Capitalism or Communism? Or Do We Have a Choice?

 At the end of the eighties things were crystal clear: communism lost, capitalism won and we will all live together happily ever after in material abundancy and liberal bliss, at last.

Now thirty years later the Chinese Communist Party has declared victory over poverty while in the US the middle class is slowly withering away while the media is increasingly turning into a propaganda machine of those in power.

Not only is the trend pointing to China becoming the #1 economy in the world but the US is foolishly isolating Russia (and increasingly the EU) thus pushing them to look for more reliable friends in the East.

How did that happen? Why? Can we do anything about it? Perhaps organize a demonstration on Tiananmen square or march on the Capitol or the Kremlin, or maybe break down the Berlin wall (that’s already broken) but we can always try the Korean demilitarized zone? Revolution?  I hope that will never happen because revolutions usually hurt the innocent and cement the power of the corrupt elite.

I do believe in unity in diversity. That we the people can and will unite and acknowledge that everyone has a right to an opinion (and that means everyone including those you don’t like or don’t agree with) as long as that opinion does not involve hate, or planning to harm someone, or planning to coerce someone into changing their opinion or choice. And that unity will bring reason, stability and abundance.

You may say I’m a dreamer but I hope I’m not the only one….

Elites need enemies to control the people

Said one smart American:
The English government presents, just now, a curious phenomenon. Seeing that the French and English nations are getting rid of the prejudices and false notions formerly entertained against each other, and which have cost them so much money, that government seems to be placarding its need of a foe; for unless it finds one somewhere, no pretext exists for the enormous revenue and taxation now deemed necessary.

Therefore, it seeks in Russia the enemy it has lost in France, and appears to say to the universe, or to say to itself. "If nobody will be so kind as to become my foe, I shall need no more fleets nor armies, and shall be forced to reduce my taxes. The American war enabled me to double the taxes; the Dutch business to add more; the Nootka humbug gave me a pretext for raising three millions sterling more; but unless I can make an enemy of Russia the harvest from wars will end. I was the first to incite Turk against Russian, and now I hope to reap a fresh crop of taxes."

If the miseries of war, and the flood of evils it spreads over a country, did not check all inclination to mirth, and turn laughter into grief, the frantic conduct of the government of England would only excite ridicule. But it is impossible to banish from one's mind the images of suffering which the contemplation of such vicious policy presents. To reason with governments, as they have existed for ages, is to argue with brutes. It is only from the nations themselves that reforms can be expected. There ought not now to exist any doubt that the peoples of France, England, and America, enlightened and enlightening each other, shall henceforth be able, not merely to give the world an example of good government, but by their united influence enforce its practice.

Thomas Paine

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/3742/3742-h/3742-h.htm

Let’s Sing the Ukrainian Song Right

Merkel 1, Putin 0, Obama -1.

The current score of the dirty chess game started by Merkel is as above. I’ll explain;

She starts with a half-hearted offer for EU negotiations that is easy to reject. It’s understandable - Ukraine is a big country with big issues and Germany is reluctant to pay for it. In jumps Putin like a knight in shining armour (or more likely - half naked) with bags of resque money to reward his now rejected friend Yanukovych - the brave president of Ukraine elected by the people. But the people it seems don’t want Yanukovych and they don’t want Putin’s money (and they are aware he is half naked) - they would rather prefer the shiny EU with difficult conditions and no money hoping mostly to rush to Germany and make some easy Euros perhaps because any economic development is difficult to imagine in an EU where only Germany is booming and the rest are stagnating (especially the new and poor members). Bam - Yanukovych is gone (even Putin doesn't love him anymore) and the mob establishes a pro EU government by making sure the parliament votes as they prefer. Also they are quick to ignite ethnic tensions by banning the Russian language historically spoken by a big part Ukrainian citizens an act guaranteed to ingnite anger and indignation.

At this moment the score is Merkel: 1 and Putin: - 1. Merica is just zero for now waiting for an opportunity to open, Putin counter attacks ostensibly “to protect” compatriots in Crimea but mostly to get back at Merkel for making him look dumb. But Merkel keeps her cool - instead Obama jumps into the fray to see if he can catch some easy fish in these troubled waters but only exposes his irrelevance. After having wasted any influence and good will he may have had by not attending the Olympics he has no options but to talk pointedly while no one hardly listens. That is a minus 1 and plus 1 for Putin to equal zero.

But where are the interests of the people of Ukraine in this whole game you may ask? Sadly no one seems to care! Even the new rulers in Kiev seem to be more interested in distributing government posts that will enable them to profit at the back of the people of Ukraine, the US taxpayer, the people of Russia and even the EU taxpayers if they are not vigilant.

I know what you are thinking - this is a useless sad story without a happy ending and no inspiring moral. There is moral: we the people have the power to keep the corrupt scheming rulers accountable. The people of Ukraine - Ukrainians, Russians, Tatars, Jews, Moldovans, Gypsies have to unite against the demagogues - not because it is a good thing to do but because the other option is slavery under the boot of Russia, the EU, the IMF too but first and foremost under their own homegrown corrupt oligarchs and politicians.

The price of gas goes up? Guess who will profit!

Epilogue

In a warm August evening in 1978 I was walking along the seaside of the Bulgarian resort of Primorsko with a couple of friends when we met a large group of Russians who invited us to join them. Soon after that we met a similarly large group of Polish holidaymakers and sat all together around a table in the park. The Russians brought a couple of bottles of Stolichnaya vodka and after some rounds offered to sing a Russian song. The moment they started there was trouble: “This is not a Russian song,” the Polish guys objected. “It is a Polish song!” The proceeded to agree the sing the song only if the Russians agree it is in fact a Polish song. Tempers flared  - fueled by the Stolichnaya. The on of the Russians shouted above all: “It’s actually an Ukrainian song! Let’s sing the Ukrainian song!” For reasons incomprehensible to me but apparently obvious to the Russians - the Polish agreed and we all sang together the Ukrainian song. All of us Bulgarians, Russians and Polish - there wasn't a single Ukrainian present.

So it looks like we (as we the people, we the humanity, we the nations) can do it. We an sing the Ukrainian song and sing it good and not out of tune if we want to. If we don’t we will be enslaved and no one can save us.

North Korea - What Now?

What will happen in North Korea?

The regime seems far less stable than the Arab dictatorships or even the USSR by the end of the 80s.
For there is no doubt that North Korean regime will collapse most probably sooner than later and in any case not later than the end of this decade if not in the first half of it.
The problem is how the world or the major interests involved will deal with it. If there are any particular plans they don't seem to be public if they exist at all so I will feel free to speculate.
Questions to be answered:

First, what could happen?
Second, who are the major players and what are their interests?
Third, what can they do to promote them or what can be expected that they may do?

Possible answers to the first question – possible developments :

1. Russian scenario. A Gorbachev style move towards reforms starts well but ends in Yeltsin type chaos of crime and corruption until the Putin type strongman regulates corruption in favor of his clique and puts the losers in jail
2. Chinese scenario. Deng Xiaoping style reforms lead to improved living standards while preserving the rule of the communist party and postponing the inevitable collapse.
3. East German scenario. South Korea absorbs North Korea and the North Korean communist elite melts into obscurity.

Additional questions stemming from the proposed answers to the first question:

• Which is the preferred scenario?
• Which is the most probable one?
• Which is the most dangerous?

Answer to the second question – major stakeholders :

1. The people of North Korea – interested in survival, development, democracy and opportunities
2. The communist elite of North Korea – interested in preserving their privileges
3. South Korea – interest in dealing with the military threat from the North and reunification.
4. China – interested in stability in Korea to prevent destabilization of its regions bordering Korea.
5. Japan – interested in removing the threat from North Korea and a host of problems.
6. USA – a peaceful Korea will reduce the need for US military presence but open opportunities for trade.
7. Russia – has shown remarkable indifference for a country so close and the importance accorded by the government to the development of the Russian Pacific region so close to North Korea.

So far all stakeholders (with the notable exception of the sovereign – the people of North Korea) have pledged to work with the elite in North Korea to facilitate a smooth transition. Russia has warned against “provocations” by North Korean neighbors probably meaning that the Russian government won't tolerate a repeat of the Libyan scenario.
That may be the most sensible foreign policy in response to the contingency of the moment but what should the main stakeholders do to secure the promotion of there strategic interests in the future?
And what those interest may be? (I am aware that the concise list provided here is far from complete and may be even off the mark.)

Henry Kissinger sent to Russia by Obama: what to expect?

If Henry Kissinger is up to some secret negotiations dramatic results are bound to follow. Usually good for the US and the rest of the world: like the end of the Vietnam war, transforming China from worst enemy to best trading partner, and ending hostilities between Israel and Egypt. What can we expect now?
Russia has been steadily antagonised by withholding their WTO membership for no valid reasons, promoting NATO expansion while Russia is not invited they have no choice but regard NATO as a hostile organisation, prod neighbours like Georgia to physically attack Russian soldiers. Not the best trust building policies. But what should be done?
I think the best approach will be to hug the bear so hard it will find it hard not to respond. Let me explain:
1. That's the approach the US used successfully in post-war Germany and Japan, that was the approach used successfully by the brilliant Nixon-Kissinger team towards communist China. (I wonder how the US would have managed in a world where the worlds most powerful economies were hostile).
2. The mindless foreign policy of the Bush administration has successfully alienated the US from most of the civilized world and has left the current administration with almost no alternative than try and repair the eroded trust (which ultimately may be a good thing: nothing wrong with consistently positive foreign policy for a change).
3. Siemens (from Germany) is developing nuclear cooperation with Russia, Areva (from France) with China, Iran is sending a satellite in space with Russian help and Russo-Chinese and Russo-Indian military cooperation (not without their own problems) is developing. It looks like Joe Biden is on his way to start repairing the damage done by the Bush administration in alienating the Europeans. The alternative will be an undesirable anti-American Euro-Russo alliance (or even worse Euro-Russo-Chinese or Indian alliance. Unlikely because of the the importance of the US for these countries that will neutralize their interest in anti US arrangements. Possible US protectionism though could make that option more viable.

That's why I think Afghanistan is the smallest American foreign policy problem. I regret to be cynical but who cares about that illiterate mountain people and a bunch of smelly Taliban with flea infested beards. No one! Just cut of their sources of international currency and they will literally have no money to travel abroad to cause trouble. (If you really care about the Afghan people think about how to offer them better livelihood than growing poppies for the Taliban instead of how to send more troops that might be cheaper and more effective).

So I suggest:
1. Get Russia into the WTO, NATO and the EU which will lead to better transparency and trust. Keeping them out gives the government the excuse to brake international norms.
2. Get the Russian army into Afghanistan (if they are to share the fruits of democracy they should share the responsibilities too).
3. Increase academic exchange between the two countries for two reasons:
a) that may actually benefit the US in the flow of technology and b) that will increase understanding and good will between the two countries and make it more difficult for the ruling elites to resort to war mongering and scare tactics.
c)send government funded consultants to help improve Russian economy (no one want's to fight on a full belly:)

Passion or Reason? Coercion or Cooperation? War and Peace!

Passion or Reason? Coercion or Cooperation? War and Peace!
I believe both. Passion to tell me what I want and Reason to tell me how to get it.
I don't believe passion should be suppressed.
If it is there it must be for a reason.
Yet it can wreck havoc.
Reason left on its own tends towards confusion wondering what's the meaning of life.
Yet people should be free to follow their passions in any way they choose (if they live by themselves in the jungle). If they choose to live with other people and enjoy civilization they they agree not to harm others or get in their way and even better help them follow their passions and they will probably help you follow yours. That sounds good but is often so hard to achieve. It requires communication, compromise, consensus which so often lead to endless delays and feared dead ends.
The alternative is easy: coercion does not require endless communication, painful compromise or elusive consensus. It has worked during the ages. In fact it has worked successfully over the ages in conjunction with cooperation. People united in families, tribes, nations, classes and castes to be able to oppress and enslave and reap the benefits. And it worked. It worked so well that it turned war into the pinnacle of human aspirations of achievement. The best inventors, thinkers, strategists and politicians put their efforts in war and it paid until war grew out of proportion with the industrialized massacre of WWII and especially with the resultant nuclear weapons and systems for their delivery with global access.
At that time one of the creators of these weapons Andrei Sakharov found out that science and technology can only develop in free discussion and so does society.
The new weapons made war not only unreasonable but unthinkable.
Unfortunately some of these weapons were in the hands of despotic and corrupt communist regimes. The United States government undertook two dramatically different approaches both of them successful. Passionately defending human rights in the USSR and its satellites led to the premature death of European communism. In China the pragmatic reasonable approach of improving relations and trade preferences led to the only successful communist country in modern times continuing to exist with US help though no longer that hostile if at all..
How is peace better achievable?
Reason without passion can lead to brilliant solutions and enhance understanding. Yet passion I believe should tell us what we really want. Not what other tell us but that what our heart wants deep inside. The passion that is the source of our fondest dreams. The dreams that always come true.
If the USSR and China problems were solved so easily then the Middle East should be far easier bearing in mind the relative weakness of the corrupt regimes there. It will be extremely easy if the goal is set properly: what we really want. What is that that we want and the people there want and will wholeheartedly support. The solution is simple.