dictatorship of the proletariat like the 1917 revolution means end of national entity for Nepal.
The only Hindu Kingdom which displayed tolerance toward all the religions has now to be transformed into a secular state like India. Ha! Ha! And, nagar and gaun panchayats have been transformed into palikas. What a joke? His Majesty King Gyanendra is still the avatar of Lord Vishnu coz he takes care of his people here and abroad. And Prachanda a tin pot non-official wants to be the president of Nepal. C'mon this must be some sort of a crude joke. A guy who ought to face Nuremberg tribunal will become Nepal's leader. Ha!
The International Criminal Court in Genev is a joke. So many white men in Nepal pandering to Maoist criminals. When Baburam Bhattarai started the people's war in Nepal, he oght to have faced the court. Such men are allowed to conduct politics in Nepal, what as shame? His supposedly highly Sanskritized Nepali language articles following the bum Karl Marx, Lenin and Engels ought to be strongly countered.
Their followers want to uproot thhe monarchy in Thailand? What a pity. Siam was one of the nicest places on earth. And they want to incarcerate King Bhumibol. Wow, journalists of Nepal and lawyers. You have beaten the whole world. These movements like the Socialist International should not be allowed to conduct programs in Nepal.
Ant there are special interest groups like the SASANET who want to disarm Nepal's army. Pls go back home! So it will become easier for Chinese army units to enter Nepal's border and kidnap all the Mongolian people. (Remember Dhaibung 1793(BS)
When Nepal's institution of monarchy is dissolved, Nepal would be no more. The massive forces of globalization coupled with new trends has the potential to wipe out monarchy. When Kenichi Ohashi, world bank rep speaks of feudalism, he better be careful. He is one of the special interest group supporting Maoist Nepal. Dictatorship of the proletariat like the 1917 revolution means end of national entity for Nepal.
The only Hindu Kingdom which displayed tolerance toward all the religions has now to be transformed into a secular state like India. Ha! Ha! And, nagar and gaun panchayats have been transformed into palikas. What a joke? His Majesty King Gyanendra is still the avatar of Lord Vishnu coz he takes care of his people here and abroad. And Prachanda a tin pot non-official wants to be the president of Nepal. C'mon this must be some sort of a crude joke. A guy who ought to face Nuremberg tribunal will become Nepal's leader. Ha!
The International Criminal Court in Genev is a joke. So many white men in Nepal pandering to Maoist criminals. When Baburam Bhattarai started the people's war in Nepal, he oght to have faced the court. Such men are allowed to conduct politics in Nepal, what as shame? His supposedly highly Sanskritized Nepali language articles following the bum Karl Marx, Lenin and Engels ought to be strongly countered.
Their followers want to uproot thhe monarchy in Thailand? What a pity. Siam was one of the nicest places on earth. And they want to incarcerate King Bhumibol. Wow, journalists of Nepal and lawyers. You have beaten the whole world. These movements like the Socialist International should not be allowed to conduct programs in Nepal.
Ant there are special interest groups like the SASANET who want to disarm Nepal's army. Pls go back home! So it will become easier for Chinese army units to enter Nepal's border and kidnap all the Mongolian people. (Remember Dhaibung 1793(BS)
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Chronicle on new Nepal
Nepal appears to be in doldrums. Now the Maoists seem to rule Nepal, having tied down the hands of the all powerful prime minister and everyone else in the government. What kind of system is this? People are led to believe that the problems are due to the so-called transitional period. Don’t the people in Nepal deserve better? There’s jacked up food prices, petroleum supply is unavailable on demand, there is load shedding and what not. Wake up Nepali leaders! Give the nation’s helm to the youth and let them lead please. March to the tune of globalization and exactly there lies Nepal’s road to prosperity. Out with you old people of politics, you’ve completely kowtowed to the Maoists’ illegitimate and ungainly demands. Please redeem your souls before Nepal is totally "red". Red with blood of its own hardworking and would be enterprising citizens. Isn’t it a pity that every youth wants to go abroad? Even lesser educated ones prefer Gulf region and get a break. If there had been any meaningful economic growth and business promotion braced by solid foreign investment, Nepal would have joined the ranks of Shining India and Growing China. Please do something to really move Nepal up the ladder of the underdeveloped club. No more behind Somalia, the image just doesn’t suit for our once glorious land of the brave Gurkhas and hardy Sherpas. Wake up people! Its 2007 not 1007 AD!!
Friday, March 30, 2007
Prachanda's Swiss watches
To the surprise of many proletariats, Maoist chairman Prachanda is said to be sporting expensive Swiss made Rolex and Rado watches. This has been noticed by eagle-eyed reporters at the frequent press meets organized by the rebel supremo. While there was much clamor over the king's lavish taste for tropical fruits from Thailand and misti curd from Bangladesh, much ink has not been spared to describe the exquisite tastes of the so-called leaders of the proletariats, the Maoists. Such lavish lifestyle is in stark contrast to the working class image, which the Maoists would like to project themselves. Just imagine life in one of the cantonments where lowly Maoist rank and file eat and sleep.
As this post is being written, Maoists are already designated to join the government (the executive branch). Some of the ministries are about to be handed over to the rebels. The announcement to be made in legislature on March 31, 2007 would mark the culmination of the ten year long armed struggle launched by the Maoists. This would be a landmark of their achievement after their entry into the interim legislature.
Maoists are yet to change their 'jungle' attitude and have failed to win the confidence of such segments like the businessmen and foreign powers. US Ambassador to Nepal, James F Moriarty is said to have cautioned PM and other some Seven Party Leaders to be careful in inducting Maoists into the Cabinet. Despite the suggestion, political scenario is such that Maoists would receive ministries whether anybody likes it or not. The Seven Party Alliance are compelled to share power with the Maoists as per their various agreements with the armed rebels. Analysts would be interested to monitor Maoist attitude after they become Nepal's rulers, albeit sharing power with other political forces.
As this post is being written, Maoists are already designated to join the government (the executive branch). Some of the ministries are about to be handed over to the rebels. The announcement to be made in legislature on March 31, 2007 would mark the culmination of the ten year long armed struggle launched by the Maoists. This would be a landmark of their achievement after their entry into the interim legislature.
Maoists are yet to change their 'jungle' attitude and have failed to win the confidence of such segments like the businessmen and foreign powers. US Ambassador to Nepal, James F Moriarty is said to have cautioned PM and other some Seven Party Leaders to be careful in inducting Maoists into the Cabinet. Despite the suggestion, political scenario is such that Maoists would receive ministries whether anybody likes it or not. The Seven Party Alliance are compelled to share power with the Maoists as per their various agreements with the armed rebels. Analysts would be interested to monitor Maoist attitude after they become Nepal's rulers, albeit sharing power with other political forces.
Friday, March 02, 2007
Imbroglio for Maoists
The armed group which calls itself the CPN-Maoist party is in the process of joining the executive branch of Nepal government. Maoist cadres already have 83 seats in the interim legislature, which was formed through nominations after the old parliament was dissolved. Despite the signing of the historic peace agreement with the Seven Party Alliance led government, the Maoists have simply not given up violence and joined the political process. The recent misbehavior by a Maoist legislator where he flaunted of possessing arms inside the parliament building and his use of abusive language demonstrates that Maoists are very much ‘jungle dwellers’.
More disturbing is the arms registration issue. While registering 30,000 armed cadres, Maoists only presented 3,000 arms. The mismatch is simply unbelievable. This points to the fact that Maoists may be hiding a greater portion of their arms for future confrontation or just armed takeover. Armed Maoists mounted in jeeps were seen in some districts. The arms carried by them were apparently ‘registered with the UN’ as claimed by the Maoists. The UN had said it wasn’t sure whether all arms were duly registered. This leaves plenty of doubt, thanks to Maoists aggressive posture.
Maoist chairman Prachanda recently said his cadres would not call any strikes and would also prevent others from organizing such stoppages. This would surely lead to further clashes with the cadres of Madhesi People’s Rights Forum (MPRF) and possibly the janajatis. The Maoists created the ethnic based movements to propel their own agenda. Now, they are facing the brunt of the problem.
More disturbing is the arms registration issue. While registering 30,000 armed cadres, Maoists only presented 3,000 arms. The mismatch is simply unbelievable. This points to the fact that Maoists may be hiding a greater portion of their arms for future confrontation or just armed takeover. Armed Maoists mounted in jeeps were seen in some districts. The arms carried by them were apparently ‘registered with the UN’ as claimed by the Maoists. The UN had said it wasn’t sure whether all arms were duly registered. This leaves plenty of doubt, thanks to Maoists aggressive posture.
Maoist chairman Prachanda recently said his cadres would not call any strikes and would also prevent others from organizing such stoppages. This would surely lead to further clashes with the cadres of Madhesi People’s Rights Forum (MPRF) and possibly the janajatis. The Maoists created the ethnic based movements to propel their own agenda. Now, they are facing the brunt of the problem.
Thursday, April 13, 2006
People's movement should yield positive results
The ongoing people's movement which began from April 6 should aim to introduce reforms in Nepali political system. Nepal should do away with feudalism and backwardness; it should move forward towards peace, development and prosperity. It is sickening to see that economic growth in Nepal is merely 2 percent according to ADB, while South Asian average growth stands at around 6-7 percent. This itself shows the impact of political upheaval and pandemic violence in Nepal.
Look at the example of Singapore. A port hamlet in 1940s have now transformed into Southeast Asia's economic powerhouse. We also need mission, vision when we think interms of developing this country. We cannot do this all by ourselves. Our diplomats abroad should convince friendly and prosperous countries to invest in what we have-- like water resources. Key to Nepal's development is foreign investment, whether you like it or not.
The country is in transitional phase. At one side ther is violent revolutionary movement which seeks to overthrow the present suystem with its own dicatorship. At the other side is the seven party alliance which is driving the present people's movement. We do need change. But what change?
One solution which I would like to propose is one which can bring the Maoists to the mainstream by meeting one of their key demands--constituent assembly. If the King and his government allow the election of constituent assembly, maoists can be asked to lay down their arms and participate in this process. But, here all sides need to compromise anfd agree to work this out. Its a great gamble for the king, but he has to agree as it would be a condition for Maoists to lay down their arms to a third party like the UN. The constituent assembly would draft a new constitution which should guarantee inclusive democracy. In this system, all peoples of Nepal would get equal opportunity. No one group or caste or family can rule over others. All leaders in the new system would be fully accountable to the people and nobody would be above law.
Let us just hope that we can find a peaceful resolution to all the crises affecting this country. Long live Nepal and its countrymen!
Look at the example of Singapore. A port hamlet in 1940s have now transformed into Southeast Asia's economic powerhouse. We also need mission, vision when we think interms of developing this country. We cannot do this all by ourselves. Our diplomats abroad should convince friendly and prosperous countries to invest in what we have-- like water resources. Key to Nepal's development is foreign investment, whether you like it or not.
The country is in transitional phase. At one side ther is violent revolutionary movement which seeks to overthrow the present suystem with its own dicatorship. At the other side is the seven party alliance which is driving the present people's movement. We do need change. But what change?
One solution which I would like to propose is one which can bring the Maoists to the mainstream by meeting one of their key demands--constituent assembly. If the King and his government allow the election of constituent assembly, maoists can be asked to lay down their arms and participate in this process. But, here all sides need to compromise anfd agree to work this out. Its a great gamble for the king, but he has to agree as it would be a condition for Maoists to lay down their arms to a third party like the UN. The constituent assembly would draft a new constitution which should guarantee inclusive democracy. In this system, all peoples of Nepal would get equal opportunity. No one group or caste or family can rule over others. All leaders in the new system would be fully accountable to the people and nobody would be above law.
Let us just hope that we can find a peaceful resolution to all the crises affecting this country. Long live Nepal and its countrymen!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
