Greek crisis endangers Europe’s heart and soul (Originally published 04/07/2015 at dawn.com)

This column is not about the Greek Eurozone crisis. How could it be — what more would I or indeed anyone — be able to add to the reams and reams of stuff that has already been written, rewritten, said and resaid about the topic?The facts are well known: Greeks will vote on July 5 in a snap referendum that Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras says will give the country’s long-suffering people the final say on whether he should accept the tough terms of a cash-for-austerity deal from creditors at the European Union, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund.Tsipras wants Greeks to say no, apparently arguing that creditors are bluffing and will not take the catastrophic step of ejecting Greece from the club of 19 nations that use the euro currency.The creditors say they’re ready to push the nuclear button. Enough is enough. Throwing Greece out of the Eurozone won’t matter that much. It’s a small economy, the impact will be limited. Eighteen countries will still be in the Eurozone. Life will go on.Of course it will. Life always goes on. After wars, earthquakes, tsunamis and suicide bombings, life goes on. People come out of the crisis, pull up their socks, get back to work.But think about it: life is never really the same ever again.So, Grexit won’t bring Europe to its knees. The Eurozone will not unravel, neither will the European Union. The other eighteen countries of the Eurozone will soldier on even if Greece exits the currency bloc.Also worth noting: even if it does leave the Eurozone, Greece will still be a member of the 28-nation EU.But let’s make no mistake: If Greece is ejected from the Eurozone, it will — even further — destroy the heart and soul of this continent.In fact, the soul of Europe is already half-destroyed. This protracted crisis is taking its toll on Europe’s self-image, self-confidence, its links with ordinary Europeans and its role and influence on the global stage.Born in Asia, grown up in Europe, I have always admired my adopted continent for its ability to put past animosities behind, to work together for the common good, to make sure war never erupts again in our lifetime and beyond.I love the variety and the diversity of Europe, the freedom to travel, work and live in any of the 28 countries, the freedom to say and do what I like, without raised eyebrows or reproachful, critical glances.But Europe is changing. The last 70 years since the end of World War II have been peaceful — but the EU showed its feet of clay during the devastating and blood-soaked Balkan conflict.Tolerance and human rights are universal values but Europe has been their most determined defender. And yet as thousands of hapless refugees arrive on its shores, Europe is showing an indifference which beggars belief.As the Far Right narrative of hatred and racism becomes ever shriller, the voices calling for peace and calm are drowned out. No politician has the courage to say that Europe needs immigration and desperately needs foreign skills and talent.The debate over Greece has polarised Europe, splitting it in half. Those in favour of austerity argue that Greece spends too much, doesn’t save enough money and doesn’t tax its rich people as much as it should.They want Athens to cut spending, slash pensions and increase taxes.Others argue equally powerfully that a country in recession cannot be punished even further and that what Greece needs above all is a fiscal stimulus to get back growth and create some desperately-needed jobs.Greek Prime Minister Tsipras and his Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis have been engaged in a seemingly un-ending battle of wills with their Eurozone colleagues for months.I have lost count of the number of marathon discussion sessions held so far, the constant tweeting by the key players and the false dawns that a deal was just around the corner.But something strange appears to have transpired over the last few days. Initial sympathy for the Athens duo appears to be fading, with more and more insiders warning that Tsipras and Varoufakis have lost the plot.German Chancellor Angela Merkel, whose nation has lent more to Greece than any other in the European Union, is often seen as the architect of Greek austerity. But some of the countries that are now coming down hardest on Greece are the smaller, poorer Eurozone nations that have accepted the bitter pills of austerity and say the Greeks should do so as well.As the debate grinds on in Brussels, Athens and other capitals, it would be heartening to know that the interest of the Greek people was top of the EU and the Eurozone agenda.It isn’t. Europe, which was once about the people, the citizens, the demos, is now transformed into an argument about money. It’s about austerity versus growth.My question is: how will Greece ever get back on track — ever start growing again — without the support, involvement and contribution of its people?

View from Abroad: All aboard the Silk Road express (Originally published 27/06/2015 at dawn.com)

Europe has been slow in its response to China’s ‘One Belt, One Road’ initiative. This may be about to change. If both sides play their cards right, the EU-China Summit on June 29 could kick-start a much-needed conversation on synergies between China’s ambitious vision of an interconnected world and Europe’s mega investment plan to boost jobs and growth.The rewards of such cooperation could be enormous. Increased EU-China connectivity will increase bilateral trade between the two partners, create new business opportunities for European and Chinese enterprises, and boost employment, growth and development in Europe and China — and in countries along the routes.To start the dialogue, Europeans will have to take the long view. With the possibility of a Greek exit from the Eurozone getting ever closer, Britain’s plans for a referendum on its EU membership becoming more strident and growing discord over how to deal with the refugee crisis, European policymakers are thinking local, not global.It’s not just about domestic difficulties; Europe’s neighbourhood is also on fire.And yet, if Europe is to fulfil its ambitions of becoming a global actor while also meeting the domestic imperative of generating stronger economic growth and creating jobs, the EU policymakers must look beyond current emergencies to Europe’s medium-to-long-term needs.This is the logic behind the $315bn investment plan drawn up by European Commission President Jean Claude Juncker to modernise Europe’s infrastructure. With its focus on investments in energy, digital, transport and innovation, the blueprint has the potential to revitalise European economies over the next decade.But Europe can’t possibly do it alone. This is why it is important that EU governments, business leaders and academics start paying more attention to China’s headline-grabbing ‘One Belt, One Road’ initiative — and ways in which this could fit in with the EU’s own investment masterplan.After months of staying relatively silent on the subject, the EU policymakers are beginning to talk about — and explore — the advantages of synergies between the Juncker plan and the ‘One Belt, One Road’ initiative.Clearly, joining forces will unleash more resources. Implementing the EU investment plan will require the mobilisation of billions of euros of private and public funds as well as capital from the European Investment Bank (EIB). As European Commission Vice-President Jyrki Katainen said recently, the EU is hoping to attract Chinese investors to stump up some of the capital for the Juncker plan. The point has also been made by European Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom as well as by the European Commission president himself.The hope is clearly that the EU connectivity projects will be able to interest both the Silk Road Fund and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). The EU is particularly interested in meeting the long-term infrastructure needs in southern, eastern and central European countries and in the Balkan states. Greece as well as some members of the so-called ‘16+1’ group of central and eastern European countries have already indicated their strong interest in such Chinese investments. If all goes according to plan, the eastern part of Europe could connect seamlessly with the western projects on the new Silk Road.As the different ‘One Belt, One Road’ projects come on stream, business opportunities will open up for construction, transport and logistical companies — including European enterprises — across the route. EU-China trade is likely to get an important boost from the expected reduction in transport time and costs while EU exporters and investors will gain access to new growth markets in inland China and Central Asia. Such a development would give an added fillip to the current EU-China negotiations on a bilateral investment treaty.As it passes through often-volatile and less-developed countries and regions, the ‘One Belt, One Road’ has the potential to unleash economic potential across the way, bringing stability as well as growth to Europe — and China’s — neighbourhood. Such a conversation could be especially useful within the 53-member Asia Europe Meeting (ASEM) where connectivity is also climbing up the agenda.It’s not just about money, technology and goodwill, however. The EU insists that investment projects selected for financing under the ‘One Belt, One Road’ initiative must meet strict governance, environmental and technical standards, and result in sustainable development.Moving from dialogue to action will require time and effort — and willingness to compromise. China has taken its time in putting flesh on the bones of the project and in explaining its many facets to a closely-watching world. A more detailed dialogue is now necessary before the EU and China get down to identifying and working on the nuts and bolts of their cooperation. Given their different working methods and cultures, European and Chinese policymakers, bankers and business leaders won’t find it easy to work together.The devil will certainly be in the detail. Expectations will have to be managed on both sides. Selecting projects will be difficult and time-consuming. And there will be no quick results.But in a world desperate for money, jobs and modern infrastructure, China has once again shown its capacity to surprise and to think big. Europeans must come on board the Silk Road ‘express’, not just watch it from the sidelines.

Shada Islam quoted in 'Upcoming EU-China summit to take relationship to new level' (Xinhua 27/6/2015)

At the first official meeting between the European Union and China since the new EU leadership in December 2014, scheduled for later this month, director of policy at Friends of Europe, Shada Islam, said the summit would take the relationship to a new level.In a recent interview with Xinhua, Islam said there were possible synergies between the EU and China on building a digital economy and cooperation in EU-China connectivity, which would provide opportunities for both sides to work together on the "Belt and Road" transportation initiative.Moreover, she said the European side was "expecting China to confirm its participation in the EU's investment plan for creating jobs and growth.""These two developments will really inject more energy and more stability into the relationship, taking it to a new level," said Islam.She said both China and Europe have two key imperatives: jobs and growth. They need to create jobs for new entrants in the labor market and they need growth to ensure continued prosperity. In politics and security, they both need to build a more stable and prosperous world, and especially a more prosperous neighborhood. In trade, both want further trade liberalization, and know how important it is to keep away from protectionism."These are signs that the relationship is becoming more diverse and also more focused on practical questions where both sides can work together and learn from each other," she said.Noting that discord over trade questions would crop up from time to time, Islam said what was important was that these questions could be resolved in a "timely and non-confrontational" manner.Concerning global issues, Islam said the world needed to work together to ensure peace and that meant working with China."If there is a good chemistry, the upcoming summit will set the tone for EU-China relations for the next few years," she said.Chinese Premier Li Keqiang will attend the 17th China-EU leaders' meeting here. Apart from the meeting, Li will also visit Belgium and pay an official visit to France, including a visit to the headquarters of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in Paris.

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: I wrote this column — despite being a woman (Originally published 13/06/2015 at dawn.com)

Yes, let’s make fun of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s sexist praise of his Bangladeshi counterpart, Sheikh Hasina, for being tough on terror “despite being a woman”. Social media in India and the world over has had a field day with Modi’s comment. I’ve laughed and tweeted along with everyone else.Imagine: the leader of the world’s largest democracy — and one which had a powerful female prime minister — making such an old-fashioned, disparaging remark about women. Outrageous. Unacceptable. Shocking. Offensive. Indian men are still stuck in a time warp.Really? Once the laughter stops, let’s take a sober look at the sad reality of women’s role, status and influence in the 21st century. And let’s also recognise that there is no dearth of men — and women — who still believe that women should be neither seen, nor heard. And that those of us who do manage to live “normal” lives, sometimes even becoming prime ministers, parliamentarians, business leaders, judges, doctors, teachers, journalists and so on… do so “despite being a woman”.Take a look: Modi trolled for lauding Hasina's courage in fighting terror 'despite being a woman'The data on lack of progress on women’s rights is daunting. Too many statistics point to the hard struggle still going on to end gender discrimination in government, business, schools and at home. Women make up half the world’s population and yet represent a staggering 70% of the world’s poor. Although some changes have been made, the struggle for women’s development and empowerment continues to face many obstacles due to government neglect, discrimination, family traditions and actions by religious authorities.The good news is that achieving gender equality and empowering all women and girls is recognised as an important priority in the post-2015 development agenda. But how committed are governments to giving priority attention to women and girls in their national development plans? Even more importantly, how ready are societies to accept women as full participants?In the same week that Modi got blasted for his comments, Tim Hunt, an English biochemist who is also a Nobel laureate, told the World Conference of Science Journalists in Seoul, South Korea, that he believed scientists should work in gender-segregated labs.“Let me tell you about my trouble with girls … three things happen when they are in the lab … You fall in love with them, they fall in love with you and when you criticise them, they cry,” Hunt intoned. Oh dear.Hunt’s angry critics have warned that his comments are a “disaster for the advancement of women”. And of course, female scientists are outraged. As it is, not many girls are opting to become scientists.If only Modi and Hunt were alone in believing women aren’t really strong and stoic enough to play hard ball. As the two men have shown, rubbishing women is probably the one sentiment/prejudice that unites many men, rich or poor, educated or illiterate, living in an industrialised or a developing country.It’s a common strand in the belief and discourse of Christian conservatives and their Muslim and Jewish counterparts. Veil them, cover their bodies and keep them home is the mantra of religious zealots of all faiths. And that includes the self-styled Islamic State of course.Sadly, women are as bad as men in believing women can’t make it to the top — and sometimes shouldn’t even try.It’s personal. As a teenager when I was still in Pakistan, a female “friend” of the family suggested that as a future housewife, I should study “home economics” rather than international politics. Others asked vaguely why I wasn’t thinking of attending a “finishing school” to make me into a perfect wife.“I plan to have a job,” I remember saying with some disdain. “But only if your husband allows it!” was the angry response.Well, luckily things turned out differently. Interestingly, at a recent dinner debate in Brussels on “women and development”, almost all female participants had very moving stories to tell of their different trajectories and of the men and women — mothers and fathers — who had helped or discouraged them on their voyage to self-fulfilment.There was talk of the “HeforShe” campaign that acknowledges that men have a key role to play in women’s empowerment. The importance of role models, inspirational mentors, hard-nosed teachers was stressed. Some women said their families had encouraged them to break away from stereotypes — others acknowledged that they did not have family support as they sought their own way in life.It was an evening of laughter and some tears. Of promises that as mothers, we were bringing up our sons and daughters differently, teaching them to respect each other.Women have achieved much over the years. But there’s still a long way to go. For all the howls of derision directed at him, Prime Minister Modi has done his bit to empower women through political appointments and social policies. After taking office last May, he appointed six women to his cabinet — the highest number in the history of the country.He has taken a strong stance against female feticide, which he called a “terrible crises” since India has a child sex ratio of 918 girls for every 1000 boys, a recipe for social unrest.It’s great he’s taken these and other steps — despite being a man.

View From Abroad: Pivotal moments on the global agenda (Originally published 06/06/2015 at dawn.com)

Read the headlines and there’s no doubt: the world is a nasty, violent, unequal place where man kills man and women are either victims of violence, discrimination or quite simply invisible.Take a closer look and it’s equally clear that despite the killing, exploitation and bloodshed, there are worthy people struggling to build a better world.Every so often, the global community has once-in-a-lifetime chance to aim high and set ambitions for a new way of living and working together. To create hope, sketch out new horizons, set new goals.In Brussels this week, the focus has been on a number of milestones, make-or-break global events which merit stronger attention and scrutiny.Two stand out because of their global significance. First, in September this year, the United Nations General Assembly will decide on a new, post-2015 agenda for sustainable development.The so-called sustainable development goals (SDGs) will take the place of the Millennium Development Goals agreed by the UN at the turn of the century. Implementation of the MDGs has been patchy, uneven and not-too impressive.But for the last fifteen years, emerging nations have been engaged in an uphill battle to make progress on reducing poverty, improving health care and access to education. And more.The SDGs under discussion are more in number, higher in ambition and target not just developing countries, but also developed ones.Second, in December at an international meeting in Paris, the focus will be on fighting climate change by committing to new targets for reducing CO2 emissions, both in industrialised and emerging countries.It’s not going to be easy, given the different levels of development, different energy mixes and economic priorities — but if agreement is reached, it will be a strong sign that when push comes to shove, rich and poor nations can work together on tackling an issue of immense global importance.Issues related to the financing of the SDGs will be discussed at a conference in Addis Ababa in Ethiopia in early July. Clearly, if the new SDGs — there are 17 in all, with 167 targets — are going to be implemented, more money will be needed.Official Development Aid will still be important — but won’t be enough. Funding will have to come from the private sector, from non-governmental organisations, from private individuals. Creative financing will have to be the buzzword.There is more. Women’s rights are climbing higher and higher up the global agenda. In Brussels this week, the focus will be on the UN Security Council Resolution 1325 which addresses the inordinate impact of war on women but also spotlights the pivotal role of women in conflict management, conflict resolution and sustainable peace.At a Nato conference, discussions focused on how the UNSCR 1325 could help to boost the participation of women in the Alliance’s armed forces.Only a day later, at an EU debate, the emphasis was on using the same resolution to ensure the participation of women in peace negotiations and the protection of women at times of conflict.It’s been fifteen years since the UNSCR 1325 was adopted. And when the review takes place in September this year, countries will be asked to show just what they have done to shelter women from the horrible effects of war and conflict.The 20th anniversary of the adoption of the wider Beijing Platform of Action on women’s rights later this year will also provide much food for thought.Although some progress has been made, the struggle for women’s development and empowerment continues to face many obstacles due to government neglect, discrimination, family traditions and actions by religious authorities.The situation is particularly serious in fragile or conflict-affected states where because of conflict, weak governance, political instability, oppressive practices and traditions, sections of society and in particular women are marginalised and under-represented.The good news is that achieving gender equality and empowering all women and girls are recognised important priorities in the post-2015 development agenda.But how committed are governments to giving priority attention to women and girls in their national development plans?Finally, inequality. There is consensus that we live in an unequal world. The world economy may be growing fairly rapidly but there are increasingly vast differences in income, equal opportunities, education, skills and access to health within countries and between countries.Inequality has been identified as one of the biggest threats to the world economy and global stability and is a salient issue in the post-2015 development debates.The focus is often mainly on inequality in emerging nations but widening inequalities and social imbalances are also evident in Europe and have worsened because of the Eurozone’s economic woes.A study by Oxfam released earlier this year warns that global wealth is increasingly being concentrated in the hands of a small wealthy elite.“These wealthy individuals have generated and sustained their vast riches through their interests and activities in a few important economic sectors, including finance and pharmaceuticals/healthcare,” the report warns.So while the rich get richer — the poor struggle to make ends meet and the middle classes live in a fragile environment where any small negative movement can bring them crashing down to the bottom of the ladder.The important international conferences coming up over the next six months will set the world on a course for conflict and discord — or, hopefully, lead to joint efforts to tackle some of the key challenges facing the world in the 21st century. The choice is ours.

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.

Bandung and a changing world order

For proof that the world is a much-changed place, look no further than last week’s impressive Asia-Africa conference in Bandung, Indonesia, marking the 60^th anniversary of the original Cold War era summit in the same city led by Indonesia’s then leader-Sukarno.The talk in Bandung six decades ago among representatives from twenty-nine Asian and African governments of Asian and African nations was of the role of the “Third World” in the Cold War, economic development, and decolonisation.The meeting’s final resolution laid the foundation for the nonaligned movement during the Cold War. The heady talk among leaders was on the potential for collaboration among Asian and African nations and their determination to reduce their reliance on Europe and North America.Fast forward to Bandung last week and replace references to the “Third World” with the more modern “emerging nations” and it’s clear that Asia and Africa have changed dramatically since 1955.The two regions – as well as Latin America – are simultaneously driving the transformation of the global landscape and thriving because of it.The mood may be morose in Washington and EU capitals – but Asia, Africa and Latin America are on a roll. Trade is booming – including between the three regions, investments are pouring in and an emerging middle class is changing social, political and economic lifestyles.Interestingly – and worth reflecting on – is the fact that much of the transformation is the result of China’s rise and its gradual but sustained emergence as an important regional and global actor.The West, especially the United States, is finding it difficult to adjust and accommodate the deep-seated paradigm shift in power taking place around it. That’s not difficult to understand given that the US as the current dominant global power has the most to lose from the shift of power to the East.But Europe also needs to come to terms with a changed world. Here in Brussels as the European Union prepares to hammer out a new European Security Strategy to replace the one written 12 years ago it needs to pay special attention to the myriad ways in which the world is becoming different, almost daily. And it needs to forge a new outlook on China and Asia.The world viewed from Europe is indeed violent, messy and dangerous. The EU faces a host of domestic problems – Greece, unemployment, and of course the deteriorating refugee crisis. Europe is surrounded as some say by a “ring of fire”: in the east by Russia and in the south, by a turbulent Arab world.But the EU should be wary of projecting its own morosity on other regions – and indeed of basing its assumptions of Asia’s future on Europe’s tragic, war-racked past.While Europe and its neighbours are in turmoil, the rest of the world is doing better than expected – and certainly better than 60 years ago.The economies of most of the African and Asian countries gathered in Bandung are booming. Steps are being taken to combat poverty, there were successful elections in Afghanistan and Indonesia – and changes are underway in Myanmar and Vietnam next year.Emerging countries are setting their own agenda, defining their interests, building partnerships and rallying together to forge a joint vision for the future.This time the talk is also of breaking the chains of colonialism – but of a different kind; today’s African and Asian governments want an end to the economic domination of the West and of Western insitutions.As the Bandung meeting pointed out last week, the focus is on establishing a new global order that is open to emerging economic powers and leaves the "obsolete ideas" of Bretton Woods institutions in the past.President Xi Jinping of China told the conference that “a new type of international relations” was needed to encourage cooperation between Asian and African nations.Indonesian President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo, the conference host, said those who still insisted that global economic problems could only be solved through the World Bank, International Monetary Fund and Asian Development Bank were clinging to a long-gone past.“There needs to be change,” he said. "It's imperative that we build a new international economic order that is open to new emerging economic powers.”In 1955, the 29 countries which met in Bandung accounted for less than a quarter of global economic output at that time; today they contribute to more than half of the world economy.Many of those countries, such as China, India and Indonesia, are now themselves at top tables like the Group of 20 and wield significant economic power.Indonesia’s Jokowi said the group was meeting again in a changed world but still needed to stand together against the domination of an unspecified “certain group of countries” to avoid unfairness and global imbalances.The creation of the China-backed Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) is one way in which emerging nations are challenging the Western-dominated economic stage. While the US has decided to stay out of the AIIB, many European countries have offered to be founding members of the new bank.Asia’s future will depend to a large extent on the economic future of China. And on relations between China and Japan.Tensions between Asia’s two biggest economies have flared in recent years due to feuds over wartime history as well as territorial rows and regional rivalry.Memories of Japan’s past military aggression run deep in China, and Beijing has repeatedly urged Japan to face up to history.In an encouraging move, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and President Xi did meet in Bandung, prompting hopes of a cautious rapprochement between the two economic giants.Peace and prosperity in Asia hinge on cordial relations, even partnerships between the region’s leading powers. And who knows if China and Japan can sidestep their historical enmities, perhaps India and Pakistan could – one day – do the same?

View from abroad : Myanmar, exiled kings and me (Originally published 18/04/2015 at dawn.com)

Our young and vivacious Myanmar guide is mystified by my question. Who exactly is this “Indian king” whose grave I want to visit in Yangon? When did he die here — why was he here in the first place? And why has no other visitor she has received ever asked to go to the tomb?She quickly goes into detective mode and thanks to the internet we discover the burial spot of Bahadur Shah Zafar, the last Mughal emperor, sent into exile in Burma by the British rulers of India. He died here in 1862, a frail and heartbroken man.The last emperor’s poignant story of pride and betrayal is magnificently told by William Dalrymple. But even before I read the book, Bahadur Shah Zafar’s tragic life and times had left an enduring mark.I am determined to visit his grave. And clearly my enthusiasm and determination are contagious. Not only are my friend and the guide anxious to go to the tomb, our chauffeur is equally curious.But locating the last Mughal’s final resting place on the internet is one thing; actually finding it in crowded, bustling Yangon is another. The address says it is in the vicinity of the magnificent Shwedagon Pagoda, a sprawling, glittering complex of golden stupas, meditating Buddhas and chanting monks which has long fascinated tourists, believers and non-believers.The evening before we had walked amid the shiny mirror mosaics and burning candles, along with hundreds of other enchanted visitors and pilgrims. There is much to see and fascinate. Everything looks bright and new. We are told that donations for the pagoda pour in daily, so more and more gold leaf is plastered on to the stupas.The people of Myanmar are rightfully proud of their Buddhist heritage —and look after it devotedly.The last Mughal emperor’s surroundings are quieter and more modest. We drive around for a bit before we find the street and then spend several minutes peering behind high walls before we come upon the unassuming yellow mausoleum.We are both saddened and reassured by what we see: the shrine is certainly small and unimpressive. But it is clean and well-looked after, with dense trees providing much-needed shade in the hot Yangon sun.We are welcomed with open arms by the friendly caretaker who is clearly thrilled to have such curious visitors to talk to. He takes us to the graves of the emperor, (actually Bahadur Shah Zafar is buried just below his “official” grave on the top floor, he tells us) his wife and granddaughter and reads out the Urdu poems inscribed on the walls, along with their English translation.There are paintings and some very moving pictures of the frail and dying king and his family. The pain on his gaunt face pierces our hearts. The caretaker tells us that his visitors are usually from South Asia — as are the donations which pay for the maintenance of the mausoleum. There are prayers on Fridays, he says proudly. “Bahadur Shah Zafar may have died a lonely and broken man — but his memory is alive,” he says proudly.For a few moments, time seems to stand still as we hear the story of the last Mughal and his life in exile. His grave was left unmarked and forgotten until 1903, the caretaker tells us, when after some protests from the Muslim community in Myanmar, the British rulers of Burma constructed a stone slab to mark the site. The spot was “lost again” only to be found in 1991. A mausoleum was constructed and inaugurated in 1994.And then just as suddenly, we are back in vibrant, modern-day Yangon. Like much of South-East Asia, Myanmar is on a roll. Encouraged by moves towards political reform and opening by the military junta which ruled the country for decades, business and investments are pouring in.China, Japan, India and neighbouring South-East Asian Nations are vying for contracts and deals while more cautious Europeans and Americans lag behind. Tourists from the four corners of the world are anxious to visit the country before it loses its authenticity.During our week in the country, the talk is about upcoming elections in November and whether or not there will be a change in the constitution so that Aung San Suu Kyi, the daughter of the nation’s slain founding father, can stand for president.Myanmar’s constitution forbids anybody with a foreign spouse or children from becoming president. Since Suu Kyi’s late husband was British, as are their two sons, there is little doubt that the provision was drafted exclusively to prevent her from becoming president.Like many countries, Myanmar is full of contradictions: newspapers talk of peace treaties between the government and some of the country’s 135 ethnic groups. Little notice is paid, however, to the plight of the more than one million Rohingya Muslims (who are not recognised as citizens but referred to as “Bengalis”) who have been herded into squalid camps by the Buddhist majority in western Rakhine state.Much to the dismay of many observers, Suu Kyi has yet to condemn the violence. But Bangladesh, Indonesia and Malaysia are pushing for more humane treatment for the Rohingyas as are the European Union, the US and international human rights groups.Dodgy politics coexist with a booming economy, huge SUVs hog the congested roads of Yangon while motorcycles and bicycles are banned from the streets and donations to monasteries and pagodas keep pouring in while schools and hospitals struggle to survive.As we travel across the country, soaking in the beauty of Bagan and the past glories of Mandalay, I have no doubt that the people of Myanmar are determined to join their South-East Asian counterparts in their march towards progress and democracy. And neither the current government — or for that matter Aung San Suu Kyi — can stand in their way.

View from Abroad: Life in Vietnam, Asia’s reborn tiger economy (Originally published 28/03/2015 at dawn.com)

The death last week of Singapore’s much acclaimed statesman Lee Kuan Yew has spotlighted world attention on tiny Singapore’s transformation from a tropical backwater to an affluent global city in just one generation. Certainly, Singapore stands tall in Asia as a formidable city state which proves that sometimes in geopolitics size does not matter.

But in South-East Asia, it’s not just Singapore that impresses.Travelling in Vietnam this week, it’s striking just how quickly this once war-devastated country has dusted off a bloody past, in favour of a new life and persona as one of this region’s most exciting economies.Ho Chi Minh City, formerly Saigon, buzzes with excitement as cars, motorcycles, buses weave their noisy way around surprisingly green urban centres — and some very narrow streets. Cafes, restaurants and bars are heaving with people. New businesses keep popping up, old ones are still thriving.A Belgian-Vietnamese friend tells me the country’s growing middle class has an appetite for foreign goods, the more luxurious, the better. Certainly, more and more European and Japanese cars on the roads are big and shiny, competing for space — and winning — against the ubiquitous scooters and motorbikes. Everyone has his/her palm pressed firmly on the car horn.This is China as it was twenty years ago, friends tell me. Noisy, crowded, the old and ramshackle giving way to the new and glittering. The skyscrapers going up, the five-star hotels, the glamorous department stores boasting French luxury brands are a foretaste of the big metropolis, a mini Shanghai, that Ho Chi Minh City is poised to become. For the moment, it is still possible to find serene hideaways where time appears to have stood still. But not for long.And certainly not at the university I visit on the outskirts of Ho Chi Minh City where students rush from class to class, stopping occasionally to sit down and play the pianos which are strewn around the campus.At the lecture I give on Europe, Asia and Vietnam, the students are serious and attentive — but impassive. I wonder in despair if I am getting through. But then the questions come fast and furious. I am grilled mercilessly on the impact of globalisation, my view of Vietnam, why Vietnam and the EU are signing a free trade agreement, how do you distinguish between good and bad journalists — and so on.Globalisation means losing our identity, they tell me, oblivious to the fact that in their skinny jeans and sneakers, carrying backpacks and peering into their smartphones, they have bought into globalisation with a vengeance. I point it out, they stare at me incredulously. This is not globalisation, this is life, they argue back. Exactly.Later as we take pictures and exchange addresses, I tell them they are lucky to be living in rising Asia, with jobs, hope — and pollution, one says interrupting me. Yes, pollution, urbanisation and overcrowding. But also jobs and growth — the two things we need in Europe. Puzzlement shows in their eyes.Their self-confidence is justified. Perched along one of the world’s most crucial shipping routes, and with a young and growing population, Vietnam is — once again — being tipped for economic lift-off, after years of disappointment.The news reports I read underline that money pouring into the South-East Asian economy from the likes of manufacturers Samsung Electronics Company and Intel Corporation is giving Vietnam a second run at becoming Asia’s next tiger economy.According to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, the country has the potential to become one of the world’s fastest-growing economies over the period to 2050. Not only is the South-East Asian nation gaining ground as a cheaper manufacturing alternative to neighbouring China, Vietnam is also a politically palatable destination for Japanese firms boosting investment in the region amid recurring Sino-Japan spats.“Vietnam is really the big winner from China losing its competitiveness because of rising wages” and a strong currency, say specialists. As labour costs rise in China, foreign investors are knocking on Vietnam’s doors.The list of those wishing to cash in is long, led by China and Japan but also including Singapore, Taiwan, the United States and the European Union.Vietnam and the US are working hard to strengthen ties, including in the security and defence sector, with Hanoi now demanding the full lifting of the arms embargo that was eased last year. Vietnam will be taking part in the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade pact, led by the US.Relations with Beijing are fraught over rival territorial claims in the South China Sea although tensions have eased in recent months and the Chinese and Vietnamese communist parties retain close ties.The EU, meanwhile is hoping to clinch negotiations on a bilateral, free trade agreement with Vietnam before too long.European diplomats tell me the country is an exciting destination for European exporters and investors.At more meetings — this time in Hanoi — the discussion turns to journalism, open societies and freedom of expression. Vietnam’s Communist Party keeps a tight lid on the media, including bloggers. The EU and the US are pressing for change and have an ongoing human rights dialogue with Hanoi. But it’s a question of one step forward, two steps back.As in China, the government appears to have struck a defining big bargain with its citizens: we’ll provide growth and progress in exchange for your loyalty. The trade-off appears to be working. So far.I see the bright lights, the fancy restaurants and the big cars. There is also still poverty and underdevelopment. I am enchanted by the friendliness of the people, young and old. Traditional and modern mix easily in the streets. There is no doubt: Vietnam is on the move. And it’s going to keep going up

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 21^st 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 20^th 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: New development paradigm (Originally published 08/03/2015 at dawn.com)

It used to be so simple: the world was divided into rich and poor countries. The rich provided aid and trade concessions to the poor ones. It was called Official Development Assistance (ODA) and often seen as a panacea for all problems facing “third world” countries. Rich nations promised to spend 0.7 per cent of their GDP as ODA. Developing nations were grateful for the help. It was neat and tidy. Orderly even.Only of course it wasn’t. It was messy, patronising and based on the notion of charity. Nothing wrong with charity — only that it begins at home. And as the going got tougher at home, growth rates dipped and jobs became scarcer, richer countries were less and less anxious to help the poorer ones.And then the world turned on its head as poor countries — or at least some of them — stopped being really poor. China, India, South Africa, Brazil began to rise, becoming more self confident and assertive by the day. They asked for stronger representation in international financial institutions, set up their own bank, started investing in and assisting their less well-off friends.In 2000 amid all the change and shift in power from North to South, the talk turned to achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and eradicating poverty. However, it was still about the rich helping the poor, putting conditions on their aid, making sure that there was no wastage, no human rights abuses.Fast forward to 2015 and the world is a dramatically different place. The talk is of a post-2015 agenda which is about sustainable development in both the North and the South. There is a focus on governance, gender balance, and moving “beyond ODA”.There is agreement that the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) will not be met by ODA alone. Their achievement will require the mobilisation of the private sector, a better use of remittances and philanthropy and more creative thinking about “blending” private and public funds.And above all there will be a focus on the mobilisation of additional resources by developing countries through domestic resource mobilisation, including through more thorough and efficient national tax collection.Yes, finally after years of beating around the bush, global attention is turning to tackling tax evasion, by companies and individuals. The question will be high up on the agenda of the third International Conference on Financing for Development which will be held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, from July 13 to 16, 2015.The reason for the focus on domestic revenue mobilisation in developing countries is clearly linked to the fact that ODA is on its way down and traditional donors are getting tougher.There is good talk about the potential benefits of taxation for state-building and the long-term independence from foreign assistance. It is also of course a question of governance.Revenue from taxation and customs provides governments with the funds needed to invest in development, relieve poverty and deliver public services directed towards the physical and social infrastructure required to enhance long-term growth.Strengthening domestic resource mobilisation is not just a question of raising revenues: it is also about designing a revenue system that promotes inclusiveness, encourages good governance, improves accountability of governments to their citizens, and cultivates social justice.Non-governmental agencies such as Christian Aid have estimated that developing countries, including lower- and middle-income countries, could be losing out on as much as $160bn a year in potential tax revenue because companies are dodging taxes. This was one and a half times the combined overseas aid budget of the whole rich world at the time, and there’s no reason to think the problem has got smaller since then.In 2011, the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa established a high-level panel to write a report on illicit financial flows (IFFs) in Africa and to come up with ways to combat them.The panel, presided by the former South African head of state Thabo Mbeki, warned that the cost of IFFs to the continent was around $50 billion each year.The report states: “Some have estimated that Africa’s capital stock would have expanded by more than 60 per cent if funds leaving Africa illicitly had remained on the continent, while GDP per capita would be up to 15 per cent more.”Worse still, this sum is even greater than the total official development assistance received by African countries, which was $46.1 billion in 2012.At a recent conference in Brussels, participants underlined that there was no dearth of money in the world and that in fact Africa was a rich continent. The money was just not in Africa, but hidden and hoarded in tax havens, most of them in rich countries.

View From Abroad: Getting excited about Asean (Originally published 28/02/2015 at dawn.com)

As China’s economy slows and Indian growth remains uncertain, global attention has switched to the end-year creation of a tariff-free 10-nation Southeast Asian “single market” as the newest and most exciting facet of rising Asia.The excitement is justified. Taken together, members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) have a population of 620 million, a growth rate of five per cent and a combined gross domestic product of almost $2.5 trillion. A growing middle class across the region has emerged as an avid consumer of foreign and domestic goods and services. Not surprisingly, global business is enthusiastic. Trade is booming and foreign investments into the region are rising.Significantly, even as they strive to get elements of the Asean Economic Community (AEC) in place by year-end, countries in the region are already crafting an even more ambitious “post-2015 vision” for further integration. The ambition is to move beyond trade and economics to focus on still largely incomplete plans for building a political and security community and preparing the groundwork for stronger social and cultural integration. One visionary goal is to create a common Asean time zone — as opposed to the current three spanning the Asean region — to facilitate cross-border business and finance.The AEC roadmap includes four pillars: a single market and production base (including the free flow of goods, services, skilled labour, capital and investment), a competitive economic region, equitable economic development and integration into the global economy.But challenges remain. First, don’t expect the AEC to enter into force with a “big bang” on Jan 1, 2016. Not all elements of the single market will or can be in place on schedule and while progress is being made to reduce trade barriers and ease investment, as well as ensure the free flow of goods, services, investment and skilled labour, the devil is in the detail — and in enforcement and implementation. An Asean Scorecard which keeps countries up to date on progress on the AEC says about 80pc of the work on completing the AEC has been done. But Asean experts acknowledge that the remaining 20pc covers “the most difficult” tasks.Malaysian Trade Minister Mustapa Mohamed, whose country holds the rotating presidency of the Southeast Asian bloc this year, has said the full impact of integration may not be felt until perhaps 2020, recognising that there are border issues, customs, immigration and different regulations, which still need to be tackled. Businesses must still navigate a complex landscape of different product standards and regulations that make it hard to sell across the region and hamper the ability of new companies to enter the market.Surprisingly, many Asean businesses appear to know little of the AEC’s pros and cons. Vietnamese officials said recently that 60pc of their country’s business community “had no idea what the AEC is”. A survey by the Singapore Business Federation in January found two out of five firms were completely unaware of it. Yet establishing the AEC will impact positively on many industries, including electronics, car parts and components, as well as chemicals, textiles, and clothing. Once completed, the hope is that the AEC will boost intra-Asean trade which currently stands at a modest 24pc of the region’s overall trade flows.Second, Asean still has much to do to connect with citizens. Increasingly vocal civil society representatives are adamant that Asean must live up to its goal of becoming “people-centred” and less elitist. In contrast to earlier years and outdated conventional wisdom, Asean civil society is proactive and striving to become deeply involved in efforts to ensure stronger human rights protection and promotion across the region. In a recent statement, the Asean People’s Forum (APF) — Asean’s largest civil society group — listed a number of problems in the region, among them grave human rights violations, corruption and poor governance. Intimidation of human rights defenders was also raised.There are signs that governments are paying heed. As current Asean chair Malaysia has indicated that one of its main priorities will be to engage Asean citizens and to promote greater understanding of Asean initiatives and projects. “We also hope to steer Asean closer to the people of Southeast Asia: to make this institution part of people’s daily lives, by creating a truly people-centred Asean,” says Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak. The rhetoric has to be turned into action, however.Third, for all the hype, Asean still has to deal with obstacles created by economic nationalism, protectionism and resistance to foreign-owned industries which persists in many member countries. Malaysia’s trade minister Mohamed has said he will not avoid the politically sensitive task of tackling protectionism in Asean such as local content requirements, mandatory product standards and import restrictions.More generally, maritime disputes in the South China Sea as well as incidents of religious sectarianism, rising intolerance, human trafficking and corruption are further challenges to surmount as are differences in levels of development and political and economic models among Asean states. Additionally, there is concern that Indonesia under President Jokowi may be too focused on the country’s domestic questions to play its traditional leadership role in Asean. Meanwhile Indonesian business continues to be wary of opening up the country’s markets to Asean competitors.Looking aheadThe Nay Pi Taw declaration on Asean’s post-2015 vision adopted last November sets out an impressive agenda for the region’s future. While deepening economic integration and connectivity remains on the agenda, Asean leaders have identified external relations and the building of political/security and socio-cultural communities as a priority.There is no shortage of interesting ideas: leaders of Indonesia and Malaysia in recent weeks have been pushing for a common time zone arguing that this would help businesses and allow for coordinated opening times for banks and stock markets. An Asean Open Skies Agreement is designed to create a single aviation market and allow for more flights, which will increase trade, investment and tourism. There are suggestions to set up an Asean regional infrastructure fund. Plans for strengthening the Asean Secretariat and improving coordination among member governments are being studied by a high-level task force. East Timor’s Asean membership is under internal discussion.Asean is a business opportunity for the West but also for other Asian countries — a fact that India, China and Japan are more than aware of.

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.