Japan Mishap Jolts US, Europe

The destruction of nuclear establishments after the recent earthquake in Japan has not only created problems for Japan but has also troubled several other countries having such establishments. It is said that nuclear energy is an unavoidable necessity. It provides maximum energy needs. That is why every country worth of it is floundering to have this facility. Today, nuclear reactors are spread across the world. Currently, there are around 441 working nuclear reactors across the world. This does not include many more under construction reactors. Until January 2010, there were 60 reactors under construction.

Security Reasons
There are 30 countries in which nuclear plants are working. There are over 100 plants that have been closed down for many reasons. In the United States, there are over 150 nuclear plants, half of which are over 30 years old. In the United States, certain plants were created for security reasons, on which work was started in 1950's.

The first nuclear power plant of the United States started in 1955, which was closed down in 1974. The reason for its closure was lack of emergency cooling system. In Europe also, over 150 nuclear plants are working, whereas dozens more European countries are planning to establish new plants.

Corrosive Process
In addition to the above, there are hundreds of laboratories where experimental work on nuclear energy is under way. Apart from the United States and Europe, Russia is one such country having numerous plants. From geographical viewpoint, Russia comes under Europe but in power block it is counted separately as an axis power. China and Japan also have constructed dozens of plants for getting energy. Although all such countries have made concrete arrangements for their safety and there are guidelines from the United Nations, still doubts persist on their safety.

Nuclear energy, which on one side has been made an unavoidable necessity, carries dangerous proportions as it is secured through a corrosive process. It is such a deadly process that even a minor fault can endanger the existence of the earth. Human beings have experienced its deadly effects still the work is going on.

The powers who have invented this dangerous technology have used it for anti-human and suppression purposes as well. When the victims of such suppression tried to develop this technology to contain the oppression, they were restrained. All this created an uneasy situation. This way the process of oppression and counter oppression kept on going.

Steps Toward Safety
Now the occurrence of Japan has cautioned all that they have invited plethora of problems for themselves. The United States and Europe made it a business by developing such technology for third world countries. Today, the plants existing in the third world are their gift of death. They invited risk not only for themselves but for others also.

Now after the Japan incident, the United States and Europe are aghast of it. The US citizens and Europeans are now emphasizing their respective governments to take prophylactic steps toward safety of these plants.

Thai Problems Solving Must Be Based on Democratic Means

Recently, the Newsweek published an interesting article entitled How Democracy Dies by Joshua Kurlantzick, an expert on Southeast Asia affairs of the Council of Foreign Relations. The article talked about political phenomena worldwide, saying the situation for democracy was worrying.

Reason for Regression
The article analyzed that democracy in several country had regressed and this happened in Africa, Latin America, Middle East, Russia and Asia. The main reason for the regression was the middle class people who used to fight for freedom and democracy by toppling dictatorial regimes. The article said the middle class people were seeing that it was hard to create true democracy so they became disappointed in the system.

The main reason that prompted the middle class people to feel so was the fact that leaders of several new democratic countries regarded elections as only a way to power. And after they won an election, they abused the administrative power and practiced nepotism. Their interpretation of democracy that way was distortion of democracy, and thus causing the public to lose faith in the democratic system.

Kurlantzick also analyzed that the economic crisis also affected democracy in certain countries because the middle class regarded that democracy and freedom came with the adoption of globalization and capitalism. After their income dropped because of the economic crisis, they blamed the democracy for the economic crisis.

Implementing Policies
The article cited examples from several countries, including the Philippines, Venezuela, Russia and Cambodia. Kurlantzick highlighted the case of Thailand as a graphic example. In the example, Kurlantzick talked about former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, saying he got the power through democratic means and implemented policies as promised during the election campaigns and helping the poor. But Thaksin eventually abused the authority. Kurlantzick also talked about the summary killings of drug suspects during Thaksin's war on drug and the disappearance of lawyer Somchai Nilaphaichit.

This is the view of a westerner who still remembers the administrative style of Thaksin. Kurlantzick also talked about the phenomenon of the middle class people in Bangkok becoming disappointed and calling for the use of special power and a coup instead of using democratic means to bring about changes by supporting the opposition or by pushing for changes via newspapers.

Kurlantzick recounted that the middle class reasoned that the coup needed to be staged to preserve democracy. And eventually, the middle class people got what they wanted - they could topple the Thaksin regime and destroy democracy at the same time.

Kurlantzick did not conclude who was right or wrong. He simply presented an analysis in a view of a foreigner. But he added that after the middle class caused the democracy to regress by a coup and other undemocratic means, the lower class people became dissatisfied, leading to protests. Kurlantzick said this did not happen only in Thailand but also in Bolivia and the Philippines.

His last observation in the article was that kind of fight destroyed system and mechanisms of the country administration as well as the people's rights and freedom. He said it would take a long time to rebuild these democratic elements and there is no guarantee that the rebuilding would be successful.

Solving National Crisis
So, I am sharing this article so that Thai people would know how other people are viewing our situation. Sometimes, all Thais are like being caught in the middle of a bout in which fighters are fiercely fighting with no indication that they would stop. When we see how our "audience" analyze and think about our situation, we may be able to see it through and find a way-out for solving our national crisis.

The principle that we need to adhere to and need to have a common stand is that democracy is the best system for providing equal political and economic chances to the people and for guaranteeing the rights and freedom of the people. All problem solving efforts must be based on democracy. What happened in the past should be regarded as a painful lesson and we should never choose a coup as a way-out again.

Check-and-Balance Mechanisms
Most of all, there must be mechanisms for sharing power so that all sides and all classes in the society will take part in the ruling with the feelings that they are all owners of the country. All interests must be equally distributed instead of being concentrated to only a group of people no matter whether they are old or neo fenders. And when someone has money and power, that person must use the power with justice instead of abusing it to benefit himself and associates. To achieve this, the check-and-balance mechanisms of the public and private sectors must be strengthened as soon as possible.

We are all humans no matter whether we are elites or ordinary people. We need to respect each other because if we fail to see each other's face and respect each other, we will end up fighting against each other.

Challenges Rising Against US Dollar as the Global Currency

The value of the US dollar and gold saw fluctuations in the global markets over the past week. The price fluctuations followed a report by The Independent, a British newspaper, quoting an unnamed source, that the Arab Gulf oil-exporting countries held a talk with major oil consuming countries like China, Russia, Japan and France. They were considering an end to the use of the dollar in buying oil, and instead opting for a basket of currencies consisting of yen, yuan and euro, as well as gold.

That report immediately caused the dollar to become weaker against other major currencies. In the meantime, the prices of gold increased rapidly and fuelled speculation that the prices would exceed 1,100 dollars an ounce in the near future.

Dollar in Oil Purchase and Sale
The countries mentioned in the report came out to deny there was no such discussion and they insisted on continuing with using the dollar in oil purchase and sale. In the meantime, analysts pointed out that it will not be easy to stop using the dollar in oil transactions as there are many obstacles to overcome, particularly for China to have to allow its yuan to become more flexible in value.

The US dollar has come under severe attacks because its value has seen a continuing decline since the United States suffered from a serious economic recession over a year ago. Early this year, there were calls from China and Russia for countries of the world to adopt the International Monetary Fund (IMF) system of currencies basket to replace the US dollar as the principal global currency. They cited concern that the dollar was gradually decreasing in value, which would result in reduced value for assets held in the dollar term.

Fluctuating Exchange Rates
In the recent meeting of the Group of Seven (G7) major industrialized countries issued a statement expressing concern about the weakening value of the dollar, a decline of 14 per cent this year when compared to six other major currencies of the world. The statement also said that the fluctuating exchange rates and the movements in value that do not correspond with the basic economic factors are undermining the stability of the foreign exchange markets and the global economy.

It is not easy for other currencies to replace the US dollar as the global currency, given the facts that the US is the world's largest economy and the international trade is mostly done in the dollar term. Most international reserves are also in the form of the greenback. Even though the euro has been rapidly rising in value, the combined size of the euro economies and the popularity of the European currency remain a distant away when compared to the US dollar.

Safe Investment Alternatives
However, the unified pressure from other superpowers against the US dollar should not be overlooked. If all those countries agree to reduce their asset holdings in the dollar term, the greenback's value will see a sudden nosedive. It is true that other currencies cannot match the US dollar, but the traditional safe investment alternatives like gold will greatly benefit. Then, oil prices will shoot up regardless of the currency used for transaction.

The US Government is trying hard to restore confidence in the country's currency and to retain its status as the No 1 economy of the world. There are new challenges from rising stars like China, which just celebrated the 60th anniversary of the republic's establishment and has expressed its determination to become the next world leader.

China, India and Russia on Global Clout

The history of countries, continents and the world is an ever-changing phenomenon. There were so many historical changes, upheavals, revolutions, records, destructions and re-emergence. In the known history of the world, the Romans were the first power to reckon with. They ruled the UK and part of Europe, followed by the Greeks, symbolised by Alexander the Great, who came up to India. Then the British, after a gap of almost more than one-and-a-half millennium, ruled the world, colonising more than half of the globe—Australia, the US, Africa and Asia. The brightest jewel of their crown, of course, was India.


After reigning supreme for almost six hundred years, the British gave way to the Americans who ruled the world and became the superpower. The erstwhile USSR, though another superpower, could not hold its fort for long and disintegrated. Now all the three superpowers of the 20th century the US, UK and the erstwhile USSR have lost their penetration. But the question is: “Who would replace them?” The answer is they would be replaced by the three Asian giants—China, India and Russia.


The Reasons
The time has changed and changed drastically. There are many countries in the world which have ruled over others in the past century. But in the new millennium many of them have been routed over or vanished from the list of superpowers. They have been replaced by another emerging powers.


The trio—China, India and Russia—each of them calls for multi-polarity in the world, which amounts to a barely concealed expression of discomfort with the overweening the US global presence—in other words, the hegemony of the US. Each of them is on an upward economic path, which makes for a more active foreign policy.


China has experienced high growth for nearly three decades and is a weighty factor in the global economy. Starting later, India has also shot ahead and bids fair to join its neighbour. China is a country whose economic success can influence the global balance. And Russia has finally put behind it the problems of its collapsed Soviet legacy, being now on a path of rapid growth which has helped restore a good part of its lost international influence.


The US might have bashed Afghanistan and Iraq or for that matter any other country in the world, but on economic matters it carries no influence on others. In the globalised world, the competing centres of wealth and power have shifted to China, India and Russia. There are many other factors which have contributed to the erosion of the American leadership. For example, the Americans are not ready to change their wasteful style of living. The Americans are only five to six per cent of the world population, yet they consume 25 per cent of the total world’s production. America was the world largest oil producer till 1974 and, therefore, it never cared for the world prices. Now it imports 60 per cent of its requirements and is hit hard by its swelling prices.


The New Trio
As the leaders of the US and the UK have been losing grip on the world economy, the leaders of China, India and Russia have been gaining strength at least in the past two decades. The South-east countries, in a combined way, got the economic activity shifted from the US to their countries. Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong and South Korea were designated as Asian Tigers. Later China, India and Russia gave stiff competition to these countries besides the US and Europe.


The shifting focus of the economic activity to Asia has given a new dimension to the leadership in China, India and Russia. Asia has more than half the world’s foreign exchange reserves but only 15 per cent of the votes in the International Monetary Fund’s Executive Board. The continent also accounts for 60 per cent of the world’s population and 25 per cent of global Gross National Product (GNP), yet only two countries are the permanent members of the UN Security Council from Asia. However, the major players remain in the form of India, China and Russia.


China
As far as China is concerned, it entered the world economy in the late 70s and soon became the manufacture of most of those products that were being manufactured in the US. Even Japanese companies shifted to China because of cheap labour, strong infrastructure and favourable Government attitude towards multi-national corporations. Soon it became the world’s fastest growing economy and the second biggest holder of American debt. All this was happening because of the strong leadership in the country.


A decade ago, China was engulfed by a largely diffident and isolationist mentality. Much has changed since then. With foreign exchange reserves in excess of one trillion dollars today, China enjoys a huge trading surplus over the US and the European Union. This economic surge has bred a new self-confidence and a prevent insistence on playing a more active role in the world order. Which the US constrained by the expensive military conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, and therefore, unable to devote sample resource to South East Asia, China has glacefully filled the vacuum. It is telling that Indonesia and the Philippines get more financial aid now from Beiging than the US.


China’s huge appetite for natural resources has led it to cultivate deeper relationship in Africa, Central Asia and Latin America. In 2008, it hosted a summit in Beijing attended by at least 45 African Heads of State. Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), founded in 2001 with Russia and other Central Asian countries, has become a crucial ins¬trument of China's energy security policy.


China is also trying on its rich cultural heritage to draw visitors and project a more positive image of itself. China soft power is playing a vital role in commenting its global eminence.


The rise of China’s global clout is manifestly obvious. But it also poses an altogether different and challenging question: Is China’s growing influence desirable? To the extent that China’s coming of age is paving the way for a multi¬polar era in global politics there are good reasons to take some comfort from it.


Yet the glow surrounding China’s ascendancy should not camouflage a colder reality. Economic success has not been accompanied by a corresponding expansion of political freedom. Few allowances are made for dissenting voices. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, a well-regarded international NGO, China has imprisoned more journalists than any other country in the world for the last eight consecutive years.


There is little to suggest that this contemptible repression will subside. At the Communist Party’s recently held National Congress it came as no surprise that the genuine need for political reforms went unacknowledged. The monolithic, centalised political structure with its chronic scorn for divergent opinion still holds sway.


India
Whereas India was a latecomer to join the economic prosperity. Former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi gave the lead when she came back to power in 1980. She introduced the process of economic liberalisation. However, the true harbingers of reforms in early 1990s, were the then Prime Minister Narasimha Rao and Manmohan Singh when he was Finance Minister.


The country, especially in the last two decades, has come out on the global scene at the second fastest-growing nation in the world, next only to China. It is believed that in the decades to come Indian economy will be larger than Italy, the UK and Japan.


Fortunately, Singh became the Prime Minister in May 2004 and is playing a dominating role in the Asian politics. His stature and competence has given the country, strength and has acquired acceptability among the world leaders. India has already established fruitful dialogue with APEC, ASEAN, SAARC, the US, the UK, Japan, Russia, China, Germany, Canada, and many other powerful countries in the world. The results are visible in the flow of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and the willingness of more foreign companies to join hands with India.


In the wake of high-profile diplomacy by Indian leaders during the past decade, India has emerged as a true leading country. The country has regained its supremacy on the international scenario.


Russia
On the other hand, Russia, under the leadership of Vladimir Putin, the former President and present Prime Minister of the country, has recovered and gained tremendous momentum from the crippling and humiliating aftermath of the collapse of the erstwhile USSR.


Russia is more prosperous today when Putin took over, and Russians at all income levels have benefited. Like all post-Communist countries, it endured a rise in poverty and political upheaval in the first half of the 1990s.


In 1997-98, Russia along with other “emerging markets” suffered a financial crash. Yeltsin appoined a new Prime Minister, Yevgeny Primakov, who restored fiscal solvency and began Russia’s recovery, before Putin appeared on the scene. The forlorn babushkas selling their personal effects that many foreigners remember were ancient history by the time Putin took power.


Russia continued the economic reforms for the last eight-nine years to good effect, especially under the leadership of Putin. But as he clamped down on poli¬tical businesses and began to resocialise the economy, investment was dampened.


The country has not only made its economy strong but also marked its presence in the various sectors especially nuclear and military powers. Its army has resumed long-hand missions by their strategic bombers with strong capability. The country has uplifted itself in such a position from where it can dictate terms in international arena.


Missile Defence System
Another subject on which the three Asian countries shared an approach is the missile defence system, a concept being promoted by the US. Evidently this was not part of the formal agenda that these countries had come up in their recent talks. As there is no difference of view between them, they felt no need to place it on the formal agenda.

The missile defence system, which is taking shape in Eastern Europe and the Cancasus region, is a particular aggravation to Russia, and that country has been swarting at its likely impact in its immediate neighbourhood.


Several Russian attempts to stave off this development have failed, so that the US missile defence plans have served to complicate relations between the two major global nuclear powers. India and China have kept clear of becoming entangled in this matter. As a non-aligned nation, India can scarcely be involved, nor is it within the affected geographical region, any more than China.

There will be a temptation to give exaggerated importance to these visible differences, perhaps even to regard them as signs of an emerging challenge to the existing US global dominance. But that would be to leap too far ahead. Though each of the three countries of this group may chafe at one aspect or other of the policies of the US, none of them can contemplate actions that would seriously complicate their relationship with the US. That remains the key connection for each of them.

It has become obvious that three-country group is not engaged in any grand redesign of the global architecture. Thus, the value of these meetings is important in fashioning a shared global vision in creating a forum that would permit useful diplomatic discourse among these super Asian countries whose impact on Asia and the world will continue to grow.