View From Abroad: Europe, India and Modi — could be starting over (Originally published 20/06/2015 at dawn.com)
It has taken one year, but Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has finally signalled an interest in reviving ties with the European Union. And the EU is ready to reciprocate, albeit cautiously.India has in fact long been the big gap in the EU’s outreach to Asia. While India and the EU declared that they were strategic partners some years ago, the relationship has never really taken off.Indians complained the EU was distracted by problems at home and its focus on China. Europeans said India was too mesmerised by the US to pay attention to Europe. Contacts between the two sides were desultory, slow-moving and lacklustre.Finally, after a year-long wait, it looks like this could change. Whether it is his “Make in India” campaign or plans for “Digital India” and “smart cities”, Modi knows he needs European know-how and money. Europe, for its part, is eager to be involved in the massive overhaul of the Indian economic system that the prime minister is promising.Modi’s warm embrace of foreign partners could soon therefore also extend to the EU and not just national European governments. To make the Delhi-Brussels rapprochement sustainable, action is required in some important areas.First, after a year of little or no high-level contact, Delhi and Brussels must resume negotiations on the much delayed Bilateral Trade and Investment Agreement (BTIA), a comprehensive deal covering all areas in goods, services and public procurement in both markets. Once signed, the agreement could act as an important launching pad for increased European investments in India.Second, India’s new economic programme opens up fresh avenues for increased EU-India alliance which go beyond the two sides’ traditional interaction. This could include cooperation in areas where both sides have a strong economic interest such as infrastructure investments, sustainable urbanisation, innovation and synergies between “Digital India” and the EU’s agenda for a Digital Single Market.Third and most importantly, there are hopes that EU and Indian leaders could meet for summit talks, possibly in November this year to coincide with the G20 summit in Antalya, Turkey. With no bilateral summit held over the last three years — the last such gathering was in February 2012 in Delhi — the EU-India relationship is in desperate need of renewed political direction to give it a new lease of life.Both sides agree that EU-India relations need to be broadened to include a “beyond-trade” agenda — and that Modi’s wide-ranging modernisation programme offers ample opportunities for such new synergies. Realistically, however, a quick relaunch of the stalled BTIA negotiations is required to get the relationship back on a constructive track and for discussions to begin in new areas.This may now happen. EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström and Indian Commerce Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, who met on the margins of an OECD meeting in Paris on June 4, have agreed to restart the BTIA talks as soon as possible. Contacts are expected to resume soon, leading to cautious hopes that the deal — eight years in the making — will finally be clinched early next year.The EU has made clear that it is targeting the emerging well-off Indian middle class for enhanced market access in automobiles, wines and spirits, and cheese. Brussels is also calling for reform in Indian laws on intellectual property rights, trade and environment, trade and labour, and wants liberal access in insurance, banking and retail trade. India, for its part, is insisting on more labour mobility, professional work visas and recognition as a data-secure country to attract more European investments in its high-tech sector.With two-way trade estimated at around €72.5 billion in 2014 while the EU’s investment stock in India was €34.7 billion in 2013, there is certainly ample room for improvement. But agreement on BTIA will require that both sides summon up the political will to look beyond the array of technical issues to the deeper strategic importance of their relations.In order to get India and the EU talking to each other on these and other equally interesting topics, Modi’s can-do spirit needs to filter down to different, less adventurous echelons of the Indian bureaucracy. The European External Action Service, meanwhile, must work in tandem with the European Commission’s trade and other departments to hammer out a fresh EU-India agenda for action which looks at new areas and interests. Such an action plan should be short, snappy and action-oriented, rather than the long wish list which the EU traditionally draws up with and for its partners. Hopefully, Such a pithy document could then be approved at the EU-India summit later this year.Above all, both sides must take a fresh look at each other. European member states have already recognised the importance of India, both as a regional actor and an influential global player. It is time the EU institutions shed their reservations and engaged with India as an increasingly powerful 21st century partner.Equally, India should recognise that while relations with national European governments are important, the EU also has much to offer. It would be a pity if the full potential of EU-India ties were to remain untapped and unexplored for another long period.
View from Abroad: Can’t live with EU — can’t live without EU (Originally published 30/05/2015 at dawn.com)
The European Union is gearing up for another bout of prolonged, agonising and internal soul-searching.Reflection on Europe’s future, its identity and role in a rapidly changing world is certainly necessary. But the European landscape has become increasingly complicated, making it imperative that even as it ponders over its future, the EU deals with the many crises on its borders — and beyond.Also, at a time when unity is a compelling necessity, many of the 28 EU countries often appear to be headed in different and often contradictory directions.Take a look: Cameron calls for ‘flexible and imaginative’ EU reformsThere is no denying that triggered by demands by Britain’s newly re-elected Prime Minister David Cameron for an across the board overhaul of key EU priorities, the bloc looks set to enter another period of deep introspection on its future direction, main concerns and general raison d’etre.Britain will hold a referendum — probably next year — on whether it should remain in the EU. But London is not alone in envisaging a withdrawal from the Union.There is also dangerous talk of a Greek exit from the Eurozone as Athens struggles to meet its massive financial obligations vis-à-vis its international lenders.Meanwhile, Poland has elected a conservative new president, Andrzej Duda, while Spain seems to have voted in the opposite — leftist — direction in recent regional elections.In addition, the European economy remains mired in stagnation. Jobs remain scarce across the bloc while the debate on immigration and reception of refugees becomes ever more toxic and complex.Ironically, even as Europeans wring their hands in despair over their many interrelated problems, countries outside the bloc can’t wait to get in.Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia have joined the long list of countries which want a so-called “road map” leading up to membership of the EU.They are not going to get any such thing. At a meeting in Riga last week, the EU made clear that while it wanted closer relations with the three countries — and despite the growing influence of Russia in the region — EU membership was not on the cards.Also in Europe, the leaders of six Western Balkan countries have told the EU that they are becoming impatient with their long wait to join the bloc and needed EU funds to keep up reforms.The prime ministers of Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia, Bosnia, Kosovo and Albania, all hoping to join the bloc, have said their cooperation should be rewarded with projects like new road and rail links.Slovenia and Croatia are the only countries in the region to have joined the EU. The others have lagged behind because of conflicts with neighbours after the break-up of Yugoslavia and a failure to achieve reform.And then there is Turkey which is still waiting on the sidelines, anxious to become an EU member but unlikely to become one any time in the future.For the moment, all eyes are on Britain and Prime Minister Cameron’s calls for a renegotiation of the EU’s Treaty of Lisbon, the latest version of its constitution.Many EU countries are sympathetic to Britain’s demands for an overhaul of the EU — but do not want another long, difficult and complicated treaty negotiation.Details of what Britain really wants are still deliberately sketchy. But, some salient demands stand out.First, Cameron wants Britain to opt out from the EU ambition to forge an “ever closer union” of the peoples of Europe.He wants to restrict access to the British labour market of EU migrants.And he would like to free business from red tape and “excessive interference” from Brussels and providing access to new markets through “turbo charging” free trade deals with America and AsiaFinally, he says Britain would resist any move towards a European army and has ruled out Britain joining the euro.Controversially, Cameron has said that while British, Irish and Commonwealth citizens over 18 who are resident in the UK will be eligible to vote, nationals from other EU countries residing in the UK will not.Very few EU leaders would like Britain to leave the bloc. Britain’s membership of the EU is good for both Britain and other European states.But many in Brussels and other EU capitals are becoming increasingly frustrated with the tone and content of the toxic British debate on Europe.As a result, many are warning that Britain may have to leave in order to ensure the survival of the EU.The prospect of a Greek exit from the Eurozone is equally problematic, with many worried of the repercussions of such a move on the credibility of the single currency.Still, while things may look very complicated for those inside the EU, membership of the club remains a goal for many of the EU’s neighbours. As Turkey has learned, however, getting a seat at the EU table is not easy. It requires hard work, time and effort — and a great deal of patience.
View from Abroad: A week of tears, tragedy and shame (Originally published 23/05/2015 at dawn.com)
They may disagree on many issues, but as they struggled to respond to their respective refugee crises, the European and Asian governments acted with an equally distressing disregard for human life.The Europeans showed little concern for the human rights and much — touted “European values” of tolerance etc that they often preach on the international stage and in their dealings with other states. The Asians illustrated an equal ruthlessness and lack of humanity.The Europeans turned a deaf ear to the Vatican’s appeal for mercy and charity. The Asian nations had little pity for the plight of fellow Muslims.In Europe, as the refugee crisis in the Mediterranean Sea worsened, with thousands of desperate African, Arab and Asian refugees continuing to arrive on Italian and Greek shores, the 28 European Union countries squabbled over the number of people they could “realistically” be expected to allow on to their territory.Plans were drawn up for a naval operation against the human traffickers. There was toxic talk of keeping out as many as possible of the world’s huddled masses.Take a look: In Asian seas, Rohingya migrants have nowhere to landIn Asia, the 10-nation Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) showed itself to be even more inhumane as Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia left thousands of Rohingya refugees adrift on the high seas, adamant that they could not be expected to open their doors to Myanmar’s persecuted Muslim minority.The Rohingyas were eventually given temporary shelter by Malaysia and Indonesia, but only after repeated scoldings by the United Nations to protect migrants and refugees stranded on the vessels, to give priority to saving lives, protecting rights, and respecting human dignity.Amazingly, Mynamar where persecution against the Rohingyas is rife escaped Asean censure. Thailand which has received many of the migrants said it was not going to be taking in any more. None of the other Asean states said a word of protest.A meeting to discuss the problem has been called at the end of the month — but many believe that Myanmar is unlikely to attend.Significantly, UN officials, including the UN High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein have also appealed strongly to European leaders to put human life, rights and dignity first when agreeing on a common response to what they called the “tragedy of epic proportions” unfolding in the Mediterranean Sea, where some 1,600 people have died this year trying to flee their strife-torn homelands.Certainly, it isn’t easy for any country to open its doors to thousands of foreigners in one go and to provide them with food, water and shelter — and a future.But in a world of war, violence, extremism, persecution and poverty, the mass movement of desperate people is inevitable. Pakistan opened its doors to millions of Afghans. Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey are taking in displaced Syrians.The situation of so-called “stateless” people is even worse. Palestinian refugees have been in camps for decades as have so-called “Biharis”. The Rohingyas, chased out by the Buddhist extremists in Myanmar, are unwelcome across Southeast Asia. Lampedusa in Italy is crowded with men, women and children of many different nationalities — but as they flee war and poverty, often leaving their documents behind, they might as well be stateless.The number of migrants entering the EU illegally almost tripled last year. Of the nearly 170,000 migrants who crossed the Mediterranean to Italy in 2014, more than 3,200 lost their lives trying to reach Europe. During the first two months of this year, arrivals were up 43 per cent versus the same period last year.The outlook for Asean is equally grim. Nearly 31,000 refugees took to the boats in the last three months of 2014, followed by another 25,750 in the first quarter of 2014. Europe’s initial response to the mass arrival of the refugees was feeble, disjointed and inadequate. But the reality of the human tragedy unfolding in what many now call the “sea of death” finally forced governments into action — of sorts.It’s still not clear if the distribution of the hapless people among EU member states will take place as the European Commission would like. Britain and France have already said no. With Europe’s Far Right xenophobic leaders breathing down their necks, others are not too keen either.Asean’s callousness is not unexpected. Countries in the region don’t really have a tradition of caring much about human rights and have a policy of not interfering in the affairs of others.Still, the lack of humanity initially shown by the region towards the desperate Rohingyas is cause for dismay. Most of Myanmar’s 1.1 million Rohingya Muslims are stateless and live in apartheid-like conditions. Almost 140,000 were displaced in clashes with ethnic Rakhine Buddhists in 2012.In addition to taking in the refugees, Asean must demand that Myanmar stop the continuing violence against Rohingyas. The credibility and reputation of the region is at stake. Asean may want to focus on high economic growth and its plans to build a frontier-free common market. But it would be a pity if it lost its soul in the process.
View From Abroad: Getting connected — the secret to reviving Asia-Europe ties (Originally published 16/05/2015 at dawn.com)
To count in an increasingly complex and interdependent world, you have to be connected. This is true for individuals, institutions, companies, continents, regions and countries. The growth of social media sites is testimony to the increased connectivity of individuals and groups.No connections translate into lack of influence. It means no voice, no role and no chance to make an impact. What’s true for individuals is also true for countries. The nations which have clout in this rapidly-changing 21st century are those that are connected to the rest of the world.That’s why the European Union is busy breaking down internal barriers to trade, services and the movement of goods among its 28-member states. It is also the reason that the EU and the United States are negotiating an ambitious and trade-boosting Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and it is also why the US is also hoping to conclude the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TTP) negotiations by the end of the year.Asians are embarked on a headline-grabbing connectivity agenda of their own. The Connectivity Masterplan drawn up by Asean (Association of South-East Asian Nations) is impressive in its scope and content. And of course China’s “One Belt, One Road” initiative is making waves worldwide.As these different initiatives illustrate, connectivity can and does take many forms. The first focus is clearly on transport — building roads, bridges, railways as well as maritime and air routes. There are also digital networks.Connectivity is also about building networks that connect people, schools and colleges, media, civil society organisations, businesses, policymakers and institutions.Being connected is good for the economy by helping to boost trade and investments and creating jobs. It is good for creativity and innovation. It is good for fostering mutual understanding. And, of course, it is very good for peace and stability.And that’s why is encouraging to see the attention now being paid to Asia-Europe connectivity. The topic is high on the agenda of Asem (Asia Europe Meetings) and is being widely recognised as a vital element in the efforts to revive Asem for its third decade.Certainly, compared to 1996 when Asem was first launched in Bangkok in 1996 or even 10 years ago, there is now a stronger EU-Asian conversation on trade, business, security and culture. As Asem celebrates its 20th anniversary in Mongolia next year, connectivity is expected to be an important driver for further Asia-Europe cooperation.Asia-Europe economic connectivity has grown. With total Asia-Europe trade in 2012 estimated at 1.37 trillion euros, Asia has become the EU’s main trading partner, accounting for a third of total trade and surpassing the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta). More than a quarter of European outward investments head for Asia while Asia’s emerging global players are seeking out business deals in Europe.The increased connectivity is reflected in the mutual Asia-Europe quest to negotiate Free Trade Agreements and investment accords. The EU and China are currently negotiating a bilateral investment agreement. The FTAs concluded by the EU with South Korea and Singapore and similar deals under negotiation with Japan, India and individual Asean countries are important in consolidating EU-Asia relations.Beyond trade and economics, Asia and Europe are linked through an array of cooperation accords. Discussions on climate change, pandemics, illegal immigration, maritime security, urbanisation and green growth, among others, are frequent between multiple government ministries and agencies in both regions, reflecting a growing recognition that 21st century challenges can only be tackled through improved global governance and, failing that, through “patchwork governance” involving cross-border and cross-regional alliances.Importantly, connectivity is the new Asem buzzword. The significance of Asia-Europe connectivity — including digital connectivity — was underscored by the Asem summit in Milan last year, with leaders underlining the contribution increased ties could make to economic prosperity and sustainable development and to promoting free and seamless movement of people, trade, investment, energy, information, knowledge and ideas and greater institutional linkages.The summit urged the establishment of an integrated, sustainable, secure, efficient and convenient air, maritime and land transportation system, including intermodal solutions, in and between Asia and Europe. It also noted the usefulness of an exchange of best practices and experiences on areas of common interest, relating for example to the governance of the EU Single Market and the implementation of the Master Plan on Asean Connectivity.A meeting of Asem summit in Milan transport ministers held in Riga discussed a common vision for the development of transport networks between Asia and Europe and emphasised the significance of connectivity between the two regions for achieving economic prosperity and sustainable development. The importance of railway links was especially underlined.Certainly, much of the talk on Asia-Europe connectivity is centred on Chinese President Xi Jinping’s plans for the Silk Road Economic Belt and a 21st century maritime Silk Road (termed together “One Belt, One Road”) aimed at building two economic corridors with important development implications for many nations, creates new opportunities for further China-EU cooperation in areas such as infrastructure, trade and investment as well as energy and resources.The initiative raises many questions: how will Europe benefit from the construction of the Silk Road Economic Belt? What is the potential for synergies between the Chinese and European infrastructure and connectivity policies? Which sectors are likely to benefit most from such cooperation? What will be the role of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank in financing the “One Belt, One Road” initiative? What is the role of youth and women in the drive to connect Asia and Europe?Is it only about infrastructure or can Asem also encourage institutional and people-to-people connectivity? The answer was given at a meeting of Asem education ministers — also in Riga — which highlighted the importance Asia-Europe cooperation in areas like mobility of students, teachers, researchers, ideas and knowledge. Finally, while increased connectivity would offer opportunities for business and trade, the darker security implications linked to the cross-border movement of arms, drugs and terrorists also need to be addressed.
Shada Islam interview: ‘AIIB will bring important input to infrastructure investment'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyFf1t1VnSw
View from abroad: When it comes to Hungary, Europe should practise what it preaches (Originally published 09/05/2015 at dawn.com)
Believe it or not, there is more to the European Union than the recent elections in Britain and London’s erratic and volatile relationship with Brussels.The EU is also not just about the dire financial and economic straits in which Greece finds itself — and unrelenting speculation about whether or not Athens is ready to exit the troubled Eurozone.In addition to fears of a Brexit and Grexit, Berlin is mired in a new spying scandal which threatens to engulf German Chancellor Angela Merkel.And, of course, the EU is under attack over its less-than-impressive response to the humanitarian tragedy unfolding on its southern shores as hundreds of refugees and economic migrants drown even as they seek to enter “Fortress Europe”.The EU’s southern and eastern neighbourhoods are in turmoil. Relations with Russia remain tense and EU governments have no influence over events in the Middle East.These and other troubles facing the 28-nation bloc capture the media spotlight and lead to endless hand-wringing over the EU’s future.All of these troubles deserve attention. But, interestingly, neither the media nor EU policymakers appear to be paying serious attention to a country — Hungary — whose leaders appears intent on defying many of the key values — human rights, democracy and tolerance — that the EU holds so dear.It is an important paradox. The EU wields enormous power over countries which are seeking membership of the 28-nation club. But once a so-called “candidate country” joins the Union, Brussels loses much of its influence over the future direction of a “member state”.This is exactly what has happened with Hungary and some other “new” EU countries which joined the Union earlier this decade.Before it entered the EU club, Hungary had to meet very strict criteria on issues like democracy and adherence to the principles of a market economy. Human rights standards had to be adhered to. Every move made by the government was scrutinised and judged.No longer. Hungary is now accused of a host of sins — and while Brussels often chides and scolds, it has little — actually it has NO — power to change the course of events in the country.There is no doubt: Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban is the bad boy of Europe. He cultivates close links with President Vladimir Putin at a time when the rest of the EU is seeking to distance itself from the mercurial Russian leader.Putin’s visit to Hungary earlier this year was widely seen as a defiance of the EU’s decision to keep cool diplomatic relations with Russia.More controversially, Orban has sent shock waves across the EU by insisting that the bloc should protect its borders against immigration by using military force because it doesn’t need new migrants.While other EU leaders in Brussels struggled to come up with a coherent plan to stem the tide of immigrants seeking shelter in Europe, Orban urged tougher measures.“Europe’s borders must be protected. We cannot be like a piece of cheese with holes in it so that they [immigrants] can be crossing in and out. Serious police and military steps must be taken and also steps that they remain at home,” he said.Going even further, Orban said the Hungarian government wanted to be able to detain all those who cross borders illegally, something that is only allowed in exceptional cases under EU law. It also wanted to have migrants work to cover the costs of their accommodation or detention in Hungary.In a questionnaire to be sent out to eight million citizens over 18 years of age, Hungarians will be asked to answer 12 questions on whether “the mismanagement of the immigration question by Brussels may have something to do with increased terrorism”.“The questions are leading and manipulative,” according to Dutch MEP Sophie In’ t Veld who said the whole questionnaire was “horrible”. Her colleague Cecilia Wikstrom, a Swedish liberal MEP, said it showed how Orban is distancing Hungary from Europe and “transforming Hungary into a mini-Russia”.There are suggestions that Orban, whose Fidesz party has seen a plunge in polls recently, is seeking to embrace issues championed by the far-right Jobbik party, the largest opposition force in Hungary.Hungary’s EU partners are equally vexed at the prime minister’s statements in favour of re-introducing the death penalty.Orban “should immediately make clear that this is not his intention. Would it be his intention, it would be a fight,” EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker has warned.Budapest has since then retracted Orban’s statements, saying it has no plans to restore the death penalty.Worryingly for Brussels, Orban has also staged an autocratic crackdown on the nation’s press, which the independent watchdog Freedom House now ranks as only “partly free”.While the EU has so far managed to keep Hungary in check, the country is a worrying example of how things can go very wrong in the heart of Europe and the European Union.EU officials and members of the European Parliament rant and rave about Hungary and Orban but the stark truth is that while the EU wields a huge stick before a country joins the club — demanding changes in government rules and regulations and overall conduct — its influence dims once a country becomes a member.So, while the talk in Brussels is understandably about Britain, Greece and Germany, it is time that EU leaders exerted some real pressure to bring Hungary in line with Europe’s standards of conduct.It’s about consistency, coherence in the EU and above all making sure that Europe practices what it preaches to the rest of the world.
ASEM: renewal and revival for the third decade
Asian and European leaders will celebrate the twentieth anniversary of ASEM (Asia-Europe Meeting) at their summit in Ulan Bator, Mongolia, next year. ASEM has come a long way since its launch in Bangkok in March 1996. Even as leaders take stock of past achievements, however, the ASEM summit in 2016 must upgrade the Asia-Europe partnership by setting it on a renewed and reinvigorated track for its third decade.The omens are good. ASEM today is more energised and vibrant than at any time in recent years. Governments in both regions seem to have discarded earlier inertia and lack of interest in ASEM in favour of a more constructive and upbeat approach. The ASEM summit in Milan in October 2014 and the meeting of foreign ministers in Delhi in 2013 injected new momentum into the Asia-Europe relationship by reviewing and simplifying ASEM’s content, procedures and outreach. Still, more needs to be done. In the years ahead, governments must strike a satisfactory balance between using ASEM as a dialogue forum and meeting demands for enhanced action-oriented cooperation on selected themes of common interest.Above all, ASEM needs a new over-arching 21st Century narrative and raison d’etre which connects it to a broader global conversation on living and working together in an interdependent but increasingly anxious age. Asia and Europe face a growing list of common concerns ranging from climate change to tackling pandemics and combating violent extremism. The two regions economies are even more closely linked than before. A fragile security environment in one region prompts unease and tensions in the other.Exploiting ASEM’s full potential therefore is about more than just improving the channels of communication between Asia and Europe. It is also about providing global public goods, better governance, managing complexities and tensions and working together in trying to shape a new world order. More than ever before, ASEM’s focus should therefore be on Asia-Europe cooperation to tackle wider regional and global challenges. It must also increase civil society involvement in ASEM in order to increase its visibility and relevance in the long-term.This discussion paper explores the relevance and importance of ASEM in a rapidly-evolving and often volatile global order and looks at efforts under way to revive ASEM through the introduction of new formats and a sharper focus on content as well as through enhanced engagement with civil society and the media. It makes policy recommendations for energising the Asia-Europe partnership and ensuring that leaders hammer out a new blueprint for reviving ASEM at its 20th anniversary summit in 2016. The paper underlines the author’s view that ASEM is a vital element of Asia-Europe cooperation and global networking but needs a rethink – and a new narrative to make it relevant and credible in an unpredictable and complex “no polar” world.The full text of the policy paper may be accessed through the link below:http://www.friendsofeurope.org/media/uploads/2015/03/ASEM-STUDY.pdf
View from abroad : Transatlantic alliance: fact and fiction (Originally published 21/03/2015 at dawn.com)
So here’s the fiction: America and Europe stand united against the “rest of the world”. The transatlantic alliance is strong, solid and a bulwark against the machinations of China and the world’s other emerging nations.Washington and Brussels are like-minded, like-thinking entities which see eye to eye on almost everything. Together, they can still rule the world.Perhaps in the 20th century — but no longer. Here are the facts: the world has changed from unipolar to multi-polar or even “no-polar”. For all its military might, the US no longer rules the world. For proof, look no further than the way Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu is obstructing progress on US-Iran nuclear talks.And here are some more facts: America and the EU are divided over the death penalty, Guantanamo Bay, illegal renditions, the use of torture and the revelations of spying by the National Security Agency as revealed by Edward Snowden.They disagree over how to deal with Russia and Ukraine. And while America sees China mainly as a strategic competitor, Europe is happy to work with Beijing on tackling many 21st century challenges.Certainly, there are some points of convergence. Significantly, negotiations are underway on a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), seen by many as the last attempt by a declining West to impose its economic rule-making model on a watching world.But even as they seek agreement on TTIP, many European states are posing the BIGGEST challenge to the US by deciding to join the Chinese-led, Chinese-inspired $50 billion Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) which Washington continues to firmly oppose.So far, EU members Britain, France, Germany and Italy have said they want to be founding members of the AIIB. But other Europeans will undoubtedly join their ranks.The story is not just about Washington vs Beijing; it’s about a changing world order, the shift of power from west to east, the rise of China and its challenge to years of US domination.It’s about the need to change and reform post-World War II multilateral institutions, including the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.And it’s about a world desperately in need of cash, especially for badly-needed infrastructure projects — and a rising China which has more money than it can handle.To be fair, US Secretary of Treasury Jack Lew has said that the US was not opposed to the creation of the AIIB. “There are obviously vast needs in Asia and many parts of the world for infrastructure investment,” he told a Congressional hearing on the status of the international financial system.The US concern, he said, has always been whether such an international investment bank will adhere to the high standards such as in protecting workers’ rights, the environment and dealing properly with corruption issues.The bank, proposed by President Xi Jinping in 2013 during a visit to Indonesia, is expected to be launched formally by the end of this year.All Asian countries can apply to become founding members until March 31.Chinese experts say they are looking less for European financial support and more for Europe’s management experience to share with the AIIB.France, Germany and Italy announced they would join the Bank after Britain said it was doing so last week. Australia, a key US ally in the Asia-Pacific region which had come under pressure from Washington to stay out of the new bank, has also said that it will now rethink that position. South Korea is also expected to join.Other European countries are expected to follow the bigger EU nations’ lead. And why not? Like most Asian countries, Europeans are looking to invest in new infrastructure to raise levels of connectivity across the continent.Policymakers are hoping that China will be an important contributor to the 300 billion dollar infrastructure fund announced earlier this year by European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker.Britain hopes to establish itself as the number one destination for Chinese investment. China is also a strong investor in Germany and in France.Analysts point out that the US has misplayed its hands and that the best way to ensure that China doesn’t dominate the AIIB is to fill it with other powers. This, they argue would result in much stricter governance rules and safeguards.The AIIB is not the only regional project China has proposed that Washington will have to grapple with. Beijing’s “one belt, one road” Silk Road projects are moving rapidly from theoretical to actual, much to the dismay of America and some European states.The Asian Development Bank has estimated Asia’s infrastructure needs at $750 billion a year, far beyond the ADB’s capacity. With connectivity the buzzword across the region, the new Bank is expected to be very busy pumping money into major infrastructure projects.China has also been quick to respond to huge and acute infrastructure needs in the developing world, in contrast with the lengthy project processes required by other lenders.In response to the Chinese initiatives, the Japanese government has also said it wants to focus on infrastructure projects in developing countries.World leaders at the G20 Summit in Brisbane in 2014 recognised infrastructure demand in the developing world as a new source of global growth in the aftermath of the global financial crisis.The transatlantic trade deal may see the light of the day by end-2015 — even though negotiations are tough and public resistance to the pact is high. But even if they do clinch an agreement on trade, America and Europe will not always share a similar vision of life in a rapidly-changing 21st century.
View from Abroad: Prepare for ‘hard power’ Europe (Originally published 14/03/2015 at dawn.com)
You would think the European Union has its hands full trying to ease the Eurozone crisis and make sure Greece stays within the monetary union. You also would think the 28-nation bloc was happy with its role as the world’s smartest “soft power”, with no boots on the ground but many diplomats, aid workers and trade specialists ready and willing to work for constructive change in an increasingly volatile world.You would be wrong. Forget gentle persuasion and change by incentive rather than coercion. Carrots over sticks. The EU now wants its own army. It’s a tough world and the EU wants to play as tough as the others.Resuscitating a long-held but equally long-discarded concept, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker has called for the creation of a European army to make Europe count on the global stage.No more soft words. It’s going to be about soldiers, guns and aircraft carriers. Europe wants to be a hard-nosed hard power, not a softie.Certainly, Europe is right to be worried — and to want to play hard ball. The world in 2015 is messy, chaotic and often violent, with no clear centre of power. In Europe, as Russia flexes its muscles over Ukraine, many decry the end of the post-World War security order.In Asia, re-emerging nations are clamouring for recognition, jostling each other to gain the upper hand as regional and global leaders. Everywhere, international norms and institutions built in the last century are under stress, and seemingly unable to cope with the increasing demands and insecurity of the 21st century.Juncker has said a European army would restore the EU’s foreign policy standing and show it is serious about defending its values. And he insisted that it would not be in competition with Nato, the US-led Western military alliance.“With its own army, Europe could react more credibly to the threat to peace in a member state or in a neighbouring state,” the Commission chief said in an interview with German newspaper Die Welt.He added: “One wouldn’t have a European army to deploy it immediately. But a common European army would convey a clear message to Russia that we are serious about defending our European values.”Juncker’s proposal does not come out of the blue. The EU has long harboured the idea of an army and has been working hard to forge a credible common security and defence policy for several decades.European military missions are active in the Balkans, Africa and parts of Asia. The soldiers are not there, however, to fight but to monitor elections, keep the peace and manage conflicts.Also, the EU already has battle groups that are manned on a rotational basis and meant to be available as a rapid reaction force. But they have never been used in a crisis.Finally, Europe’s defence is assured by Nato. Put bluntly, if push comes to shove, the US will come to Europe’s assistance with its military might.The timing of the latest proposal is certainly linked to criticism of what many view as Europe’s lacklustre response to Russia’s annexing of Crimea last year and support for separatist rebels in eastern Ukraine.The scene is clearly set for another long and painful — and distracting — intra-European debate. For starters, Germany likes the idea, Britain does not.German Defence Minster Ursula von der Leyen, underlined in an interview that “our future as Europeans will at some point be with a European army.”The UK government spokesman has warned, however that “our position is crystal clear that defence is a national, not an EU responsibility and that there is no prospect of that position changing and no prospect of a European army.”Geoffrey Van Orden, a conservative member of the European Parliament has accused Juncker of living in a “fantasy world”. “If our nations faced a serious security threat, who would we want to rely on — Nato or the EU? The question answers itself,” he said.Nato isn’t too happy either. The civilian and military heads of Nato have said they would welcome increased EU defence spending but cautioned the bloc against duplicating efforts.Analysts say the fundamental problem with the proposal is that, without full political union, it has no chance of becoming a credible force. So long as fierce national rivalries exist at the heart of policymaking, a common army would quickly find itself reduced to a state of impotence if required to deal with any threat to an EU state.EU member states do not often see eye to eye on major global security issues. During the 2011 Libya campaign, for example, Britain and France played a leading role in the air campaign, while Germany’s staunch opposition meant that Berlin wouldn’t even provide air-to-air refuelling tankers.More recently, deep divisions have arisen over how to tackle Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and military intervention in Ukraine, with Germany and Italy reluctant to support the economic sanctions advocated by Britain and its allies.Many argue that instead of getting caught up in acrimonious debates on a European army, the EU should focus on intensifying member states’ defence cooperation.“Whatever was Jean-Claude Juncker thinking when he called for the creation of an EU army? The notion may have appeal in Germany and perhaps in Luxembourg, too. Elsewhere, it serves only to supply Europhobes with more evidence of Brussels’s reflexive urge to expand its power,” said Nick Witney, senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations.Whitney may be right. But Juncker is in no mood to back down. And if Germany, the EU’s most influential member state likes the idea — and France opts in — one day there will be a European army — of sorts.
View From Abroad: Europe needs lucid advice on diversity, not US grandstanding (Originally published 21/02/2015 at dawn.com)
Pity embattled European Union leaders. Not only are they grappling with tough-guy Russian President Vladimir Putin, striving to prevent the collapse of the ceasefire in Ukraine while also preventing Greece from exiting the eurozone, they now also have the United States — and Israel — grandstanding and haranguing them on how to reduce racism and make Europe a better and more inclusive place.Europe certainly needs advice on dealing with immigrant communities and the rise in anti-Semitism across the bloc is cause for great concern. But reading the barrage of criticism levelled at European leaders over the last few days I could not help thinking about people in glasshouses not throwing stones at others.Neither the US nor Israel is in a position to give Europe lessons on dealing with minority communities. Neither, by the way, are any Muslim-majority countries whose track record on dealing with minority populations is quite simply abysmal.True, Europe needs to engage in some deep soul-searching on just what kind of a society and future it wants: one in which “foreigners” are treated with contempt, where asylum seekers are allowed to drown as they head for European shores, where the Far Right appears to speak for all of Europe or a more open, diverse and multicultural/religious/ethnic place where all people feel at home.What Europe needs therefore are thoughtful, well-reasoned and lucid advice and counsel on developing new pro-minority policies, ensuring better integration and combating the toxic rhetoric of xenophobic Far Right parties, which currently dominate Europe’s societal and political discourse.Such advice can come from all sources. But make no mistake: this is a global challenge, not just a European one. Such a debate is necessary in most countries, including the US and Israel — and all Muslim ones. When it comes to accepting difference and diversity, all countries are sinners.Discriminatory treatment is not just reserved for those who practise a different religion, come from a different ethnic group or just simply look different but also for those with physical disabilities, different political ideas, a different sexual orientation or just who don’t “fit in”. In some countries, just being a woman means being treated as an inferior being.“Good” countries are aware of the challenges and hammer out — and implement — laws which ban such discriminatory treatment. They develop an inclusive narrative and make sure that criminals are brought to justice. They strive to make everyone feel at home.“Bad” countries do the opposite. They may be aware of the problem but often pretend that their nation is perfect. They don’t stand up for the victims of racism/discrimination. There is no focus on accountability or securing justice.Yes, that is an over-simplification. But so is the advice that Europe has received recently. US presidential hopeful Jeb Bush recently told foreign policy experts that America under his rule would welcome immigrants. Unlike Europe, Bush said that “we come in 34 different flavours” and “we have the potential to be young and dynamic again”.US Vice President Joe Biden told last week’s three-day White House summit on countering violent extremism that Europe was vulnerable to radicalised attacks because immigrants in the EU are less integrated into the local societies compared with the US. “I’m not suggesting ... that I think America has all the answers here. We just have a lot more experience,” Biden said and stressed that “inclusion counts”.Bush and Biden are right in some aspects: America could some years ago claim to be less hysterical about Islam than Europe. But the Tea Party and Fox News are proof that the anti-Muslim diatribes are now the same on both sides of the Atlantic. That’s no surprise given the transatlantic cross-fertilisation of “ideas” on Islam-bashing under way.Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meanwhile has made a much-publicised call for European Jews to move to Israel after recent terrorist killings in Denmark. Significantly, his views are prompting a backlash from not only European leaders but Jews themselves. Commentators argue that for many Jews, such remarks ignore, and even insult, the acceptance they feel in the countries where they and their families have often lived for generations.“We are a little confused by this call, which is basically like a call to surrender to terror,” said Arie Zuckerman, senior executive at the European Jewish Congress. “It may send a wrong message to the leaders of Europe.” According to Rabbi Menachem Margolin, “to come out with this kind of statement after each attack is unacceptable.”Not surprisingly many European Muslims feel similarly irritated when leaders from Muslim countries try and give advice to them.Better advice has come from Francois Crepeau, a UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, who has said that the EU needs to change its migrant policy as it doesn’t answer to the problems which are emerging. “A common narrative celebrating mobility and diversity, recognising real labour market needs, as well as the needs of migrants, based on human rights guarantees and access to justice, must be developed,” said Crépeau.The UN Rapporteur is right. European leaders must act urgently to stop the rise in Islamophobia and build more inclusive societies. They should stop pandering to the Far Right. More humane policies are needed towards the endless waves of asylum seekers stuck in Lampedusa and other centres. Above all, attitudes to change.Proof that this can happen is provided by the new Greek government led by Alexis Tsipras. Greece has seen a surge in racist assaults in recent years, with the Golden Dawn fascist party intimidating immigrants and human rights advocates.The new government has pledged to close down detention centres for illegal immigrants that have long been criticised by rights groups as inhuman.Tasia Christodoulopoulou, a veteran human rights attorney who is now Greece’s first-ever minister for immigration, has said Athens has to move quickly to improve the poor reputation it has acquired handling those fleeing poverty and deprivation.Tsipras may be getting flak from other European leaders when it comes to his eurozone politics. But his EU partners could learn a thing or two about trying to build a better society from Greece.
View From Abroad: European lessons for Asian security (Originally published 14/02/2015 at dawn.com)
The just-negotiated ceasefire to stem the conflict in eastern Ukraine may or may not last. But the hard work put in by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French leader Francois Hollande as they negotiated for over 18 hours with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and Russia’s Vladimir Putin points to the still-potent and constructive security role that European states can play in their neighbourhood.It also underlines that — when it comes to the crunch — it’s Germany, France, and sometimes Britain, rather than the European Union which can do the hard labour involved in defusing tensions and securing a semblance of peace.True, the crisis has spotlighted divisions in the European Union over relations with Russia. The current sanctions regime against Moscow is not popular with all EU states.And certainly, the collapse of previous ceasefires has stoked doubts as to whether this one will hold. But before they throw up their hands in despair and accept confrontation with Russia — or follow America in seeking to send military aid to the Ukrainian army — European leaders will certainly try — and try again — to secure peace in the neighbourhood.And the lesson that peace is worth patiently, painstakingly and repeatedly striving for is an important one for Asia’s many star-crossed nations.This is also why the new European Security Strategy that the EU intends to hammer out by the end of the year should not ignore the different ways in which Europe can help Asia to deal with its many security challenges.Much has changed in the world since the last European Security Strategy was released in 2003, in the aftermath of the Iraq war. As EU foreign and security policy chief Federica Mogherini pointed out at the Munich Security Conference last weekend, the world today is a disorderly place. “The world is far from being a unipolar one, nor is it truly multipolar ... maybe we are living in times of an absence of poles,” Mogherini underlined, adding: “The big question for all of us is ... how do we manage complexity?”Asians are also struggling with the same challenge. For the first time in history, Asia is home to four — even five — important powers: a rising and increasingly assertive China, Japan that wants more influence, Korea searching for an expanded regional role, India which is being wooed by many as a counterweight to China and Asean, the regional grouping which has made peace and cooperation its leitmotif for many years.Trade and investment are the backbone of EU-Asia relations so far. But an EU-Asia conversation on security is set to be the new frontier. The EU cannot afford to be outside the loop of the dramatic geopolitical power games, rivalry and tension being played out in Asia between China, Japan and India — and the 10 south-east Asian members of Asean. Increased spending on arms across Asia is one indication that the region feels insecure, fragile and uneasy.The so-called Asian “paradox” — the fact that the region’s economies are closely knit together but governments are still grappling with historical tensions, is pushing some in Asia to take another, closer look at how Europe has been able to deal with its own tensions.Asian perceptions of security are also changing. The focus on territorial security is shifting to the importance of non-traditional security threats, such as climate change, pandemics, extremism and human trafficking, with some Asians putting the emphasis on “human security”. Across Asia, there is a recognition of the need for a collective or cooperative security architecture. But cooperative security in Asia remains underdeveloped, lacking collective security, regional peacekeeping and conflict resolution functions.Differing threat perceptions, mutual distrust, territorial disputes, concerns over sovereignty make things very difficult.But as their views of security evolve, for many in Asia, the EU is the prime partner for dealing with non-traditional security dilemmas, including food, water and energy security as well as climate change.Asian views of Europe’s security role are changing. Unease about the dangerous political and security fault lines that run across the region and the lack of a strong security architecture has prompted many in Asia to take a closer look at Europe’s experience in ensuring peace, easing tensions and handling conflicts.As Asia grapples with historical animosities and unresolved conflicts, earlier scepticism about Europe’s security credentials are giving way to recognition of Europe’s “soft power” in peace-making and reconciliation, crisis management, conflict resolution and preventive diplomacy, human rights, the promotion of democracy and the rule of law. Europeans, too, are becoming more aware of the global implications of instability in Asia. Clearly, the EU as the world’s largest trading bloc needs safe trading routes and sea lanes.Also, Europeans are now recognising that fragile peace in Asia will have an enormous impact on global security. That is one reason that the EU has signed Asean’s Treaty of Amity and Cooperation and is seeking entry to the East Asia Summit in order to sit beside the United States and Russia.An important challenge for the EU in its relations with Asia is to retain its identity vis-à-vis the much more dominant role played by the US. As it fashions its distinctive security role in Asia, the EU must make an effort to its own distinct profile in promoting multilateral approaches, the rule of law, good governance and regional integration.And that’s what makes the progress made with Russia over Ukraine so important.
View from Abroad: As Germany versus Greece, it’s about the people (Originally published 07/02/2015 at dawn.com)
The epic battle being fought between a tough-talking Germany which appears to want each and every European to “tighten his/her belt” and Greece’s new anti-austerity government is tearing the European Union apart.The confrontation reveals many fissures in the 28-nation bloc. For some, it’s a fight between David (Greece) and Goliath (Germany). In other words, Europe’s biggest and most powerful economy is shamefully bullying the weakest. But, as in the legend, many are betting that David will win.Others point to a confrontation between Protestant Germany which believes in under-spending, under-consuming and putting aside money for tough times and Orthodox Greece which has spent, spent, spent and is now hopelessly broke.German media rant against the lazy, good-for-nothing Greeks who are looking for more handouts. Greeks rage against a heartless Germany obsessed with austerity.The real fight, however, is not about religion, cultural prejudices, stereotypes, racist clichés and worse. It is about European priorities, values and what comes first: money or people? The battle is for the hearts — or the minds — of Europeans. For the moment, there are no winners.With their demands for a renegotiation of their country’s crippling debt burden and an end to austerity, the new Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras and his Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis are appealing to the hearts of the millions of Europeans — especially young Europeans — who have been devastated by the economic crisis.Growth may be picking up slowly but jobs are still scarce. Greece has undoubtedly been hit the hardest by the crisis. Germans say angrily that Greece was also the most profligate of the Eurozone nations. For the moment, Germany is refusing to consider debt relief for its southern partner.Across the bloc, the debate has pitted economists against each other, put the European Central Bank on a collision course with Athens and triggered an even greater rift between Berlin and Athens. EU member states are reluctant to take sides, wary of getting on the wrong side of Berlin and triggering panic in world financial markets.But Greece has sympathisers in France, Spain and Portugal, countries which have also been wriggling in Germany’s tight grip.During a much-publicised “charm offensive” last week, Greek Finance Minister Varoufakis sought to speak to the hearts of all Europeans when he urged Germany not to humiliate his country over its debts.Interestingly, Varoufakis’ sartorial style — he eschews the finance ministers’ uniform of white shirt and dark suit in favour of bright shirts and leather jackets — has been the subject of as much media comment as his stance on his country’s economic plight.The Greek finance chief has compared Greece’s situation with that of interwar Germany, telling German television: “I think of all the countries in Europe, the Germans understand best this simple message. If you humiliate a proud nation for too long and subject it to the worry of a debt deflation crisis, without light at the end of a tunnel then things come to the boil.”Differences between the two countries were in strong evidence at a tense press conference after a meeting in Berlin, when German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble and Varoufakis “agreed to disagree” over the proposals of the Syriza-led anti-austerity government.Both men refrained from angry outbursts but if there is to be a compromise, it will take time to emerge.While economists in Berlin and Athens battle it out with figures and percentage points, the rest of Europe is mourning the demise of what is often viewed as one of the bloc’s most significant and valuable achievements: solidarity.Working together, looking after each other and taking care of the most disadvantaged were supposed to be the key values and the fundamental basis of the EU. Solidarity was supposed to make the EU go round. But the economic crisis has shown the limits of solidarity.At a recent conference in Brussels, a German academic complained with a mixture of anger and sadness that Berlin was so focused on numbers that it was forgetting the human dimension of the economic crisis. “They tell me this crisis is about money, not about people,” she said.It is also my experience. In meeting after meeting, policymakers, academics, business leaders discuss the pros and cons of austerity versus growth, myriad ways to stimulate the economy, tackle global competition and increase productivity.There is little mention of the tragic toll the crisis has taken on many Europeans, especially young people, or of the growing disconnect between Europe’s decision-makers and European citizens.While European finance ministers scramble to find a satisfactory compromise, Tsipras and Varoufakis have made their point: it’s about the people, stupid.
View From Abroad: Ties with China are bright spot in Europe’s foreign policy (Originally published 31/01/2015 at dawn.com)
The new European Union Commission, in office since November last year, likes to talk of a “fresh start” for Europe. There is upbeat talk of streamlining EU actions, simplifying procedures, launching a new era of mega investment projects and revving up growth.The reality is more complicated. The election in Greece of a new anti-austerity coalition government headed by Alexis Tsipras has highlighted growing dissent and anger in the Eurozone over the unrelentingly rigid fiscal policies imposed by Germany and followed by the EU.The much-publicised 315 billion euro investment plan launched by the new European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker may look impressive on paper but is seen by many as too woolly to really generate the growth and jobs that Europe needs so desperately.Additionally, the aftermath of the terrorist attacks in Paris earlier in January means that the Far Right and anti-Islamic parties continue to gain traction and become ever more dominant in the debate on immigration.It’s equally bleak on the foreign policy front. Relations with Russia remain tense. Although there is almost agreement among the 28 EU nations on the need to maintain sanctions against Moscow, depending on their national histories and experiences, European foreign ministers’ attitudes towards Moscow range from very tough (the Baltic states and some Central and Eastern European countries) to soft (Greece and Italy).In the south, the EU is struggling to forge a coherent and meaningful strategy towards Turkey and its other Southern Mediterranean neighbours as well as the Islamic State (IS). European governments also remain divided over whether or not to recognise an independent Palestinian state.Further afield, relations with Japan, South Korea and India remain largely lacklustre and uninspiring. Unlike US President Barack Obama, no European leader can claim to have a glamorous bromance with India’s celebrity Prime Minister Narendra Modi or Japan’s Shinzo Abe.Not surprisingly therefore to many observers in Asia, EU foreign policy seems slow and plodding, focused almost exclusively on trade and business and not enough on a long-term strategy for closer political and security ties.There is one striking exception, however: China. Surprisingly in a world of flux, EU-China relations remain relatively strong, vibrant and multifaceted even as Europe dithers over Russia, India and other emerging nations.The point was made at a meeting of European think tanks in Brussels this week, with experts agreeing that Europe and China must up their engagement. Such consensus is rare in Brussels, especially among academics.Certainly, it’s their mutual economic interdependence that keeps EU-China ties dynamic and buoyant. China’s growth rates may be slowing down but its appetite for European goods and investments continues to be crucial in determining the pace and success of Europe’s economic recovery.China’s economic transformation — and plans for even more change in the coming years — demands that it has access to European know-how, experience and technology.China’s reform agenda also gives European companies myriad opportunities for enhanced trade and investments. Both sides are negotiating a formal treaty to further boost mutual investment flows.Increasingly, also in Brussels there is recognition that a deeper EU-China relationship is important in order to polish Europe’s foreign policy credentials.Europe’s one-time ambition to shape China into a “responsible” international stakeholder now appears hopelessly out-of-date and patronising. But there is no doubt that the EU needs to engage with China on a range of urgent foreign and security policy issues including relations with, Russia, Iran’s nuclear plans, policy towards the IS, fighting Ebola and combating climate change.Significantly, China has invested time, effort and money into upping its relations with Europe. Beijing is working on several tracks at the same time. The focus in recently years has been on further consolidating the China-Germany “special relationship” but also reinforcing ties with former communist nations in Central and Eastern Europe, countries in the Western Balkans and also Nordic states.Responding to critics who complained that Beijing was paying too much attention to European member states and not enough to the EU, Chinese leaders have made it a point in recent months to visit Brussels.The result is a surprisingly solid and well-rounded EU-China relationship which could even become a model for other Asian countries.A key problem, however, is that the EU still treats China as just another emerging nation rather than the regional and global mammoth that it has become. The emphasis is on bread and butter issues like trade and investments, urbanisation, good and valid subjects but do not reflect Beijing’s increasing global clout and outreach.The EU should be looking at thrashing out a new narrative for China which is truly strategic and considers issues like global governance, sustainable development goals and international terrorism.In other words, as the EU and China prepare to celebrate 40 years of their relationship, the EU-China relationship should move from the ritualistic to the strategic — as quickly as possible.
This time it can be different: SDGs need more funds, changes in mindset (Originally published 26/01/2015 at friendsofeurope.org)
Prepare for a pivotal year for development cooperation. For most of 2015, the focus will be on seeking to define a transformative agenda for poverty eradication and shaping social, economic and environmental development over the next 15 years.Priority attention will be on knitting together a “post-2015” blueprint for poverty eradication and sustainable development which follows on from the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) of 2000 and the 2012 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20). Agreement on the “Sustainable Development Goals” (SDGs) is expected at the UN General Assembly in September this year.Consensus on a new set of goals – however long – is important in order to focus minds and ensure more coherence in global development. Even more crucially, however, implementation of the SDGs will demand a broader, more inclusive mindset, more international consultation and certainly more active civil society engagement. Additional resources, renewed attention on updating existing financial tools and instruments and creating new ones will also be needed.As such, the conference on Financing for Development Conference to be held in Addis Ababa in July must be well-prepared, with participants ready to look at traditional and innovative ways to fund growth and development.Also in 2015, a climate change agreement is hoped for at the December COP21 ministerial meeting in Paris. Last but not least, the EU has designated 2015 as its first-ever European Year of Development.Significantly, the 2015 summits are linked. An agreement at the Addis Ababa financing conference will provide momentum for the dialogue on the SDGs which will, in turn, create an impetus ahead of the critical climate talks.A radically changed environmentThe rhetoric in 2000 was impressive. But fifteen years after the adoption of the MDGs, the jury is still out on nations’ record in meeting the eight targets. The headline goal for extreme poverty reduction appears to have been met five years ahead of its target. Significant successes in school enrolment and mortality rates for under-fives have been achieved (albeit at slightly less than target rates). However, progress in meeting other important indicators remains patchy.This time, it’s different. The MDGs were brief, focused, easily understood and communicated – and represented a rare international consensus for development. The SDGs reflect the concerns and priorities of a radically changed world. As EU Development Commissioner Neven Mimica pointed out, “the world is a very different place in 2015 to what it was in 2000. We can no longer focus only on eradicating poverty; today’s challenges are much more inter-related and we have to make sure that we achieve sustainable development in all of its three dimensions: environmental, social and economic.”The SDG consultative process has been long and painstaking. The 17 SDGs and 169 targets agreed by the United Nations Open Working Group and endorsed by the General Assembly last year, represent a global wish list and cover the broad themes of the MDGs – ending poverty and hunger, and improving health, education and gender equality – but also include specific goals to reduce inequality, make cities safe, address climate change and promote peaceful societies. As such, they bring together two frontiers – development and climate – and tackle global public goods problems as well as national obstacles. There’s something for everyone – almost.For purists, the list is too long, the goals too disparate. “What the world needs is a plan of action to replace the Millennium Development Goals. What’s on offer is a shopping list,” according to Kevin Watkins, Director at the Overseas Development Institute. “The 17 SDGs and 169 targets cover everything from the urgent and measurable – eliminating poverty, cutting child deaths, universal provision of education, water and sanitation, and climate stability – to the vaguely aspirational.”Certainly, the goals are going to be much more complex to describe, implement and monitor.On the plus side, however, the SDGs could encourage a more holistic approach to development and offer a chance for more partnerships and collaboration. Crucially, the SDGs will be universal, which means all countries – rich and poor – will be required to consider them when crafting their national policies. This is different from the MDGs, which were applicable to all and marketed as anti-poverty goals for poor countries.Significantly, the adoption of the SDGs goes beyond the pure development agenda. They signal a determination by nations to jointly tackle complex global challenges. The importance of sustainable development will be accepted and highlighted as fundamental. Not least, they will reinforce an unprecedented process of international consultation and commitment at a time when many are sceptical about multilateral cooperation.Global partnership for development.MDG 8 urged development actors to forge a global partnership for development. Turning that ambition into reality means focusing on finding the resources to implement the post-2015 agenda. “Funding is crucial for credibility on climate and post-2015 efforts,” according to UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon who believes that all public, private, domestic and international funding sources need to be tapped.Public financing and Official Development Aid (ODA) will be central to supporting the implementation of the SDGs. But money generated from the private sector, through tax reforms, and through a crackdown on illicit financial flows and corruption will be vital.Certainly, there will be less ODA to spur implementation. Aid flows look set to stagnate at best, and continue declining in importance to emerging economies. Public-private partnerships will be crucial. New development actors are emerging as an important source of funds for developing countries, especially for the financing of infrastructure. Foreign direct investments (FDI) in emerging countries are on the rise as are impact investments, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) activities and philanthropy.Remittances from workers abroad are a huge boon to their countries of origin. Governments are also under pressure to increase domestic resource mobilisation through more effective tax collection and anti-corruption measures.According to Amina J Mohammed, special advisor to the UN Secretary General on post-2015 development planning, “the private sector also has responsibilities and all must work in partnership, within and across sectors,” adding: “Indeed, partnership is critical but means so much more than just collaboration. Partnership is about the integration of visions, values, plans, accountability, resources and knowledge sharing.The world in 2015 will continue to be a difficult and hazardous place. The SDGs are one way of ensuring that the goal of a fairer, more equal and more stable world is kept alive.
Forget the headlines: Life is getting better (Originally published 24/01/2015 at dawn.com)
Cast a glance at the headlines and it’s clear: the world is a violent, cruel and unforgiving place. Inequality is rampant. Terrorists stalk our streets. Poor, homeless people crowd our shelters. It’s bleak and grim — and not getting better.
View From Abroad: Islamic nations should not meddle in European Muslims lives (Originally published 17/01/2015 at dawn.com)
It must be said loud and clear and repeatedly: governments in Islamic countries must stop meddling in the lives of European Muslims.Many of the 20 million or so Muslims in the European Union may still hold passports of their countries of birth, in addition to their European nationalities. They may also have families in their countries of origin, harbour fond memories of lives (or their parents’ lives) there and retain a link to these nations.But make no mistake: the concerns, priorities, needs — and values — of European Muslims are very different from those living elsewhere, not just in Muslim-majority countries but also in North America.There is an exception to this: radicalised Muslims across the globe are being financed, trained, incited and equipped by Wahabi/Salafi extremist groups with their origins in Saudi Arabia and a few other Middle East nations.Wahabi tentacles reach deep into many European Muslim and American Muslim communities just as they do across the world, including Pakistan. And the results are the same: radicalisation, extremism and — in some cases — terrorism in the name of ‘jihad’.But the majority of European Muslims — especially those born and bred in Europe or those who have made Europe their permanent home — have long stopped obsessing about what happens in Turkey, Algeria, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Egypt. They care, certainly, for these and other countries and can even help on both the political and economic fronts. But their lives and future are here in Europe. Quite simply: they are European.And just like other Europeans, their focus is on jobs, education, housing and security. Yes, European Muslims sometimes face discrimination and racism — and certainly there is a rise in anti-Islam feeling in the wake of the Paris tragedy. The rise of the toxic Far Right is a cause for concern and anxiety.But no, mostly, Muslims in Europe don’t want to go ‘back home’. Europe is their home.They certainly don’t need the ‘support’ and ‘sympathy’ of non-European Muslim leaders and governments who know nothing of Europe and whose comments — possibly well-meant — can make things worse.Take the justifiable and widespread derision at the presence of leaders from many Muslim countries at the demonstration in Paris last week in favour of freedom of expression and against terrorism, following the murder of 12 people, including two Muslims, at the Charlie Hebdo magazine.Yes, it was hypocritical and ironic, even amusing. Many of the male leaders (I did not see any Muslim female leaders) who walked solemnly in Paris are not well-known for their defence of human rights, freedom of expression and commitment to diversity. They engage in torture, repression and worse. Many support extremist groups. They clamp down hard on dissent.Some of these leaders deserve special mention. In Brussels this week, Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu made a strong and very valid call for an “inclusive European identity”, arguing passionately that Turks and Muslims in Europe should not be the target of discrimination. Just as he had marched in Paris, non-Muslim European leaders should show the same solidarity when mosques are burned, he argued.Quite true. If only Turkey did not have one of the largest number of journalists in prison, had not arrested some of the country’s top journalists working for the Zaman newspaper and did not have more than 70 Turkish journalists currently being investigated for referring to the corruption allegations against close associates of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.Bahraini Foreign Minister Sheikh Khaled bin Ahmed al-Khalifa marched in Paris, seemingly oblivious to the fact that 12 Bahraini journalists are currently detained in Bahrain, the youngest only 15.Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to France had the gall to be in the demonstration while his government has publicly flogged blogger Raef Badawi for ‘insulting Islam’ and sentenced him to 10 years in prison. And there are more floggings to come, up to 1,000 lashes.Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry was also there although his government has jailed three Al-Jazeera journalists. The blacklist also included Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.It’s not just their presence at these marches that irks, it’s also their comments on European Muslims’ lives. Yes, many of the European Muslim community were offended and disturbed by the Charlie Hebdo cartoons. But many were not. And those who do object make their feelings known through court cases, articles and discussions.And if they really don’t like it in Europe, Ahmed Aboutaleb, the Muslim mayor of Rotterdam, recently argued that they can leave.“It’s incomprehensible that you can be against freedom like that. But if you don’t like that freedom, pack your bags and leave,” Aboutaleb said to the Huffington Post, adding: “If you can’t find your place in the Netherlands, in the way we want to build a society together, leave.”Originally from Morocco and the son of an imam, Aboutaleb moved to the Netherlands in 1976 when he was 15 years old. Since becoming mayor of Rotterdam in 2009, he has broken new ground for minorities and Muslims across Europe.Europe has many examples of well-integrated, tax-paying, peaceful and successful European Muslims. There are Muslim politicians, business leaders, artists, doctors and lawyers. They may sometimes face prejudice — young European Muslims in France but also elsewhere are disenfranchised and angry. But mostly Muslims make a positive contribution to Europe’s diverse societies.If they are honest, many admit that they are better off here in Europe than in Mirpurkhas or Anatolia.Muslims need to strike a seminal “win-win” big bargain with the countries they call home. They should leave no doubt about their allegiance and loyalty to Europe, their commitment to universal values of tolerance, democracy and human rights.In exchange, they must be recognised and celebrated as fully fledged, active and constructive European citizens. Those who commit terrorist attacks should not be labelled ‘Muslims’ — they are murderers and criminals and should be tried as such.There is no room in such a social contract for meddling by non-Europeans, however well-intentioned. Despite the toxic Far-Right messages, the unfortunate media hype and the anger in the wake of the Paris attacks, Europe is a multi-cultural and diverse continent — even if sometimes, Europeans forget it.
View from Abroad: Peshawar, Paris, Pegida and me (Originally published 10/01/2015 at dawn.com)
Just when you think it can’t get any worse, it does.On the second day of my long-awaited trip to Pakistan in December last year, I woke up to the news of the horrible massacre of school children in Peshawar.Like most people, I wept for the innocent lost lives, the bereaved families and a once honourable country which has lost its path, becoming mired in ever-more indecent violence and barbarism.As I made my way home to Brussels a few days into 2015, I was preparing to write about Pegida, Germany’s nascent and very toxic ‘anti-Islamisation’ movement which is making headlines across the globe.But then tragedy struck again as terrorists, unfortunately and wrongly, described as Islamists gunned down 12 people at the offices of Charlie Hebdo, the Paris-based satirical magazine.As France and the world mourned the dead and worried about the freedom of expression, diversity and tolerance, I asked myself: how many tears can you shed? How long and often can you weep? Will the hatred, violence and extremism ever end?I don’t know the answers but I know that whether we recognise the link or not, Peshawar, Paris and Pegida are, tragically, connected.I know that money, encouragement and support for the extremists whether in the Middle East, Pakistan, Asia or Europe can be traced to extremist Wahabi state and non-state actors in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states.I know that Far Right groups in Europe and the United States are spreading a hysterical and toxic anti-Islam message, gaining traction and popularity as the economic slowdown persists and unemployment continues to rise.I know that politicians in Europe, the US and the Muslim world are unwilling and unable to rise to the challenge of building a strong counter-narrative of tolerance and discrimination.I know that 2015 is going to be a defining, testing year for humanity’s ability to live together in peace while accepting differences in religion, colour and culture.I know that the violence-loving, gun-toting men and (some) women who kill, maim and torture are outside the boundaries of any religion. There is no “Islamic State”, only murderers and criminals. There is no “good” Taliban, just blood-thirsty barbarians.I know that just as is the case for freedom-loving people in Pakistan, life for Muslims in Europe is going to get tougher in the aftermath of the recent terrorist attacks.But I also know that sanity and good sense will probably and hopefully prevail in both Pakistan and Europe.In the end, it’s not the politicians who will stop the rot. It is the people, the ordinary men, women and young people who say “enough is enough” to violence and intolerance.I know it is possible. As we visited Lahore only hours before the massacre in Peshawar, girls and boys came up to us to talk and take pictures, giggling and chuckling, proud of Pakistan and their heritage.The Badshahi Mosque and the Lahore Fort sparkled in the sun but it was the laughter and the cheeky jokes of the young men and women that warmed our souls.This was Pakistan the way it really is, the way it should always be. Hours later as we tried to come to grips with the tragedy in Peshawar, I took solace in the hope I had seen in the eyes of the young people of Lahore.In Europe too, it is the people who will stop the continent from descending into a dangerous downward spiral of anti-Muslim sentiment.True, the Far Right is gaining momentum. Talk of a “clash of civilisations” is rife. But equally those who want a multicultural and tolerant Europe are speaking out.Pegida gatherings have been dwarfed by massive counter-demonstrations in Dresden, Berlin and Cologne where people have spoken in support of immigrants and condemned intolerance.The famous Cologne cathedral and Berlin’s Brandenburg gate have switched off lighting as a sign of protest against xenophobic rallies. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has warned against hate and discrimination.In the aftermath of the Paris killings, European governments will certainly clamp down hard on radicals and would-be terrorists. They are right to do so. But in the medium and long-term, European politicians must also focus on the compelling need to integrate and accept their Muslim citizens.Retribution and revenge must not be allowed to take centre stage. If it does, it will play into the hands of the extremists.This is a dangerous moment. Yes, it is war. But it not a conflict between Islam and the West. The battle being fought so cruelly is between people who believe in humanity and criminals and terrorists who, quite simply, want to kill.
Shada Islam quoted in 'Europe Muted on CIA Torture Report Amid Islamic State Conflict' (The Washington Post with Bloomberg 10/12/2014)
European governments gave a muted response to a U.S. report on Central Intelligence Agency torture, declining the opportunity to criticize the Obama administration amid concerns over current security threats.
While China accused the U.S. of hypocrisy, the European Union and the U.K. moderated their response to the findings of the report by Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee.
“There’s a deep reluctance to open old wounds just as we face the challenge of Islamic State and parts of the Middle East go up in flames,” Shada Islam, Director of Policy at the Friends of Europe advisory group in Brussels, said in a phone interview. “Many European governments were complicit or at least turned a blind eye to what the CIA was doing.”
The report, which focused on the agency’s “enhanced interrogation techniques” in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, revealed that U.S.-held terrorism suspects received more brutal treatment than previously known.
For the full article, visit http://washpost.bloomberg.com/Story?docId=1376-NGBYTJ6K50YD01-0BB8G4EV8H8HOEQDREHOMQHNBP
View from Abroad: A new plan to revive 'Granny Europe' (Originally published 29/11/2014 at dawn.com)
Not much gets Europeans excited these days. When challenges emerge — at least on the foreign policy front — the reaction seems to be almost always the same. Problems with Russia? Let’s expand sanctions. Iran? Let’s keep sanctions. Islamic State? Let’s impose sanctions although just how and on whom is not clear.But suddenly, out of the blue, there is a bit of a buzz in the winter air. Europeans woke up on Nov 26 with a new “hero”: European Commission President Jean Claude Juncker who strode on to centre stage to promise peace — or at least jobs — in our time.It was a seminal moment. For Juncker and Europe.The former Luxembourg prime minister is facing allegations that hundreds of multi-national firms were reportedly attracted to Luxembourg in legal tax avoidance schemes. Juncker was prime minister at the time but denies wrongdoing. The new plan has the advantage of taking the almost-scandal off the media radar.For Europe, the plan could be the answer to its dreams of revival. The 28-nation bloc is still struggling to climb out of a long and painful Eurozone crisis. Growth rates are low, unemployment is tragically high, especially among young people. People are downbeat and dejected. Even the German economy is beginning to flag.To top it all, making pessimists even more downbeat, in a speech to the European Parliament last week, Pope Francis likened Europe to a grandmother, “no longer fertile and vibrant”. (I’m not sure he’s talking about the lively grannies I know though…)Anti-granny remarks aside, the pontiff’s remarks do resonate for many. Europe is getting a tad worn out, depressed and haggard. A shot of vitamins is badly needed.Enter Juncker with a magic bullet: a 315 billion euro plan to spend EU money on new infrastructure projects as part of an initiative to revive granny and help Europe grow and thrive again.Only, there is no magic involved. There will be hardly any new money — only €21bn in EU funds as a guarantee to raise private cash in the capital markets — with the rest of the money expected to come from private sources.EU policymakers say they will be looking for funds wherever they can. Chinese investments will be sought out avidly. Middle East investors will be welcome.“I often hear we need so-called fresh money. But we need a fresh start and fresh investment,” Juncker told the European Parliament this week. “We will not betray our children and grandchildren by writing cheques they ultimately will have to pay.”With one eye on developments across the Atlantic, the Commission chief moaned that “While investment is taking off in the US, Europe is lagging behind. Why? Because investors lack confidence, credibility and trust.”The Commission is making up for the lack of solid details on the plan by upping the hype. Juncker says the initiative represents a cornerstone of efforts to revive an ailing economy.Others have called it a historic moment, a make-or-break initiative, a European “New Deal” to get Europeans working again.Certainly, the timing is right. Many European economists have been saying for some time Europe needs to move from the current focus on austerity to programmes which bring back growth.And the best way to do so is to start investing again — especially in infrastructure.The Commission believes it could create up to 1.3 million jobs with investment in broadband, energy networks and transport infrastructure, as well as education and research.National governments could contribute to the fund if they wished and would be asked to come up with a list of projects with “high socio-economic returns” that could kick-off between 2015 and 2017.With a nod to Martin Luther King, Juncker added that he had a dream. He wanted to see schoolchildren walking into a brand new classroom equipped with computers in the Greek city of Thessaloniki, European hospitals saving lives with state of the art medical equipment and French commuters charging electric cars on motorways.The good news is that pro-austerity Germany — the bane of countries like France and Italy which want the EU to start spending itself out of economic stagnation — is in favour of the plan.But EU officials admit the initiative will not fill the gap in the amount of investments needed, especially in infrastructure across Europe. There is also concern that there will not be enough credible projects around for investors to put their money into.The European Investment Bank will be the “prime mover” in delivering seed money for those investments over the next three years. The plan will now be discussed by the 28 EU leaders at the Dec 18-19 summit.Juncker’s shift from austerity and cutting debt to investment is not going to be the botox shot needed to transform “Granny Europe” into a vibrant young woman. But it is a start.
View from Abroad: Europe waits for trade talks but Modi ‘looks East’ (Originally published 22/11/2014 at dawn.com)
These are busy times for Asian leaders — and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is among the busiest.Last week as he criss-crossed Asia, clinching business deals, attracting much-needed investments and building strategic alliances, Modi found time for a quick meeting with the European Union’s outgoing European Council President Herman Van Rompuy to underline that the “EU should take advantage of the new economic environment in India”.The two men apparently agreed that the United Nations should hold an annual international “Yoga Day”.But not much was apparently said on the EU-India free trade agreement that the two sides have been trying to negotiate for the last seven years and which now seems to have run into the ground.EU officials are still hoping that the negotiations will be back on track soon. But the Indian leader is too busy looking elsewhere.As of this autumn, Modi has his nation and the rest of Asia abuzz with his determination to inject new life into India’s “Look East” policy which, following his incessant Asian travels, including recent talks with Asean (Association of South-East Asian Nations) and other Asian leaders in Myanmar, has morphed into what Modi proudly describes as a “Look East — and Act East” policy.India’s decision to step up its game in Asia is no surprise. As an emerging power with “great power” ambitions, India has no option but to seek a stronger role in a volatile neighbourhood and a region marked by often-changing geopolitical rivalries and alliances. Also, tapping into the region’s dynamic economies is critical for India’s own growth and reform agenda.Certainly, China has the funds needed to help finance India’s infrastructure requirements while Japan and South Korea have the technical experience and expertise. South-east Asian markets are important for Indian investors and exporters. Sustainable peace with Pakistan may still be a long way off but is essential for India’s development and peace and stability in the region.While in Myanmar, Modi made the headlines by pushing his “Make in India” campaign, which aims to turn the country into a global manufacturing hub, by cutting red tape, upgrading infrastructure and making it easier for companies to do business. Modi promised to implement long-delayed plans to boost trade and deepen ties with Asean so that current trade flows could rise from $75 billion today to $100 billion by 2015.In fact, the policy is not new. India has long spoken of developing a “Look East” policy, but has lagged behind China in forging ties with emerging economies in South-East Asia. Tackling China’s influence on Asean and South Asia is still a challenge but India benefits from the fact that Japan, Asean and others in the region are certainly looking to reduce their economic dependence on Beijing by reaching out to Delhi.Indian commentators also underline that Modi used the Asean meeting to articulate for the first time India’s intent to enhance “balance” in the Asia Pacific region, arguing that the word was carefully chosen to reflect India’s shared concerns with other Asian countries about China’s growing assertiveness in the region.Interestingly, Indian defence cooperation is being stepped up with several Indian Ocean states including Sri Lanka and Maldives. India will supply four naval patrol vessels to Hanoi as part of $100 million Line of Credit signed last month. The two countries have also decided to ramp up cooperation in the field of hydrocarbon, civil nuclear energy and space.Given Modi’s focus on the Asia-Pacific, the EU’s new leaders may have to wait a long time before he signals a real interest in upgrading bilateral ties.It is no secret that the EU-India strategic partnership needs a shot in the arm and that trade and investment flows are much too modest. But negotiations for an India-EU Bilateral Trade and Investment Agreement (BTIA) — the most important issue on the bilateral agenda — have lasted for seven years, with no end in sight. And hopes that New Delhi would put energy and effort into the successful conclusion of the elusive deal have not materialised, with differences over tariffs and market access as well as questions related to the protection of intellectual property rights continuing to impede progress.The pact could be signed in 2015 — but only if both sides can summon up the political will to look beyond the array of technical issues to the deeper strategic importance of their relations.Modi and the EU’s new leaders face the uphill task of taking the relationship to a higher and more genuinely strategic level, a move that would benefit both sides.In addition to the geopolitical value of such a decision, European investors are willing and eager to enter the Indian market. European know-how could be valuable to India’s reform and modernisation agenda. Europe, meanwhile, needs new markets to keep its modest economy on track.To inject momentum into the relationship, both sides will need to make an effort. EU and Indian leaders have not met for summit talks since February 2012. An early meeting between Modi and the EU’s new presidents of the European Commission and the EU Council this autumn will therefore be crucial in signalling a fresh start in relations.