Young Diplomats

Moscow is “deploying nuclear-capable missiles in Europe with very short warning times,” the head of the alliance also warned.

NATO commanders are considering options in the “military domain” to counter Russia’s alleged violation of a nuclear weapons treaty, the head of the alliance said Tuesday.

During a wide-ranging interview with NBC News, Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg previewed an aggressive approach to Moscow ahead of a NATO gathering in Brussels this week.

He also told NBC News that NATO has discussed the possibility of a troop drawdown in Afghanistan as part of a peace deal with the Taliban.

On Russia, Stoltenberg said that NATO’s “first priority” is to save the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty, which Washington is walking away from because it says Moscow has deployed a banned missile.

“We are planning in many different domains, including of course in the military domain,” Stoltenberg said. “Our military commanders are looking into different options: how we need to respond to the fact that Russia are deploying more nuclear-capable missiles in Europe. But we will take our time before we make decisions.”

He added: “We are planning for a world without the INF Treaty, with more Russian missiles in Europe.”

Signed by the U.S. and Soviet Union in 1987, the pact was designed to reduce the threat of nuclear war in Europe.

Stoltenberg called the agreement a “cornerstone for European security,” and without it some experts worry there could be a new arms race on the continent, with both sides trying to match newly deployed weapons on the ground.

The NATO chief said Moscow is “deploying nuclear-capable missiles in Europe with very short warning times and they are also reducing the threshold for any potential use of nuclear weapons in armed conflict.”

Russia denies this, and says that a U.S. missile defense system deployed in Europe could be adapted to fit treaty-violating cruise missiles. Moscow has also suspended the pact.

Earlier, Stoltenberg told reporters that NATO members did not intend to deploy more nuclear missiles in Europe to retaliate for the Russian violations.

Defense ministers are set to discuss their response Wednesday but Stoltenberg declined to shed light on what that might look like.

“We don’t want a new arms race but we need to provide credible deterrence and defense in a world without the INF Treaty,” he told NBC News.

On Afghanistan, the secretary-general said that NATO has “discussed the possibility, of course as part of a peace deal, to reduce the presence of NATO troops” in the country.

Last month the U.S. held peace talks with the Taliban aimed at ending Washington’s longest war. Both sides claimed progress toward a potential agreement that could see the U.S. withdraw American troops within 18 months, and the Taliban commit to preventing terrorist groups from using the country as a haven.

“I think there is more reason now to believe that it’s possible to reach a peace agreement than it has been in the time previously in this very long conflict,” Stoltenberg said Tuesday.

He said that “the aim is not to stay in Afghanistan forever” but said it was “very dangerous to speculate” about when or how any troop withdrawal might begin.

“We are not negotiating a leave deal, we are negotiating a peace deal,” he said.

This article was found on NBC news you can find the original version here https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/nato-plans-world-without-inf-treaty-stoltenberg-says-n970486

Hobbes once wrote that ” Man is a wolf to man “. This English philosopher stresses an eternal truth : men will never live in a peaceful world. They have fought the one with the other. Athenians and Spartans used to wield shield and swords. French and English did fight with bows and more rarely, with cannons. Six centuries later, soldiers of the XXth century firmly held their rifles and helmets. Technic changes Man doesn’t.

The atomic revolution

At the end of the Second World War, the US made up a weapon able to wipe out hundreds of thousands of lives in less than a minute. Suddenly, global conflicts have been made impossible. Man did find a way to drastically disrupt the ancestral path to solve its issues : war. Since the detonation of Little Boy and Fat Man, more than 70 years ago, it has to be said that atomic bombs have become infinitely more powerful and dangerous. Global destruction is not fiction anymore. Many argues that this excessive power is the only reason explaining the relative prolonged peace we’re currently living in. We could discuss this position for hours but this is not the point of this article.

What’s the relation with cyber threats ? 

At first sight, there isn’t any correlation between those two ways of fighting. Let’s have a look on this fascinating, as well as scary, topic. The cyber attack that targeted Estonia in 2007 is a pretty good starting point. After a deemed anti-Russian act committed by the Estonian government, the State has been hit by a massive wave of cyber-attacks. They have paralyzed the country for hours and prevent public websites from functioning. More than 10 years later, analysts admit that the strikes did not cease because of any kind of counter attacks or defense system. Indeed, the offensive stopped because the strikers were willing to stop. Many reports put the light on Russia but it seems very complicated to demonstrate the direct implication of Moscow.

How did they attack ? 

To sum up, strikers has prioritized simplicity and efficiency : the DDOS attack. The attacker floods a network to prevent it from operating. Thousands or even millions of people and computers connect to the same service so that it ceases to function. Of course, there are now well-know ways to counter such cyber attacks.

A paradigm shift ? 

The atomic wave has created massive destruction. Given this fact it’s hard to imagine cyber-attacks as more dangerous that an atomic bomb. From a philosophical perspective, I think it can be. Children, teenagers and adults currently surf on internet everyday. There are the equivalent of nearly 5.5 billion Google searches per day! Why ? Because we use internet as our first communication tool. We socialize on Facebook, react on Twitter and get inform on Google news or other numeric newspapers. More than a thousand of years before Hobbes, Aristotle taught us that ” Man is by nature a social animal “. It means that the relationships we build with our peers are what made us human beings. Thus, it is no exaggeration to state that internet partly carries this inherent aspect of human kind.

Conclusion

The atomic bomb is the last tool made by men to fight and destroy. This weapon, albeit incredibly powerful, is in line with the continuity of artillery and bombings that killed millions during the two World Wars. Paradoxically, cyber-attacks kill less but they might be far more dangerous than atomic bombs. They did affect the very essence of human being : communication with its peer.

The launchers of Russian-made S-300 missile defense systems deployed to Syria have been erected, new satellite images released on Tuesday showed.

“Due to the current regional tension and the detected erection of the launchers it is possible that the mentioned activity indicates an increase of the operational level and alertness,” ImageSat said in their assessment of the images.
The camouflaging of the fourth launcher “is rare and raises question marks about the operational level of the whole battery and specifically of the covered and folded launcher,” they added.

Russia delivered the launcher, radar and command and control vehicle of the advanced surface-to-air missile system to the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad in early October as a response to the downing of a Russian reconnaissance plane by Syrian air defenses during an Israeli airstrike on Iranian targets the previous month.

Moscow said it would also impose electronic countermeasures over Syria’s coastline to suppress satellite navigation, onboard radar systems and communications of warplanes attacking targets on Syrian territory.

The incident has led to one of the lowest points in the relationship between Jerusalem and Moscow in years. Earlier on Tuesday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced that he would be heading to Moscow later in the monthto meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin, their first-such official meeting since the crisis.

With the help of the Russians, Iranians and Hezbollah, Assad has regained control over the majority of Syria and is rebuilding his army, focusing first on intelligence and air defense divisions which could pose a threat to Israeli aircraft.
Syrian air defenses are largely antiquated Soviet-era systems, with SA-2s, SA-5s and SA-6s, as well as the more sophisticated tactical surface-to-air missiles, such as the SA-17s and SA-22 systems. Moscow has also supplied the short-range Pantsir S-1 to the Assad regime.

The advanced S-300 would be a major upgrade to the Syrian air defenses and would pose a threat to Israeli jets on missions as the long-range missile defense system can track objects, such as aircraft and ballistic missiles, over a range of 300 kilometers.
A full battalion includes six launcher vehicles, with each vehicle carrying four missile containers for a total of 24 missiles, as well as command-and-control and long-range radar detection vehicles.

The system’s engagement radar, which can guide up to 12 missiles simultaneously, helps guide the missiles toward the target. With two missiles per target, each launcher vehicle can engage up to six targets at once.

Israel has been carrying out airstrikes in the war-torn country against Hezbollah and Iranian targets. While the number of airstrikes in Syria attributed to the Jewish state has dropped since the downing of the Russian plane, Israel has stressed that it will continue to operate when necessary.

“We are operating both against Iran and against the Syrian forces that are abetting the Iranian aggression,” Netanyahu said at the end of January. “We will strike at anyone who tried to harm us. Whoever threatens to eliminate us, bears full responsibility.”

This article was found on The Jerusalem Post you can find it here https://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Russian-made-S-300-missile-defense-system-active-in-Syria-579764

On January the 10th 2019 Cambridge Analytica pleaded guilty to using Facebook to collect the private details of 87 million users and strategically targeting them with political ads which helped Trump to victory similarly to the Brexit case. It is still unclear how far the use of controversial targeted advertising by Cambridge Analytica and Aggregate IQ played in two of the biggest political upsets in recent times. Nevertheless prior to this, we have been forced to re-evaluate digital privacy raising important questions such as: How does it fit into our rights as citizens? And where does responsibility fall for the protection of our data, the users or the company? These questions effectively fall into the classic bipartisan political debate of business versus the individual.

In another light one of the reasons for the effectiveness of the Trump campaign came through the use of new technology. Trump’s use of social media was blatant throughout his campaign. To date Trump has sent out over 40,000 unfiltered tweets to his audience of almost 60 million. The shock factor of what he was saying meant that his thoughts were shared or re-tweeted allowing him to remain in the social media spotlight. Social media is an innovative way that politicians are appealing to citizens who don’t regularly vote.  Other politicians globally are similarly successfully with utilising social media, Narendra Modi Indian’s current prime minister has a twitter following of over 45 million giving him a wide audience to spread his unaltered agenda.

The power of social media is has been recognised by many but with the dangers are also ever present. ‘Fake news’ was Collins dictionary word of the year in 2017 displaying the growing concern of disinformation. Analysts now see it as one of the greatest threats to democracy as it often overshadows real information because of its shock value. Many major companies such as Google and Facebook are trying to combat misinformation, $300 million dollars in planned to go into Google News Initiative a newly formed . Facebook have already updated its newsfeed featuring an ‘about this article’ giving its users the opportunity to check the credibility of the source and has made additional plans to extend its fact checking partners worldwide in 2019.

The wide prevention of misinformation effectively shows the potential it has to damage society. Although the action taken by social media giants is a necessity it is not enough. We as citizens partially have a duty of eliminating fake news on the unacceptable level it’s on today.  Knowing how to spot ‘fake news’, checking sources and credibility before we accept the information as facts is a minor obligation, we must bear in order to recreate a trusting relationship with our media.

Chadian Foreign Minister Cherif Mahamt Zen’s exclusive interview with Young Diplomats

Young Diplomats’ Africa Regional Director, Idriss Zackaria, conducted an exclusive interview last week with Chad’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, Hon. Cherif Mahamat Zen, in the Chadian capital city N’Djamena. During the interview; the minister demonstrated extraordinary knowledge of regional and international burning issues as will be seen from his answers. He was so friendly, spoke calmly, chose his words well and was very methodical in his responses.

We recently have seen that Chadian diplomacy is becoming more and more dynamic; I wonder what your foreign policy strategic vision is?

In my new role and vision as Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation of the Republic of Chad, one of my principal functions is to mobilize external resources for our economic development, my job is to promote and protect Chad’s interests and image globally through innovative diplomacy, to contribute towards a just, peaceful and equitable world. To meet the challenges and opportunities in a rapidly changing world, our diplomats must be diverse, well-rounded, agile, and able to carry out multiple tasks – this requires that the right people have the right skills in the right place at the right time. Meanwhile, continued training and career development programs will better prepare our diplomats and advance their expertise.

Chad is a big African country that plays a highly significant role in the continent and should play bigger role in global affairs. We seek to use Chad’s diplomatic power to build a lasting peace in the region, establishing a joint effort in order to tackling the root causes of conflict, such as environmental degradation, poverty and cultural misunderstandings around the globe. We must face current and future challenges by developing and expanding our diplomatic footprints and diversifying our trade and investment portfolio. We also plan to open an Embassy in New Delhi this year in order to open up new prospects for Win-Win cooperation with India.

We must rise to answer a new historic calling that lay new diplomatic foundations to secure a future of development for all people – like the great changes of the past – the new efforts we undertake today will not be completed tomorrow. However, transforming the Chadian diplomacy is the work of a generation – it is urgent work that cannot be deferred. The Ministry will further inculcate a sense of shared and collective responsibility for the execution of the Ministry’s mandate.

Israel and Chad officially renewed diplomatic relations this month, during a visit by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the Chadian capital. Can you tell me why the resumption comes now?

Relations between Chad and Israel had been severed since 1972, when Chad was one of the twenty two African nations to break off ties with Israel after the Israeli-Egyptian War of Attrition. Basically we need to consider the historical contexts and the distance when we talk about such specific relations, Israel invaded an African country which is Egypt and captured Sinai by the time. However, the Sinai Peninsula was returned to Egypt in stages beginning in 1979 as part of the Israel–Egypt Peace Treaty, and the Sinai Peninsula has not been regarded as occupied territory anymore again. Therefore, the diplomatic relations between both of the countries were cut in 1972 for specific historic reasons, but our special relations continued all the time. Hence, today, we believe that there is no need to keep such feeling of distance, we are a world in pieces, and we need to be a world at peace. I strongly believe that together, we can build peace and restore trust.

On the other hand, let me tell you that there are 46 other Africa nations that have formal and informal relations with Israel at the moment; Chad is not the only African country to have relations with Israel. We believe that the idea of peace still is, and still must be, dominant in human affairs.

What does Chad gain from formal diplomatic ties with Israel?

Israel can be important for Chad’s security and prosperity, we are taking our cooperation forward to establish a sound and productive bilateral relationship, cooperation between our countries in the agricultural sector is crucial, fisheries, livestock and biotechnology, cyber security and high-technology. You know that Chad is a rising power in Africa with a military that is considered developed and efficient. We have also sent peacekeeping forces to other states nearby; hence, we are continuing to develop our bilateral defense cooperation with Israel to cover operational territorial surveillance and protection of territorial integrity.

One criticism we’ve heard from some Arab and Muslim nations that Chad is moving away from the Palestinian case, denouncing Chad’s renewed diplomatic relations with Israel as a “stab in the back” against the Palestinian cause, how would you respond to this?

Let me make it clear that the resumption of diplomatic relations with Israel does not make us forget or even ignore the Palestinian issue. Chad is profoundly attached to the peace process and has shaped the Arab peace initiative, the Madrid principles and existing agreements.

Peace between Israel and the Palestinians should reflect the principles of the Security Council, the Arab League, the Madrid Principles, and bilateral agreements between the parties. We believe nonviolence is the only way to a true and lasting solution to conflict, as we also believe in establishing peace amongst all human beings.

Thank you very much for making this clarification, Mr. Minister. But allow me to go back to the recent development in Central Africa Republic. You are about to join the Inter-Central African peace talks that will take place tomorrow in Khartoum, the Sudanese capital. Could you enlighten our readers about your role in that peace talk?

I will absolutely participate in the inter-Central African talks in Khartoum tomorrow, which armed groups and the Central African government are scheduled to meet in the Sudanese capital from January 24 to 30 to discuss the issues of peace in order to truly initiate the disarmament of armed groups for an end of the crisis in the country, which has been sinking into violence for several decades. It is an essential step for building peace in Central Africa. Several personalities and representatives of Central African armed groups are invited by the African Union to the talks.

It is a great initiative that we should be part of it, because we have committed to support peace talks in Central Africa by any mean; we must and will strengthen our position in the peace talks, we are keen to end the tragedy that our Central African brothers and sisters have been facing for decades

Chad faced repeated criticism of its conduct in Central African Republic (CAR), that it has played an influential and ambiguous role in the country, how would you respond to such claim?

Whatever claims people were making were false, Chad is crucial to United Nations peacekeeping efforts in CAR and elsewhere, like in Mali, where our soldiers face threats from insurgents affiliated with Al Qaeda. Despite the sacrifices we have made in the continent, Chad and Chadians have been targeted in a gratuitous and malicious campaign that blamed them for all the suffering.

Such claims have forced us to withdraw our entire contingent from the Central African Republic’s peacekeeping mission, in the wake of the accusations, however, and unfortunately our withdrawal didn’t solve the Central African crisis, it also created new security and political problems that have been affecting us for years, we don’t want problems in the neighboring countries and on our borders at all.

Chad has clearly been the most influential neighbor in terms of CAR’s political and economic stability. We never seek military intervention in other countries, but we will do our best to contribute to the neighboring countries’ stability and economic integration; including Central Africa.

I want to go back just very briefly, some detractors online have been making all kinds of claims about French President Emmanuel Macron’s recent visit to Chad, claims said that he came to discuss the crisis in CAR with President Idriss Déby, amid widespread concerns about increasing Russian influence in the country. What is going on with these allegations?

French President Emmanuel Macron visited Chad because he had a working session with his Chadian counterpart, President Idriss Déby, which extended to the two delegations on economic cooperation between the two countries and the fight against terrorism in the Sahel region, he didn’t visit Chad amid Russian intervention in Central Africa as it was claimed.

There is no doubt that the principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs of States remains a well-established part and the center of our foreign policy strategy. The prohibition of intervention is a corollary of every state’s right to sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence. Therefore, Central Africa is an independent sovereign state, and President Faustin-Archange Touadéra came to power through democratic elections, hence, any regime change should be by the Central African people, Chad has nothing to do with that. And let me tell you that any instability in CAR would directly affect us badly, that’s why any signs of political instability in CAR can be very worrying to us. Allow me also to tell you that Southern Chad is host to hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing the fighting in neighboring CAR. We are managing a huge humanitarian crisis in our territory as a result of conflicts in the neighboring countries. Approximately 111,500 people are internally displaced along with more than 200,000 refugees from Sudan as well as 100.000 refugees and more than 150.000 returnees of Chadian origin from CAR; we host millions of refugees in this country, we have enough on our plate. The current situation is awkward, and can’t stand any additional regional crisis.

By Idriss Zackaria

It’s been almost a month since the beginning of the Jair Bolsonaro administration—and it has been an uphill struggle trying to work out what exactly is going on. Members of the Brazilian government have sent messages in different directions, and the number of U-turns and retractions seems to be unprecedented. Many feel that Mr. Bolsonaro’s strategy is to create controversy in order to turn our attention to one way—so we won’t pay attention to what he is really up to, much like Donald Trump in the United States.

So we ask: what is this administration really doing so far?

To answer that question, we have created a brand new newsletter service: Brazil On The Record. Every 15 days, we will publish the most important laws, decrees, administrative acts, and executive orders approved by the Brazilian government — and published on the Federal Register (the Diário Oficial da União).

If something has not been published on the Federal Register, it doesn’t exist, as far as the Brazilian government is concerned.

READ MORE

When someone says JAPAN; a superb finished glittering imagery strikes in mind. It is a developed country in Asia with great competition from their neighbours now a days. South Korea, China and Russia, three developing nations are fighting for catch up policy led by Japan in 1870’s. After Meiji Restoration, Japan put human development and social sector development on back seat and rides the wave of industrial development led by West in first half of 20th century. So, reforms in these sectors also get affected and government machinery as well as civil societies focused on economic benefits rather than social benefits like gender equality, subaltern groups, and other undeveloped communities. I am very happy to see that at least Japan won’t followed ‘FOOTBINDING’ habit of Chinese people to glorify and identify their royal women as a stature to protect them by cover. Because, it was believed that ‘Japanese do, as the Chinese do.’

Recently released ‘World Gender Gap Index’ put Japan in the list at 110th position which was a pinch up from last year’s 114th. Also their great admirer from centuries South Korea comes after Japan in the list. Japan is in lowest position among G7 group of nations as well as 4th last in G20 group. If we analyse sub-indexes of it, we find appertain conditions in politics and economy. But in education and health, story is much different as they stood at 65th and 41th in the row.

As Prime Minister Shinzo Abe clearly stated in his address at the 68th Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations on 26 September, 2013, the Government of Japan will cultivate the power of women as the greatest potential for the growth of the Japanese economy, and further strengthen cooperation with the international community as well as assistance to developing countries with the belief that creating “a society in which women shine” will bring vigour to the world. But they are not even in the position economically to gain momentum with society. They are always seen as the stepney for the main breadwinner of family.

Women’s participation is very worse in Japan even after the initiative taken by PM Shinzo Abe to include 5 women in cabinet. Present situation is very different from 2017, that all the five were removed on the charges of corruption or incapacity from their offices and the powers were curtailed, as per law. There is a very famous commercial in Japan which delineates Japan as “underdeveloped country” in gender equality.

Although from past WW-II, women enjoyed full legal rights as men but on economic front, imbalance was wide and still not filled satisfactorily. Modern policy initiatives to encourage motherhood and workplace participation have had mixed results. When I cite Article 4 of the Fundamental Law on Education, which says,

“Citizens shall all be given equal opportunities to receive education according to their abilities, and shall not be subject to discrimination in education on account of race, creed, sex, social status, economic position or family origin,”

I find Japanese labour participation very poor and insufficient to what is required in numbers also in capacity.

The 2018 government report on gender equality shows that although the ratio of women entering universities is growing in Japan, the corresponding ratio is rising much faster in other countries. While the ratio of women entering high schools or vocational schools is higher than men’s, the percentage of women enrolled in universities is 6.8 points less than men — 49.1% versus 55.9%. The gap becomes steeper in postgraduate education: Women account for 31% of university graduates who go on to master’s courses and 33.4% of those in doctorate courses. Women account for only 15.7% of researchers in Japan (as of March 2017) — at the bottom of the ranking among OECD members. Discrimination must be eliminated and corrected by treating all under same opportunity of employment.

As said by Abe at UN address:

‘Toward a “society in which all women shine” Japan will strongly promote assistance to developing countries through its close cooperation with civil societies including NGOs and business circles.’

Cooperation to others is a far thing for Japan right now; at least statistics won’t support the commitment done by Japanese Prime Minister earlier. Prime Minister Abe emphasized Japan’s intention to enhance cooperation with the international community and its assistance to developing countries for women’s empowerment and gender-equality, as part of its effort to address global agenda. Women of Japan need more exposure to their rights and can be observed by society as basic need for their pride and existence.

In conclusion, I assert that “Rights are not a commodity that reduces when granted to others” most of the times rights actually behaves like any limited resource; especially if they comes from politics. For start, rights must not obey the point of view of one person with power or the point of view of the group that governs; rights must obey to the kind of equilibrium built by the culture by the past of the time. For this reason any healthy change must be natural, spontaneous and slow. Independently of the last, I believe that well defined and nature coherent gender roles are valuable, romantic, and make the life of many people clearer and easier.

Both the rhetoric and actions of the Trump administration point to the rising probability of an economic war between the United States and China. To have a chance of winning such a war, the Trump administration needs to get the rest of the world on its side. This is not likely to happen for three reasons: the United States’ economic leverage is not strong enough; national interests in much of the rest of the world are not aligned with such an arrangement; and the U.S. is at a comparative disadvantage in terms of resources.

Tariff hikes don’t have much chance of breaking China. Nowadays exports are about 20 percent of China’s GDP; exports to the United States make up about 18 percent of China’s exports, and the domestic value added of Chinese exports is about 70 percent. Multiplying these, one gets the total share of U.S. exports in China’s GDP as about 2.5 percent. With this rather low level of dependency, the impact of tariff hikes on the Chinese economy will not be hard to manage with monetary and fiscal policies. The impact may be magnified through changes in expectations that lead to reduced consumption and investment expenditures, or these may trigger a crisis in the highly leveraged economy, but judging by its past performance, Chinese government is likely to be able to contain these risks.

With tariff hikes, the Trump administration might be aiming to change the topology of the international supply chains, to induce export-oriented producers in China to relocate, preferably to the United States. Such relocation is likely to be very limited and very unlikely to be to the United States. As attested by the former and current CEOs of Apple, China’s current position in the international supply chains is based on the qualification and size of its labor force, its developed physical infrastructure, and its sophisticated manufacturing ecosystem, rather than low labor costs. These are products of the country’s size, culture, and specific economic development path, and are not likely to be matched by other candidates in the near term. Hence, relocation is likely to be limited to low value added, labor intensive products and production processes, especially final assembly stages; and the relocation will be to neighboring low wage economies. Such production activities by both Chinese and foreign firms have been relocating to neighboring low wage countries for some years now. As this is a process encouraged and helped by China’s minimum wage policies, apparently aiming to spur the country’s economy to higher value added activities, is not likely to put much pressure on the Chinese government.

Cutting off U.S. technology supply, as in the ZTE and Fujian Jinhua cases, is not going to break China either. In the long run it is likely to speed up China’s technological catch-up. In the short run China can rearrange its technology resources to reduce the impact: ZTE is very dependent on U.S. technology but Huawei, designing its own chips, is not; should ZTE again be the subject of a technology restriction, a merger between the two may save it. More importantly, China can source the withheld technologies from elsewhere: cutting of Fujian Jinhua from the world’s top semiconductor equipment and materials suppliers is a blow, but these can be sourced from Japanese, European, South Korean, and partly domestic suppliers.

Ineffective as they are, these policies are costly for the United States. Aside from China’s retaliation, as is well recognized, U.S. tariff hikes will raise the cost of living for middle and lower income households, and degrade the cost competitiveness of U.S. industries because of rises in the price of production inputs. Cutting China’s access to U.S. semiconductor technology is at the same time cutting the U.S. producer’s access to the world’s number one market, essentially giving it away to competitors from other countries. With such a dismal cost-benefit structure, these policies do not have much chance of success.

The chances of success would increase if the Trump administration could get other countries, especially those with advanced economies to go along. The impact of tariff hikes and other trade barriers on China would increase along with the total economic size of the “coalition,” and the technology restrictions can really bite if other technology supplier nations join in. However, the Trump administration is likely to have hard time recruiting members for such a coalition, for three reasons.

First, the main leverage the Trump administration has for forming such a coalition is the size of the U.S. market. But the Chinese market is larger today for many products, from cars to groceries, and is expected to be the largest soon for pretty much everything. Even though there are restrictions for some goods and services, most of the Chinese market is quite open, and advanced country producers are already taking full advantage through exports and production in the country. Foreign-funded enterprises, which are mostly firms from advanced economies producing for the local market, account for more than 15 percent of the industry profits in the country. Including those from Hong Kong and Taiwan, which produce more for the export market, about a quarter of all industrial profits in China are made by non-domestically funded firms. In fact the most profitable premium segments of the markets for most consumer and producer goods in China today are dominated by companies from advanced economies, with domestic producers holding the price-sensitive lower segments. Consequently other countries, especially the advanced economies and others that aspire to that status, will not easily trade access to the Chinese market for the U.S. one, if it comes to that.

Second, even though some countries may share the Trump administration’s concerns about China and others may have their own worries, unlike (apparently) the Trump administration, the issues most of these countries have are not big enough to take the economic and political risks of an economic war, which is not at all guaranteed to stay economic. A China completely broken in this conflict would not serve the national interests of many either; for most countries, a world ruled by China holds risks, but so does one ruled by the “America First” principle. Many of the emerging economy countries, themselves likely harboring own versions of the “Made in China 2025” plan or Chinese Dream, are not likely to become staunch opponents of government-led economic development either. Consequently most countries in the world, rather than taking an active part in this conflict, are likely to use it to shape the policies of the two sides to their best national interests and try to try to maintain a state of balance of power between them.

Third, with its Belt and Road and similar initiatives China has become a significant source of investment and finance for many countries in the world, with an impact on their international policies. The United States does not have the resources to compete with China in this arena. In 2017, the United States’ and China’s GDPs in purchasing power parity terms were $19.4 trillion and $23.3 trillion, respectively; their national savings rateswere 18 percent and 48 percent. This puts their national savings, the amount of resources that can be spent on investments, at about $3.5 trillion and $11 trillion. Considering that its government has stronger control over the use of these resources, the amount China can spend on strategic domestic and international projects is much larger.

Given these factors, the Trump administration is not likely to be able win an economic war against China. But no one should take comfort in this; such a war will cause serious damage to the world economy, and precisely because it is not winnable, an economic war has the potential to turn into a more serious form of conflict. It seems the time has come to do some out-of-the-box thinking on the rules of conduct for and governance of a world characterized by rise of new economic powers — not only China, but India and others on the line.

Fatih Oktay is the author of a widely acclaimed book, China: Rise of a New World Power and Changing Global Balances, in Turkish. He teaches Chinese economy and politics at leading universities, and has served in the top management teams of banks and technology companies in Turkey. Follow him on Twitter: @Fatih_Oktay_ENG.

This article was not originally published by the website the Diplomat you can find the article just here https://thediplomat.com/2018/11/3-reasons-why-trump-cant-win-a-trade-war-with-china/

Achievements of Cyrus –The Great:
According to the narrator of the documentary (2014), Cyrus –The Great created and maintained an empire not only because of his military strategies but also because of his political sagacity. The narrator also adds that he was an excellent manager of human capital (The Persians: Engineering an Empire, 2014). In this context, Ambler (2001) argues that because of his attractive qualities, Cyrus marched from one victory to another (p. 4). He was a successful ruler on the vast scale (Ambler, 2001, p. 1).  While discussing conquests of Cyrus – The Great, Beck, et al. (2009) argue that within a short span of time, he was able to control an empire that covered 2000 miles, from Anatolia in the west to the Indus River on the east. It was possible because of his governing method along with his military genius (p. 99). Crompton (2008) adds that by 546 B.C., Cyrus was at the top of his success. His empire now spanned from Pasargadae to the Greek city-states and most of Turkey (p. 59).

Cyrus – The Great introduced a revolutionary concept in the ancient world. He refused to enslave his new subjects and showed kindness toward his captives. Ambler (2001) argues that in order to identify Cyrus’s subjects, it would be hard not to admire his qualities of generosity, justice, benevolence and clemency. In order to secure stability in his empire, mere obedience would have sufficed but he emerged as a ruler who lived up to the interests and hopes of his subjects (p. 4).  Spek (2014) in this context argues that Cyrus- the Great “aimed at winning the subject nations for the Persian Empire by tolerance and clemency (p.233).” Crompton (2008) adds that Cyrus had judged well and shrewdly throughout his military career (p. 85).

Contributions of Cyrus – The Great to the World History:

Cyrus – The Great is famous for his humanist nature, military shrewdness and justice and kindness towards his captives. However, he set some precedents which contributed to the world History.

The Cyrus Cylinder

In 539 B.C., Cyrus captured Babylon (Briant, 2002, p. 34, Crompton, 2014, p.78 & Spek, 2014, p. 235)). Cyrus had the priests or scribes to create the famous Cyrus Cylinder soon after he conquered Babylon (Crompton, 2014, p. 79). Cyrus – The Great did a totally novel thing when he captured the Jews of Babylon. He freed the enslaved Jews who had been living in captivity since their temple and city – Jerusalem was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar (Engineering an Empire – The Persians, 2014). Prof. Stronach (2014) states, “Cyrus –The Great recognized the local validity of different religions and beliefs and allowed them to persist.” Dorey (2015) argues that sometimes human rights are depicted as a western concept. He calls it a misrepresentation of history and adds that along with setting his captives free, he gave people the right to religion and equal treatment to all ethnicities. These rights were recorded on a cylinder which is considered the first charter of human rights in the world. Dorey (2015) further adds that Cyrus cylinder (charter) has been translated in all six official languages of United Nations and its provisions reflect the first four articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which was adopted almost 2500 years later in 1948.

Arts and Technology:

Cyrus – The Great launched engineering projects in 550 B.C. With his high standards, he was a very innovative builder. He borrowed various technological concepts from areas which he conquered. He took the most advanced and best ideas from different cultures and moulded them into the distinctive technologies of his own. Romans later adopted the same thing. Arts and technology of Pasargadae influenced others thousands of miles away as remote as in Egypt and Anatolia (The Persians: Engineering an Empire, 2014).

Death of Cyrus – The Great:

Cyrus –The Great died in a battle in 530 B.C. before he could launch a military campaign to make Persia a lone superpower of the ancient world. Alizadeh (2014) says that he could not live enough to show the world what he was able to do outside the battlefield. In that sense Cyrus can be compared with Julius Caesar, Alizadeh (2014) adds. Persian Empire had three capitals i.e. Babylon, Susa and Ecbatana at the time of Cyrus’s death. However, he chose to be buried in the city of Pasargadae which he himself built (The Persians: Engineering an Empire, 2014 & Crompton, 2008, p. 16)

Conclusion:

Cyrus, indeed, proved himself to be worthy of being called the great. There was no power on earth that could stand up against Cyrus – The Great for thirty years of his reign from 559 B.C. till his death in 530 B.C. His military tactics, governing methods, respect and tolerance for others’ cultures and religions and the architectural structure of his tomb in Pasargadae which is simple but elegant show his meekness. His achievements in the battlefield and winning hopes and interests of his captives are just a few of his many achievements. His contributions to human rights are still unmatched and the world remembers him for his unprecedented steps for humanity even after almost 2500 years of his death.